Here I go again

[dilloduck]

By what authority does the federal govt have to step into the business of states when the state is doing nothing unconstutional ? The Constitution. SCOTUS basically can interpret that baby to mean anything they want and NO ONE has any realistic way of stopping them except to wait for them to die and appoint ones who think differently.
Is our constitution a little lame in this respect ?

 

[William Joyce]

By what authority does the federal govt have to step into the business of states when the state is doing nothing unconstutional ? The Constitution. SCOTUS basically can interpret that baby to mean anything they want and NO ONE has any realistic way of stopping them except to wait for them to die and appoint ones who think differently.
Is our constitution a little lame in this respect ?

100 percent correct.

There's no problem with the Constitution, which was and still is a brilliant document. The problem is with the human beings charged with its care. The biggest missed point about our system of government is that the federal government was only empowered to do the things listed in Article I of the Constitution. Today, they do as they please.

What's to stop them? Well, not much. The federal government sends its troops in to kill anyone who resists it. States are POWERLESS in the face of the feddy.

It wasn't supposed to be this way. But power abhors a vacuum. Nobody is ever satisfied with the idea that they CAN'T do a certain thing. They want total power, absolute power. So they figure out a way to get it. If all you need is a few word games, hey, SCOTUS is right there.

It's basically man's political immaturity. It's like handing someone a gun and telling them not to use it. Fat chance.

Funny thing is, the founders KNEW all this. And they predicted problems.

Christ, I don't know. It's like we've always had the same damn thing, all through history: despotism. But it's always been known by a different name. First, it was monarchy. Then, republicanism. Then, communism. Then, democracy. But those are all just different names for what's basically the same shit in a different ziplock bag: some people have power, others don't. That's how it goes. The battle for power continues, regardless of the name of the system.

 

[dilloduck]

100 percent correct.

There's no problem with the Constitution, which was and still is a brilliant document. The problem is with the human beings charged with its care. The biggest missed point about our system of government is that the federal government was only empowered to do the things listed in Article I of the Constitution. Today, they do as they please.

What's to stop them? Well, not much. The federal government sends its troops in to kill anyone who resists it. States are POWERLESS in the face of the feddy.

It wasn't supposed to be this way. But power abhors a vacuum. Nobody is ever satisfied with the idea that they CAN'T do a certain thing. They want total power, absolute power. So they figure out a way to get it. If all you need is a few word games, hey, SCOTUS is right there.

It's basically man's political immaturity. It's like handing someone a gun and telling them not to use it. Fat chance.

Funny thing is, the founders KNEW all this. And they predicted problems.

Christ, I don't know. It's like we've always had the same damn thing, all through history: despotism. But it's always been known by a different name. First, it was monarchy. Then, republicanism. Then, communism. Then, democracy. But those are all just different names for what's basically the same shit in a different ziplock bag: some people have power, others don't. That's how it goes. The battle for power continues, regardless of the name of the system.

Thanks, ---Interesting how this transistion has occured in such a relatively short period of time. Guess they set the ball rolling and it was up to future generations to deal with the problems inherent in the constitution. They gave us a pretty good start. I wonder if we can pull it off.