Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: A CA Guy
I am paraphrasing the Congress site on this issue.

Did you forget that Congress, the House and the Senate, were created by the Constitution? What the Congress says about the the Constitution means exactly Jack. Like dogs discussing God.

Unless, of course, you give that representative branch power by your word. You word is added to like words and the Constitution takes on the character of legislation. Remember, the enacting clause for the Constitution is the Preamble, and you know who used the sovereign terms "ordain" and "establish", don't you? You're one of those.

"Living Constitution", my ass.

224 posted on 03/27/2002 8:28:06 PM PST by William Terrell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies ]


To: William Terrell
Hi, I thankfully have no clue about your ass and have no desire to find out. I do NOT live in San Francisco. It is so bad there I hear that if you drop your wallet, rather than bending over to pick it up, you kick it to a safe city! LOL

On the issue of the Constitution, I agree it gives it's power to the Congress, Senate and all that. I also agree that in many cases the way it is interpreted seems to suggests that the Courts are all full of Yoga Masters!
But the main area that you don't like that I think is a true fact is that if they didn't interpret the Constitution with current law, you'd have to go with adding on amendments. If you do that you would have a Constitution with amendments that would make it look like the tax code law books (LARGE LOADED AND CONFUSING)! In future years I could see where you would easily have more than 13,000 amendments if the current system didn't exist.
That in my opinion would reduce the original Constitution to just a nice old piece of history as originally written. And NONE of those in Congress wanted that, so we have what we have. (FROM WHAT I HAVE READ SO FAR)!

If you don't like the current way of doing it you would get the 13,000 amendment method. That would be far more out of control and was why the current way won out from what I read. I am a logical guy and it makes sense to me over the alternatives.

Can you come up with a third way that would work better without being sarcastic for real? Right now we have two choices:
#1 current system.
#2 thousands of amendments (confusing).
#3 your sincere heart felt better ideas?

You have to realize there is no way to just go back to the original without amendments because we simply do no live in the 1700s any more. The idea of amendments up the kazoo just isn't efficient. I don't work for the Government at all, but I can't think of an easy answer to this.

PS: Please next time leave your ass out this and use your gray matter upstairs.

Best wishes to you and may you and your family have a wonderful Easter. God Bless!

252 posted on 03/28/2002 6:44:53 PM PST by A CA Guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 224 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson