Defending the Constitution?

[Adam's Apple]

Justice Kennedy’s Mind
By Jonah Goldberg, National Review
March 9, 2005

Imagine you were asked to protect, uphold, and defend the framfra of the United States of America. Or ask yourself, What if you were appointed to faithfully execute the queenestray of the land?

You'd be forgiven if, before holding up your right hand, you asked, "Uh, what's a framfra?" or "Could you explain what a queenestray is?" After all, you wouldn't want to take an oath that required you to kill puppies or watch Carrot Top movies. Mature, sensible people generally don't agree to obligations they don't understand.

But that is precisely what our elected and appointed leaders are asked to do today. When taking office, they swear an oath to protect, defend, and enforce the Constitution of the United States. Yet it is becoming more and more difficult to say exactly what that means. Sure, on one level, anybody can read what the Constitution says. But, apparently, knowing what it says doesn't necessarily mean we know what it means.

for full story:
http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg200503090749.asp

 

[no1tovote4]

Justice Kennedy’s Mind
By Jonah Goldberg, National Review
March 9, 2005

Imagine you were asked to protect, uphold, and defend the framfra of the United States of America. Or ask yourself, What if you were appointed to faithfully execute the queenestray of the land?

You'd be forgiven if, before holding up your right hand, you asked, "Uh, what's a framfra?" or "Could you explain what a queenestray is?" After all, you wouldn't want to take an oath that required you to kill puppies or watch Carrot Top movies. Mature, sensible people generally don't agree to obligations they don't understand.

But that is precisely what our elected and appointed leaders are asked to do today. When taking office, they swear an oath to protect, defend, and enforce the Constitution of the United States. Yet it is becoming more and more difficult to say exactly what that means. Sure, on one level, anybody can read what the Constitution says. But, apparently, knowing what it says doesn't necessarily mean we know what it means.

for full story:
http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg200503090749.asp

I for one get upset when our elected officials violate the tenets of the framfra and the queenestray. I think we should recall every politician that specifically presents eltimagistac that violates the framfra!

 

[Adam's Apple]

Hope you read the entire article and didn't get hung up of "queenestray" and "framfra," which hardly anyone has ever heard of.

 

[musicman]

Our way of life is in mortal danger.

 

[no1tovote4]

Hope you read the entire article and didn't get hung up of "queenestray" and "framfra," which hardly anyone has ever heard of.

About as many as had heard of eltimagistac?

Brevity is sometimes unappreciated.

I agree with the premise of the article, international law is not applicable to the Constitutionality of a law and should not be used as a framework for a decision of the Constitutionality of the law. It is a shameless attempt at working to find for your opinion than actually reading and applying the tenets of the Constitution that gives them their power.