The Repeal Vote: An historic repudiation of an entitlement that is only 10 months old

[Scataphagos]

Quote from cgroupman:

"... the Constitution is in need of updating due to the many changes since it was written.

ABSOLUTELY NOT! Other than the already prescribed procedure for changes.. and that be Amendments. The Constitution was written to PROTECT THE PEOPLE'S RIGHTS FROM BIG GOVERNMENT.

You're not really a pinko Commie are you?

The ONLY hope America has is adherence to the Founders original Constitutional principles.

 

[cgroupman]

Quote from Scataphagos:

ABSOLUTELY NOT! Other than the already prescribed procedure for changes.. and that be Amendments. The Constitution was written to PROTECT THE PEOPLE'S RIGHTS FROM BIG GOVERNMENT.

You're not really a pinko Commie are you?

The ONLY hope America has is adherence to the Founders original Constitutional principles.

I try to not deal in absolutes. When I hear -only hope- and -certain disaster- armageddon type rhetoric, I tend to discount it. In the trading and legal circles, absolutes are a no no. I'm not saying we should change the Constitution or anything like that. I'm saying that when changes are suggested, it is usually inspired by one extreme or the other, not the majority.

I am a big fan of people's rights, civil rights, all sorts of rights. You'll notice my concern over government wiretaps early on. I want to keep government out of our homes and bedrooms. And, government should not to dictate ones sex life etc.

I'm think many agree with this.



c

 

[pspr]

Quote from cgroupman:

.......One reason why many, necessariy me, think the Constitution is in need of updating due to the many changes since it was written. Often times, it is what changes that Americans can ever agree on. To stick to one's previous beliefs based on, perhaps, what someone else has dictated, instead of feeling comfortable to change with the new facts.
c

Now you are completely off the wall! There is a method to amend the Constitution but to say it is need of updating is a ridiculously naive statement. It is thinking like that that may one day cause us to lose our freedom.

 

[Scataphagos]

Quote from cgroupman:

I try to not deal in absolutes. When I hear -only hope- and -certain disaster- armageddon type rhetoric, I tend to discount it. In the trading and legal circles, absolutes are a no no. I'm not saying we should change the Constitution or anything like that. I'm saying that when changes are suggested, it is usually inspired by one extreme or the other, not the majority.

I am a big fan of people's rights, civil rights, all sorts of rights. You'll notice my concern over government wiretaps early on. I want to keep government out of our homes and bedrooms. And, government should not to dictate ones sex life etc.

I'm think many agree with this.



c

It's only the Leftists who argue for "changes to the Constitution"... they don't want to be restricted and encumbered. Any modifications beyond Amendments would only decrease people's rights and protections.

Government wiretaps? Originally PROHIBITED except when authorized by a judge and "only when there is probable cause of a crime" ... 4th Amendment right. Usurping of this right by law enforcement AND THE HEINOUS PATRIOT ACT... are an affront to the Constitution and ALL American citizens... REGARDLESS OF THE EXCUSE PROVIDED BY POLITICOS.

 

[cgroupman]

Quote from pspr:

Now you are completely off the wall! There is a method to amend the Constitution but to say it is need of updating is a ridiculously naive statement. It is thinking like that that may one day cause us to lose our freedom.

I don't think so much naive, hopefully never off the wall. I think more of thinking that updating, via the proper methods, such as making an amendment, would by similar in meaning and results. Although the two words are not necessarily synonyms, they do have simialr meanings. I don't see an argument here.




c

 

[pspr]

Quote from cgroupman:

I don't think so much naive, hopefully never off the wall. I think more of thinking that updating, via the proper methods, such as making an amendment, would by similar in meaning and results. Although the two words are not necessarily synonyms, they do have simialr meanings. I don't see an argument here.
c

Update implies a re-write. Amendments are single items that are carefully considered by state populations and if a sufficient number of states ratify the ammendment that particular item ammends the Constitution.

You use the word "update" as if nearly every part of the Constitution needs reviewed and modification considered. Such tampering by re-writers would not only be "unconstitutional" but would be very dangerous for our way of life.

The Constitution is fine as it stands. NO UPDATING IS REQUIRED.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from pspr:

...You use the word "update" as if nearly every part of the Constitution needs reviewed and modification considered...

Actually that's what I thought he meant too.

The Constitution is fine as it stands. NO UPDATING IS REQUIRED.

Personally I'd like to see congressional term limits and a balanced budget amendment.

 

[cgroupman]

Quote from Scataphagos:

It's only the Leftists who argue for "changes to the Constitution"... they don't want to be restricted and encumbered. Any modifications beyond Amendments would only decrease people's rights and protections.

Government wiretaps? Originally PROHIBITED except when authorized by a judge and "only when there is probable cause of a crime" ... 4th Amendment right. Usurping of this right by law enforcement AND THE HEINOUS PATRIOT ACT... are an affront to the Constitution and ALL American citizens... REGARDLESS OF THE EXCUSE PROVIDED BY POLITICOS.

Without the capital letters for intensity. Not a fan of the patriot act. Don't like, what some may call loopholes in the system. This position seems to be coming more from left leaning than right leaning in my observations. Am I mistaken in this view of the patriot act?




c




c

 

[cgroupman]

Quote from Lucrum:

Actually that's what I thought he meant too.

Personally I'd like to see congressional term limits and a balanced budget amendment.

Samples of what I hear as well.



c

 

[Scataphagos]

Quote from cgroupman:

Without the capital letters for intensity. Not a fan of the patriot act. Don't like, what some may call loopholes in the system. This position seems to be coming more from left leaning than right leaning in my observations. Am I mistaken in this view of the patriot act?

Sadly, there isn't all that much difference between "Big Government Republicans" and "Big Government Democrats"... more like "two sides of the same coin".

Bush was a SON-OF-A-BITCH for signing the Patriot Act, Republican or not.

In case anybody is unclear... The Tea Party is America's last hope. They are not big enough, yet.... may never be.. but we should all hope to Hell that they get big enough to dominate and change American Government.

Odumbo? Might as well have been Mao or Stalin...

America is probably already FUCKED TO THE HILT! If the Tea Party principles can't turn the tide, we might as well all bend over an kiss our free asses good-by... We'll soon be like the former Soviet Union before its collapse... And following the collapse, DICTATORIAL RULE.. all because we greedily voted for "free money from the Government"...