The Constitution is TOO OLD to have ANY Binding Power...

[chefdennis]

And it is Confusing.....

I know it isn't always a good thing to bring "stuff" from one thread to another, but I think this is ok based on what was said and what the attached links are about..

Turtle Posted this quote from Mr. Thomas Jefferson:

"Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual." ~ Thomas Jefferson

Jaminjim wrote:

I like that quote. Those old dudes had a knack of saying a whole lot in just a few sentences.

Now in response to Jims post, yea those "old dudes" pretty much knew what was goin on...and they said things that really don't appear Confusing...they even wrote some historical documents that well were suppose to be what our country was based on and how things were suppose to go as far as govening the country...

Well today we are faced with this:

Liberal Star Blogger Ezra Klein: Constitution ‘Has No Binding Power on Anything’; Confusing Because it’s Over 100 Years Old

Breitbart.tv » Liberal Star Blogger Ezra Klein: Constitution ‘Has No Binding Power on Anything’; Confusing Because it’s Over 100 Years Old

Then there is this asking just what Confused Mr. Klein:


Which Part of the Constitution is ‘Confusing’ Ezra?

Which Part of the Constitution is ‘Confusing’ Ezra? - Big Journalism

Yea those Libs are, well...how has it been said ? "Liberalism is a Mental disorder..."

 

[Pilgrim]

It should come as no surprise that the Constitution confuses him and that he doesn't understand it. I guess that sort of statement should be expected from the liberal members of "Generation Me".

Don't forget that Barack Hussein Obama has also made it clear that he thinks the Constitution is a flawed document - but that shouldn't be a surprise either, coming from a full-blown socialist.

Obama Thinks Constitution Flawed Without Redistribution Of Wealth | Freedom's Wings

Fortunately, these viewpoints only represent a small minority of the American public.

 

[Turtle]

I know it isn't always a good thing to bring "stuff" from one thread to another, but I think this is ok based on what was said and what the attached links are about..

It's really only a bad thing when you interject something from outside the current thread for the purposes of an ad hominem attack.

Just the same as it is in real life when someone brings up something from the past that has no relevance on the discussion at hand.

"No, honey, I don't want to go see that movie."

"Yeah, well, you slept with another woman twenty five years ago so shut up and get in the car."

 

[chefdennis]

Turtle wrote:

Just the same as it is in real life when someone brings up something from the past that has no relevance on the discussion at hand.

"No, honey, I don't want to go see that movie."

"Yeah, well, you slept with another woman twenty five years ago so shut up and get in the car."

LOL, yes indeed!! My dad use to call that.."burying the dead cat, but leaving the tail sticking out so one could grab it when needed.."

Kinda like that "endless filing cabinet' that some have full of stuff from the past, just open the drawer and dig out that old file when the need arises...

 

[greg334]

1) The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
2) The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
3) The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
4) The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
5) The right of every family to a decent home;
6) The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
7) The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
8) The right to a good education.


Doesn't this sound like Obama?

 

[dieseldiva]

1) The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
2) The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
3) The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
4) The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
5) The right of every family to a decent home;
6) The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
7) The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
8) The right to a good education.


Doesn't this sound like Obama?

FDR's "second bill of rights"?????

 

[jaminjim]

First and second link are the same.

 

[RLENT]

Yea those Libs are, well...how has it been said ? "Liberalism is a Mental disorder..."

The insanity isn't confined to strictly the Left ..... we've recently heard from a number of those on the Right that the right to vote ought not to apply equally across the board to all those who could be conscripted into the military .... with at least one party constantly proclaiming that the entire Constitution should be fully upheld, not just those parts of it you like ...

I rather suspect that the Founding Fathers would take a somewhat dim view of the premise ....

 

[Turtle]

Good grief <sigh>

 

[chefdennis]

No Jim, they both contain the same video, but the 2nd link has the article that questiones what Mr Klein may be confused about...there is no "article" in the 1st link....

 

[RLENT]

Good grief <sigh>

You considered that an ad hominem attack ?

I believe that when one goes down the road of calling one side's or the other's political philosophy a "Mental Disorder" one opens the door for a response in kind ....

And the example I pointed is relevant because it pertains to exactly the topic being discussed here - the Constitution, and peoples views of it.

It would certainly be better to discuss the actual issues without all the extraneous, derisive political labeling ..... however it's been all too clear, for far too long, that some folks just can't help themselves ...

 

[Turtle]

You considered that an ad hominem attack ?

An ad hominem attack? Considering the person you are talking about isn't even participating in this thread, no, I don't.

Looks, smells and walks like a snipe, tho.

I believe that when one goes down the road of calling one side's or the other's political philosophy a "Mental Disorder" one opens the door for a response in kind ....

Possibly, but it could have done without using an example so thinly veiled so as to be veiled with a single sheet of Saran wrap applied with no air bubbles to distort what lies underneath.

And the example I pointed is relevant because it pertains to exactly the topic being discussed here - the Constitution, and peoples views of it.

Again, at least I think, the issue could still be discussed without bringing individuals into the discussion, and pointing out a particular individual's hypocrisy on the matter in kind of an ad hominem attack in absentia.

It would certainly be better to discuss the actual issues without all the extraneous, derisive political labeling ..... however it's been all too clear, for far too long, that some folks just can't help themselves ...

Because others can't help themselves, you.... never mind.

Excuse me whilst I go bang my head on the wall of futility.

 

[jaminjim]

Gosh I'm sure glad that I finally looked up the word ad hominem.

 

[Turtle]

Which word?

I'm havin' hominy grits for dinner.

 

[RLENT]

I probably should have listened to the video clip before I posted anything in this thread, and I probably should have known better than to accept the premise of the OP, given his previously declared intentions (with respect to irresponsibly forwarding or promoting things whose veracity is of a dubious nature)

In listening to the clip two things become immediately apparent:

1. What Ezra Klein said was that the action of reading (aloud) of the Constitution by someone in Congress has no binding power - not that the Constitution had no binding power.

2. That the Constitution is confusing.

Klein posits that the latter is due to both:

A. the document being written over 100 years ago (in this, I believe he is wrong - some of the greatest written works of mankind are far older than that and yet are capable of being understood as to intent), and

B. that what people believe it says differs from person to person, often depending on the political agenda they are looking to accomplish. It is quite easy to see how this is, in fact, true ..... certainly doesn't take much looking around to find evidence of that.

Further, we have the matter of Supreme Court reversals of precedent and previous findings of law ....

As to point No. 1 the only way I can see anyone coming up with anything other than what I outlined above (in point No. 1) is two things:

1. That some are so functionally illiterate that they are utterly incapable of understanding a very clear and plain statement on the part of another, or

2. That they are such partisan zealots that they would intentionally misrepresent what was actually said and intended, simply for (imagined) political gain .....

In either instance, neither reflects well on the individuals making (or forwarding) such untrue claims .... they are either illiterate idiots .... or dishonorable liars ....

 

[layoutshooter]

"Looks, smells and walks like a snipe, tho."


You must be one REALLY fast turtle to get close enough to a snipe to know what they smell like. Why would you WANT to know what a snipe smells like? That is really strange.

 

[chefdennis]

Rlent wrote:

1. That some are so functionally illiterate that they are utterly incapable of understanding a very clear and plain statement on the part of another, or

2. That they are such partisan zealots that they would intentionally misrepresent what was actually said and intended, simply for (imagined) political gain .....

In either instance, neither reflects well on the individuals making (or forwarding) such untrue claims .... they are either illiterate idiots .... or dishonorable liars ....

So which are yu calling me if either!?!? Since I didn't write the article or the headline, I simply posted it here....but yeap I did do that you are the one that brought up the "imagined" political gain...so i guess it must at least bring the thought about...even to you.....

As for the comment on the "mental disorder"...the full line is the title of a book and also the topic of more then one dicussion on the topic by metal professionals....soooo....again, I didn't write it, I just posted it....

So agin which are you calling me???

 

[RLENT]

So which are yu calling me if either!?!?

I called you neither - I merely offered the only two possible things I see as a reason or motivation for the post itself, and the way it was constructed - if either apply to yourself, by all means, feel free to man up and claim them.

And if you are aware of some third possibility, please let us all know, so that we might judge it on its relative merits .....

Since I didn't write the article or the headline, I simply posted it here....but yeap I did do that you are the one that brought up the "imagined" political gain... so i guess it must at least bring the thought about ... even to you.....

Well, it brings up the thought that one would have to be pretty dim to believe that there was really any potential political gain to be had - when the premise of the headline (at breitbart.tv) was patently false .....

If that is the best that so-called (probably neo) conservatives can come up with, it truly says alot ..... none of it particularly good.

.... you commented on it ..... at the barest minimum, you (apparently) believed it ..... despite the fact that the actual evidence of the lie was right there in video, on the website .....

And I'm guessing that you even watched and listened to the video before starting this thread ......

As for the comment on the "mental disorder"...the full line is the title of a book and also the topic of more then one dicussion on the topic by metal professionals .... soooo .... again, I didn't write it, I just posted it ....

.... in support of an agenda I would presume .....

So agin which are you calling me???

Read what I wrote above again - I didn't call you anything.

However I will say this: If, after reading what I wrote, my intent is still unclear, then it is fairly likely that one of the possibilities I offered is the more likely of the two (but that still doesn't mean it couldn't have been both .... )

Again, I am open to the possibility of a third option, if you have one:

What was your motivation ?

 

[chefdennis]

LOL, and you'd be guessing wrong ...I didn't watch the video or even read the article accompaning it on the 2nd link...truth be told, I don't read alot of the stuff i post here, i simply post it to rattle the cages...and it works most of the time...

As to the agenda, again, just to rattle the cages, but, if anyone wants to take the title at face value and think its correct and then judge Mr. Klein on what is printed, more power to the title....As you pointed out , for the most part I don't care if its true or not....

As to my "comment", it wasn't made about the article, but about the Liberal mindset....and yea i am sure that the author of the book by the title and those professionals that have written about the liberal mindset being a mental disorder certainly have an agenda....

Oh and its good to know that you weren't calling me any of those things, just leaving it to myself and others to consider...LOL...

 

[RLENT]

LOL, and you'd be guessing wrong ...I didn't watch the video or even read the article accompaning it on the 2nd link ...

... I suppose there's really no great surprise there .....

...truth be told, I don't read alot of the stuff i post here ...

Thanks for clearing that up

As to the agenda, again, just to rattle the cages, but, if anyone wants to take the title at face value and think its correct and then judge Mr. Klein on what is printed, more power to the title .... As you pointed out , for the most part I don't care if its true or not ....

Good to see that you're still claiming ..... the low ground ....

As to my "comment", it wasn't made about the article, but about the Liberal mindset....and yea i am sure that the author of the book by the title and those professionals that have written about the liberal mindset being a mental disorder certainly have an agenda....

Keep spinnin' it chef ..... I'm sure that it sounds quite brilliant .... even if it's only in your own mind ...

Oh and its good to know that you weren't calling me any of those things, just leaving it to myself and others to consider...

I'd be quite willing to call you either of those things .... or any number of other things ..... if I could figure out exactly what applied.

I just wouldn't be inclined to do it on here - since that would be a violation of the Code of Conduct ....