Let’s see, I present a well-formed argument based on facts and logic from the actual Constitution, the founders’ own words and references to law.
You counter will simpleminded contradiction, no facts, no logic, nothing but Alinsky name calling and projection of your own emotional devotion to your otherwise unsupported beliefs.
When it comes to these disparate arguments, I am more than happy to the let the reader be the judge of which to believe. :)
Alinsky? You’re the one who made personal insults. I only attacked your *argument*, which was overly emotional and devoid of logic. I would never attack you personally.
Stop with the penumbras. Find the place where the Constitution explicitly says what you claim it explicitly does. Because you’ve not shown it yet.