The Constitution

[KC9IUX]

I only find ONE Presidential candidate who does.

Put aside ad hominem attacks, and tell me how your pick would honor the oath of office.

[n4sva]

Quote[/b] (KC9IUX @ Dec. 29 2007,19:09)]I only find ONE Presidential candidate who does.
Whom might that be? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

[kc7jty]

Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 30 2007,01:11)]Quote[/b] (KC9IUX @ Dec. 29 2007,19:09)]I only find ONE Presidential candidate who does.
Whom might that be? #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
Hillary

[W1GUH]

I love the question, and it's one that all US Citizens should take to heart.

The problem is...there's no way for the grass roots US Citizen to enforce it. The power people will violate it at their whim, and we can only suck it up and swallow what they cram down our throats unless we've got deep enough pockets to challenge it, which few of us can.

Yes, I support the Constitution of the United States of America. All the way.

It's up to us, the people, the grass roots, to figure out how to hold the power people to it. As of now, that looks impossible.

[KC9IUX]

Quote[/b] ]Whom might that be? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif

I'm not trying to be rude, but that is not an answer. Other post I have made make it obvious. I guess I should have not put that in my initial post. My bad.

Those who attain Federal office take an oath. can you explain how they(who you might support) would honor that oath?

I think few do.

[KL1ZB]

I'm voting for Steve Jobs.

[KC9JIQ]

Quote[/b] (KC9IUX @ Dec. 30 2007,01:09)]I only find ONE Presidential candidate who does.

Put aside ad hominem attacks, and tell me how your pick would honor the oath of office.
really? so somehow they are not going to take a oath to uphold it, if they win the presidency?

[k4kyv]

The Bill of Rights and the Constitution are the ONLY thing that might set the US apart from the rest of the industrialised world. But one of our high government officials is alleged to have said that the Constitution is nothing but a "goddam piece of paper".

[KG4JYD]

Yes- follow the Constitution to the letter 100%

[AE6IP]

Not to put too fine a point on it, but your unnamed but obvious candidate doesn't understand the constitution and, if he fulfilled the prophecies of his supporters on QRZ, as president he would quickly violate his oath of office.

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (KC9IUX @ Dec. 30 2007,04:09)]I only find ONE Presidential candidate who does.

Put aside ad hominem attacks, and tell me how your pick would honor the oath of office.
Yes I do which is why I won't vote for the Texas Toad. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

[N3ATS]

Following the Constitution to the letter spells death to the Statists and big government. That's why both the Neo-Cons and the Tax and Spend Socialists hate him!

[KG4JYD]

Quote[/b] (N3ATS @ Dec. 30 2007,12:47)]Following the Constitution to the letter spells death to the Statists and big government. That's why both the Neo-Cons and the Tax and Spend Socialists hate him!
Exactly. And that's why if I have anything to do with it (and I do), Ron Paul will win.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (N3ATS @ Dec. 30 2007,12:47)]Following the Constitution to the letter spells death to the Statists and big government. #That's why both the Neo-Cons and the Tax and Spend Socialists hate him!
The problem is that most #Ron Paul supporters are pseudo-constitutionalists. The know very little about constitutional law nor how the process of interpreting the constitution and validating an act as constitutional or unconstitutional is done.

I would advise a few good courses in law with AT LEAST a semester of "Law and the Constitution".

[kc2orw]

You know it's bad when they start ignoring everyone else and quoting other known supportive suspects. I suppose it makes people feel better knowing there are other with similar views out there. So if quoting a supportive post and ignoring conflicting posts makes them feel better, all power to ya. But I suppose this will continue after Paul goes independent in 6-10 weeks.
http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[N3ATS]

I thought you were a Thompson supporter?

What happened with that? Did you learn something about his record that turned you off to him, or did you abandon your principles because he's lagging in the polls?

Say what you want about Paul's supporters but we've stuck by him regardless of the poll numbers or what is socially popular. That's what people do who want a candidate to win.

[wa4brl]

I believe our constitution had a very good run. #It lasted almost 170 years after its adoption.

The military-industrial complex had taken over by 1957, superceding the constitution -- perhaps forever. #Our representatives sold out our nation, it's people, and the very constitution they swore to defend. #Each collected his 40 peices of silver and not one of them had the good taste to hang himself afterwards.

Now we are ruled by the big corporations, their strong-arm thugs and the cheesy political puppets they choose to do their bidding. #Not even the corporate shareholders have any power. #The corrupt CEO's/board chairmen work only to loot whatever corporate assets they can seize while cooking the books to show continuing profits. #They can't lose, for their sweetheart clauses and golden parachutes guarantee phenominal wealth at shareholder expense even if they are forced out.

It's all OK, for as U.S. power wanes, its economy tumbles, and the dollar goes into free-fall, the corporate captains will retain their wealth even as their children and grandchildren are enslaved by Russia, China, or some former foreign-aid receiving middle-eastern hotshot.

Yes, it was a grand, noble experiment. #Sad that darkest human nature wins out over the best that our forefathers' greatest philosophical minds could produce.

[KC2PBJ]

Sad to say that the average American citizen has little understanding of the reality of our Constitution. More unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of our elected officials don't either - or choose to ignore anything beyond their own self-promotion.

[al2i]

Quote[/b] (wa4brl @ Dec. 30 2007,13:28)]I believe our constitution had a very good run. It lasted almost 170 years after its adoption.

The military-industrial complex had taken over by 1957, superceding the constitution -- perhaps forever. Our representatives sold out our nation, it's people, and the very constitution they swore to defend. Each collected his 40 peices of silver and not one of them had the good taste to hang himself afterwards.

Now we are ruled by the big corporations, their strong-arm thugs and the cheesy political puppets they choose to do their bidding. Not even the corporate shareholders have any power. The corrupt CEO's/board chairmen work only to loot whatever corporate assets they can seize while cooking the books to show continuing profits. They can't lose, for their sweetheart clauses and golden parachutes guarantee phenominal wealth at shareholder expense even if they are forced out.

It's all OK, for as U.S. power wanes, its economy tumbles, and the dollar goes into free-fall, the corporate captains will retain their wealth even as their children and grandchildren are enslaved by Russia, China, or some former foreign-aid receiving middle-eastern hotshot.

Yes, it was a grand, noble experiment. Sad that darkest human nature wins out over the best that our forefathers' greatest philosophical minds could produce.
I will likely quote this in another forum. Magnificently written OM.

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (N3ATS @ Dec. 30 2007,17:20)]I thought you were a Thompson supporter?
Ah another nonsensical attack... running out of material? http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

No I have always been in favor of Obama and I see no Republican candidates worthy of support. I don't even see the non Republican Republican as not worthy of support.
Alas the USA is indeed full of bigots as they can't deal with the notion of a black man as the President.
This goes for the Democrats who are swearing Hillary is more electable as their reason for supporting Hillary over Obama.

[N3ATS]

Sorry, must have been someone else. I thought you supported Thompson.

[k4kyv]

Quote[/b] (wa4brl @ Dec. 30 2007,21:28)]The military-industrial complex had taken over by 1957, superceding the constitution -- perhaps forever. Our representatives sold out our nation, it's people, and the very constitution they swore to defend. Each collected his 40 peices of silver and not one of them had the good taste to hang himself afterwards.

Now we are ruled by the big corporations, their strong-arm thugs and the cheesy political puppets they choose to do their bidding. Not even the corporate shareholders have any power. The corrupt CEO's/board chairmen work only to loot whatever corporate assets they can seize while cooking the books to show continuing profits. They can't lose, for their sweetheart clauses and golden parachutes guarantee phenominal wealth at shareholder expense even if they are forced out.

It's all OK, for as U.S. power wanes, its economy tumbles, and the dollar goes into free-fall, the corporate captains will retain their wealth even as their children and grandchildren are enslaved by Russia, China, or some former foreign-aid receiving middle-eastern hotshot.
Finalised by the coup of 22NO63.

[wa4brl]

Quote[/b] (k4kyv @ Dec. 30 2007,17:28)]Quote[/b] (wa4brl @ Dec. 30 2007,21:28)]The military-industrial complex had taken over by 1957, superceding the constitution -- perhaps forever. #Our representatives sold out our nation, it's people, and the very constitution they swore to defend. #Each collected his 40 peices of silver and not one of them had the good taste to hang himself afterwards.

Now we are ruled by the big corporations, their strong-arm thugs and the cheesy political puppets they choose to do their bidding. #Not even the corporate shareholders have any power. #The corrupt CEO's/board chairmen work only to loot whatever corporate assets they can seize while cooking the books to show continuing profits. #They can't lose, for their sweetheart clauses and golden parachutes guarantee phenominal wealth at shareholder expense even if they are forced out.

It's all OK, for as U.S. power wanes, its economy tumbles, and the dollar goes into free-fall, the corporate captains will retain their wealth even as their children and grandchildren are enslaved by Russia, China, or some former foreign-aid receiving middle-eastern hotshot.
Finalised by the coup of 22NO63.
Sad but true.

[KC9IUX]

Quote[/b] ]Those who attain Federal office take an oath. can you explain how they(who you might support) would honor that oath?


So far I see no answers from Rudy, Hillary, Obama, McCain or Thompson supporters, only Paul supporters have answered.

Comes as no surprise, I have yet to find any other candidates from the two major parties claim any concern for a constitutional government.


Quote[/b] ]I would advise a few good courses in law with AT LEAST a semester of "Law and the Constitution".



That is a typical elitist statement, used by those who claim to have some esoteric knowledge unavailable to the unwashed masses. Only they can tell the rest of us the true meanings of a plainly written piece of paper. The hidden meanings are usually in direct contradiction to the obvious.

The document wasn't written for lawyers or college students.

It was written for "The People".

[kc2orw]

Wow you Ron Paul supporters really are a bunch of conspiracy theory whacks.
See you tomorrow... maybe... http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/laugh.gif

[W2ILP]

There is no question about supporting the Constitution. #It is the law of our land and we must live by it if we are not anarchists...BUT it is not written in stone. #It can be amended. #Parts of it are now ambiguous and must be clarified to meet thew objectives of modern times. #It was written before the Morse Code was developed...before radio...before television...before the A-Bomb...before the Internet. #It must be brought up to date so as to apply to everything that "God" has wrought and lots of stuff that us godless humanists live with in our everyday lives.

There is an amendment that says that women have the right to vote...BUT Where does it say that a woman has the right to run for president?#

w2ilp (Incited Law full Paragraphs?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif) #...Take revenge with your weapons?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif...Nah only in a well regulated militia?....Meaning a military reserve?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif....Subject to get ordered to Iraq?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif...And subjected to be wire tapped by the "terrorist" hunters?...Who will pay the unconstitutional BILL...OF RIGHTS?http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif # Not BILL Clinton...He gets paid to represent Dubai.

[KC9IUX]

It wasn't meant to control technology.

It simply gives powers to the federal government, and lists some rights that the same government should not violate.

[KG4JYD]

Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Dec. 30 2007,13:42)]I would advise a few good courses in law with AT LEAST a semester of "Law and the Constitution".
Unfortunately "Constitutional Law" these days is NOT based upon the Constitution but upon previous rulings of courts.


Unfortunately since some of the earliest Supreme Court rulings the court has decided that it is with its power to interpret the Constitution and then lecture the executive branch on it. Unfortunately this was a power usurped by the Court.

And due to a fallocy of the way law is practiced in this country: Stare decisis; bad court rulings are rarely overturned. And most bad rulings are not based upon the Constitution, but upon other bad rulings.

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KG4JYD @ Dec. 30 2007,17:20)]Quote[/b] (n2ize @ Dec. 30 2007,13:42)]I would advise a few good courses in law with AT LEAST a semester of "Law and the Constitution".
Unfortunately "Constitutional Law" these days is NOT based upon the Constitution but upon previous rulings of courts.


Unfortunately since some of the earliest Supreme Court rulings the court has decided that it is with its power to interpret the Constitution and then lecture the executive branch on it. Unfortunately this was a power usurped by the Court.

And due to a fallocy of the way law is practiced in this country: Stare decisis; bad court rulings are rarely overturned. And most bad rulings are not based upon the Constitution, but upon other bad rulings.
So how is it that you, who can't even get through his head that the US is, indeed, a representational democracy, and who has never had a course in constitutional law, are qualified to judge whether men like John Marshall, who were heroes of the revolution, and active in the effort to ratify that constitution in the first place, were wrong to decide that the court has that power?

It would strike me that someone involved in ratification of the constitution, (you know, a Founding Father, like you keep preaching you believe in,) would have a clearer sense of the intent of the document than someone who doesn't understand that John Adams meant 'representational democracy' when he used the word 'republic' in an unusual way in the Federalist Papers.

By the way, you keep dodging a question: If Ron Paul disagrees so strongly with even the moderate Federalist position and so obviously with the High Federalist position, and wouldn't have made the Louisiana purchase, made by the Republican Thomas Jefferson, just which "founding father" does he emulate?

[KC9IUX]

So the founding fathers never disagreed?

[KG4JYD]

Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Dec. 30 2007,18:17)]By the way, you keep dodging a question
Remind me next week. My research and books are back at my other house. At the moment I'm heavily drugged and 3 states away after a wisdom teeth extraction.

I am not avoiding it, I simply don't have the answer in front of me at the moment.

[K0RGR]

Yes, the Libertarian Party intends to save us by correcting the errors made by our government in the 1800's. Lincoln, of course, overstepped his bounds by abolishing slavery in the rebel states.

[KG4JYD]

Quote[/b] (K0RGR @ Dec. 30 2007,21:08)]Lincoln, of course, overstepped his bounds by abolishing slavery in the rebel states.
Actually yes he did.


And he suspended habeas corpus, threw dissenters in jail, shut down newspapers, started an illegal war against the South, illegally created West Virginia, etc....

Lincoln was a LOUSY president and should've been removed long before.

[NL7W]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Dec. 30 2007,11:16)]Quote[/b] (KC9IUX @ Dec. 30 2007,04:09)]I only find ONE Presidential candidate who does.

Put aside ad hominem attacks, and tell me how your pick would honor the oath of office.
Yes I do which is why I won't vote for the Texas Toad. http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I wouldn't vote for a "horny toad" either.

[KW4MW]

When I was a kid growing up my old man told me "Son, anyone can grow up to be president".

I'm beginning to believe that he was right! http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

[N5ZAP]

Quote[/b] (kc2orw @ Dec. 30 2007,14:51)]Alas the USA is indeed full of bigots as they can't deal with the notion of a black man as the President.
This goes for the Democrats who are swearing Hillary is more electable as their reason for supporting Hillary over Obama.
Things have a way of happening that make people change. When Katrina hit my home town we had Kathleen Blanco as governor (of Louisiana). She beat a Republican, Bobby Jindall, who was clearly a better choice and would have handled the situation more carefully. Jindall is of Indian parents, even though he himself was born in Louisiana. Most people in Louisiana that supported him know that the Northern part of the state, which is rural and usually decides these elections, would rather vote for a woman than a "foreigner."

After the debacle that was the state response to Katrina, Jindall was elected in a landslide in the next gubernatorial election.

The problem is that "The People" often don't see the light until after the disaster.

[KG4JYD]

Quote[/b] (N5ZAP @ Dec. 30 2007,21:36)]The problem is that "The People" often don't see the light until after the disaster.
Which is why we live in a Constitutional Republic and NOT a democracy.

[n2ize]

Quote[/b] (KG4JYD @ Dec. 30 2007,20:26)]Quote[/b] (AE6IP @ Dec. 30 2007,18:17)]By the way, you keep dodging a question
Remind me next week. My research and books are back at my other house. At the moment I'm heavily drugged and 3 states away after a wisdom teeth extraction.

I am not avoiding it, I simply don't have the answer in front of me at the moment.
As far as your understanding of the constitution goes I won;t trade places with you.

As far as being drugged goes I would gladly trade places with you. Well, at least enjoy it for the new year http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/smile.gif

[w5klb]

Quote[/b] (KG4JYD @ Dec. 31 2007,08:24)]Quote[/b] (N5ZAP @ Dec. 30 2007,21:36)]The problem is that "The People" often don't see the light until after the disaster.
Which is why we live in a Constitutional Republic and NOT a democracy.
CIA Facebook N3ATS posted claims that we have "strong democratic traditions". Interpretation for the RP supporters: The United States is a DEMOCRACY.

But you, ATS, and 2I keep reading the works of that great Constitutional "expert" James Woodburn. While you're reading, ask yourselves the question: Can an anthropologist give any meaningful discourse on ANYTHING pertaining to the Constitution or government? Most educated people would dismiss this "expert" solely on his credentials, but who says you have to be educated to be a Ron Paul supporter?

Mr. Woodburn needs to stick with something he knows well: ANTHROPOLOGY. #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Happy New Year, and may God bless this wonderful DEMOCRACY.

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/unclesam.gif

[AE6IP]

Quote[/b] (KG4JYD @ Dec. 31 2007,08:24)]Quote[/b] (N5ZAP @ Dec. 30 2007,21:36)]The problem is that "The People" often don't see the light until after the disaster.
Which is why we live in a Constitutional Republic and NOT a democracy.
We live in a constitutional representative democracy which is also a republic.

A republic is simply a country that doesn't have hereditary rulers.

You need to start including the last 200 plus years into your education.

[wa6ccw]

Quote[/b] (KG4JYD @ Dec. 31 2007,22:24)]Quote[/b] (N5ZAP @ Dec. 30 2007,21:36)]The problem is that "The People" often don't see the light until after the disaster.
Which is why we live in a Constitutional Republic and NOT a democracy.
BRAVO to both statements... truth-a-plenty in each.

[nx6d]

Quote[/b] (N5ZAP @ Dec. 30 2007,20:36)]
Quote[/b] ]When Katrina hit my home town we had Kathleen Blanco as governor (of Louisiana). She beat a Republican, Bobby Jindall, who was clearly a better choice and would have handled the situation more carefully.

How do you know that? You don't.

BTW, the feds did more to bungle Katrina than did the locals in LA. THAT is a fact, station.

Also, I'm sure if Jindal (note the spelling) was a Democrat, you'd be dumping all over him.

Dave NX6D
Fremont, CA

[w7act]

Quote[/b] (kc7jty @ Dec. 29 2007,17:21)]Quote[/b] (n4sva @ Dec. 30 2007,01:11)]Quote[/b] (KC9IUX @ Dec. 29 2007,19:09)]I only find ONE Presidential candidate who does.
Whom might that be? #http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif
Hillary


Yeah, Right, What's Hildabeast's stand on the Second Admendment....

That's one of the Articles in the "Bill of Rights, which I believe is part of the Constitution....

[kc2orw]

Quote[/b] (nx6d @ Dec. 31 2007,13:29)]
Quote[/b] ]When Katrina hit my home town we had Kathleen Blanco as governor (of Louisiana). She beat a Republican, Bobby Jindall, who was clearly a better choice and would have handled the situation more carefully.

How do you know that? You don't.

BTW, the feds did more to bungle Katrina than did the locals in LA. THAT is a fact, station.

Also, I'm sure if Jindal (note the spelling) was a Democrat, you'd be dumping all over him.

Dave NX6D
Fremont, CA
Seems to be a tad judgmental N5ZAP only has 20 posts how could you be so entirely sure about someones position with such a small sampling?

[kf6rdn]

I support it.

Of all the heavy cruisers, it's been the workhorse of the Federation.

http://www.shiporama.org/images/constitution/Constititle.jpg
http://www.shiporama.org/images/constitution/1701.jpg

http://www.qrz.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif