Posted on 08/13/2010 8:21:08 PM PDT by WriteStuff
So… the US Constitution isn’t a “living document” that must breath with the times?
That’s what Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is intimating, at least in her comments on the 14th Amendment.
“Any talk about amending the constitution is just wrong,” Napolitano said. Her comment was reported on the network news this evening in a story about the call to address the birthright citizenship issue as it is said to relate to the 14th Amendment of the Constitution.
(Excerpt) Read more at conservativepoliticalblog.wordpress.com ...
““Any talk about amending the constitution is just wrong,” Napolitano said.”
Not your choice butthead
“Any talk about amending the constitution is just wrong,”
Well, that does say it all doesn’t it? No amendments to the Constitution for any reason.
It’s not that she disagrees and it is her opinion, but there should be no amendment - crazy to my way of thinking.
It is up to the people you silly bureaucrat - NOT you... That is why we have a Constitution in the first place.
One thing about a living Constitution, when the people change it, the judges can just reject the change anyway. After all, international standards are what are important, right?
terrorists and illegals is the side homeland security is on.
Napolitano was a crappy governor. She’s even worse as...whatever she’s doing these days. She bankrupted our state and she wants to make sure that Arizona stay bankrupt.
Is this a rhetorical question? Easy-peasy, she’s on the side that’s against the U.S.A., which is the same side Barack 0 is on.
In 1866, Senator Jacob Howard clearly spelled out the intent of the 14th Amendment by stating:
“Every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country.”
There is no need to reword the Amendment. The wording is fine. The interpretation that the Liberals have made, however, is wrong and needs to be rejected.
It is done everyday by the self-righteous black robed elites in our courts.
Gee, that's going after her hard. Yessirree, she's shakin' in her booties.
Crappy? The woman was a damn DISASTER for Arizona. If it hadn't been for the legislature standing in her way, you'd be living in Alta Sonora by now and paying mordida to the local Federale Colonel every week.
She's a frozen faced Bolshevik Dyke bent on destroying America in revenge for the alienation she felt as just another Bull Dyke growing sick in Albuquerque.
More like "worse then Raul Castro, but able to pronounce English with a minimal accent"
Dims in power is what is wrong. Not much longer though.
Not ours.
Hey Napo... we didn’t start this fight, fool.
Why do you assume that? Do you think that the people that wrote that amendment years ago were smarter than we are today?
Maybe you just think that once these changes are made, there should be no others.
Well, let me shock your attitude... Many today are smarter than those that created that amendment in the past. The reasoning has changed - (do you know the original reasoning behind the 14th amendment?). Doubt that you do but it had to do with slavery which today has no bearing on the issue.
Do you think that maybe today we might need some changes in the laws from 100 years ago? If that is so, don’t you think that maybe some of those amendments to the Constitution may have been made for problems during their time frame?
Really, it is okay to not want to change things - I really hate to change the Constitution also. It is another thing to look at the problem today vs why things were done yesterday.
I’m skeptical that she’d know/recognize the truth
if it slapped her upside the head and
. . . uhhhh . . . flushed all the craziness out her lower orifice.
Just like Obama and all the rest of his flunkies, she's on the side that opposes individual liberty, free markets, small business, entrepreneurism, God, the 2nd Amendment, the family, traditional marriage, personal accountability, voluntary charity, states rights, secure borders, a free internet, true freedom of speech, the Constitution, rule of law, and America as we once knew it.
Appreciate your rampage ... did you even read my post? My statement was meant to indicate that the Constitution was being change every day by the courts. Courts that believe that the Constitution is a living document ... something I don’t hold to be true. Never did I mention the 14th amendment, wasn’t the reason for my posting.
Hey, sorry, had no problem reading your post (after all, it was only one line). I did take it the wrong way though and apologize for that. It sounded like you were making excuses...my bad.
So’k, I spend my life on FR apologizing. LOL!
We have to get these “living breathing” idiots out of office!!!
So following my ex-Gov’s (sorry) reasoning, then the 14th Amendment, was wrong to being with? It was there to right a wrong, so using Janet’s logic, it was wrong for the States to even AMEND the Constitution.
I like your attitude...heh. Yep, I only spend about 40% of my time apologizing...so maybe I have you beat... ha.
Much of my comments are made way too quick and without enough thought but I still enjoy it...seems to be a real problem.
She should have been fired back when she asserted “the system worked” after the December terrorist attempt.....=.=
The 14th Amendment AMENDS the Constitution. The ENTIRE Consititution. The MEANING of the Constitution. The INTENT of the Constitution. The PURPOSE of the Constitution. The REASON FOR the Constitution. The ESSENCE of the Constitution.
As you WELL KNOW.
BITCH.
CHANGE
Ping!
There is no need for any amendment to the 14th Amendment.
It is very clear in it’s intent. However, the 3 houses of our esteemed Fed government have selective reading and comprehension skills.
The MOST important part of the 14th “ . . . and subject to the jurisdiction thereof . . . “ is, and has been conveniently ignored by the powers that be for their own perverted benefit.
The bottom line is, anchor babies born on US soil are NOT ‘subject to the jurisdiction’ of the US. They are subject to the laws and regulations and jurisdiction of their illegal alien parents’ homeland.
No need for ‘living document’ interpretation.
Enforce the 14th as written and all will be well.
The amendment process was designed to be both difficult and cumbersome in order to make sure changes in the constitution were not the result of some short-term political whim or stylish trend, not to replace the other two branches of government with a judicial oligarchy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.