[Southack]

"In other words, you've given up trying to attack my position on rational grounds and are now going for the bandwagon approach. ... Since the whole point of the original article was to say that the constitution is being ignored, and that federal judges aren't doing what they are put in place to do, whether or not federal judges agree with me isn't relevant."

That's utter rubbish. I've given nothing up, but rather simply asked you to substantiate some *authority*, in fact *any* authority, in the last 200+ years (for your claim as to your own unique interpretation of our Constitution that seems to leave whole parts of that document out due to your inferred redundancy).

[Sofa King]

"That's utter rubbish. I've given nothing up, but rather simply asked you to substantiate some *authority*, in fact *any* authority, in the last 200+ years (for your claim as to your own unique interpretation of our Constitution that seems to leave whole parts of that document out due to your inferred redundancy)."

Are you retarded or something? I just got finished telling you that federal judges AREN'T_DOING_THIER_JOB. ie, what their rulings say and what they SHOULD say don't match up. THAT'S the problem. Also, I'm not leaving out a thing. You're the one pretending that Article 1 section 8 clauses 2-18 don't exist.