The very fact that the Constitution is amendable makes it a living document.
Sure the Constitution can be amended..
-- But its amendments cannot violate its basic principles.
"We the People" cannot give Congress, or the President, or the Supreme Court, - any more powers than we ourselves possess.
We ourselves have no power to attack our neighbor on mere supposition,
-- but in the case in question, we have more than enough reason to justify the attack on Iraq.
Paul is wrong, -- But he is not a traitor.
And yet we have done it everyday for over 200 years.
Yep, various men have been ignoring our Constitution for far too long. -- Paul isn't one of them.
We are still here. Sometimes it is bad and sometimes it is good.
I wish everything worked in a vacuum, it would make everything so easy. Alas it is not so...
Alas, alas. -- We see some of the results of "vacuum" type thinking on this thread, imo.
Ok I’ll play along.
Let me give you a bit of a poser here
Say that in a few weeks a bill comes across some committee in Congress proposing an Amendment to the US Constitution that says something to the effect that all previous admsntments are now void and from this point on we will use the rules of Monopoly in governing the country. Say that bill passes from both houses to the many states and becomes ratified, survives all legal challenges and the like and becomes law of the land. As an approved, ratified and vetted Amendment, part of the Constitution itself, is it Constitutional?
Remember in my earlier post about the founders trusting future generations to do the right thing. By making the Constitution a very strong statement on running a republic, by creating the supporting governmental structures, and the fact that it can be amended for ANY reason, they passed to us a living guide for all time.
Now argue the strengths and weaknesses of that statement as you will. I know how much that has been used by the left and how it hacks us as conservatives, but anything open to certain various interpretations via courts and the law will not please everyone. We were entrusted to do what is best, it is our own fault if we allow people with contrary opinions to succeed.
As far as ignoring the Constitution, it has been done more than once. Does that suck, perhaps and perhaps not depending on the exact issue. My favorite example is Jefferson and the Louisiana purchase. That was way out of bounds and it was done by one of the very men who created the Constitution itself, and for that I respect him, for I would miss Cajun food...