the constitution

[rightwinger]

Seriously? With both Clinton and Bush there is no constitution. You're weeping over a dead document. When the people that are entrusted piss on it, it's done.

Could you provide specifics so we don't have to debate generalities?

Where has the Supreme Court been?

Missing. When it came to 2000 election, when it came to eminent domain. Missing.

Annie

I'm still not following you. I'd like to discuss your Constitutional concerns but I need to know specifics of where the Constitution has been violated

 

[indianaboy]

what part of the constitution, specifically, do you believe is now being abrogated that wasn't abrogated over the past eight years?

It's been going on much longer than the last 8 years.

funny...and i think it's been largely pretty strong for over 200.

of course, it gets a little strained at times.

it's only problematic if one is one of the extremists who think it's never supposed to be interpreted.

"Interpret" doesn't mean "change its meaning to coincide with changing viewpoints of society".

 

[rightwinger]

Can anyone here provide specific examples?

 

[indianaboy]

Can anyone here provide specific examples?

Griswold certainly springs to mind, as does Gitlow. There are plenty of other examples, the current health care reform movement being one of them.

 

[DiamondDave]

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.

This is just Horrible!

Imagine people in the richest nation on earth wanting a decent education, a roof over their head, food. clothing, care when they are too old to work

What the hell was FDR thinking?

You don't just get something at the expense of someone else BECAUSE YOU FUCKING WANT IT... and you sure as hell don't have a government, in a society based on personal freedoms and liberty, go against it's constitution to facilitate it for you... you leftist entitlement junkie

 

[jillian]

Can anyone here provide specific examples?

Griswold certainly springs to mind, as does Gitlow. There are plenty of other examples, the current health care reform movement being one of them.

griswold? as in griswold v connecticut?

you're kidding, right? you think it's a violation of the constitution for the feds to prohibit the state from denying contraception to a married couple?

 

[jillian]

It's been going on much longer than the last 8 years.

funny...and i think it's been largely pretty strong for over 200.

of course, it gets a little strained at times.

it's only problematic if one is one of the extremists who think it's never supposed to be interpreted.

"Interpret" doesn't mean "change its meaning to coincide with changing viewpoints of society".

really? you might want to discuss that with the separate courts that heard plessy v ferguson and brown v bd of ed.

or with the court that decided bush v gore

people like you lose the forest for the trees....

 

[RetiredGySgt]

when did it become irrelevant? it seems whenever BIG GOVERNMENT on both sides of the aisle deems something a "crises" they completely dismiss the constitution and ram something through. why is this?

Mike

Please explain what has been dismissed in the Constitution

Social Security, Medicare, the proposed Health take over, the bailouts, the list is endless. The Commerce clause does not cover half the shit the Government claims it does.

 

[jillian]

bull... you really want to discuss the constitutionality of social security?

see...this is why i find these threads so ridiculous...

 

[Libertarian2009]

I say we do away with all government programs and the Government itself and let the military defend us and call it a a day. Tax money goes to the military to pay off our debt and to pay our men and women to defend us.

For once let the people take care of the people.


Just think how fast our debt goes away and never returns.




NO GOVERNMENT, NO DEBT!

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

I say we do away with all government programs and the Government itself and let the military defend us and call it a a day. Tax money goes to the military to pay off our debt and to pay our men and women to defend us.

For once let the people take care of the people.


Just think how fast our debt goes away and never returns.




NO GOVERNMENT, NO DEBT!

I am not into anarchy.

 

[Elutherian]

I say we do away with all government programs and the Government itself and let the military defend us and call it a a day. Tax money goes to the military to pay off our debt and to pay our men and women to defend us.

For once let the people take care of the people.


Just think how fast our debt goes away and never returns.




NO GOVERNMENT, NO DEBT!

I like this idea. Of course I'd make defense private too... but it's on the right track.

 

[Intense]

The first two major assaults on the Constitution.

Here Hamilton Shreds the "Enumerated Powers" of the Federal Government by Trumping them with the misuse of the "Health and Welfare Clause". Arguing that Anything that possibly could be imagined, should be prepared for" What If Defense of Usurpation""The End Justifies the Means", limitless power of Imagination. Hamilton ignored all of the major defenses and justifications of Federalism here to advance his agenda.
Hamilton: The Constitutionality of the Bank of the United States, 1791

Marbury V.S. Madison The History behind this decision and what led up to it violate what was used to Justify the Court in the Federalist Papers by Hamilton. You need to decide which Hamilton to support, Hamilton B.C. (Before Constitution Ratified), or Hamilton A.D. (After he Destroyed the barriers and Borders, of The Constitution, Oligharchy Hamilton). The Empire Forever!!!!
Marbury v. Madison - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[indianaboy]

Can anyone here provide specific examples?

Griswold certainly springs to mind, as does Gitlow. There are plenty of other examples, the current health care reform movement being one of them.

griswold? as in griswold v connecticut?

you're kidding, right? you think it's a violation of the constitution for the feds to prohibit the state from denying contraception to a married couple?

About as clear a violation as there ever has been.

funny...and i think it's been largely pretty strong for over 200.

of course, it gets a little strained at times.

it's only problematic if one is one of the extremists who think it's never supposed to be interpreted.

"Interpret" doesn't mean "change its meaning to coincide with changing viewpoints of society".

really? you might want to discuss that with the separate courts that heard plessy v ferguson and brown v bd of ed.

or with the court that decided bush v gore

people like you lose the forest for the trees....

I'd be happy to discuss this with the Courts. BTW Brown is another horribly decided case.

 

[lawbuff]

I think all you people need to answer Jillian's question, rather than continue to spout talking points.

This question has been asked in a whole bunch of other threads devoted to the same BS question.

What exactly is being "dismissed" aboutu the Constitution and "rammed through".

Please feel free to be specific about what portion of the constitution is being contradicted.

Congress has a tendency to "re-write" legislation when a SC decision does not set well with them, as in Flag burning some years ago.

One specific case I can think of is the New London eminent domain case. This was so wrong in my mind. After that, states began looking to thier own constitutions to forbid such as was done.

 

[lawbuff]

really? you might want to discuss that with the separate courts that heard plessy v ferguson and brown v bd of ed.

or with the court that decided bush v gore

The SC has overturned themselves about 200 times since 1789, mostly minor decisions.

One main one was where the court started, in the early 1920's, to start to incorporate the Bill of Rights to the states, clearly over Marshall's decision in Barron v. Baltimore.

Which court was correct?

Another major one, Mapp v. Ohio, overruling Wolf v. Colorado's exclusionsry rule non admission.

 

[MikeHoncho]

the point i was making about entitlement programs is when they take from me and give to the collective with out my consent, i believe they call that stealing. entitlement programs are only used as a marketing tool for inpressionable people to believe the government can handle your property better than you can. people are willing to give up their liberty for the idea that it will be better because the government says it will. when did we become so crippled to trust someone whos track record is a failure when it comes to entitlement programs. they claim to be fore the little guy, well tell them to take their foot of his throat.

 

[Intense]

the point i was making about entitlement programs is when they take from me and give to the collective with out my consent, i believe they call that stealing. entitlement programs are only used as a marketing tool for inpressionable people to believe the government can handle your property better than you can. people are willing to give up their liberty for the idea that it will be better because the government says it will. when did we become so crippled to trust someone whos track record is a failure when it comes to entitlement programs. they claim to be fore the little guy, well tell them to take their foot of his throat.

When the Union's took over Education, Government, and the Media? Comrade.

 

[MikeHoncho]

When the Union's took over Education, Government, and the Media? Comrade.[/QUOTE]


no i hear ya. i just dont understand why people have a problem with having a little more of THEIR money in their pockets to provide for their families. that cant be, the governement likes spending other peoples money. they provide programs that go insolvent because they use the $$ on everything other than their intended purpose.

people get so caught up in the so called benefits of what the govt is proposing they dont even step back to see that we always fit the bill for something that never comes to fruition, it never happens the way it was planned, or the timeframe it should have. its stupid. why do we have to look at the government for charity? let me manage MY money and get your hand out of my wallet.

 

[jillian]

really? you might want to discuss that with the separate courts that heard plessy v ferguson and brown v bd of ed.

or with the court that decided bush v gore

The SC has overturned themselves about 200 times since 1789, mostly minor decisions.

One main one was where the court started, in the early 1920's, to start to incorporate the Bill of Rights to the states, clearly over Marshall's decision in Barron v. Baltimore.

Which court was correct?

Another major one, Mapp v. Ohio, overruling Wolf v. Colorado's exclusionsry rule non admission.

and? your point? courts come down with different decisions. that's the nature of the constitution and it's construction. it's retarded to think there's one answer. if you change the composition of the court tomorrow, you'll have opposite decisions from the ones you have today.

btw, i should probably tell you that you can assume I know what you're talking about. I've been making my living at the practice of law for quite a while.

thanks.