One of the main objectives of our Constitution

[boedicca]

Inferences are important here: I see where your failure with critical thinking skills is at.

The meme. It states "was" not "is" -- follow me? The US Constitution "was" meaning the past. Ask yourself in what context. I suggest the context is at -- wait for it -- at what we call "The Founding."

The Founding - the beginning. When it was ratified. Follow me?

"Was" not "Is"

The meme. It is what people were and are responding to. That and the inanities of the OP himself.

Given that the poster of the OP has like my posts, I believe I have interpreted his intent quite properly.

You, on the other hand, get an F in logic today.

 

[para bellum]

The "constitution" set out the framework of our republic, but the constitution does NOT contain limitations on what govt can do.

There are a number of limitations on the government that are found in the Constitution.
No permanent standing army.
No direct taxes that are not proportional to the census.
No suspension of Habeas Corpus unless rebellion or invasion.
No ex post facto laws.
No duties between States.
Money from the Treasury must be appropriated by Congress.
No granting of titles of nobility.

To list a few...

The separation of powers and the Federal system of Gov't are both inherent structrural limits on government power. Checks and balances of the branches of Gov't, and between the States and the Federal Gov't.

 

[Dante]

Schumer

Should the Government Restrict ‘Harmful’ Speech Online? - FEE

The First Amendment prohibits the federal government from suppressing speech, including speech it deems “harmful,” yet lawmakers keep trying to regulate

fee.org

and Walz

VP Candidate Tim Walz on "There's No Guarantee to Free Speech on Misinformation or Hate Speech, and Especially Around Our Democracy"

Robby Soave at Reason writes about this 2022 quote from Walz (MSNBC): https://youtu.be/y8ns76RCmWs : … I want to talk about what you just mentioned

reason.com

come to mind.

Fail -- no quote by Schumer stating what you claim

Fail -- no quote by Walz stating what you claim

two links to opinion pieces that do what?

 

[Dante]

Given that the poster of the OP has like my posts, I believe I have interpreted his intent quite properly.

You, on the other hand, get an F in logic today.

The meme.

What the delusional OP keeps saying (after the OP) and liking is beside the point

 

[Dante]

What the Constitution meant is what it means.

Poor befuddled the dainty.

Gibberish on steroids

 

[BackAgain]

Fail -- no quote by Schumer stating what you claim

Fail -- no quote by Walz stating what you claim

two links to opinion pieces that do what?

You have just lied again.

You asked the question. I answered it. You don’t like the answer that shows you’re wrong.

Typical the dairy cowardice.

Anyway, to get more fully back ON topic, despite your efforts to take it all off topic, the fact remains:

Our Constitution has multiple purposes. One of its major objectives is to limit the power of the federal government so as to preserve the rights and liberties of the people. It enumerates what the government’s powers are — via enumerated topics of that power.

If you still don’t understand why the authorized powers are enumerated, you are unlikely to ever grasp what the Framers were seeking to accomplish.

You don’t understand federalism. You don’t understand checks and balances. You don’t understand the purpose behind the Bill of Rights which ARE parts of our constitution.

In fact, and pretty obviously, there is really not much about our Constitution you do understand.

 

[Dante]

You have just lied again.

You asked the question. I answered it. You don’t like the answer that shows you’re wrong.

Typical the dairy cowardice.

Anyway, to get more fully back ON topic, despite your efforts to take it all off topic, the fact remains:

Our Constitution has multiple purposes. One of its major objectives is to limit the power of the federal government so as to preserve the rights and liberties of the people. It enumerates what the government’s powers are — via enumerated topics of that power.

If you still don’t understand why the authorized powers are enumerated, you are unlikely to ever grasp what the Framers were seeking to accomplish.

You don’t understand federalism. You don’t understand checks and balances. You don’t understand the purpose behind the Bill of Rights which ARE parts of our constitution.

In fact, and pretty obviously, there is really not much about our Constitution you do understand.

You have no quotes of anyone saying what you claim. None. nada

 

[BackAgain]

Gibberish on steroids

Every time you post.

You have no quotes of anyone saying what you claim. None. nada

You can’t stop lying.

Walz (quoted in the link I provided) said, “There's no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy. “

But you’re also off topic.

 

[Dante]

Our Constitution has multiple purposes.

Can you provide a link to this opinion?

One of its major objectives is to limit the power of the federal government so as to preserve the rights and liberties of the people. It enumerates what the government’s powers are — via enumerated topics of that power.

If you still don’t understand why the authorized powers are enumerated, you are unlikely to ever grasp what the Framers were seeking to accomplish.

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” The origin of the “enumerated rights” concept traces back to the debates surrounding the Constitution's ratification.

You don’t understand federalism. You don’t understand checks and balances. You don’t understand the purpose behind the Bill of Rights which ARE parts of our constitution.

In fact, and pretty obviously, there is really not much about our Constitution you do understand.

Federalism? I understand it far better than you could ever grasp. It's why I support each state having 2 Senators each, regardless of size of territory or population. I understand the democratic principles and values inherent in our republic. It's how and why I grasp the nature of the USA being a democratic republic and a constitutional one and a federalist... blah, blah, blah...

I have threads in forums here:

US Constitution

Discussions on the US Constitution including the Bill of Rights, Amendments and more.

www.usmessageboard.com

That you are absolutely lost in if you even try and engage

 

[Dante]

Every time you post.

You can’t stop lying.

Walz (quoted in the link I provided) said, “There's no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy. “

But you’re also off topic.

In colonial America and later in the early days of the founding of the USA There were limits on speech as there were always limits on guns. People usually misread and misunderstand things.

I wonder who you rely on in the scholarship of it all. I've listed my sources and influences many times. You? You just seem to bloviate and talk shit

 

[Dante]

Every time you post.

You can’t stop lying.

Walz (quoted in the link I provided) said, “There's no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy. “

But you’re also off topic.

“There's no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy. “ equals what you claim along with the meme?

I don't think so

 

[BackAgain]

Can you provide a link to this opinion?

What a stupid question.

Are you actually trying to deny that the Constitution serves multiple purposes?

You poor pathetic loser. You must have been at the bottom of your class for however long you made it through school.

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” The origin of the “enumerated rights” concept traces back to the debates surrounding the Constitution's ratification.


Federalism? I understand it far better than you could ever grasp. It's why I support each state having 2 Senators each, regardless of size of territory or population. I understand the democratic principles and values inherent in our republic. It's how and why I grasp the nature of the USA being a democratic republic and a constitutional one and a federalist... blah, blah, blah...

I have threads in forums here:

US Constitution

Discussions on the US Constitution including the Bill of Rights, Amendments and more.

www.usmessageboard.com

That you are absolutely lost in if you even try and engage

Also, try to out enumerated rights to the side. I was addressing enumerated powers. The fact that they are enumerated puts a restraint on what our lawmakers have any authority to try to legislate. It limits government.

Libturds like Walz and Schumer seek to limit what the People may say or write or publish. But that’s why the First Amendment exists. Because “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

 

[Dante]

What a stupid question.

Are you actually trying to deny that the Constitution serves multiple purposes?

Nope. But run with that if it makes you feel smart.

You poor pathetic loser. You must have been at the bottom of your class for however long you made it through school.

you have no clue, do you...

Also, try to out enumerated rights to the side. I was addressing enumerated powers. The fact that they are enumerated puts a restraint on what our lawmakers have any authority to try to legislate. It limits government.

no one disagrees with this. You keep building up strawmen and tearing them down. Would've been impressive in the days before FOX News

Libturds like Walz and Schumer seek to limit what the People may say or write or publish. But that’s why the First Amendment exists. Because “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Here we go again with "Libturds"

I've give you enough attention today, this week.

bye bye

 

[BackAgain]

In colonial America and later in the early days of the founding of the USA There were limits on speech as there were always limits on guns. People usually misread and misunderstand things.

I wonder who you rely on in the scholarship of it all. I've listed my sources and influences many times. You? You just seem to bloviate and talk shit

Limits on speech like falsely shouting “fire” in the proverbial crowded theater or like publishing our troop movements in time of war are designed for safety reasons but don’t affect our right to speak freely, etc.

It might fascinate you to grasp that our Constitution is not now and never was a “suicide pact” — to paraphrase a smart jurist.

 

[Dante]

Limits on speech like falsely shouting “fire” in the proverbial crowded theater or like publishing our troop movements in time of war are designed for safety reasons but don’t affect our right to speak freely, etc.

no shit Sherlock

It might fascinate you to grasp that our Constitution is not now and never was a “suicide pact” — to paraphrase a smart jurist.

there you go again...

continue...

with yourself

 

[BackAgain]

Nope. But run with that if it makes you feel smart.

I don’t need to feel smart. I am smart. Certainly smarter than you, the dainty. But I am gratified that it’s not why you asked your stupid question.

you have no clue, do you...

I’m the one who does. Your mistake, as always.

no one disagrees with this.

You seem to have.

You keep building up strawmen and tearing them down. Would've been impressive in the days before FOX News

Except that’s not remotely what I’ve been doing. As you knew when you typed your latest lie.

Here we go again with "Libturds"

Poor pitiable pathetic the dainty.

I've give you enough attention today, this week.

bye bye

Good. Fuck off. I’ve beaten you down enough for now.

 

[Dante]

I don’t need to feel smart. I am smart. Certainly smarter than you, the dainty. But I am gratified that it’s not why you asked your stupid question.

this is a keeper post



for my files

 

[BackAgain]

this is a keeper post



for my files

 

[Rigby5]

Yup

But the purpose of the document is to define the government

And what is the purpose of defining the government?
You do that so that you can prevent the government from expanding and being abusive.

And clearly the federal government has expanded to the point of being abusive.
For example, there is no authority to regulate drugs, medicine, firearms, gambling, alcohol, etc.
Economic sanctions, like against Russian oil, is totally illegal and in violation of the 4th amendment.
If someone wants to buy pharmaceuticals from China and sell them here, the feds get no say legally.

 

[Rigby5]

To engage in a serious discussion - You'd have to ask the OP who exactly has claimed:

"The US Constitution is Meant to Restrain Citizens." and "Who claims the US Constitution tells Citizens what they may not do.?"

As it is based on a silly meme (grandchild of Bumper sticker) it isn't really something 'meant' to be taken seriously.

What?

That is totally wrong.
The OP claimed "the US constitution is meant to restrain government".
You have it backwards.