Romney versus Obama: Who's Closer to the Constitution?

Discussion in 'Election Forums' started by longknife, Oct 22, 2012.

  1. longknife
    Offline

    longknife Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    Messages:
    25,171
    Thanks Received:
    8,310
    Trophy Points:
    900
    Location:
    Sin City
    Ratings:
    +13,517
    2012 Presidential Race -

    By Douglas V. Gibbs @ Political Pistachio: 2012 Presidential Race - Romney versus Obama: Who's Closer to the Constitution?

    The United States Constitution is the basis of my political stance on the issues. Therefore, when trying to decide who to vote for, the first piece of criteria for me is simply: Which candidate's platform is closest to that document? I understand that none of the candidates are going to come as close as I do when it comes to understanding the Constitution. Perfection is not possible.

    That said, when it comes to determining who to vote for in regards to the United States Presidency, the decision is actually quite easy.

    A couple years ago I was waiting at a tire shop for my car and struck a conversation with a gentleman that was waiting with me. The political discussion was about the coming mid-term election, and during the conversation I pulled out a couple of Pocket Constitutions and began going over a couple things with my lobby-mate.

    Nearby, a woman listened intently to our conversation. She remained quiet during most of the way through the discussion until finally she could not wait anymore. "Excuse me," she said.

    I acknowledged her with eye contact, and she said, "Since you are a Constitution guy, then you must be very excited that President Obama is a Constitutional Scholar."

    "Ma'am," I responded, "I don't think he is a Constitutional Scholar."

    "Sure he is," she said. "He taught classes on the Constitution, and everything."

    "A squirrel can call itself a rabbit all it wants, but that doesn't make it a rabbit."

    -- Political Pistachio Conservative News and Commentary


    :cool:

    Forum copyright policy, to be found HERE, prohibits posting of pieces in their entirety.

    ~Oddball
     
  2. Avorysuds
    Offline

    Avorysuds Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2010
    Messages:
    13,834
    Thanks Received:
    1,655
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Eugene Oregon
    Ratings:
    +2,141
    Umm, neither are?
     
  3. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    55,976
    Thanks Received:
    9,333
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +24,525
    There are Pocket Constitutional scholars right here on the forum who do not know what "equal protection of the laws" means.

    Memorizing it and knowing what it means are two entirely different things.



    .
     
  4. Wry Catcher
    Offline

    Wry Catcher Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2009
    Messages:
    31,737
    Thanks Received:
    4,240
    Trophy Points:
    1,160
    Location:
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Ratings:
    +8,148
    I await your response.
     
  5. NYcarbineer
    Offline

    NYcarbineer Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    95,791
    Thanks Received:
    11,241
    Trophy Points:
    2,060
    Location:
    Finger Lakes, NY
    Ratings:
    +30,129
    Do you mean the Constitution as it currently stands on the issues?

    Or what?
     
  6. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    ^^^
    This.

    Oboingo and Vinnie Vitalis aren't even on the same continent, when it comes to following the model of the republic as set forth in the Constitution.
     
  7. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    55,976
    Thanks Received:
    9,333
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +24,525
    False premise. Without a specific issue mentioned, the question implies only one is always closer to the Constitution on all matters, and the other one always is not.

    Name an issue and where each one stands on it.

    .
     
  8. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    What do you think it means?
     
  9. g5000
    Offline

    g5000 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2011
    Messages:
    55,976
    Thanks Received:
    9,333
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Ratings:
    +24,525
    Very simple. If the federal government creates a law, everyone must be equally protected by it.

    So, for example, if the federal government creates a candy distribution benefit, no one can be excluded from receiving the candy benefit just because they are part of a group hated by another group.

    If some bigoted Pocket Constitutional scholar comes along and says, "Show me where a right to free candy is in the Constitution" to justify denying candy to a group they hate, which they frequently do, they would be demonstrating their vast ignorance of the Constitution.


    .
     
    Last edited: Oct 22, 2012
  10. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    No it doesn't, it implies that one is closer more often than the other. Only an idiot would try to turn a commutation of conditionals into a false dichotomy.
     

Share This Page