Religion And The Constitution

The religious Right has been blowing smoke up Americans butts for years…..especially about the Constitution and other historical events…..but most of the things they, the religious Right, say that were the principles that this country was founded on are…..well…..LIES!

I got this on Twitter yesterday and wanted to pass it along…..

 

constitution

When You Have NO Solutions—Sue The Bastards

Americans are ate up with the “Lawsuit Lotto”.

Then there is the Congress, the most wasteful institution in DC…..not only is it a part-time leadership but it is equally as worthless as a governing body……Obama recently got fed up with the dance that Congress was playing on immigration and took matters into his own hands…..

And of course whatever he does is wrong in the eyes of the GOP….they bitch and moan…..whine and shout……and still cannot come up with a plan…

But now they have their little lap dogs to do their work for them……GOP governors…….

More than a third of the states have joined a lawsuit fighting President Obama’s sweeping executive action on immigration. The suit brought by 17 states against the federal government was filed in Texas and announced by Greg Abbott, the state attorney general and governor-elect, reports the Los Angeles Times. He accuses Obama of “abdicating his responsibility to faithfully enforce laws that were duly enacted by Congress and attempting to rewrite immigration laws, which he has no authority to do.” The filing in federal court says the suit “is not about immigration. It is about the rule of law, presidential power, and the structural limits of the US Constitution.”

The other states suing are Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. Supporters of Obama’s immigration order called the suit grandstanding, and the administration says the order was legal and has precedent, reports the Wall Street Journal. “The Supreme Court and Congress have made clear that federal officials can set priorities in enforcing our immigration laws, and we are confident that the president’s executive actions are well within his legal authorities,” a White House spokesman says.

Just what the resident of those states need…..a moronic lawsuit instead of jobs and policies that benefit the people…but NOOOOOOOOOOO!  These turkeys want to grand stand and play the Constitutionality card….a term they do not understand.  It all sounds impressive but in reality it is a game and a political theater.

Is It Time For A Change?

Change?  A subject that Americans clamor on and on about…..but yet Not one of them can accurately say just what change entails……….most are not looking for real change but rather just a new set of politicians ………..which is NOT change.

When the war of words between the two drag ass parties gets heated someone always brings up the issue of constitutionality…….and then some else has the brilliant idea of a constitutional convention to solve any dispute…..and then everyone takes a step back and calmer heads prevail…….

But in reality is there ever going to be a convention to possibly re-do the constitution or maybe add an amendment or two?

The US Constitution has 27 amendments, all of which have been added in the usual manner laid out in high school civics texts. But Bloomberg catches up with a movement to alter the Constitution in a way that’s never been done—by holding a constitutional convention to draft changes. In order for such a convention to happen, two-thirds of the states need to call for one, and advocates say they’ve already cracked the two-dozen mark on the way to the necessary 34. As Bloomberg’s Albert Hunt explains, most of the push is coming from fiscal conservatives who want to add an amendment requiring a balanced budget or some other kind of financial discipline.

Hunt thinks it’s “still not likely” the movement will succeed, but what has critics and constitutional scholars worried nonetheless is the unprecedented nature of such a convention. Would anything be up for debate? Might the Bill of Rights be endangered, at least theoretically? Robert Greenstein of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities writes in the Washington Post that everything about a possible convention, from the selection of delegates to the voting rules, is uncharted territory. “That means that under a convention, anything goes,” he writes. The website redmillennial.com rounds up views from high-profile advocates, including Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who calls a convention the only way to “restrain the size of the federal government.”

Lots of bold talk……but who has the cajones to ride this issue to finish….my guess is…NO ONE!  It is all talk….making political points…..but No action will ever occur.

Personally, I think that it is beyond time to take a hard realistic look at a new convention……there are so many issues that need to be cleared up and put into perspective.

Shredding the Fourth Amendment in Post-Constitutional America – The Unz Review

In this world where many are worried about the first and second amendment rights…………Everybody and I do mean……..EVERYBODY has an opinion on the loss of privacy and such…….but the 4th amendment is being shredded and no matter where you are on the political spectrum………you should be WORRIED!

 

Shredding the Fourth Amendment in Post-Constitutional America – The Unz Review.

Can 2nd Be Fixed?

Shooting after shooting…..death after death….it seems to be a vicious cycle that we cannot get out of…..like it is stuck in some diabolical short story………yes, we have those that call for massive gun control, something I do not completely agree with…..and then there are those that think people need assault weapons to protect their home and family….another completely biased statement…….

Is it possible the 2nd amendment can be fixed?

Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens argues in the Washington Post that the debate over the 2nd Amendment and the right to bear arms can be settled with the addition of five words. Here they are, inserted into the amendment in bold:

  • “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”

In his essay, which is an excerpt from his new book, Stevens writes that those words get back to what the original drafters had mind. It wasn’t about personal self-defense—”the notion that the states were concerned about possible infringement of that right by the federal government is really quite absurd.” Instead, the amendment was intended to protect “the citizen’s right (and duty) to keep and bear arms when serving in a state militia,” he writes. This stemmed from states’ concerns about a national standing army running roughshod over them, he explains. Recent court opinions have lost sight of this and curbed the government’s ability to “minimize the slaughter caused by the prevalence of weapons in private hands.” Click for his full column.

This could fix the “problem of guns”……but it could also open up a whole new bunch of “fixes’ to our beloved Constitution……and that would be something that is not gonna happen.

What do you, my readers, feel about this?