The left does not believe in “law and order”. They believe in “the ends justify the means” and they use backward logic.
The Democrats will spout liberal/socialist/communist tripe, but they really just want easy money…..lots of money.
Vision 2 is fundamentally the same view that is prevalent in Russia about their Constitution: it can be changed to reflect the prevailing view held by the Leader and minions, either by a direct word change or addition or by legal fiat.
There are3 communists on the court. They hate the constitution and want to destroy it. It is that simple.
Learning the Constitution is an educational effort, not a “one and one” deal. The Left has managed to exclude the Constitution (and the Bible) from K-to-12 schools and thus we have an widely ignorant populace - deadly for the perpetuation of freedom and ripe for the subtly of tyranny.
To learn the Constitution, one must learn
1) the context (the development of Anglo-American political thought and concepts)
2) the presumptions,
3) the structure,
4) the text
5) the perversions and wresting over the last 200+ years.
To understand the presumptions of the Constitution, one must begin with the Declaration of Independence (DOI). The DOI contains certain eternal truths that are not subject to time or changes in popular culture. The Constitution is built upon those eternal, unchangeable truths.
Congress therefore gives an expert agency the power to address issues ...
Better than "give," what is going on is "delegate." There is not a new power, only the same legislatve one. The institution responsible is still Congress.
The reason the country is not drilling for petroleum is that Congress allows the Bureau of Land Management to shut it off.
The reason inflation is high is 100% Congress, which has the power to regulate the value of money.
I consider the US Constitution as humanly perfect as any governing document on this planet can be. Written by God-inspired men (who had human flaws yet still managed to create the foundation that allowed this country’s evolution and greatness to happen.
The problem with it, if one could call it that, is that it requires honest, ethical peoples to follow, nurture and enforce it.
With respect to the article’s Vision 2, its flaw is that it falls with in the need for “honest and ethical” people to ......category.
IOW? Vision 1.....short and sweet.... WORDS MEAN THINGS.
Vision 2? Go find another country and write your own Constitution, then...
We cannot allow candidates for SCOTUR to evade close scrutiny as to which of these two vision they subscribe to. Feankly, that goes for any candidate for public office. Litmus test? Hell yes!
False dichotomies may get clicks but they don't enlighten.
The details and commentary on the dissents listed breakdown to what these Justices were taught as L-1 students all those years ago: when the law is on your side, pound the law; when the facts are on your side, pound the facts; when neither the law nor the facts are on your side, pound the table. All of the dissents arise from Vision 2 which is merely pounding the table because you have nothing else.
This is a good opportunity to debunk these misleading "child deaths involving firearms" arguments. The study has been pushed by all the main media outlets in recent weeks, i.e., concurrent with Buffalo and Uvalde. They will continue to use faulty statistics and bogus information to put forward a fabricated argument.
The gun data referenced above about child/adolescent death is from the CDC. We now know the CDC provides data that fits its agenda; in this case, gun control. The CDC gets it from a University of Michigan Institute for Firearm Injury Prevention study published in April. No agenda there! The NEJM article uses the same study - Goldstick, Cunningham and Carter published it and are all with the IFIP.
An article debunking the study here:
excerpt:
”As the authors point out, total firearm-related deaths for people 1-19, including suicide, homicide, unintentional and undetermined intents, were the leading category at a total of 4,357 deaths, overtaking vehicle-related deaths for the first time. This is an alarming number for anyone to wrap their head around.
Upon further analysis, though, it’s clear why the authors included adults in the study. Almost half of the reported deaths, 47.9 percent, originate in the 18- and 19-year-old adult victims.
Including adults in a “children mortality study” is clearly a ruse to pad the firearm-related death numbers for institutional interests. Correcting the parameters to only include children, aged 1 to 17, the leading mechanism of death switches back from firearms to motor vehicles, the historic leading cause of death for this demographic."
Just guessing, but the likelihood is high that the 18- and 19-year-old adult victims reside in inner-city/urban areas.
Interesting article that gives context to the CDC’s institutional bias against gun ownership.
The One about the CDC and Guns / Published October 17, 2017