[kjam22]

But you do agree that they left a way to ammend the constitution. That they left all the powers not specifically mentioned to "the people" or "the states". Right???

So a strict reading would say that the people and the states can make laws about libraries... because we just dont' find the word Library mentioned in the consitution. It is the living interpretations that pretend that clauses which never address the internet or libraries somehow regulate them instead that 10th ammendment that specifically leaves unmentioned powers to the people or the states.

[EBUCK]

You are right. Those avenues are left open to the STATES or the PEOPLE...not the fed of which the FBI is a part. And it is the fed that concernes me. If Oregon decides to invade my privacy I can move to Idaho or any of the other 49 to seek freedom. When the fed oversteps its bounds it effects everone everywhere and usually in an un-equal fashion.

And yes they left a way to ammend the constitution but they do not seem to use that avenue. Choosing expedience over Constitutional procedure. That is where the living interpretation comes into play. Someone aske the question...

"Does the constitution allow for this new gubment increase?"

and someone answers "Well, if you interpret "general welfare" this way it sure does!"

"How do we get the constitution interpreted this way?"

"Well, you just appoint someone to the bench that thinks like us, or is indebted to us, and viola!"

"Kewl, that means we can do just about anything we want right?"

"As a matter of fact it does....it's gonna be a BRAVE NEW WORLD by the time we're done..."

EBUCK