>It’s sad they have to pass laws to interpret those written in plain english.
>What part of “Shall NOT” is causing the confusion.
Nothing, to you or I, however the whole thing seems to be held as “optional” by the “Powers That Be.”
I wrote about the same situation in a State’s Constitution here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2874833/posts
>No law no way no how! We already have the law! Written in easy to understand language!
>It’s the Constitution!
Yes, however, if there is no consequence to violating a Constitution then it stands to reason that that Constitution dead, null and void.
Perhaps it needs to be watered in the same way the Tree of Liberty does.
The Constitution has been subverted primarily through the overwhelming dominance of the “progressive” MSM. If the MSM raised a stink each time a politician violated their oath of office, the practice would soon cease. Instead, the MSM celebrates the violation of the Constitutional oath by lauding a “living constitution” and applauding politicians who “grow in office”. Look no further than “progressive” control of the MSM to see the reason for politicians haphazard attention to their oath of office.