Posted on 06/27/2014 2:21:28 AM PDT by markomalley
One of the big virtues of the American system is that it allows itself to be changed. But changing our system, i.e. amending the Constitution, requires a supermajority of three-quarters of the states. That’s a bigger supermajority than what’s needed to override a veto, and it’s a bigger supermajority than what’s needed to convict and remove an impeached president. So while change of the system is possible, it’s very difficult; it takes a “super-consensus,” and that’s a good thing.
However, there are those who will have no truck with that nonsense. For them, all that’s needed for change is a telephone and a pen.
For those Americans who are fond of an imperial presidency, this must be the best of times, a veritable Golden Age; for constitutionalists, not so much. It’s been said that Barack Hussein Obama is the president Richard Milhous Nixon wanted to be. But the initial crimes of Watergate only affected the Democrat party, while Obama’s lawlessness strikes at our very system. It’s time to ratchet back the power of the office of president.
One of the places where presidential power could be curbed is the pardon. America has an entire branch of government devoted to ascertaining guilt and innocence, and the determinations of such are the result of the collective wisdom of judges and juries. To have those decisions and the entire judicial process nullified by any one person is too much, especially if that person is not above using power for purely political purposes, or whose judgment has been shown by recent events to be sorely under par. Even before Obama, the power of the pardon was abused, as in the case of the FALN terrorists pardoned by Clinton.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Sorry. I’m not a fan of monkeying with the Federal Constitution. Not for any great sense of nostalgia but because it is greatly difficult to do so and in the end, it doesn’t strike at or even acknowledge the underlying problems.
The US has 330 million people and the Federal Constitution, when ratified, covered a population not even one onehundredth of that. It was designed for a much smaller government and much smaller country. It was also designed for a population that at least had some passing knowledge or even appreciation for the principles contained therein. Can that still be said? I think not.
Conservatives and Constitutionalists have this really bad habit of thinking we’re in the majority when in fact we’re not. And our minority is spread over a huge geographic area. Sure, there are a few areas of concentration where we’re doing ok. But those are more than the exception than the rule.
It is a crying shame we don't abide by it.
Hear! Hear!
Thank you, Smokin’ Joe.
Paragraph number one, I agree with not monkeying with the Constitution
Paragraph number two, “It was designed for a much smaller government and much smaller country”.
Absolutely correct on one, completely wrong on the other. I’ll leave it to you to figure out.
Paragraph number three, majority/minority, who cares, it’s the principle that matters, the Founding Fathers were certainly in the minority but the principles prevailed.
Liberals will never allow strict constitutionalism....
too many sacred cows will be gored......
conservatives will never allow strict constitutionalism either...
too many sacred cows will be gored......
what is a constitutionalist to do?
The Federalist Papers clearly rebuke that notion. The larger the country the better the Constitution would perform to the benefit of the entire country.
It was also designed for a population that at least had some passing knowledge or even appreciation for the principles contained therein
The Federalist Papers clearly support that notion.
One of the roots of such wasteful, foolish, thuggish, and tyrannous government is the ease with which it can create
almost unlimited amounts of money out of thin air. Near-infinite money buys near-infinite government, and a bureaucracy that is generously funded can entertain an open-ended dream about how to expand its realm.
Every day more people are coming to the judgment that a carefully organized effort to repair the constitution via the States’ power to propose and ratify amendments has less risk to our liberty and prosperity than the present trajectory of the federal government and especially the federal bureaucracy.
The first order of business of an Article V Convention must be to limit government’s ability to spend and create near-
infinite amounts of money.
Nobody, including Conservatives, really wants to follow the Constitution. Two words: Drug War. Can’t have that if you follow the existing Constitution.
How about 2 more words..
patriot act.....
Who needs words at all?
EPA
FDA
DEA
NEA
NSA
...and any other gov’t body where non-elected bureaucrats get to make law.
True. No Federal Drug War.
You could, however, have 50 Drug Wars going on at the State level.
Way too many libertarians don't realize that the Constitution is not a libertarian document. It's a document that established a federal government with limited powers.
State governments had almost no restrictions put onto them by the Constitution. Initially, even the Bill of Rights did not apply to the states, which could and did interfere with freedom of speech and press, for instance.
An extremely odd place to start.
Possibly the least abused presidential power.
In fact, I would suggest the President should issue a lot more pardons than he does. Past presidents did.
The author of this piece really, really does not understand our Constitution. What he's talking about here is a parliamentary form of government versus our president/congress form.
There's nothing wrong with a parliamentary system, but it's fundamentally different from ours.
Interesting post; thread.
The republic has been taken over by the U.S.A. (United Socialists of America)
BIG GOVERNMENT IS CRONY SOCIALISM
DISMANTLE it. Pick one…any one…
http://www.usa.gov/directory/federal/
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
(see above link for a long A-Z list of grievances in this one grievance)
(need more grievances? examine those in the declaration and in the unconstitutional acts by the current and former traitors)
Above all, if you wish to be strong, begin by rooting out every particle of socialism that may have crept into your legislation. - Bastiat
Or, how about the inter-generational economic enslavement foisted upon us and our progeny by elitists/socialists/totalitarians?
DEPOPULATE socialists from the body politic. Some…here…
http://cpc.grijalva.house.gov/caucus-members/
It easy to…
live - free - republic
/soap box (education)
onward ballot boxes (many coming up)
EXCELSIOR!
You could indeed. But we know of at least two that wouldn't be waging a War On Marijuana - and several more that wouldn't be waging a War On Medicinal Marijuana.
Are you kidding? Nixon's crimes are mere small fraction of the misdeeds of this treasonous president. It boggles the mind to see what this SOB is trying to do each day, and the mass of scandals that are being left unpunished by the spineless GOP and the complicit MSM.
Huh? What is it that does not strike at the underlying problem?
BTW, the constitution was designed for a republic of republics, so that it could govern across a continent.
“Huh? What is it that does not strike at the underlying problem?”
Monkeying around with the existing constitution. Wasting time and resources trying to perfect an adequate document when the existing document or any improvements to it will simply be ignored by those in power. Worse, continuing to spend time and resources on editing efforts when the populace at large doesn’t even agree with the underlying principles.
The key is to make structural amendments that cannot be ignored. Otherwise, our slide into tyranny is assured.
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.