1. Progressives have a rather unique view of their heroes.
The mob characteristic most gustily exhibited by liberals is the tendency to worship and idolize their political leaders. Gustave Le Bon, in his groundbreaking 1896 book, The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind, explained that mobs can only grasp the very simple and very exaggerated. Their chosen images must be absolute and uncompromising As Le Bon says, the primitive black-and-white emotions of a crowd slip easily into infatuation for an individual. Liberals worship so many political deities that they must refer to them by initials, just to save time- FDR, JFK, RFK, MLK, LBJ, and O.J. Ever hear a conservative get weepy about RWR or refer to something as hokey as Camelot? Passionate adoration are the primitive emotions of a mob, sentiments generally associated with women, children, and savages, according to Le Bon.
Coulter, Demonic.
2.The Founders were men, not gods. The framers of the Constitution combined the best political ideas from the past with what The Federalist called an improved science of politics: federalism, separation of powers, and checks and balances. Doing so, they created a form of government which had, in the words of James Madison, no model on the face of the earth.
Larry P. Arnn, Hillsdale College.
3. Still, in the view of conservatives, the Founders were men- brilliant, -but still men. Not gods, not perfect beings, but men; we do not worship them. We are not like the Liberal mob! Therefore, we are capable of considering that the document that they produced to memorialize our nation, the Constitution, has flaws.
4. Heres for-instance. Whether the original Constitution counted slaves as 3/5 of a person because the Founders felt slaves less than human, or because allowing as a full person would prove the South 40% more toward representation in government, and therefore prevent ever doing away with slavery it was recognized as needing a change. And section 2 of the 14th amendment did just that.
Passed by Republicans, btw.
5. Then there was the time that the Progressives decided that big government was better than federalism, and it would benefit their intentions to wrest power away from the states. They went to work on Article one, section 3, and took selection of senators away from state legislatures. They passed the 17th amendment.
6. How about one that appears less important? Article1, section 4 names the first Monday in December as the start of Congress. Simple enough to change the date: see the 20th amendment, section 2.
7. Dont like how the vice-president is chosen, in Article 2 no prob, amend it .12th amendment.
8. Hey what if something happens to the President? Well is was covered in Article 2, section 1 but we like a formal list better: so, 25th amendment.
9. Exactly what the courts can rule on (Article 3) well, lets add an 11th amendment with more specificity.
10. Lets see .I count 10 instances where the original Constitution has been changed by the amendment process. Some by each side.
Doesnt seem to be any argument that the my bad process set in place by the Founders in Article V, doesnt work
..why, then, are so many important issues allowed to be entirely changed by judges and Justices?
11. There is a school of thought that validates constitutional law based on the good it can do for people now. This idea questions how adherence to a 200-year-old can be defended as beneficial today. Pragmatism, the progressive doctine, as the basis of judicial decision-making, places its weight on the consequences of a judges decisions; advocates would be Justice Stephen Breyer, and Judge Richard Posner.
In short, this idea replaces the rule of law with the rule of judges.
Originalism: A Quarter-Century of Debate, by Steven G. Calabresi
a. The original Constitution is the only instrument that the people have consented to be governed by.
b. Abortion is covered no where in the Constitution. Nor is the right of privacy. Judges make these up. They find penumbras. They imagine.
13. Why not an amendment if they are important to our nation?
a. Abandoning originalism means abandoning the rationale which Marbury v. Madison uses to justify judicial review. Without originalism there can be no constitutionally limited government, and no judicial review.
b. Marshall wrote that the principles of the Constitution are deemed fundamental and permanent and, except for formal amendment, unchangeable.
See Marbury v. Madison.
14. In fact, St. George Tuckers treatise, the first learned commentary on the Constitution, published in 1802, describes exactly the rule of construction with respect to the enumerated powers, and the rights retained by the states and by the people.
The opinions of the Supreme Court should echo the theory of strict construction first presented in works like St. George Tucker's View of the Constitution and James Madison's Report on the Alien and Sedition Acts, and reflect this rule of interpretation: federal power must be narrowly construed in order to prevent undue interference with matters best left under state control. In the words of St. George Tucker, the Constitution "is to be construed strictly, in all cases where the antecedent rights of a state may be drawn in question. Tucker, View of the Constitution, supra note 6, ed. app. at 151.
Either the Constitution has the force of law....or judicial decisions make the law....not both.
America is getting hosed by these corrupt and illegal decision. The legitimate method for change of the Constitution is the amendment process.
Throw the bums out!
The mob characteristic most gustily exhibited by liberals is the tendency to worship and idolize their political leaders. Gustave Le Bon, in his groundbreaking 1896 book, The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind, explained that mobs can only grasp the very simple and very exaggerated. Their chosen images must be absolute and uncompromising As Le Bon says, the primitive black-and-white emotions of a crowd slip easily into infatuation for an individual. Liberals worship so many political deities that they must refer to them by initials, just to save time- FDR, JFK, RFK, MLK, LBJ, and O.J. Ever hear a conservative get weepy about RWR or refer to something as hokey as Camelot? Passionate adoration are the primitive emotions of a mob, sentiments generally associated with women, children, and savages, according to Le Bon.
Coulter, Demonic.
2.The Founders were men, not gods. The framers of the Constitution combined the best political ideas from the past with what The Federalist called an improved science of politics: federalism, separation of powers, and checks and balances. Doing so, they created a form of government which had, in the words of James Madison, no model on the face of the earth.
Larry P. Arnn, Hillsdale College.
3. Still, in the view of conservatives, the Founders were men- brilliant, -but still men. Not gods, not perfect beings, but men; we do not worship them. We are not like the Liberal mob! Therefore, we are capable of considering that the document that they produced to memorialize our nation, the Constitution, has flaws.
4. Heres for-instance. Whether the original Constitution counted slaves as 3/5 of a person because the Founders felt slaves less than human, or because allowing as a full person would prove the South 40% more toward representation in government, and therefore prevent ever doing away with slavery it was recognized as needing a change. And section 2 of the 14th amendment did just that.
Passed by Republicans, btw.
5. Then there was the time that the Progressives decided that big government was better than federalism, and it would benefit their intentions to wrest power away from the states. They went to work on Article one, section 3, and took selection of senators away from state legislatures. They passed the 17th amendment.
6. How about one that appears less important? Article1, section 4 names the first Monday in December as the start of Congress. Simple enough to change the date: see the 20th amendment, section 2.
7. Dont like how the vice-president is chosen, in Article 2 no prob, amend it .12th amendment.
8. Hey what if something happens to the President? Well is was covered in Article 2, section 1 but we like a formal list better: so, 25th amendment.
9. Exactly what the courts can rule on (Article 3) well, lets add an 11th amendment with more specificity.
10. Lets see .I count 10 instances where the original Constitution has been changed by the amendment process. Some by each side.
Doesnt seem to be any argument that the my bad process set in place by the Founders in Article V, doesnt work
..why, then, are so many important issues allowed to be entirely changed by judges and Justices?
11. There is a school of thought that validates constitutional law based on the good it can do for people now. This idea questions how adherence to a 200-year-old can be defended as beneficial today. Pragmatism, the progressive doctine, as the basis of judicial decision-making, places its weight on the consequences of a judges decisions; advocates would be Justice Stephen Breyer, and Judge Richard Posner.
In short, this idea replaces the rule of law with the rule of judges.
Originalism: A Quarter-Century of Debate, by Steven G. Calabresi
a. The original Constitution is the only instrument that the people have consented to be governed by.
b. Abortion is covered no where in the Constitution. Nor is the right of privacy. Judges make these up. They find penumbras. They imagine.
13. Why not an amendment if they are important to our nation?
a. Abandoning originalism means abandoning the rationale which Marbury v. Madison uses to justify judicial review. Without originalism there can be no constitutionally limited government, and no judicial review.
b. Marshall wrote that the principles of the Constitution are deemed fundamental and permanent and, except for formal amendment, unchangeable.
See Marbury v. Madison.
14. In fact, St. George Tuckers treatise, the first learned commentary on the Constitution, published in 1802, describes exactly the rule of construction with respect to the enumerated powers, and the rights retained by the states and by the people.
The opinions of the Supreme Court should echo the theory of strict construction first presented in works like St. George Tucker's View of the Constitution and James Madison's Report on the Alien and Sedition Acts, and reflect this rule of interpretation: federal power must be narrowly construed in order to prevent undue interference with matters best left under state control. In the words of St. George Tucker, the Constitution "is to be construed strictly, in all cases where the antecedent rights of a state may be drawn in question. Tucker, View of the Constitution, supra note 6, ed. app. at 151.
Either the Constitution has the force of law....or judicial decisions make the law....not both.
America is getting hosed by these corrupt and illegal decision. The legitimate method for change of the Constitution is the amendment process.
Throw the bums out!
