REPOST: How Tyranny Came to America [re: Constitutionalism 101]

Constitution Party / www.constitutionparty.org ^ | 2000 | Joseph Sobran

[Southack]

See post #61. You aren't going to destroy socialism if you use bad methods (e.g. pretending that the law says one thing when it actually says another).

[Magoo]

I'm not a constitutional scholar by any means and I'm not selling a 200 year old argument. The crux of the article in question is about how the Judicial system since the time of Roosevelt has progressively perverted the context and intent of the constitution to expand the powers of federal government to achieve a vision of egalitarianism and socialism.

[Yeti]

One wonders what his definition of socialism is.

No kidding!

I am getting nothing out of this but angry, so I think I'm just going to ignore him now.

[Southack]

"The crux of the article in question is about how the Judicial system since the time of Roosevelt has progressively perverted the context and intent of the constitution to expand the powers of federal government to achieve a vision of egalitarianism and socialism."

The article said:

"Where does the federal government get the power to legislate in this area? The answer is: Nowhere."

And the author of the article is wrong. The power resides in Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, as indicated in my very first post on this thread.

[Sofa King]

'another blow'

LOL. Where's the first one?

Also, slavery wouldn't have been made illegal if the people who made it so considered that the fact that it hadn't been made illegal yet as proof that it was morally right.

[thepitts]

Go back to your kiddie star wars games.

[Magoo]

The "great system" as you call it has been corupted by the removal of checks and balances by the judiciary. They now legislate laws from the bench rather than simply judge their constitutional validity.Also all of the federal agencies which "regulate" our society have become a law unto themselves.

Have you read First Among Equals by K Starr? It details the subtle corruption of SCOTUS over the past 80 years or so.

You sound like James Taggart in Atlas Shrugged.

[Black Agnes]

"General Welfare" != 'Stealing my money to buy the votes of the slacker family next door'.

Or do you equate the slacker mentality with that of men/women who've served in our armed forces honorably & possibly been wounded in said service?

[Magoo]

Apparently he quit. He was overwhelmed by the 4 to 1 odds and went to hide in a bunker, just like the Iraqis. You make five, regards.

[stainlessbanner]

I had bookmarked this article twice before from two previous duplicates. I'm reading it again here (who reads their bookmarks anyway?). Thanks SWL

[Black Agnes]

I've seen him argue this on other threads. Apparently he's deluded into thinking socialism is somehow a more 'Christian' and 'humane' form of government. There is nothing Christian about promoting one group of people to covet anothers stuff and using government to steal it for them. That's breaking 2 commandments right there. 3 if somone is killed while it's being done.

What's more, government employees have gotten pensions for a long time. That's not quite justification enough to start the 'great society' programs of the 60's.

[Sofa King]

I don't think it was the 4 to 1 odds, it was the fact that he was being crushed. I had him on the run; he completely shifted the point of the argument twice and couldn't shake me.

[Magoo]

You know you're debating a liberal when your opponent pretends to be omniscient. Hell, if you'd just read the article you'd see that there were justices who wouldn't let Roosevelt do what he wanted (thus agreeing with me), but I guess it's just easier for you to claim to know what is in the heart and mind of every justice ever appointed.

Worth Repeating

You da man! Err King ;)

[Dead Corpse]

Freedom Bump. Just so I can find it if that coward comes back.

I hate socialists. Especially when they try to masquerade as "conservatives". Sullies the name.

[gorush]

James Madison, the Father of the Constitution, elaborated upon this limitation in a letter to James Robertson:

"With respect to the two words "general welfare," I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators. If the words obtained so readily a place in the "Articles of Confederation," and received so little notice in their admission into the present Constitution, and retained for so long a time a silent place in both, the fairest explanation is, that the words, in the alternative of meaning nothing or meaning everything, had the former meaning taken for granted."

[gorush]

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated."
--Thomas Jefferson

[Yeti]

Thank you for your clarification, gorush. You are obviously better-educated in this matter than myself.

It has been my perception that the original document doesn't require a great deal of specific learning to interpret accurately, but some dedicated scholarship seems to be necessary in order to defend it against those clever but misguided inellectuals who would distort its meaning contrary to the intent of its authors.

[gorush]

The quotes that I have referred to can be found on Walter E. Williams' most excellent web page at http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/wew/quotes/govt.html

[Sofa King]

"Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated." --Thomas Jefferson

Looks like somebody agrees with my interpretation after all, huh?

[Dead Corpse]

Yeah, but what did Jefferson know....

(That was sarcasm for those so impaired...)