Can You Answer These Constitutional Questions?

SmarterthanYou said:
14th Amendment resolved that. the states no longer have the right to order social structures based on color. there is NO conflict of rights here.
Click to expand...

Take notice how the lefties always avoid the "hot potato" constitutional questions by attempts to confuse the issue with court cases decided by the ideologue partisan gang of 9 who were appointed by another ideologue and confirmed by more ideologues like those corrupt ideological partisan bastards collectively decide anything by actual constitutional decorum.

Fact is, the left has no actual rational response to the original questions I presented in the original topic of this thread. The average leftist has little to no intellectual capacity to think for themselves or make sound arguments to hot potato constitutional questioning. That's because the left has little to no loyalty to the Constitution and most actually abhor it because the Constitution is in opposition to the left's "BIG mommy & daddy government knows best and is my savior" philosophy.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the government has no DUTY to provide for the health and safety of it's people. 1) WE are not the governments people, the government belongs to US. 2) read the numerous court decisions telling us that the government has no responsibility to provide protection to individuals (only society at large) and that they are NOT liable for failure to do so.

a majority of do gooders are going to tell the government to take your kid, that doesn't make it right or constitutional. the courts are going to side with the majority because they've been infused politically for decades now, so YOU are left with the decision of killing all that they send or submitting to unconstitutional power and authority.
Click to expand...

Okay, you can argue the point all day, and I might agree with what you say. That was not my point, and not what we were discussing.

As you already know, I posted these to illustrate to you that there are CONFLICTS, or at least people will claim conflicts... and if the Courts are not going to rule on them... who is?

You said the Court does not have such authority, my point is that if they don't... the Government cannot function.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
14th Amendment resolved that. the states no longer have the right to order social structures based on color. there is NO conflict of rights here.
Click to expand...

The People of Louisiana sure thought there was. So, since according to you the Court does not have the authority to determine that, who do we look to for the final answer that there is no conflict? You?
 
Jarod said:
The People of Louisiana sure thought there was. So, since according to you the Court does not have the authority to determine that, who do we look to for the final answer that there is no conflict? You?
Click to expand...

in this instance, since the state of LA didn't want to adhere to the constitution, the national guard should have been sent in immediately and every state legislator imprisoned until trial so they could be executed. my point with this is that there can be NO balancing act where rights of the people are concerned.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
in this instance, since the state of LA didn't want to adhere to the constitution, the national guard should have been sent in immediately and every state legislator imprisoned until trial so they could be executed. my point with this is that there can be NO balancing act where rights of the people are concerned.
Click to expand...


So, you think its the President who should decide what side is correct?
 
Classic Liberal said:
What kibosh, what interpretations? None of Jarod’s court cases have a dime’s worth of relevance to the original questions of this thread. Allow me to repeat the actual issue y’all lefties attempt to confuse so you can avoid actual rational answers to the actual original questions.

“If the “general welfare” clause of Article One, Section Eight of our Constitution validates as constitutional federal socialist programs, i. e., Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Obama-Care, what actions/laws doesn’t the general welfare clause validate the Congress/federal government doing in the name of the general welfare?”

“If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution, why did the authors of the Constitution waste so much time, ink and paper to even bother writing the rest of the Constitution?”

If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution why didn’t the authors simply end up with a single sentence Constitution that stated something like this,” “The Congress shall have all mighty power to make whatever laws they choose as long as they claim they are in the “general welfare” and the President signs them into law.”

If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution, What’s with Amendment 10? What good is Amendment 10, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution or prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”??? What’s that all about anyhow???

“If the general welfare clause doesn't trump everything else in the Constitution, what doesn't it trump?”

Here’s the next question for y’all lefties.

Can you and will you explain IN YOUR OWN WORDS, considering amendment 10 of our Constitution, how and by what constitutional directive the court came to the conclusion that Obama-Care/ACA is constitutional?
Click to expand...

"If" seems to be the cornerstone of your BS....pity that Jarod and I are dealing in FACTS, valid documentations and HISTORICAL CASE LAW AND PRECEDENT to support what we are POINTING OUT, NOT speculating on, or supposing or conjecturing.

Like all failed anti-gov't types, all you can do is try and CREATE your own version of what should be, then is no one plays into that fallacy by answering silly "what if" questions, you bray like an ass that you've "won" your point. :palm:

Sorry, but my old teachers and professors would just ignore you and/or flunk you. Think I'll do the same here.
 
Taichiliberal said:
"If" seems to be the cornerstone of your BS....pity that Jarod and I are dealing in FACTS, valid documentations and HISTORICAL CASE LAW AND PRECEDENT to support what we are POINTING OUT, NOT speculating on, or supposing or conjecturing.
Click to expand...

What does case law have to do with rationally and honestly answering the questions? Case law is performed by lawyers and ideological partisan judges. The latter appointed by partisan ideological Presidents and confirmed by partisan ideologues in the Senate. Good luck getting a ”CONSTITUTIONAL” decision from that gang of partisan ideological bastards.

All that’s ask of you in this thread is some honest answers to some honest constitutional questions. Here! I’ll post them again for your contemplation.

“If the “general welfare” clause of Article One, Section Eight of our Constitution validates as constitutional federal socialist programs, i. e., Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Obama-Care, what actions/laws doesn’t the general welfare clause validate the Congress/federal government doing in the name of the general welfare?”

“If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution, why did the authors of the Constitution waste so much time, ink and paper to even bother writing the rest of the Constitution?”

“If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution why didn’t the authors simply end up with a single sentence Constitution that stated something like this,” “The Congress shall have all mighty power to make whatever laws they choose as long as they claim they are in the “general welfare” and the President signs them into law.”

“If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution, What’s with Amendment 10? What good is Amendment 10, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution or prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”??? What’s that all about anyhow???

“If the general welfare clause doesn't trump everything else in the Constitution, what doesn't it trump?”


“Can you and will you explain IN YOUR OWN WORDS, considering amendment 10 of our Constitution, how and by what constitutional directive the court came to the conclusion that Obama-Care/ACA is constitutional?

Like all failed anti-gov't types, all you can do is try and CREATE your own version of what should be, then is no one plays into that fallacy by answering silly "what if" questions, you bray like an ass that you've "won" your point.
Click to expand...

Can you produce any posted quote of mine proving that I’ve “brayed like an ass that I’ve won my point?”

Why not simply be honest and honestly answer the questions or better yet admit that if you actually did answer them honestly you’d disprove your own contention that the general welfare clause absurdly trumps anything and everything else in the Constitution?

Sorry, but my old teachers and professors would just ignore you and/or flunk you. Think I'll do the same here.
Click to expand...

Apparently they were/are ideological Constitutional disloyal neo-communist leftist too, huh?

You Can’t flunk me! I don’t belong to your neo-communist school of traitors to our Constitution.

I’ll await your answers to the questions, but of course we both know you haven’t the gonads to answer them honestly, don’t we?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
don't obfuscate or be obtuse. the 14th Amendment is clear. the president wouldn't be guessing if he's correct or not. he'd be protecting the constitutional rights of the people of Louisiana
Click to expand...

You don't understand, there are plenty of people who will distort and claim different meanings of very specific things. Look at the COnservatives on this very board. Someone will need to be in a position to be the final arbitrator of such claims. The founders chose the Supreme Court.
 
Classic Liberal said:
If the “general welfare” clause of Article One, Section Eight of our Constitution validates as constitutional federal socialist programs, i. e., Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Obama-Care, what actions/laws doesn’t the general welfare clause validate the Congress/federal government doing in the name of the general welfare?

If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution, why did the authors of the Constitution waste so much time, ink and paper to even bother writing the rest of the Constitution?

If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution why didn’t the authors simply end up with a single sentence Constitution that stated something like this, “The Congress shall have all mighty power to make whatever laws they choose as long as they claim they are in the “general welfare” and the President signs them into law.”

If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution, What’s with Amendment 10? What good is Amendment 10, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution or prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”??? What’s that all about anyhow???

If the general welfare clause doesn't trump everything else in the Constitution, what doesn't it trump?

Wonder how many leftist will tackle those questions? Seems the only thing in the Constitution the left believes in is the general welfare clause. They should at least explain it, don’t ya think?
Click to expand...

It isn't the general welfare that is the problem. You may have noticed that providing for the general warfare or the common offense is nowhere to be found in our supreme law of the land.
 
Jarod said:
You don't understand, there are plenty of people who will distort and claim different meanings of very specific things. Look at the COnservatives on this very board. Someone will need to be in a position to be the final arbitrator of such claims. The founders chose the Supreme Court.
Click to expand...

the founders chose 'we the people' to be the final arbiter, not the courts.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
the founders chose 'we the people' to be the final arbiter, not the courts.
Click to expand...


So, I ask you... when two different groups of "we the people" as you see them, disagree on a Constitutional issue... how do you resolve that?

War? Majority rule?
 
Classic Liberal said:
If the “general welfare” clause of Article One, Section Eight of our Constitution validates as constitutional federal socialist programs, i. e., Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Obama-Care, what actions/laws doesn’t the general welfare clause validate the Congress/federal government doing in the name of the general welfare?

If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution, why did the authors of the Constitution waste so much time, ink and paper to even bother writing the rest of the Constitution?

If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution why didn’t the authors simply end up with a single sentence Constitution that stated something like this, “The Congress shall have all mighty power to make whatever laws they choose as long as they claim they are in the “general welfare” and the President signs them into law.”

If the general welfare clause trumps everything else in the Constitution, What’s with Amendment 10? What good is Amendment 10, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution or prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”??? What’s that all about anyhow???

If the general welfare clause doesn't trump everything else in the Constitution, what doesn't it trump?

Wonder how many leftist will tackle those questions? Seems the only thing in the Constitution the left believes in is the general welfare clause. They should at least explain it, don’t ya think?
Click to expand...

Because, the general welfare is not the general warfare. We should have a welfare-State not a warfare-State economic paradigm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top