Can someone explain why we can't just give freedom a chance?

[rightwinger]

Nobody's stopping you from breathing clean air....Stay home.

Smoke at home asshole

 

[Pheonixops]

Why can't the federal government just stick to the constitution? Since when has this become a bad thing? I don't understand...republicans complain, democrats complain, our whole system is just whiners with no real solution...when the solution is right in front of us. That's right. I am talking about the damn United States Constitution. All the rules are in place...but we don't follow them. The federal government grows and grows and grows, seizes power that by design the 10th amendment is supposed to protect, etc. etc. Maybe the reason why the country is declining economically, morally, etc. is because we strayed from our foundation...the foundation of liberty secured primarily by local government.

God help us.

This is just naïve and ignorant.

The Federal government is ‘sticking to’ the Constitution, there is no deviation or aberration. The Constitution is fully functional today just as the Framers intended, as interpreted by the Supreme Court.

The Constitution states nothing about what the ‘size’ the Federal government should be. Congress is authorized by both enumerated and unremunerated powers to address matters both ‘necessary and proper.’ See: McCulloch v. Maryland (1819), Gibbons v. Ogden (1824).

Since the First Quarter of the 19th Century it was understood and accepted that the 10th Amended merely acknowledged a ‘truism,’ and that it places no restrictions on the Federal government with regard to its supremacy over the states. See: US v. Darby (1941), Cooper v. Aaron (1958). States may not preempt, ignore, or otherwise ‘nullify’ Federal statutes. Whether or not a given Federal law is un-Constitutional is for the courts to decide, not the states.

If anything, since the early 1950s, we have moved closer to the original intent of the Framers, by abolishing segregation, discrimination, and anti-miscegenation laws, all Americans today realize actual freedom and individual liberty.

Indeed, during the 20th Century it has been state and local governments who were the greatest enemy of individual liberty: black codes, poll taxes, and ‘separate but equal’ were but a few of the instruments of injustice used by the states in violation of the Constitution.

Telling how libertarians and conservatives bemoan the ‘tyranny’ of the Federal government yet embrace the tyranny of the states.

God protect us from the ignorant and reactionary right.

Excellent points, though I slightly disagree with the last line. I'm a Liberal with very Libertarian leanings, labels suck but they help a little bit in identifying one's perspective. I abhor any sort of tyranny whether it's "local" or "national". I'm pretty sure that there are plenty of other Libertarians who feel the same way.

 

[Oddball]

Nobody's stopping you from breathing clean air....Stay home.

Smoke at home asshole

The asshole is the one making demands of private property and business owners, while taking none of the risks associated with running the business...IOW, it's you, asshole.

 

[rightwinger]

So now we see why the right is whining about their loss of precious "freedom". They ignore the freedoms of civil rights, womens rights, gay rights and moan because they can no longer force other people to breathe in their stink

 

[Mac1958]

You do not have the freedom to force noxious chemicals down another persons lungs any more than you have the freedom to dump noxious chemicals down a river.

If you don't like it, find another river

Nothing is being "forced down your lungs" when you can (1) choose to get up and leave, or (2) choose not to be there in the first place.

Do you really not see the distinction?

.

Or I could Choose to have the person who is fouling the air go outside......I like that idea better

Sure, you could try.

But if that person chooses not to, you could go where the air is up to your standards.

You're both happy.

.

 

[Ariux]

So now we see why the right is whining about their loss of precious "freedom". They ignore the freedoms of civil rights, womens rights, gay rights and moan because they can no longer force other people to breathe in their stink

You call the government-given right to impose on others "freedom". You've got shit for brains, libtard.

 

[rightwinger]

So now we see why the right is whining about their loss of precious "freedom". They ignore the freedoms of civil rights, womens rights, gay rights and moan because they can no longer force other people to breathe in their stink

You call the government-given right to impose on others "freedom". You've got shit for brains, libtard.

Actually it was conservatives insisting that the government enforce their hatreds towards blacks, gays, women.....

 

[Govmule4]

Why can't the federal government just stick to the constitution? Since when has this become a bad thing? I don't understand...republicans complain, democrats complain, our whole system is just whiners with no real solution...when the solution is right in front of us. That's right. I am talking about the damn United States Constitution. All the rules are in place...but we don't follow them. The federal government grows and grows and grows, seizes power that by design the 10th amendment is supposed to protect, etc. etc. Maybe the reason why the country is declining economically, morally, etc. is because we strayed from our foundation...the foundation of liberty secured primarily by local government.

God help us.

Power. The very thing that the Founders feared the most has come to pass.

We have an aristocracy, or ruling elite, who think they are ordained to rule us, and no aspect of their schemes are so outrageous that they fear removal from power.

You are witness to the truth of that old adage.

Power corrupts. Soon, they will have absolute power.

And we willingly go to our demise.

You are pretty misguided, the founding fathers did not fear power. In fact, when they wrote into the constitution that only White Land Owning Males could vote, guess who the founding fathers were, White Land Owning Males. Lets be honest, that was more of an aristocracy than today. Take your head out of american exceptionalism's ass and read a history book.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Liberals have finally decided to give freedom a chance. Only for illegal immigrants though.......

 

[The T]

Liberals have finally decided to give freedom a chance. Only for illegal immigrants though.......

Yeah forget legit Citizens out of work...Dictate Illegals will be given work...UNIONSW won't like this at all...

Obama is sealing his doom...and inching toward Constitutional crises.

 

[Intense]

Liberals have finally decided to give freedom a chance. Only for illegal immigrants though.......

Yeah forget legit Citizens out of work...Dictate Illegals will be given work...UNIONSW won't like this at all...

Obama is sealing his doom...and inching toward Constitutional crises.

Unions don't give a shit as long as they get to collect their dues.

 

[Govmule4]

I think many of the problems with the constitution and its interpretation stems from the Supreme Court. For the majority of history, the Supreme Court has been primarily focused on big business and political rights, with little attention to civil rights until the 1960s. The different parts of the federal government can usually be tracked back to a cases that allowed congress to essentially run America, which makes sense. Lets remember though that the Supreme Court has for the majority of its history held strong conservative values.

 

[chikenwing]

you don't need an "amendment" to protect rights which already exist. and, for the record, civil rights legislation didn't amend the constitution.

They didn't need to because the Constitution already provided for civil rights. The problem was the government, like today, wasn't following the Constitution. The civil rights legislation in the 1960s was completely unnecessary. All the feds had to do was enforce the Constitution.

People changed,the Gov may have forced the unwilling,but we see the social changes because WE the people have changed.

WE are doomed for sure if we become so lazy and stupid we let the Fed's dictate our morality,or beive that it should.

 

[The T]

you don't need an "amendment" to protect rights which already exist. and, for the record, civil rights legislation didn't amend the constitution.

They didn't need to because the Constitution already provided for civil rights. The problem was the government, like today, wasn't following the Constitution. The civil rights legislation in the 1960s was completely unnecessary. All the feds had to do was enforce the Constitution.

People changed,the Gov may have forced the unwilling,but we see the social changes because WE the people have changed.

WE are doomed for sure if we become so lazy and stupid we let the Fed's dictate our morality,or beive that it should.

We changed because the POPULAR CULTURE changed...and it appears to be FORCED.

 

[rightwinger]

They didn't need to because the Constitution already provided for civil rights. The problem was the government, like today, wasn't following the Constitution. The civil rights legislation in the 1960s was completely unnecessary. All the feds had to do was enforce the Constitution.

People changed,the Gov may have forced the unwilling,but we see the social changes because WE the people have changed.

WE are doomed for sure if we become so lazy and stupid we let the Fed's dictate our morality,or beive that it should.

We changed because the POPULAR CULTURE changed...and it appears to be FORCED.

We changed because we became a better society. More concerned about the fair treatment of others, more understanding of what freedom means

 

[JoeB131]

The electoral college is not a defense against the popular will, you idiotic coward. It is a means of balancing the interests and influence of states with large and small populations in our electoral system.

Open a book sometime, you fucking moron.

Why do we need to do that? Why should the vote of someone in Wyoming count more than mine?

That's kind of stupid, when you think about it. (Oh, wait, you aren't into the whole "thinking" thing, are you?)

Two things we ought to chuck. The Senate and the Electoral College.

If we didn't have the Electoral College... New York, Chicago, and LA would be deciding our future Presidents. And we DON'T want that. The vote in Wyoming doesn't "count" more than yours, but the State of Wyoming's vote isn't negated by a State with a higher population. It's hardly "kind of stupid"... It prevents densely populated area's from maintaining a lock on who gets elected, by giving FAIR representation to States where fewer people reside.

Why don't we want that? I mean, I know why YOU don't want that. Heaven forbid that we let the sophisitcated folks who live in cities choose our leaders when Clem and Cleetus can do it if they live in a swing state?

Fair representation is one man, one vote. Which is the way the rest of the world does it.

 

[rightwinger]

When Americans were being denied the freedom to participate in their own society, denied the right to vote, denied the right to marry.......Conservatives could not give a shit

When Americans were told they could not smoke in public or had to buy health insurance conservatives whimper about their loss of freedom

 

[The T]

when americans were being denied the freedom to participate in their own society, denied the right to vote, denied the right to marry.......conservatives could not give a shit

when americans were told they could not smoke in public or had to buy health insurance conservatives whimper about their loss of freedom

bullshit.

 

[rightwinger]

when americans were being denied the freedom to participate in their own society, denied the right to vote, denied the right to marry.......conservatives could not give a shit

when americans were told they could not smoke in public or had to buy health insurance conservatives whimper about their loss of freedom

bullshit.

Come on Righty....

Tell us about all the freedoms you do not have today and compare it to the Civil Rights era

 

[Liberty]

The problem with the left is they falsely equate the term "freedom" as freedom to DO something, vote, talk, etc. Which is only partially the case. They completely forget the other part of freedom and that is the freedom FROM certain entities and actions. For example, freedom also includes the freedom to keep the fruits of your labor FROM others without your consent. Freedom includes the freedom FROM paying into a social security system that amounts to burglary. There are others. The freedom FROMs are what is most at stake.