[William Tell]

mrsmith said: "It might be interesting if you would explain why you consider your's [knowledge of the Constitution] is superior."

For the same reason that my knowledge of the Second Amendment is superior to many who have claimed that it is a "collective right". The Constitution is a document whose primary purpose is to limit the power of government. If no limitations were needed, then why have it. If limitations are needed, then why ignore the limitations.

[mrsmith]

I prefer to read the Constitution as Adams and Jefferson did.

I wish you felt the same- then you would be a fellow Constitutionalist.

There were times, such as the Alien and Sedition Act, when a case can be made that the Founders ( or some of them) erred.

As I said, if you wish to make a case that Jefferson and Adams erred go ahead- but your bald opinion vs their acts, supported by the Congress at the time, means less than nothing.

The Constitution means, and will always mean, what the Founders thought it did.