So, our Constitution and system is "archaic"???
- Thread starter MountaineerWV
- Start date
I wouldn't say that it's archaic, I would say that it has been neglected and/or unable to stop the incremental shift to the left. As John Adams once said...
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
As America has become less moral and religious so has the Constitutions ability to restrain government been eroded.
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
As America has become less moral and religious so has the Constitutions ability to restrain government been eroded.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...trump-popularity-ratings-barack-a7710781.html
So, basically, make it easier for ONE MAN to run this nation......
First, the President didn't say the Constitution is archaic or bad for America. Maybe the U.K. paper and you are unaware that district courts and federal appellate courts are not in the constitution.http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...trump-popularity-ratings-barack-a7710781.html
So, basically, make it easier for ONE MAN to run this nation......
I find it humorous that the alt-right gets up in arms about Bannon v Kushner and the left latches on to any little gossip by "sources". Donald Trump is a 70 YO multibillionaire businessman, he'll do what he wants to while taking in multiple streams of input before he makes a decision.
He's talking about the Senate, even mentions the Senate. I wonder if he and other Republicans believed this same thing when Democrats were in the office and Republicans in Congress used the "archaic rules" to their favor????
Here's some of the transcript:
I understand what has to be done, I get things done I've always been a closer. We don't have a lot of closers in politics and I understand why. It's a very rough system, it's an archaic system. You look at the rules of the Senate, even the rules of the House, bit the rule of the Senate and some of the things you have to go through, it's really a bad thing for the country in my opinion.
There are archaic rules and maybe at some point, we're going to have to take those rules on because for the good of the nation things are going to have to be different. You can't go through a process like this. It's not fair, it forces you to make bad decisions. I mean, if you're forced into doing things that you would normally not do except for these archaic rules, so -
Well, you know, you look at the voting and you look at the filibuster system. And it used to be. You know, I always thought of filibuster where you stand up and you talk all day and then somebody else--
Any amendment since they gave women the vote has to be considered suspect at best and downright anti American at worst.
Here is what little hands did say:
“People don’t realize, you know, the Civil War, if you think about it, why? People don’t ask that question, but why was there the Civil War? Why could that one not have been worked out?”
Thanks for putting the biggest idiot in office ever.
“People don’t realize, you know, the Civil War, if you think about it, why? People don’t ask that question, but why was there the Civil War? Why could that one not have been worked out?”
Thanks for putting the biggest idiot in office ever.
So, it's interesting that our president would like a government with less rules? With less restrictions to allow for one man to govern? I don't call that "interesting", I call that scary!
Agreed, but let's not act like he's the first President with such ambitions. They all chip away at the separation of powers. We can all point and laugh at the people that bought in to his swamp draining talk though.
PS - BTW, My initial post was about the term archaic.
And maybe you should read what's in the Constitution and what's not before posting stuff like this.
Article III.
Section. 1.
The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.
The Judiciary Act of 1789 established Federal district courts, and proceeded from there: https://www.fjc.gov/history/timeline/8276
I don't see where you disagree. Congress could vote to wipe them all out of existence except SCOTUS tomorrow.
And they could have increased the judges to 16 like FDR wanted under his "Court-Packing Plan".....but thankfully they (Congress) saw how scary this could be giving one man too much power in our federal government and did not do so. Messing with the Constitution isn't smart for Trump. Losing any more Republican support in Congress could spell doom for him.......
I agree, it should be updated to say, "Thou shalt own and carry at all times in all places"
There are several angles to take when approaching how the 2nd amendment should be approached. My personal view is that every able bodied male over the age of 21 should be required to serve in their states militia and required to carry at all times unless an exemption is made on religious grounds, due to health issues (mental or physical) or they sign a declaration voluntarily surrender of their right to bear arms.
The property rights of business owners must be respected as well and if a business owner decides to prohibit carrying within their establishment then that is their right.
The property rights of business owners must be respected as well and if a business owner decides to prohibit carrying within their establishment then that is their right.
And you should read your own copy/pastes before you make a fool of yourself. Oops, too late.
Really? You said that lower courts weren't in the Constitution, and I copied and pasted where Congress is given the power to create them - and I'm the one who's a fool? You need to look up something else: The definition of fool.
True, they could - and in fact, they did eliminate a bunch in the early 19th Century. But don't act like the Constitution only provides for the Supreme Court, which is what Cajuneer said.
Drumpf administration looking at eliminating freedom of the press and flag burning.
http://theslot.jezebel.com/reince-priebus-says-the-trump-administration-has-looked-1794787486
Archaic constitution.
http://theslot.jezebel.com/reince-priebus-says-the-trump-administration-has-looked-1794787486
Archaic constitution.
I never said "lower courts." I made specific reference to federal district and appellate, neither of which are mentioned in the Constitution. Also, I looked up "fool." Webster included your picture.
So.....you still sticking with your story huh? [winking] You said "district and appellate".......which are the "lower" courts.......hmmm.......:americanflag: