Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
I suspect the liberals would have no problem if the government looks for guns on government owned and controlled property (or privately owned and paid for property) but they want the welfare crowd's "rights" when it comes to drug trafficking and dealing.
|
Yep. They want to do what they want to do. The constitution has meaning only insofar as it enables them to accomplish something they want to accomplish. Otherwise it is just an obstacle to be overcome.
What's amazing to me is how so many people have adopted this philosophy. The idea that taking the law into your hands is granting your opponents the same power doesn't seem to occur to some people. "I think Obama should do X" Well, he doesn't have the authority to do X, so why should he be able to do it irrespective of whether or not it's a good idea? What about if a Republican gets into office and he uses the same methods to do something you hate? Then it's your fault for letting Obama get away with it. I haven't seen even one single Democrat say Obama was wrong for appointing those people as recess appointments when the Senate wasn't in recess. Does that mean a Republican can start putting whoever he wants wherever he wants whenever he wants and the Democrat Senators get no oversight on that?
I want rule of law even when it disadvantages me, because the rule of law itself is valuable to me. Sure, if I don't like a particular law I'll try to change it. But I won't try to get around it, because the law itself needs to mean something.
I read a news story a while back about Obama administration officials discussing whether they should try to find a way to shut down Fox News. What??? The fact that they could even sit down and have such a conversation in America is just astounding to me.