I don’t agree with everything that is farmed in under the Commerce Clause, but it’s impossible to be in violation of the Constitution if that clause exists there and the interpretation is incorrectly applied.
You argument fails. If you wish to see the amendment containing the clause repealed, I think that’s a reasoned goal. I do think there are some reasoned issues that can be covered under the clause. I don’t like seeing it abused.
LOL, you follow the logic trail quite well, recognize the problem and then tell me I’m the one who is mistaken.
I do not agree with you here. Sorry.
“...but it’s impossible to be in violation of the Constitution if that clause exists there and the interpretation is incorrectly applied.”
I don’t even understand what you are trying to say here. It seems you are saying something is not unconstitutional as long as you appeal to some part of the Constitution to justify it, even if you are doing so incorrectly? By that logic, Roe v. Wade is not unconstitutional.
“If you wish to see the amendment containing the clause repealed, I think that’s a reasoned goal.”
The Commerce Clause isn’t an amendment, but regardless, I don’t want it to be repealed, since it is a necessary part of the Constitution. It’s simply been misapplied by the courts and Congress to justify anything that they want to.
“LOL, you follow the logic trail quite well, recognize the problem and then tell me I’m the one who is mistaken.”
Yes, because your “logic trail” is illogical. It might appear logical on its face, but you are relying on fallacious reasoning.
Oh well, as you said in your other post, we’ll have to agree to disagree on this one. Once we’ve solved the other 1001 problems in the country that we agree on, we can all duke it out over this one.