You know, there does exist an alternative explanation for your current displeasure. Perhaps you should just briefly entertain the possibility that most people in this country, including your President, do support the Constitution, but that there exists legitimate differences of opinion concerning exactly what does and does not constitute compliance with its terms. And, BTW, we do have constitutional mechanisms that we can use to resolve such differences of opinion as they may arise. How effectively do you make use of those mechanisms?
You claim that you have "watched those Principles errode rather rapidly since the 1960s." Well, I can assure you that there were some important constitutional disputes in this country long before 1960. In fact, since it is obvious that civil liberties are important to you (as they are to me), I suggest that you Google up the Sedition Act that was enacted by the U.S. Congress less than ten years after our Constitution was ratified. If you read the terms of that statute, you will find that it threatened criminal penalties against anyone who as much as publicly criticized the President of the United States. In short, from your posts on this thread, it seems obvious to me that you feel more free today than Americans did under John Adams, our second president.
So, please understand that preserving civil liberties in this country has been one long, continuous struggle. There was nothing particularly special about the 1960's or the time that has passed between then and now. Whenever our national security is threatened (as most people think it is now), the struggle to preserve civil liberties just gets a little harder.
Absolutely!! They set up a Republic, not a Democracy. You can find mountains of specific discussion on this very topic! The comparison, "A democracy is two wolves and one sheep discussing what they will have for dinner" is the jist of their arguments. You have demonstrated profound ignorance of the Principles on which this Nation was founded. You have proved the point I was trying to make. You haven't even the slightest clue about what made this Nation become what it is today. Go read. Hurry!
And, BTW, we do have constitutional mechanisms that we can use to resolve such differences of opinion as they may arise. How effectively do you make use of those mechanisms?
I vote in every election. I write and call congresscritters quite frequently. Excercising my First Ammendment Rights, I even discuss the issues with folks that don't have a clue how this Nation was formed or how it works.
Well, I can assure you that there were some important constitutional disputes in this country long before 1960.
Had you been reading my posts with some care, you would have noticed that I already admitted that I know this. On the other hand, I have watched significant erosion of the Bill of Rights in my own lifetime. It is getting worse now that there are so many like you who don't have a clue.
So, please understand that preserving civil liberties in this country has been one long, continuous struggle.
For someone who hasn't read the Founding documents, you sure are ready to be the history teacher. Go read them. You'd be surprised how pumped up you can become. Your jaw would drop over the remarkable wisdom of those old farts.
Whenever our national security is threatened (as most people think it is now)...
So, why does everyone tolerate such lame security measures, measures that do very little to secure the Nation but much to erode Liberty? What of substance has been done to secure this Nation? Taking the Medal of Honor from a retired four star general? Making old ladies disrobe while the "stereotypes" board the planes without notice? This seem like security to you? I can only chuckle and shake my head in wonder at yet another member of "The Thundering Herd".