good individual perspectives and able to engage in a respectful dialog without the typical childish antics that you often see when someone is having a meltdown...
I dont get why someone that never posts in the politics section (alias im guessing) tried to accuse him of being a mindless fox "news" lemming...
especially when we have a "crew" of fox news mindless lemmings who are obviously just parroting the propaganda given to them...
makes you wonder why rick got attacked like that...
0
Quote Originally Posted by MoneySRH:
Rick3117, posts #15 and #17, are brilliant posts.
Rick is a quality poster...
good individual perspectives and able to engage in a respectful dialog without the typical childish antics that you often see when someone is having a meltdown...
I dont get why someone that never posts in the politics section (alias im guessing) tried to accuse him of being a mindless fox "news" lemming...
especially when we have a "crew" of fox news mindless lemmings who are obviously just parroting the propaganda given to them...
makes you wonder why rick got attacked like that...
Oh. So the last guy trashed the constitution so it is ok now? Gotcha.
I prefer to abhor violations of the constitution regardless of administration.
rick,
first off you saw on the previous page that I was joking...
second, I want to address your whole constitution, USA government talk...
the basic premise of the thread is that the constitution is not the agreed upon agenda, but rather a tool to be used selectively and in a crafty way to push an agenda...
so people who disagree with an action/situation and can use the constitution as a tool to promote their agenda... and then turn a blind eye to another action/situation that is a violation of the constitution...
so think about this... if you consider checks and balances, if the constitution is being violated and there is no response, who is failing?
0
Quote Originally Posted by rick3117:
Oh. So the last guy trashed the constitution so it is ok now? Gotcha.
I prefer to abhor violations of the constitution regardless of administration.
rick,
first off you saw on the previous page that I was joking...
second, I want to address your whole constitution, USA government talk...
the basic premise of the thread is that the constitution is not the agreed upon agenda, but rather a tool to be used selectively and in a crafty way to push an agenda...
so people who disagree with an action/situation and can use the constitution as a tool to promote their agenda... and then turn a blind eye to another action/situation that is a violation of the constitution...
so think about this... if you consider checks and balances, if the constitution is being violated and there is no response, who is failing?
They are being lied to about the nature of their birthright from an early age. When respect for the rule of law flourishes so will corruption. It is direct cause and effect.
Kids in school today are taught nothing of the right to revolt, the true nature of the second amendment, or the sacred obligation that even citizens have to the Constitution. The Presidency is without question turning into a dictatorial office, not by referendum, like Hitler, but through shear ignorance and indifference of the people.
0
The people are failing.
They are being lied to about the nature of their birthright from an early age. When respect for the rule of law flourishes so will corruption. It is direct cause and effect.
Kids in school today are taught nothing of the right to revolt, the true nature of the second amendment, or the sacred obligation that even citizens have to the Constitution. The Presidency is without question turning into a dictatorial office, not by referendum, like Hitler, but through shear ignorance and indifference of the people.
no worries on grammar or spelling rick... being relegated to correcting spelling or grammar is what happens to the usual suspects when they lack the ability to have a civil discussion...
0
no worries on grammar or spelling rick... being relegated to correcting spelling or grammar is what happens to the usual suspects when they lack the ability to have a civil discussion...
They are being lied to about the nature of their birthright from an early age. When respect for the rule of law flourishes so will corruption. It is direct cause and effect.
Kids in school today are taught nothing of the right to revolt, the true nature of the second amendment, or the sacred obligation that even citizens have to the Constitution. The Presidency is without question turning into a dictatorial office, not by referendum, like Hitler, but through shear ignorance and indifference of the people.
I dont disagree with you about the people failing on some level... but if you look at checks and balances when it comes to constitutional issues wouldn't you say that the judicial branch is responsible for that?
Am I wrong on that?
0
Quote Originally Posted by rick3117:
The people are failing.
They are being lied to about the nature of their birthright from an early age. When respect for the rule of law flourishes so will corruption. It is direct cause and effect.
Kids in school today are taught nothing of the right to revolt, the true nature of the second amendment, or the sacred obligation that even citizens have to the Constitution. The Presidency is without question turning into a dictatorial office, not by referendum, like Hitler, but through shear ignorance and indifference of the people.
I dont disagree with you about the people failing on some level... but if you look at checks and balances when it comes to constitutional issues wouldn't you say that the judicial branch is responsible for that?
The Judicial Branch once ruled that Blacks were property. They don't always get it right. They are appointed by the president and have their own biases.
0
I think so.
The Judicial Branch once ruled that Blacks were property. They don't always get it right. They are appointed by the president and have their own biases.
It is my understanding that the judicial branch is responsible for upholding and interpreting the constitution... not the legislative or executive branch... nor are these ruling decided by the people in the voting booths...
yes the appointments is the checks and balances part that the executive branch has over the judicial branch...
we are talking about the process of our government... and like the constitution, this is how are government is structured...
so if there is failure to uphold the constitution, it is my understanding that the judicial branch is a failing... no the president, congress/senate or the people...
am I wrong?
0
It is my understanding that the judicial branch is responsible for upholding and interpreting the constitution... not the legislative or executive branch... nor are these ruling decided by the people in the voting booths...
yes the appointments is the checks and balances part that the executive branch has over the judicial branch...
we are talking about the process of our government... and like the constitution, this is how are government is structured...
so if there is failure to uphold the constitution, it is my understanding that the judicial branch is a failing... no the president, congress/senate or the people...
So if the president thinks that we should re-instate slavery, and the Supreme court agrees with him then it is constitutional?
Nope, not even a little bit.
Just look at FDR and the supreme court.
man is fallible. We have a great system, but it is not full proof. that is why the people are needed as a final check on the govt. Without the people being firmly planted in
Today the checks and balances are essentially a joke. Congress has abdicated much of their sacred responsibility, the executive branch has grabbed power well above and beyond what was meant for the office of the president, and the Supreme Court is essentially gelded.
The Heller decision comes to mind. Where they have ruled, yet places like Chicago, and DC have completely ignored their ruling.
0
So if the president thinks that we should re-instate slavery, and the Supreme court agrees with him then it is constitutional?
Nope, not even a little bit.
Just look at FDR and the supreme court.
man is fallible. We have a great system, but it is not full proof. that is why the people are needed as a final check on the govt. Without the people being firmly planted in
Today the checks and balances are essentially a joke. Congress has abdicated much of their sacred responsibility, the executive branch has grabbed power well above and beyond what was meant for the office of the president, and the Supreme Court is essentially gelded.
The Heller decision comes to mind. Where they have ruled, yet places like Chicago, and DC have completely ignored their ruling.
say what you want about separation of power/checks and balances.... but like the constitution, it is the blueprint which our country is based on...
When it comes to uphold the constitution, it is the job of the judiciary system... so if the constitution is not upheld, then this is where the blame lands... like it or not, similar to the constitution, it is the foundation of our government...
Im not sure with your example if the president has the power to re-instate slavery.... but if it violated constitutional rights, it is the job of the judicial branch of government to address the issue...
I think it is the legislative branch that can make amendments...
So I think that the power of judicial appointments are a huge responsibility of the executive branch, especially with no terms limits in the supreme court...
you talk about the people... but what exactly is it that you think the people's responsibility... other than selecting the executive and legislative branches through voting?
0
say what you want about separation of power/checks and balances.... but like the constitution, it is the blueprint which our country is based on...
When it comes to uphold the constitution, it is the job of the judiciary system... so if the constitution is not upheld, then this is where the blame lands... like it or not, similar to the constitution, it is the foundation of our government...
Im not sure with your example if the president has the power to re-instate slavery.... but if it violated constitutional rights, it is the job of the judicial branch of government to address the issue...
I think it is the legislative branch that can make amendments...
So I think that the power of judicial appointments are a huge responsibility of the executive branch, especially with no terms limits in the supreme court...
you talk about the people... but what exactly is it that you think the people's responsibility... other than selecting the executive and legislative branches through voting?
The media has a huge role, but they have been clearly co opted. Protest and civil disobedience are good examples of what should be done. Demanding investigations etc.
0
The media has a huge role, but they have been clearly co opted. Protest and civil disobedience are good examples of what should be done. Demanding investigations etc.
But the judiciary is limited because it can only rule on cases that appear before it. Courts cannot make a unilateral decision on something they find appalling and unconstitutional unless a third party files a motion or tort. The Heller case, for example, was brought about by amicus curiae briefings.
Also, it has no power to enforce any of its decisions, thus must rely on the other branches for this. DC and Chicago can pretty much do what they want unless the DOJ gets involved.
0
But the judiciary is limited because it can only rule on cases that appear before it. Courts cannot make a unilateral decision on something they find appalling and unconstitutional unless a third party files a motion or tort. The Heller case, for example, was brought about by amicus curiae briefings.
Also, it has no power to enforce any of its decisions, thus must rely on the other branches for this. DC and Chicago can pretty much do what they want unless the DOJ gets involved.
The media has a huge role, but they have been clearly co opted. Protest and civil disobedience are good examples of what should be done. Demanding investigations etc.
I would like to know your thoughts on media... It was said that fox"news" was nothing more then a sounding board for GW and the neo"cons"... would not surprise me if msnbc is the same thing for the current administration... but in terms of the constitution, why does this matter?
protest and civil disobedience makes sense as the right to assembly peaceful to make a point is within constitutional rights... although i find it meaningless in this day and age...like when palin and beck went farakan/millionman and stormed the washington monument with their mob of followers, I think it had absolutely no effect beyond getting the beck lemmings and palin cheerleaders in a tizzy for the moment...
perhaps it was because they did not have an actual point of change... more of a emotional tantrum because a kenyan, muslim, racist, communist, terrorist, hitler, satan was president...
I do believe it is on the part of the people to demand investigations... but then who actually does these investigations and how do people get them to do it?
perhaps we can talk solutions here and look at the reality of the system and who is not doing their part...
0
Quote Originally Posted by rick3117:
The media has a huge role, but they have been clearly co opted. Protest and civil disobedience are good examples of what should be done. Demanding investigations etc.
I would like to know your thoughts on media... It was said that fox"news" was nothing more then a sounding board for GW and the neo"cons"... would not surprise me if msnbc is the same thing for the current administration... but in terms of the constitution, why does this matter?
protest and civil disobedience makes sense as the right to assembly peaceful to make a point is within constitutional rights... although i find it meaningless in this day and age...like when palin and beck went farakan/millionman and stormed the washington monument with their mob of followers, I think it had absolutely no effect beyond getting the beck lemmings and palin cheerleaders in a tizzy for the moment...
perhaps it was because they did not have an actual point of change... more of a emotional tantrum because a kenyan, muslim, racist, communist, terrorist, hitler, satan was president...
I do believe it is on the part of the people to demand investigations... but then who actually does these investigations and how do people get them to do it?
perhaps we can talk solutions here and look at the reality of the system and who is not doing their part...
But the judiciary is limited because it can only rule on cases that appear before it. Courts cannot make a unilateral decision on something they find appalling and unconstitutional unless a third party files a motion or tort. The Heller case, for example, was brought about by amicus curiae briefings.
Also, it has no power to enforce any of its decisions, thus must rely on the other branches for this. DC and Chicago can pretty much do what they want unless the DOJ gets involved.
So perhaps this is the role of the people that we have been talking about... bringing issues to the judicial system...
the problem is that the current state of the nation is for the lemmings to chase their tail on whatever the current talking point has been prescribed to them, but do absolutely nothing about it other than bitchand moan
0
Quote Originally Posted by speak2truth:
But the judiciary is limited because it can only rule on cases that appear before it. Courts cannot make a unilateral decision on something they find appalling and unconstitutional unless a third party files a motion or tort. The Heller case, for example, was brought about by amicus curiae briefings.
Also, it has no power to enforce any of its decisions, thus must rely on the other branches for this. DC and Chicago can pretty much do what they want unless the DOJ gets involved.
So perhaps this is the role of the people that we have been talking about... bringing issues to the judicial system...
the problem is that the current state of the nation is for the lemmings to chase their tail on whatever the current talking point has been prescribed to them, but do absolutely nothing about it other than bitchand moan
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
