Skip to comments.
We Need a New Constitution [So Says Larry Sabato]
LA Times ^
| October 10, 2007
| Larry J. Sabato
Posted on 10/10/2007 6:40:54 PM PDT by seanrobins
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 next last
This guy is a real loony tune. And what a thoroughly dangerous idea he's pushing.
And, no, I don't think that the Founders would be shocked, as Sabato suggests, to find that the Constitution has held up as well as it has over all these years.
Sabato seems to think that the sheer passage of time has left the Constitution moribund and draped in cobwebs, that we need to shake off with a new constitutional convention.
Ye, Gods! Look at how the Libs work hard to pervert the Constitution as it is. Can you imagine what they would do with -- as Sabato seems to suggest -- a clean slate?
Man the lifeboats!
To: seanrobins
It’s simple: The Constitution is the only thing standing in the way of tyranny. It must go!
2
posted on
10/10/2007 6:42:59 PM PDT
by
telebob
To: seanrobins
Let me guess: He wants to substitute the Communist Manifesto for the current U.S. Constitution?
3
posted on
10/10/2007 6:44:19 PM PDT
by
2ndDivisionVet
(Security * Unity * Prosperity | Fred08.com)
To: seanrobins
4
posted on
10/10/2007 6:45:17 PM PDT
by
advance_copy
(Stand for life, or nothing at all)
To: seanrobins
It does not need to be rewritten...only reread.
To: Frumious Bandersnatch
6
posted on
10/10/2007 6:47:06 PM PDT
by
seanrobins
(Hillary research at: www.hillaryfactfile.com)
To: seanrobins
All we really need is an amendment requiring our gov’t to quit violating the existing constitution.
7
posted on
10/10/2007 6:47:06 PM PDT
by
umgud
(Axis of Propaganda; lib academia, lib media, lib entertainment)
To: umgud
All we really need is an amendment requiring our gov’t to quit violating the existing constitution. You know, I never would have thought that was necessary.
8
posted on
10/10/2007 6:48:50 PM PDT
by
seanrobins
(Hillary research at: www.hillaryfactfile.com)
To: seanrobins
Sabato is a socialista bent on dragging us into that brave new world.
It will be time to start shooting if they go after the Constitution like that. I’ll not go gentle into that goodnight.
9
posted on
10/10/2007 6:48:52 PM PDT
by
ExpatGator
(Extending logic since 1961.)
To: advance_copy
10
posted on
10/10/2007 6:49:06 PM PDT
by
USNBandit
(sarcasm engaged at all times)
To: seanrobins
What an asshole, he hit every left wing talking point. If there was ever any doubt in my mind where this shmuck stood, there isn't any longer.
11
posted on
10/10/2007 6:49:10 PM PDT
by
jwalsh07
To: seanrobins
What an asshole, he hit every left wing talking point. If there was ever any doubt in my mind where this shmuck stood, there isn't any longer.
12
posted on
10/10/2007 6:49:38 PM PDT
by
jwalsh07
To: seanrobins
I wonder if Laura Ingraham knew him when she was at UVA?
13
posted on
10/10/2007 6:49:42 PM PDT
by
Perdogg
(Join the NCAA basketball thread - Freemail me)
To: Frumious Bandersnatch
“It does not need to be rewritten...only reread.”
They can’t read in the first place.
On a side note, are you by any chance the same Bandersnatch that posts over at 5’s?
14
posted on
10/10/2007 6:50:14 PM PDT
by
2CAVTrooper
(A ron paul supporter called me a traitor and said I should be executed for not supporting him)
To: seanrobins
An Article Five convention would be a disaster, it would be the end of the republic.
It would devolve into a "kangaroo convention," and we would wind up with gems like "The Freedom From Gun Violence Amendment" and the "Economic Justice and Democracy Amendment."
At least half of the nation would utterly reject the validity of anything coming out of such a kangaroo convention, and that would mean certain civil war.
15
posted on
10/10/2007 6:51:03 PM PDT
by
Travis McGee
(---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
To: seanrobins
16
posted on
10/10/2007 6:51:17 PM PDT
by
mathprof
To: Frumious Bandersnatch
17
posted on
10/10/2007 6:51:17 PM PDT
by
rlmorel
(Liberals: If the Truth would help them, they would use it.)
To: seanrobins
If Congress didn't approve of troop deployments being extended, they could cut off funding. Duh.
A President might get away with sending a fleet halfway around the world and sticking Congress with paying their way back. But he couldn't leave troops overseas for years without funding.
18
posted on
10/10/2007 6:51:57 PM PDT
by
Dilbert56
(Harry Reid, D-Nev.: "We're going to pick up Senate seats as a result of this war.")
To: Perdogg
I was there 75-79. Even then he was considered a Major Guru.
19
posted on
10/10/2007 6:52:02 PM PDT
by
Travis McGee
(---www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com---)
To: Frumious Bandersnatch
“It does not need to be rewritten...only reread.”
Amen.
20
posted on
10/10/2007 6:52:34 PM PDT
by
Grimmy
(equivocation is but the first step along the road to capitulation)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
