The Real Board
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

our constitution

+4
whoosieme
Scooby01_98
Markwes
floridafun
8 posters

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

Go down

our constitution Empty our constitution

Post  floridafun Mon Sep 07, 2009 12:45 pm

i always have a hard time understanding those who feel so firmly that america is in danger and needs to be reined in as an act of preservation or some such thing. seems those who feel strongly their constitutional rights as a general thing are being trampled are not making their case.

seems to me there are 2 sides to the losing-or-not-losing-my-constitutional-rights arguement. one is either for it as it is today..which also accepts future changes based on supreme court decisions and articles added as times change, OR go back to having the constitution in its original form with no supreme court decision influences being legally recognized, and no articles attatched because they werent part of the original constitution. i really dont grasp how anyone can say they want the constitution just as it is now with no new adaptions to take place. because the only reason it is as it is now is simply because changes have been fought for and demanded by the people or have been added to correct injustices.
floridafun
floridafun
Jedi Knight
Jedi Knight

Female
Number of posts : 2519

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Markwes Mon Sep 07, 2009 1:06 pm

Just my opinion but I think most people who fight to protect the constitution don't really have a problem with adding to it, though doing so shouldn't be taken lightly. The problem comes when we start talking about taking away an existing right. A good example is the Fairness Doctrine, which many believe goes against freedom of the press.
Markwes
Markwes
Jedi Master
Jedi Master

Male
Number of posts : 3096
Age : 59
Location : asylum

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Mon Sep 07, 2009 3:04 pm

Where do all these "czar" appointments fit within the constitution. These appointments are a big crock of crap.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  floridafun Mon Sep 07, 2009 3:44 pm

if it takes an appointment to fill a real need..rather than months and months of pissing in the wind by the just-say-no'ers whose mission is to waste time and do nothing..why not appoint and get some work done. it isnt like he is the originator of appointing czars.
floridafun
floridafun
Jedi Knight
Jedi Knight

Female
Number of posts : 2519

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  floridafun Mon Sep 07, 2009 4:02 pm

Markwes wrote:Just my opinion but I think most people who fight to protect the constitution don't really have a problem with adding to it, though doing so shouldn't be taken lightly. The problem comes when we start talking about taking away an existing right. A good example is the Fairness Doctrine, which many believe goes against freedom of the press.

guess thats true. like the right of white land-owner males were the only ones allowed to vote originally. and the right of white schools to be protected against having to tolerate non-whites learning right in the same classroom as their own kids.

i dont see what the problem is with the fairness doctrine actually. i cant wrap my mind around the constitutionality of it as a point of arguement. it was in the constitution before it was removed--right? other than the extremists might hear 2 sides to a commentary and ooops what if they start thinking the other side is making some iota of sense!!!
floridafun
floridafun
Jedi Knight
Jedi Knight

Female
Number of posts : 2519

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Mon Sep 07, 2009 5:38 pm

floridafun wrote:if it takes an appointment to fill a real need..rather than months and months of pissing in the wind by the just-say-no'ers whose mission is to waste time and do nothing..why not appoint and get some work done. it isnt like he is the originator of appointing czars.

That's worked well for countries run by Kings. I thought we got away from the "King" system by declaring our independence from England. Now it looks like we have our own king. King Obama.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Markwes Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:29 pm

floridafun wrote:
Markwes wrote:Just my opinion but I think most people who fight to protect the constitution don't really have a problem with adding to it, though doing so shouldn't be taken lightly. The problem comes when we start talking about taking away an existing right. A good example is the Fairness Doctrine, which many believe goes against freedom of the press.

guess thats true. like the right of white land-owner males were the only ones allowed to vote originally. and the right of white schools to be protected against having to tolerate non-whites learning right in the same classroom as their own kids.

i dont see what the problem is with the fairness doctrine actually. i cant wrap my mind around the constitutionality of it as a point of arguement. it was in the constitution before it was removed--right? other than the extremists might hear 2 sides to a commentary and ooops what if they start thinking the other side is making some iota of sense!!!
Those things you mentioned are part of the Constitution? I think you're confusing rights and laws.

Actually, you're missing the whole point of what our founders were trying to do, so maybe a history lesson is in order. They came here because of too much government control. When England tried to force their rule and the U.S. succeeded in gaining independence, they wanted to be absolutely sure that our new government would not try to exhibit the same power. Just look at the Bill of Rights.
Freedom of religion - the government can not establish a religion that citizens are forced to practice.
Right to bear arms - the whole well regulated militia thing.
Freedom of press - And yes, they did not want the government dictating what the press could report. Start allowing laws saying what the media can say and you have just given the government more control over you.
Markwes
Markwes
Jedi Master
Jedi Master

Male
Number of posts : 3096
Age : 59
Location : asylum

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Scooby01_98 Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:38 pm

The constitution was meant to be a living document and changeable to meet the future. I saw no freedoms lost under Bush that the left whine about and no freedoms lost under Obama as of yet. If any rights have been lost in the last couple of decades it has been the rights of the states. The federal government has became too big and powerfully and basically taken away states rights by holding the all mighty dollar over the states heads i.e. speed limit, drinking age, etc.

While certain parts of what is in the constitution is out dated, the core parts are still essential and we need to go back to the core essential purpose of the constitution. Provide for defense, state, treasury. There are two more amendments to the constitution I would like to see. A balance budget and line item veto amendments.
Scooby01_98
Scooby01_98
Jedi Padawan
Jedi Padawan

Male
Number of posts : 1642
Location : The Fort

http://www.nola.com

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Scooby01_98 Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:51 pm

Here is a link to the US Constitution, where is slavery and only white land owners allowed to vote in it (article and section please)? The 14th amendment did away with certain state laws that did have those requirements. You know slaves count as 3/5 of a person for the distribution of legislatures. ect.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/index.html
Scooby01_98
Scooby01_98
Jedi Padawan
Jedi Padawan

Male
Number of posts : 1642
Location : The Fort

http://www.nola.com

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:59 pm

Kroman wrote:Where do all these "czar" appointments fit within the constitution. These appointments are a big crock of crap.

Pls Kroman, these CZARs are just a name change on what was previously called a "Senior Advisor to the President". Name change ... now pull those pink panties out of your crotch.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Mon Sep 07, 2009 8:09 pm

Bman wrote:
Kroman wrote:Where do all these "czar" appointments fit within the constitution. These appointments are a big crock of crap.

Pls Kroman, these CZARs are just a name change on what was previously called a "Senior Advisor to the President". Name change ... now pull those pink panties out of your crotch.

Hail the King! Hail the King! Bman you should volunteer to be his chief cupbearer.

By the way, isn't David Axlerod the current "Senior Advisor" to the President. Nice try at an anology there bman.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:22 pm

Scooby01_98 wrote:The constitution was meant to be a living document and changeable to meet the future. I saw no freedoms lost under Bush that the left whine about and no freedoms lost under Obama as of yet.

I still have nightmares about the patriot act.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:28 pm

Scooby01_98 wrote:A balance budget and line item veto amendments.

I'll go with you on balanced budget, but cannot logically see the need to restrict veto. IMO, The sense that a "container" that can be compromised or exploited is my reservation. why would we give the president the 'valet' set of keys to the car? why give your keys to someone you wouldn't trust?

beer.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Czars

Post  whoosieme Mon Sep 07, 2009 10:36 pm

Sorry Doe er i mean Kroman....Bush the 1st came up with the title of "czar" for many of his appointees. You cant blame that one on Obama......

whoosieme
Jedi Youngling
Jedi Youngling

Number of posts : 110

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Mon Sep 07, 2009 11:12 pm

whoosieme wrote:Sorry Doe er i mean Kroman....Bush the 1st came up with the title of "czar" for many of his appointees. You cant blame that one on Obama......

King Obama has czars. That is the fact. Why do you wacko liberals keep bringing up Bush? Interesting that you back bman. Maybe we now know who he gets his skirts from.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Cincy Fan 44 Mon Sep 07, 2009 11:30 pm

I'm just glad Obama doesn't have Sars... Smile
Cincy Fan 44
Cincy Fan 44
Jedi Council Member
Jedi Council Member

Male
Number of posts : 4852
Location : Wherever you can gird your loins

http://www.whodeyrevolution.com

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Mon Sep 07, 2009 11:46 pm

Kroman, I speak for myself... I don't see the value in hitting rewind unless it's to remind everyone of the song we've just listened to.

Rock...
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Tue Sep 08, 2009 7:38 am

meta4 wrote:Kroman, I speak for myself... I don't see the value in hitting rewind unless it's to remind everyone of the song we've just listened to.

Rock...

I agree.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Pez Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:03 am

Kroman wrote:
floridafun wrote:if it takes an appointment to fill a real need..rather than months and months of pissing in the wind by the just-say-no'ers whose mission is to waste time and do nothing..why not appoint and get some work done. it isnt like he is the originator of appointing czars.

That's worked well for countries run by Kings. I thought we got away from the "King" system by declaring our independence from England. Now it looks like we have our own king. King Obama.

So what exactly is the problem with these appointments again? I know you said load of crap, but really, what is the issue?

Pez
Jedi Padawan
Jedi Padawan

Male
Number of posts : 1979
Location : Ft Wayne

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Tue Sep 08, 2009 11:40 am

Kroman wrote:
Bman wrote:
Kroman wrote:Where do all these "czar" appointments fit within the constitution. These appointments are a big crock of crap.

Pls Kroman, these CZARs are just a name change on what was previously called a "Senior Advisor to the President". Name change ... now pull those pink panties out of your crotch.

Hail the King! Hail the King! Bman you should volunteer to be his chief cupbearer.

By the way, isn't David Axlerod the current "Senior Advisor" to the President. Nice try at an anology there bman.

You know nothing ... there are more than one senior advisors to the President. Yep ... David Axelrod is one and there are others. Hell, Karl Rove and Harriet Meiers were both Sr. Advisors to Bush to name two of his worthless ones.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Fighter59 Tue Sep 08, 2009 12:04 pm

Bman wrote:

You know nothing ... there are more than one senior advisors to the President. Yep ... David Axelrod is one and there are others. Hell, Karl Rove and Harriet Meiers were both Sr. Advisors to Bush to name two of his worthless ones.

Fail. . . Karl Rove was Assistant Chief of Staff and Harriet Meiers was White House Counsel, hardly advisors. Both of these positions have long standing roles with past Administrations.

Please list another Administration with a Green Jobs Czar, just one.
Fighter59
Fighter59
Jedi Youngling
Jedi Youngling

Male
Number of posts : 58
Location : Fort Wayne

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Tue Sep 08, 2009 12:28 pm

just like old times Fighter ... I will prove you wrong ... below is an excerpt.

Karl Christian Rove (born December 25, 1950) was Senior Advisor and Deputy Chief of Staff to former President George W. Bush until his resignation on August 31, 2007. He has headed the Office of Political Affairs, the Office of Public Liaison, and the White House Office of Strategic Initiatives. Since leaving the White House, Rove has worked as a political analyst and contributor for Fox News, Newsweek and The Wall Street Journal.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Rove


Not STFU and go back to work.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Guest Tue Sep 08, 2009 12:36 pm

United States
Senior Advisor is a title used within the Executive Branch of the United States Government for various positions.

In the Executive Office of the President of the United States, the title has been used in two different capacities:

In the George W. Bush administration, it was a formal position, first held by Karl Rove and then by Barry Steven Jackson, in the Office of the Senior Advisor to the President. It had responsibility for the following four groups:
White House Office of Strategic Initiatives
Intergovernmental Affairs
Political Affairs
Public Liaison
In prior administrations, the position of "senior advisor" was a title used for various.
Numerous examples of the position also exist throughout the Executive Departments and in the branch's independent agencies. For example, the FDA includes a position called the Senior Advisor for Science. The Department of the Interior includes, for example, a Senior Advisor for Alaskan Affairs.

The senior advisors to President Barack Obama are David Axelrod, Valerie Jarrett, and Pete Rouse.
Anonymous
Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Scooby01_98 Tue Sep 08, 2009 1:53 pm

meta4 wrote:
Scooby01_98 wrote:The constitution was meant to be a living document and changeable to meet the future. I saw no freedoms lost under Bush that the left whine about and no freedoms lost under Obama as of yet.

I still have nightmares about the patriot act.

But how has it affected you? What did you lose?
Scooby01_98
Scooby01_98
Jedi Padawan
Jedi Padawan

Male
Number of posts : 1642
Location : The Fort

http://www.nola.com

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty czars

Post  whoosieme Tue Sep 08, 2009 2:20 pm

Scrotman YOU were the one who whanked and whinged over Obamas use of the "czar" word and how unamerican it was and some other senseless blither. I only pointed out that Bush was the president who use the term czar 1st.
And so freaking what if Geo the 1st didnt have a "green czar" he STILL czars. "czars" as in the word that sends Scrotman in a patriotic dither........

whoosieme
Jedi Youngling
Jedi Youngling

Number of posts : 110

Back to top Go down

our constitution Empty Re: our constitution

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 3 1, 2, 3  Next

Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum