Amendment to return power to states with veto

[Revere]

REAL Americans love the Constitution and don't want it changed.

Only Conservatives feel threatened by the Constitution as it is today and seek to tear it apart

Did he 14th and 19th amendments "tear it apart?"

I'm not the one trying to change the Constitution

I love it just the way it is...just like REAL Americans

Slavery? No suffrage?

 

[Liberty]

This country is so fucked thanks to dimwits like swallow and rightwinger. SO fucked. Good game, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin. 200 years, not bad. It's a shame I had to be born into this nightmare though...(Yes I would prefer to live in a world of small pox than a world of brainless zombies)

 

[rightwinger]

It is only a small percentage of Conservatives in this country who want to tear apart the Constitution and craft it to meet their agenda

 

[Revere]

This country is so fucked thanks to dimwits like swallow and rightwinger. SO fucked. Good game, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin. 200 years, not bad. It's a shame I had to be born into this nightmare though...(Yes I would prefer to live in a world of small pox than a world of brainless zombies)

He's a see thru dick.

 

[Avatar4321]

It is only a small percentage of Conservatives in this country who want to tear apart the Constitution and craft it to meet their agenda

Preserving Freedom and eliminating corruption is such a horrible agenda for you isnt it?

 

[rightwinger]

As a real American I support my Constitution

No desire to change it

So you're pretty much okay with that whole 3/5's of a person thingy?

I said..the way it is..not was

 

[rightwinger]

As a real American I support my Constitution

No desire to change it

So you're pretty much okay with that whole 3/5's of a person thingy?

The 3/5s compromise was a brilliant compromise designed to punish slave states by denying them their full representation as long as they supported slavery.

Why is it we seem to ignore why certain things were in the Constitution?

LOL

As Avatar tries to defend slavery

 

[Liberty]

It is only a small percentage of Conservatives in this country who want to tear apart the Constitution and craft it to meet their agenda

Are you on fucking drugs, dumbass?

Article V

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

This is further expanded in the following documents:
Federalist 40, 42, 43, and 85

Changing the constitution IS constitutional if done in the provided constitutional manner. I am surprised you can feed yourself without drowning in your own drool, retard.

 

[Liberty]

So you're pretty much okay with that whole 3/5's of a person thingy?

The 3/5s compromise was a brilliant compromise designed to punish slave states by denying them their full representation as long as they supported slavery.

Why is it we seem to ignore why certain things were in the Constitution?

LOL

As Avatar tries to defend slavery

...wow you are a fucking idiot. Did you even read what he said? Do you even know how to read?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Would not need "checks and balances" if the Federal government weren't walking all over states right now.

It's called the Supremacy Clause.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

This will never see the light of day. It's not worth discussing.

 

[rightwinger]

This will never see the light of day. It's not worth discussing.

But I am having so much fun

 

[Liberty]

Would not need "checks and balances" if the Federal government weren't walking all over states right now.

It's called the Supremacy Clause.

The Supremacy Clause only applies IF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS STICKING TO THE ENUMERATED POWERS YOU FUCKING TOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

IF IT'S NOT, THATS WHERE THE 10th AMENDMENT COMES IN!!!

Read the federalist papers for fucking crying out loud.

 

[Revere]

Would not need "checks and balances" if the Federal government weren't walking all over states right now.

It's called the Supremacy Clause.

No, it's called extra-Constitutional governance by the Feds.

 

[rightwinger]

The 3/5s compromise was a brilliant compromise designed to punish slave states by denying them their full representation as long as they supported slavery.

Why is it we seem to ignore why certain things were in the Constitution?

LOL

As Avatar tries to defend slavery

...wow you are a fucking idiot. Did you even read what he said? Do you even know how to read?

He defended the rights of states to have slavery

A true abolitionist would have insisted that if the person did not have all the rights of a citizen they do not count towards your representaion in the House

3/5ths?? They did not have 3/5ths citizenship rights

 

[Revere]

The Federal government prolonged slavery by twice refusing to uphold fugitive slave laws in free states.

 

[Liberty]

LOL

As Avatar tries to defend slavery

...wow you are a fucking idiot. Did you even read what he said? Do you even know how to read?

He defended the rights of states to have slavery

A true abolitionist would have insisted that if the person did not have all the rights of a citizen they do not count towards your representaion in the House

3/5ths?? They did not have 3/5ths citizenship rights

You might want to read up on what the 3/5ths actually did. Something along the lines of not giving the south as many representatives in congress so the north would always have majority ring a bell? I thought not. It was meant to protect slaves. You are an uneducated zombie dumbfuck. Your mom should have aborted.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Would not need "checks and balances" if the Federal government weren't walking all over states right now.

It's called the Supremacy Clause.

No, it's called extra-Constitutional governance by the Feds.

No, it would be Constitutional by your own logic, since you're proposing to amend the Constitution to fix it or get rid of it, or do whatever you're trying to do.

 

[NYcarbineer]

As a real American I support my Constitution

No desire to change it

So you're pretty much okay with that whole 3/5's of a person thingy?

The 3/5s compromise was a brilliant compromise designed to punish slave states by denying them their full representation as long as they supported slavery.

Why is it we seem to ignore why certain things were in the Constitution?

That's almost as ignorant as your daft claim yesterday that foreign oil companies could drill in American waters without permission.

 

[Avatar4321]

So you're pretty much okay with that whole 3/5's of a person thingy?

The 3/5s compromise was a brilliant compromise designed to punish slave states by denying them their full representation as long as they supported slavery.

Why is it we seem to ignore why certain things were in the Constitution?

LOL

As Avatar tries to defend slavery

Thank you for demonstrating your ignorance of the Constitution. Because the 3/5s compromise was designed to end slavery by limiting the power of slave with the idea that it would end completely.

Are you suggesting that Slave states should have been giving their full power while they kept people in bondage?