Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

You are an effing ding dong, you don't know jack about our constitution, it is absurd that you would pretend to know or even be concerned about our constitution. You are just showing yourself to be a foolish old man with nothing better to do than to come here and show your ignorance.

Kraken Loc: Barry's Bay

You know something, I actually hope trump gets in for the next 4 years as long as all his stupidity is confined within the US borders but the problem is his insanity will affect the rest of the world and that is not going to be good. And why can't you control your dirty filthy insulting mouth, is that because you know deep down inside you are wrong about trump?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Because C*****rs, you are out of bounds talking about our constitution, you really are not at all familiar or even versed on our constitution and Trump is not a threat to the constitution, that is the function of the Supreme Court, the Court at its will can either protect or destroy our constitution, no other persons or entity in this country has the power to do so.

Kraken Loc: Barry's Bay

And when trump has all his yes men placed in key positions like the Supreme court and other high positions what happens then? Are you willing to find out?

jcboy3

He is. They are. The demographic handwriting is on the wall, and a lurch to authoritarianism is their only chance.

Steven Seward Loc: Cleveland, Ohio

He's comin' for you next, Karaken! The whistleblower just confirmed Trump's phone call to Trudeaux "Justin, Baby, I want you to look into this pesky guy on HedgeHog."

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

C*****rs, most of what you know about this country probably comes from what you learn from progressive news sources and websites. The fact is that our constitution was mostly concerned with limiting the powers of the federal government, in an interview back in 2001 the then "Constitutional Scholar" Barack Obama bemoaned that our constitution is a charter of negative liberties, in the interview that aired on Chicago Public Radio Obama said the following.....

“The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth and sort of basic issues of political and economic justice in this society, and to that extent as radical as people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical,” "It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as it has been interpreted. And the Warren court interpreted it generally in the same way – that the Constitution is a document of negative liberties, says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf, and that hasn’t shifted."

Obama was correct in his interpretation of the courts rulings and the court was also correct in its interpretation of the constitution. The constitution is not about the American people it is about our government and it is about the limitations of the power and responsibilities of our government. This is nowhere more clearly expressed than in our 10th amendment,

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."

The constitution itself is not such a hard document to understand, the constant fight between conservatives and the progressive left is not about black and white or white people and people of color as the left would have you believe but it is more focused on the power and reach of the federal government, when liberals say that they love our constitution their words ring quite hollow on conservatives because they have never loved the constitution specifically because it limits the power of the federal government which for them is the organ which must have expanded reach and power within our society to bring about the society they envision for our country.

You asked me if I am not concerned about the justices that Trump has appointed to the Supreme Court, to some extent I am because I have concerns as to their fidelity to the constitution and the original intent of our founders, liberals want to say that ours is a living constitution that can be molded by the courts to fit the society that we live in today, personally I consider this to be a very dangerous concept. The constitution itself contains an amendment process for which the founders intended to be used to change the constitution, they did not expect the courts to change the constitution's meaning or to give it added meaning that was not previously considered, that is what the amendment process was intended for.

Consider this C*****rs, if 5 unelected government bureaucrats, who are unelected by the people, who can not be held accountable for their decisions because of lifetime appointments, have the power to change our constitution then what guarantee of freedom and democracy does our constitution really offer to the people of this country. Judicial review was never afforded to the court in our constitution, the courts responsibilities were spelled out in the constitution and judicial review was not one of them, when the court assumed this responsibility for itself Thomas Jefferson in 3 separate letters wrote the following...…

"The Constitution... meant that its coordinate branches should be checks on each other. But the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch." --Thomas Jefferson to Abigail Adams, 1804. ME 11:51

"To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men and not more so. They have with others the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. Their maxim is boni judicis est ampliare jurisdictionem [good justice is broad jurisdiction], and their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to wh**ever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves." --Thomas Jefferson to William C. Jarvis, 1820. ME 15:277

"In denying the right [the Supreme Court usurps] of exclusively explaining the Constitution, I go further than [others] do, if I understand rightly [this] quotation from the Federalist of an opinion that 'the judiciary is the last resort in relation to the other departments of the government, but not in relation to the rights of the parties to the compact under which the judiciary is derived.' If this opinion be sound, then indeed is our Constitution a complete felo de se [act of suicide]. For intending to establish three departments, coordinate and independent, that they might check and balance one another, it has given, according to this opinion, to one of them alone the right to prescribe rules for the government of the others, and to that one, too, which is unelected by and independent of the nation. For experience has already shown that the impeachment it has provided is not even a scare-crow... The Constitution on this hypothesis is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please." --Thomas Jefferson to Spencer Roane, 1819. ME 15:212

C*****rs, Trump does not scare me and his appointments to the court do not scare me, the only reason they scare the left is because of their professed fidelity to our country's constitution, it is the liberal judges that would be appointed by an Elizabeth Warren or a Bernie Sanders who would lead an assault on our country's constitution.

jcboy3

"...I do not believe that the meaning of the Constitution was forever “fixed” at the Philadelphia Convention. Nor do I find the wisdom, foresight, and sense of justice exhibited by the Framers particularly profound. To the contrary, the government they devised was defective from the start..." -- Thurgood Marshall

Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL

Lol, ya think?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

No my friend, they included the amendment process, a process in which the people of this country can change the constitution to fit the times and the moral standards of the people.... The framers were brilliant.

jcboy3

Not working out so good for women since they couldn’t get an ERA passed. What’s that saying? “All men are created equal, and tough luck for women.”? Yes, that one.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

What it is saying is that the law contains provisions that go way beyond the title of the law, that is the thing about you guys, you only go as deep as talking points and don't look at the complete package and its ramifications.

Tell me, what rights does our government afford to men that it does not afford to women?

Steven Seward Loc: Cleveland, Ohio

The United States has been the foremost world leader of women's rights ever since we were established as a country. We have always been the first to emancipate women from their traditional roles and strictures in society. European women used to be resentful of American women because the Americans were always demanding more rights when they already had the most rights of any women in the world.

jcboy3

That is because the government passes laws that are barely or not at all covered by the Constitution.

LWW Loc: Banana Republic of America

Such as?