We need a new Constitution, yes or no?

[Kosh]

Sure, why not?

Drive by posts by Kosh in this thread;

And how does that prove it?

I recommend that you apply to your local community college for adult remedial education and have them teach you how to communicate effectively.

So in other words you have no real proof. I knew that before you posted.

So got any real proof? or just plain speculation that even a far left Obama drone with the two year old mindset might be able to produce?

 

[Kosh]

you asked me and i proved it....how many times do i have to prove it?.....90% of the shit you post is calling someone a far left Obama drone.....Even if the poster is not a far lefty....it doesnt matter to you....if someone has the gall and audacity to not agree with you he automatically is labeled a far left drone....a moderate righty would not do that....because they know not everyone on the left is far left....you already made your bed Kosh.....to late to change the sheets....

Wrong! Once again! If someone posts far left propaganda it gets called out. I will call someone a "far left Obama drone" if they deserve it, or to mock someone like you that can not tell the difference. So once again you posted lies and no proof.

You goof ball, that is how you are treated - a far right propagandist who is treated the way he treats others. You will get no respect until you start posting worthy commentary and material while laying off the trolling.

Tis what it is.

Oh my the irony of those comments from a racist, bigoted far left Obama drone.

Still have no proof other than I am not far left. Then again to the far left anyone not far left is far right.

You going to denounce Obama for his illegal acts in Iraq?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Wrong! Once again! If someone posts far left propaganda it gets called out. I will call someone a "far left Obama drone" if they deserve it, or to mock someone like you that can not tell the difference. So once again you posted lies and no proof.

You goof ball, that is how you are treated - a far right propagandist who is treated the way he treats others. You will get no respect until you start posting worthy commentary and material while laying off the trolling.

Tis what it is.

Oh my the irony of those comments from a racist, bigoted far left Obama drone.

Still have no proof other than I am not far left. Then again to the far left anyone not far left is far right.

You going to denounce Obama for his illegal acts in Iraq?

You are a far right reactionary drone who will be called out regularly as necessary: fact.

You have no proof that BHO has committed illegal acts in Iraq: fact.

 

[Kosh]

You are making the same allegation so the onus is not on me to "prove you wrong" but for you to provide credible substantiation that your allegation is not just your own biased opinion.

So now that you have made that unproven allegation the onus is on you to provide a credible nonpartisan source.

ttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuABhumm6fY

No such thing exists, so you want people to provide something that does not exist in reality.

Yes, there is no proof that either 2ndA or HD are correct in their baseless allegation about what schools are teaching.

Which establishes that this is only their own personal biased opinion and has no connection with reality.

Says the one that asked for an unbiased creditable link.

 

[Kosh]

You goof ball, that is how you are treated - a far right propagandist who is treated the way he treats others. You will get no respect until you start posting worthy commentary and material while laying off the trolling.

Tis what it is.

Oh my the irony of those comments from a racist, bigoted far left Obama drone.

Still have no proof other than I am not far left. Then again to the far left anyone not far left is far right.

You going to denounce Obama for his illegal acts in Iraq?

You are a far right reactionary drone who will be called out regularly as necessary: fact.

You have no proof that BHO has committed illegal acts in Iraq: fact.

It has been posted many times, and it was the same ones that the far left used for Bush in 2003 to 2009.

So you going to condemn Obama for his illegal acts in Iraq?

 

[Andylusion]

Please, its not crazy talk......Our original Constitution was the Articles of Confederation....the founders themselves weren't willing just to let things be...why should we?

I brought up the enforcement argument not because I necessarily agree with it, but because I anticipated a lot of folks saying "lets just enforce the one we've got".

You do have a point on if they dont follow it now why will they then....but thats not really an argument not to try for better. In general I think society would follow the rules better if they felt they were fairer.

We have an amendment process if you want to change something. Toss in your amendment, and if we all vote for it, great. Otherwise, no.
The problem with the articles of confederation, was that it was so limited, we couldn't defend the country.
The constitution, is likely one of the greatest documents in human history.... and it works.... if we follow it.
The problem today is that we're not following it. That doesn't mean we need a new document, it just means we need to follow what we have.
Out of all the civilizations in the world, we have become the most powerful and wealthy nation to ever exist, over hundreds of nations that have existed for hundreds, thousands of years.
What we have, does work. Let's just enforce what works.
Adopting something new, when we are not following what we already have, is like Venezuela. They changed everything, and their nation is ruined.

Thats essentially what I was proposing, amendment......or a series of them.

That the articles was limited our defense was disputed.....in fact we beat the british without even that limited form of government.

I dont think it works good enough....

I don't think it was nearly as much in dispute as you claim. It's true that we did in fact beat the British, with the articles of Confederation.

But that doesn't change the reasoning behind the replacement.

Congress complained that they could not enforce tax collection. The were not able to pay for the army. As a result, the army had more allegiance to New York, which providing the majority of the funding, than Congress.

Additionally they had no ability to compel those of other states, to join the army.

These were the two primary motivating factors in replacing the Articles of Confederation, with our modern Constitution.

Again, I would suggest the reason it 'doesn't work good enough', is merely because we're not following it.

Any system, no matter how will planned, if you don't follow it, won't work good enough.

It's kind of like saying your personal trainer doesn't work good enough, when you eat a triple chocolate cake every Thursday, and refuse to do his work out regiment throughout the week.... I just don't think my trainer works very well.

The constitution works extremely well, when you actually follow it.

And no new constitution will work any better if you don't follow it.

The solution is to simply go back to following it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The allegation without proof has been posted many times, yes: this Board does not accept the Big Lie as you practice it as proof, Kosh.

What you are trying to suggest is that BHO in the presidency is a criminal because he is trying to clean up Bush's illegal and foolish actions.

That is why you are considered such a far right reactionary drone goof ball here.

 

[Kosh]

The allegation without proof has been posted many times, yes: this Board does not accept the Big Lie as you practice it as proof, Kosh.

What you are trying to suggest is that BHO in the presidency is a criminal because he is trying to clean up Bush's illegal and foolish actions.

That is why you are considered such a far right reactionary drone goof ball here.

Oh the far left and their propaganda!

So yes the far left will yet follow Obama once again as he commits another illegal war.

 

[regent]

Perhaps with a new Constitution there will be the desire to enforce it.

Dont know what your getting at with the schools teach comment.

The current trend is to do what feels right. Not what IS right, but what feels right. You hear it all the time.

What kind of society do we want to be....

This is nothing more than code for, I want to do this and I don't care if it hurts more than it helps. I want it.

People are being taught in our schools that the Constitution is obsolete, even though it is the most relevant document in the world today. They are being taught that it is better to do what we feel than to think things through and make choices that may not seem compassionate, but will server the greater good.

If you do not desire to enforce the law of the land, then any document that purports to be the law, is worthless. Because there is no desire to enforce it.

New or old.

Do you realize that the fifty states govern education, and in those fifty states are over 13000 school districts, and in those 13000 districts are 24,000 high schools and in those 24,000 high schools are one or more classes teaching the Constitution. Yet they all manage to teach the Constitution is obsolete. Sounds like another communist conspiracy in the making.

 

[Derideo_Te]

And how does that prove it?

I recommend that you apply to your local community college for adult remedial education and have them teach you how to communicate effectively.

So in other words you have no real proof. I knew that before you posted.

So got any real proof? or just plain speculation that even a far left Obama drone with the two year old mindset might be able to produce?

The proof was your mindless drone slurs with zero substance. That you failed to appreciate how you appear to others with such pathetic posts says volumes. You aren't doing yourself any favors.

 

[Derideo_Te]

No such thing exists, so you want people to provide something that does not exist in reality.

Yes, there is no proof that either 2ndA or HD are correct in their baseless allegation about what schools are teaching.

Which establishes that this is only their own personal biased opinion and has no connection with reality.

Says the one that asked for an unbiased creditable link.

 

[Kosh]

I recommend that you apply to your local community college for adult remedial education and have them teach you how to communicate effectively.

So in other words you have no real proof. I knew that before you posted.

So got any real proof? or just plain speculation that even a far left Obama drone with the two year old mindset might be able to produce?

The proof was your mindless drone slurs with zero substance. That you failed to appreciate how you appear to others with such pathetic posts says volumes. You aren't doing yourself any favors.

Wrong again!

Mindless would be to accept far left propaganda without question or hesitation, so you are saying that is was not far left propaganda?

Where is your proof from all those credible unbiased sources you think exist?

 

[Derideo_Te]

The current trend is to do what feels right. Not what IS right, but what feels right. You hear it all the time.

What kind of society do we want to be....

This is nothing more than code for, I want to do this and I don't care if it hurts more than it helps. I want it.

People are being taught in our schools that the Constitution is obsolete, even though it is the most relevant document in the world today. They are being taught that it is better to do what we feel than to think things through and make choices that may not seem compassionate, but will server the greater good.

If you do not desire to enforce the law of the land, then any document that purports to be the law, is worthless. Because there is no desire to enforce it.

New or old.

Do you realize that the fifty states govern education, and in those fifty states are over 13000 school districts, and in those 13000 districts are 24,000 high schools and in those 24,000 high schools are one or more classes teaching the Constitution. Yet they all manage to teach the Constitution is obsolete. Sounds like another communist conspiracy in the making.

Yet another baseless allegation with ZERO credible substantiation!

 

[Kosh]

Yes, there is no proof that either 2ndA or HD are correct in their baseless allegation about what schools are teaching.

Which establishes that this is only their own personal biased opinion and has no connection with reality.

Says the one that asked for an unbiased creditable link.

So you can not produce something you ask from others.

Go figure that one.

 

[Derideo_Te]

So in other words you have no real proof. I knew that before you posted.

So got any real proof? or just plain speculation that even a far left Obama drone with the two year old mindset might be able to produce?

The proof was your mindless drone slurs with zero substance. That you failed to appreciate how you appear to others with such pathetic posts says volumes. You aren't doing yourself any favors.

Wrong again!

Mindless would be to accept far left propaganda without question or hesitation, so you are saying that is was not far left propaganda?

Where is your proof from all those credible unbiased sources you think exist?

No point wasting any further time and bandwidth on anyone who cannot follow basic logic and reason.

Edit Ignore List *click* Add a member to your ignore list...Kosh [Okay] *click*

 

[The2ndAmendment]

The Despotism Counter-Enlightenment folk, I mean the Progressives, have really laid it out on the line in this thread that they believe the Federal Government should be the judge of its own powers.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Let me reiterate, I never made any claim, I stated a fact. And to prove that it was a fact I provided a link for your benefit.

He was the one who made an allegation without providing any substantiation. Go and reread the thread and you will see that is exactly what transpired.

The onus is on him to prove his allegation first and foremost. It is not on anyone else to disprove an unproven allegation. I recommend that you learn the rules of debating before continuing any further.

2nd Amendment implied that some schools teach a watered down version if i got him right...... you did not PROVE that schools around the country do not teach this....out here there are teachers who i would not put it past them to mention this as quickly as possible and get on past it....thats not teaching thats skimming over it and then say we covered it .....there are teachers who do not particularly like this Govt....and thats MY opinion,and im sure many more in this Country have the same one....and i doubt very much you would be able to prove me wrong..

You are making the same allegation so the onus is not on me to "prove you wrong" but for you to provide credible substantiation that your allegation is not just your own biased opinion.

So now that you have made that unproven allegation the onus is on you to provide a credible nonpartisan source.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuABhumm6fY"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuABhumm6fY[/ame]

yes it is on you....you say what you say is a fact....ALL Teachers teach the Constitution....i claim that some gloss over it because they do not like what it says and said that was my opinion,not a fact....



" to provide credible substantiation" that your allegation is not just your own biased opinion.

but i said it was my opinion......and you will not be able to prove that opinion wrong....




a credible nonpartisan source.

like you will accept any source that doesnt say what you say.....i have played this game before with others here....you wont be any different.....

 

[Kosh]

The proof was your mindless drone slurs with zero substance. That you failed to appreciate how you appear to others with such pathetic posts says volumes. You aren't doing yourself any favors.

Wrong again!

Mindless would be to accept far left propaganda without question or hesitation, so you are saying that is was not far left propaganda?

Where is your proof from all those credible unbiased sources you think exist?

No point wasting any further time and bandwidth on anyone who cannot follow basic logic and reason.

Edit Ignore List *click* Add a member to your ignore list...Kosh [Okay] *click*

And the far left shows that they would much rather watch the world burn than admit they were wrong!

 

[Derideo_Te]

The Despotism Counter-Enlightenment folk, I mean the Progressives, have really laid it out on the line in this thread that they believe the Federal Government should be the judge of its own powers.

That is the Judicial branch in case your home schooling neglected to explain how checks and balances work.

 

[Derideo_Te]

2nd Amendment implied that some schools teach a watered down version if i got him right...... you did not PROVE that schools around the country do not teach this....out here there are teachers who i would not put it past them to mention this as quickly as possible and get on past it....thats not teaching thats skimming over it and then say we covered it .....there are teachers who do not particularly like this Govt....and thats MY opinion,and im sure many more in this Country have the same one....and i doubt very much you would be able to prove me wrong..

You are making the same allegation so the onus is not on me to "prove you wrong" but for you to provide credible substantiation that your allegation is not just your own biased opinion.

So now that you have made that unproven allegation the onus is on you to provide a credible nonpartisan source.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuABhumm6fY"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuABhumm6fY[/ame]

yes it is on you....you say what you say is a fact....ALL Teachers teach the Constitution....i claim that some gloss over it because they do not like what it says and said that was my opinion,not a fact....



" to provide credible substantiation" that your allegation is not just your own biased opinion.

but i said it was my opinion......and you will not be able to prove that opinion wrong....




a credible nonpartisan source.

like you will accept any source that doesnt say what you say.....i have played this game before with others here....you wont be any different.....

You appended this to your "opinion";

i doubt very much you would be able to prove me wrong

I was clarifying that the onus is not on me to prove that your worthless opinion is wrong.