Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Really? Please! Nothing was "intentionally vague." What liberal professor taught you this garbage?
Its views like this that have caused so many of our problems that have resulted in the bastardization of the Constitution. The meaning is quite clear if we study it correctly.
Agreed, their comment is the fundamental problem with the people today. They have been propagandized to the point where it is ridiculous. What is sad, is you only get that way by not questioning and simply accepting your teachers claims at face value. I was educated in a very progressive institution and you have to be lazy to accept what they say as even the texts they use still contradict them at times. Basically, you have to be a non-thinker to accept progressive ideology.
I still try to comprehend the imbecility of a political system where men who are dead for 200+ years direct the life of a society they could not even imagine. If Constitution will not be re written using modern ideas, aspirations and language, it will be sorta a religious scroll interpreted this or that way by the priests of the Holy Supreme Court. Outdated document awards enourmous power to unelected judges whims and wishes. The Constitution is just like the Bible it means whatever people want it to mean.
Agreed, their comment is the fundamental problem with the people today. They have been propagandized to the point where it is ridiculous. What is sad, is you only get that way by not questioning and simply accepting your teachers claims at face value. I was educated in a very progressive institution and you have to be lazy to accept what they say as even the texts they use still contradict them at times. Basically, you have to be a non-thinker to accept progressive ideology.
Pish-posh!
Marbury v Madison established that the Supreme Court would have the power of judicial review. That was in 1803, when many of the Founding Fathers were still alive, so any bs about the Constitution's intent is in the garbage.
And the Court's rulings aren't about "changing the Constitution"; most often they are about balancing the rights and powers outlined in the Constitution when those rights or powers come into conflict. Your claim about not questioning and blind acceptance is a two-edged sword. It's not that you don't like the Supreme Court ruling on the Constitution, it's that you don't like the balance that the rulings tend to enforce. When the Court's "interpretations" go your way, you love the Court. When they strike a different balance, you whine about the Court's "changing the Constitution". The Court does not "change the Constitution", it only seeks to address the conflicts between parties when both parties have rights and power guaranteed by the Constitution.
Marbury v Madison established that the Supreme Court would have the power of judicial review. That was in 1803, when many of the Founding Fathers were still alive, so any bs about the Constitution's intent is in the garbage.
And the Court's rulings aren't about "changing the Constitution"; most often they are about balancing the rights and powers outlined in the Constitution when those rights or powers come into conflict. Your claim about not questioning and blind acceptance is a two-edged sword. It's not that you don't like the Supreme Court ruling on the Constitution, it's that you don't like the balance that the rulings tend to enforce. When the Court's "interpretations" go your way, you love the Court. When they strike a different balance, you whine about the Court's "changing the Constitution". The Court does not "change the Constitution", it only seeks to address the conflicts between parties when both parties have rights and power guaranteed by the Constitution.
The Supreme court is about to rule on NC sex offenders using face book. The Supreme Court is a joke and absurd whichever way you look at
it except the deadly force backing up jaw dropping insane rulings.
"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare and secure the Blessings of Liberty ..."
Note that "general Welfare" is not talking about the welfare system. It means the state of well-being.
Correct. For some reason some people don't see it.
- insure domestic Tranquility,
- provide for the common defence (British spelling, which was common at the time)
- promote the general Welfare
Furthermore, the US Constitution and each of the State Constitutions were NEVER intended to have their meanings and INTENT "interpreted". No... instead the founding father's of this great nation created the incredible brilliance of the Constitutions by creating a method for which each of them can be amended. That is by far their greatest achievement with the Constitutions, federal and State.
As far as the actual INTENT of the Constitution, one need look no further than the writings (letters back and forth) contained in the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist. Most positions WERE widely agreed upon, with few (a centralized national bank) being widely rebuked.
Due to the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist no HONEST person can claim the founder's INTENT cannot be determined. Part of the problem is our leftist public schools teach a little about the Constitution, injecting leftist interpretations of the INTENT, then refuse to use the actual documents which could easily disprove their nonsense claims, the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist, because these writings which show the actual intent go against their desire to rewrite the founding father's actual INTENT with the left's ever changing judicial interpretation.
That's a strict constructionist look at the Constitution and state constitutions. It isn't wrong, but it isn't right either. The constitutions (state and federal level) can be both looked at the strict construction and loose construction views and neither are wrong. Well until the Supreme Court rules in a way or Congress and the states passes an amendment that overrules that ruling.
Force everyone to benefit everyone. How about that?
The only way to do that is to implement a capitation tax. Split the costs of all levels of government by the local, state, or US population, equally. A single person pays a single share. A family of 4 pays 4 shares. Etc.
I still try to comprehend the imbecility of a political system where men who are dead for 200+ years direct the life of a society they could not even imagine. If Constitution will not be re written using modern ideas, aspirations and language, it will be sorta a religious scroll interpreted this or that way by the priests of the Holy Supreme Court. Outdated document awards enourmous power to unelected judges whims and wishes. The Constitution is just like the Bible it means whatever people want it to mean.
I was waiting when this argument would appear.
This is where we always end up folks. Press the Constitution, press the founders words and the use of the words at the time and you will eventually cause this argument to pop up.
It is the trump card argument that allows them to dismiss the Constitution, the founding forefathers intent in its use and the purpose and function of our government to promote some rationalized excuse in how they can disregard everything and just do what the hell they want.
This is the basic core position of the progressives and why no matter how civil you are, how reasonable, and how logical you are, you will NEVER find purchase with them.
Progressives are COMMUNISTS who do not respect individual liberty, our Republican form of government or any design we have.
The fact that they lie to us constantly in the process of such should be an indicator of what you should expect once they finally do gain full power.
Remember, people aren't killed in mass by Communism out of an honest mistake, it is through devious intent to see a failed idea to fruition and upon that failure, the arrogance that causes them to refuse to admit such to make any change.
So, next time a progressive argues with you, remember.. this is where you will ALWAYS end up.
This is where we always end up folks. Press the Constitution, press the founders words and the use of the words at the time and you will eventually cause this argument to pop up.
It is the trump card argument that allows them to dismiss the Constitution, the founding forefathers intent in its use and the purpose and function of our government to promote some rationalized excuse in how they can disregard everything and just do what the hell they want.
This is the basic core position of the progressives and why no matter how civil you are, how reasonable, and how logical you are, you will NEVER find purchase with them.
Progressives are COMMUNISTS who do not respect individual liberty, our Republican form of government or any design we have.
The fact that they lie to us constantly in the process of such should be an indicator of what you should expect once they finally do gain full power.
Remember, people aren't killed in mass by Communism out of an honest mistake, it is through devious intent to see a failed idea to fruition and upon that failure, the arrogance that causes them to refuse to admit such to make any change.
So, next time a progressive argues with you, remember.. this is where you will ALWAYS end up.
This is why progressives are enemies of liberty.
Wow! What a nice swift kick to the crotch you delivered there!
Were you a former place kicker in college or pro football?
Remind me to never stand flat footed across from you in a debate.
All of the arguments provided by these conservatives, including our founding Fathers, is nothing more than a child screaming that "This is mine and mine alone". They were all willing to take from the many to provide for themselves by market manipulations of any sort.
You need to rethink WHO benefits from market manipulations.
Just as an FYI, look at where the CalPERS (California Public Employee Retirement System) pension fund is invested... The ten largest holdings of CalPERS:
Quote:
"Can you name the biggest American investor? No, it's not Warren Buffett; as a matter of fact, it is not a person. It is CalPERS, the California Public Employees' Retirement System"...
Exxon
General Electric
Microsoft
Citigroup
Bank of America
Johnson & Johnson
Wal-Mart
Pfizer
Proctor & Gamble
JP Morgan Chase
Then ask yourself if public employee union members are conservatives or liberals.
And BTW, HOW many of those liberals who will benefit from a CalPERS pension stupidly rail against "big oil," "big pharma," and "bankers." Idiots. The lot of them. /SMH
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
