Obama is showing us all why the Constitution was written. To prevent abuse of power.
Most inteligent people understand the importance of our Constitution. Liberal Ideologs of course have no clue. They think the Constitution shoud be a living document that changes with the times.
You see, an intelligent person understands that the next President's ideology could be the exact opposite of their own. Liberals are fine with changing the Consttution when it agrees with them. They would be the biggest hypocritical riot mob if a Conservative tried to ignore the Constitution and push laws contrary to what Liberals want.
Obama is the closest thing we have ever had to a dictator with a political agenda to transfrom America and a willingness to circumvent the Constitution when it comes to balance of powers. Obviously important decisions that would effect all Americans should be agreed on by Congress. No one man should ever be able to make executive orders on important issues. To do so takes the power from the people as our voices would be silenced. We elect people to Congress to represent our beliefs.
|
To prevent abuse of power If that's why we have a Constitution, why hasn't it done that? Obama is the closest thing we have ever had to a dictator with a political agenda to transfrom America FDR They think the Constitution shoud be a living document Ratification of the 27th Amendment was finalized in 1992. This brought a change to our Constitution. Are you against the Constitutional ratification process which allows for the document to change with the times? 1
point
Are you against the Constitutional ratification process which allows for the document to change with the times? Of course it is. It has said repeatedly that it wants America to go back to the way it was at the beginning. This means it either wants to get rid of the constitution entirely, or that it wants every single amendment to it overturned. The FromWithin persona wants to end freedom of speech and religion (obviously, given its stance on prayer in schools et al, it would prefer a christian theocracy), wants to bring back slavery, everything. 1
point
You obviously have no clue what I want because the Constitution gives us freedom of Religion, not freedom from religion. The freedoms I speak of have nothing to do with Government ESTABLISHING a religion, but those like yourself will lie, distort, twist anything to strip all mention of God on public land. People like you are scary! When a community chooses to have a prayer at their school or football games, etc. they are not forcing anything on anyone. If you are some kind of insecure close minded bigot who would censor the vast majority of Americans who want free speech, too bad for you! Can you imagine an America that censored any speech that offended the one? We would be living in a Dictatorship. 0
points
One would have to be brain dead not to know we have had amendments to the Constitution. Amendments are used when BOTH sides agree that there needed to be new wording in the Constitution on issues that were not clearly defined. It is something not taken lightly and as you can see done very seldom. Liberals like Obama would rewrite the entire thing if he could. The reason abuse of power exists today is because of the welfare mentality where people would vote for the most corrupt politician in the world if they give them free subsidies. This is what is so scary when a Party like the Democrats start pandering to low income people to buy their votes with other's money. Our leaders are then elected no matter how corrupt they are. 1
point
" Amendments are used when BOTH sides agree that there needed to be new wording in the Constitution on issues that were not clearly defined" Every constitutional amendment had opposition, so saying it is only when both sides agree isn't really correct. " Amendments are used when BOTH sides agree that there needed to be new wording in the Constitution on issues that were not clearly defined" No, most would simply add some more amendments, just like many Conservatives. " Amendments are used when BOTH sides agree that there needed to be new wording in the Constitution on issues that were not clearly defined" So why did abuse of power exist before the modern welfare "mentality"? 1
point
Right! Let's go back to how it was at the beginning! Why did we even get rid of slaves? Or give women the right to vote? I mean, all men are created equal, but especially the white males! I mean, we should really only follow the amendments in the Bill of Rights. We have to keep everything how it was the beginning! All change is bad. Adapting is bad. The world stage is exactly the same and our founding fathers were basically gods whose morals match up perfectly with everything we have today, so we have no need to change anything! Really good point. (this is sarcasm, if you can't tell) 1
point
Your so called sarcasm is the exact same rhetoric every good little Liberals spits out when a Conservatives speaks on these issues. You try to scare people into swallowing your rhetoric. I realize it works with the low end voters but it is insulting to anyone with the slightest amount of intellect when it comes to our politics. SLAVERY, WOMEN'S RIGHTS!!!!! Just like blaming George Bush for everything... GETS SOME NEW MATERIAL. I must have missed it when I said everything was perfect back then. I must have missed where I wanted Slavery because they had it back then. But please don't let that stop you from parroting the Left wing talking points. So you are saying that Conservatives want to go back to how it was back when the Constitution was written? Do you have a clue how ludicrous that is? We want the Constitution upheld and our freedoms upheld. Freedoms to own guns, freedoms to have prayers when the community wants prayers, freedom to buy things like healthcare when we choose, but people like you want to scream RACISM, SLAVERY, WOMEN'S RIGHTS, CONSERVATIVES WANT US ALL TO GO BACK TO THAT! Get real! 100 years from now, I hope people will be saying, do you actually want to go back to a time when the Democrat party wanted freedom to kill any healthy late term Baby for any reason? All under the excuse of Privacy? Yes there are inhumane things that happen from every generation, and the Constitution can be twisted to allow it. This is why Conservatives want to interpret the law, not legislate it. 2
points
"Your so called sarcasm is the exact same rhetoric every good little Liberals spits out when a Conservatives speaks on these issues. You try to scare people into swallowing your rhetoric. " How is sarcasm meant to scare people? And when you insult anyone who disagrees with you, aren't you doing exactly what you are accusing him of? "I must have missed it when I said everything was perfect back then. I must have missed where I wanted Slavery because they had it back then. But please don't let that stop you from parroting the Left wing talking points. So you are saying that Conservatives want to go back to how it was back when the Constitution was written? Do you have a clue how ludicrous that is?" Just as ludicrous as when people, mainly on the right, say they want "traditional America back" or want to restore "traditional American values and culture". "freedoms to have prayers when the community wants prayers" You have that freedom. "100 years from now, I hope people will be saying, do you actually want to go back to a time when the Democrat party wanted freedom to kill any healthy late term Baby for any reason? All under the excuse of Privacy?" They don't, and you still have yet to provide any evidence that they do. "100 years from now, I hope people will be saying, do you actually want to go back to a time when the Democrat party wanted freedom to kill any healthy late term Baby for any reason? All under the excuse of Privacy?" Are you claiming that Conservatives do not pass laws? 1
point
I'm not saying that Conservatives want to go back to the way things were. It is clear that they accept that change can occur, and should, because it would be unreasonable to say that everything should always remain the same. Yes, freedom is important, but that's not to say things can't be regulated, or that people in the past can't have made mistakes. We're not saying you want to go back to the troubling times of the past, merely pointing out that to solve problems, adaptations had to have been made. When troubles are faced today, or when problems exist, it is well within the right of the president and government to make changes to stop troubling times. Do you mean to imply that where we are is perfect? Yes, inhumane things happen, but merely changing your interpretation of the law is trying to loophole your way out of it and pretend that what already exists was the intent of those who created it. Change is necessary if a country wants to survive. Your last statement is confusing. You say twisted things can happen, and the Constitution can be twisted to allow them. Wouldn't that imply that we should update the Constitution to stop allowing these things in the future? By simply hoping that people will choose to interpret them differently, how will anything change? And then to address a couple of the freedoms you want protected: The freedom to own guns. Sure, it's all very "America" that everyone gets to have a gun if they want one. But it is also a fact that gun violence in America is much higher than it is in countries with stronger gun control laws. The freedom to "have prayers," I assume you mean religion. This already exists. Sure, there are restrictions, like a separation of church and state (supposedly,) so what are you looking for? An opportunity to make the entire country Christian? If you truly want freedom to have prayers, then every town should have religious groups of ALL religions, as well as atheist recognition. I somehow don't think that's what you have in mind. And then the problem of abortion. I could go into abortion arguments here, that a woman who has been raped should be able to protect herself from a life she is unable to or not ready to lead and so on, but I know that won't make any difference to you because you are much too set in your own opinions. But think about the future… people could easily say 100 years from now, "can you believe people used to not allow a woman to save her life if having a child was going to kill her? Or destroy her life?" Trying to pass it off as on ok argument because you hope people's opinions will change over time argues nothing. And final note: you yell to "get some new material" in references the atrocities of the past… but can you really deny those points? People with intellect should be able to see the mistakes of the past, and how legislative change was necessary to overcome discrimination. How is that not true? Dear FromWithin: I feel compelled to clarify your OP, as it seems my esteemed fellow debaters have failed to grasp the noble purity of your argument. Most inteligent people understand the importance of our Constitution. Liberal Ideologs of course have no clue. They think the Constitution shoud be a living document that changes with the times. Breakdown: The Constitution is important. Some intelligent people do not understand its importance. Liberals don't understand its importance. Liberals want the ability to change the Constitution. Your statement is actually that Liberals want to make changes to our Constitution that advance liberal ideology. I would agree. You see, an intelligent person understands that the next President's ideology could be the exact opposite of their own. Liberals are fine with changing the Consttution when it agrees with them. They would be the biggest hypocritical riot mob if a Conservative tried to ignore the Constitution and push laws contrary to what Liberals want. Breakdown: People with differing ideologies have held the office of President. Liberals want the ability to change the Constitution. redundant point Liberals would not agree with Conservative changes to the Constitution. Your statement is actually that Liberals DON'T want to make changes to our Constitution that advance CONSERVATIVE ideology. I agree Obama is the closest thing we have ever had to a dictator with a political agenda to transfrom America and a willingness to circumvent the Constitution when it comes to balance of powers. Obviously important decisions that would effect all Americans should be agreed on by Congress. No one man should ever be able to make executive orders on important issues. To do so takes the power from the people as our voices would be silenced. We elect people to Congress to represent our beliefs. Breakdown: Obama is willing to advance his Liberal agenda by using executive powers, because Congress blocks the changes he wants. The rest is bla bla bla. Summary Liberals want to make changes to our Constitution that advance liberal ideology. Liberals DON'T want to make changes to our Constitution that advance CONSERVATIVE ideology. Obama is willing to advance his Liberal agenda by using executive powers, because Congress blocks the changes he wants. I'll bet you a dollar to a donut that my esteemed fellow debaters will not disagree with your points when presented in this way. Hmmm 1
point
Thanks for putting your slant on my post but I will stay with what I wrote. I guarantee you if I had posted the exact same words as you just posted, they would attack me the same exact way. Me thinks you are not grasping who we are dealing with here. What I actually believe is that Liberals know all to well that they would not want a Conservative President twisting the Constitution and making serious executive orders in the same manner as Obama, but they could care less because they know they now have the power of the Liberal media behind their cause and can do any arrogant illegal thing they want, because they know they can get away with it. 1
point
Yes, but we don't make the argument that the Constitution should stay exactly how it is. I would, for example, oppose a bill that made gay marriage illegal, not because I think the Constitution is flawless, but because the bill conflicts with my moral standpoint. Of course Obama is going to propose bills that fit the Liberal agenda because his views are primarily Liberal, but that does NOT mean that he is abusing power. Do you mean to suggest that a Conservative president would not also try to make legislative changes and "twist" the Constitution for more right-wing ideas? 1
point
" I guarantee you if I had posted the exact same words as you just posted, they would attack me the same exact way. " How would you know, you haven't tried it. Why not try it and find out? I have maintained a civil tone with you, regardless of your rather offensive tone. Maybe if you were civil as well, we could actually have a constructive debate. "What I actually believe is that Liberals know all to well that they would not want a Conservative President twisting the Constitution and making serious executive orders in the same manner as Obama," Obama's executive order usage is minimal, compared to most of our past presidents in the last 100 years. 1
point
"Liberals don't understand its importance. Liberals want the ability to change the Constitution." Wouldn't you say that can apply to Conservatives as well, considering the number of Conservatives that have called for modern constitutional amendments, some of which are in stark opposition to the Bill of Rights? Therefore, wouldn't that mean that Conservatives want to make changes to our Constitution that advance Conservative ideology? "Obama is willing to advance his Liberal agenda by using executive powers, because Congress blocks the changes he wants." Obama's executive order usage is actually quite minimal compared to past presidents. Why do Republicans never recognize that? Obama is currently at 203, and based on his average number per year, won't even pass Conservative patron Ronald Reagan, who stands at 381. Your fundamental argument is that Liberals are a danger to our freedoms. I agree IF you are actually referring to Liberal Progressives. LP 's are bent on transforming our nation into a socialist utopia, along the lines of Lenin's dream. If this is your meaning, be careful not to say Liberals or Democrats, as these labels are not the enemy. The difference is this, most Liberals and Democrats love this nation and want to keep us free. Liberal Progressives, have openly stated their intent to fundamentally transform America. 1
point
I do not believe for a second that most most Liberals and Democrats love this nation the way it is. THEY WANT TO TRANSFORM IT! You actually believe these people who say they don't like Obama or they don't agree with how he did this or that? They would vote for Obama again in a heart beat if they could over any Republican. They are like the low end voters who would vote for a fence post if it gave them free stuff. But their unconditional vote is based on ideology. 1
point
1
point
"I do not believe for a second that most most Liberals and Democrats love this nation the way it is." Saying "the way it is" is a bit misleading. Liberals and Democrats can love this nation, but want it to change in some ways. Conservatives and Republicans sure do. So why does wanting some changes preclude you from loving this nation? " You actually believe these people who say they don't like Obama or they don't agree with how he did this or that?" Are we not allowed to both disagree with you, AND Obama? If so, why not? " They would vote for Obama again in a heart beat if they could over any Republican" I sure didn't, either time. " They are like the low end voters who would vote for a fence post if it gave them free stuff. But their unconditional vote is based on ideology." So do you believe that every Democrat is on welfare? 1
point
"What I actually believe is that Liberals know all to well that they would not want a Conservative President twisting the Constitution and making serious executive orders in the same manner as Obama," By definition of the words you are using, you are wrong. "Liberal" Progressives are not Socialist. Socialist Progressives want what you have mentioned, though many are less in line with Lenin due to the inherently flawed nature of Authoritarianism and are more in line with a semi-Hybrid state. Liberal progressives, by nature of being liberal, are not socialist. " Liberal Progressives, have openly stated their intent to fundamentally transform America." I know you love to use that phrase, but it really doesn't mean anything. This nation has been fundamentally transformed so many times, and in many ways it was undoubtedly for the best. "fundamentally transform" is not inherently negative. When Obama said "fundamental transformation", it clearly pointed to the belief that our nation has something fundamentally wrong with it. IMO our foundation is not fundamentally wrong. This is a negative direction if it takes us away from the freedoms our founders sought to preserve. We know the the more government you have, the less freedom you enjoy. Liberal Progressive is a name these subvertive bastards choose to call themselves. They know quite well what they will garner if they admit that they are socialists or communists. They did that only once, and will not repeat that mistake again. They are quite aware that Americans will reject them if they do not hide behind more acceptable names. They can't defeat us, so they are slowly subverting us and our constitution. IMO Don't be fooled by the labels they use, they are the enemies of democracy. 0
points
Your so called sarcasm is the exact same rhetoric every good Liberals spits out when a Conservatives speaks on these issues. You try to scare people into swallowing your rhetoric. I realize it works with the low end voters but it is insulting to anyone with the slightest amount of intellect when it comes to our politics. SLAVERY, WOMEN'S RIGHTS!!!!! Just like blaming George Bush for everything... GETS SOME NEW MATERIAL. I must have missed it when I said everything was perfect back then. I must have missed where I wanted Slavery because they had it back then. But please don't let that stop you from parroting the Left wing talking points. So you are saying that Conservatives want to go back to how it was back when the Constitution was written? Do you have a clue how ludicrous that is? We want the Constitution upheld and our freedoms upheld. Freedoms to own guns, freedoms to have prayers when the community wants prayers, freedom to buy things like healthcare when we choose, but people like you want to scream RACISM, SLAVERY, WOMEN'S RIGHTS, CONSERVATIVES WANT US ALL TO GO BACK TO THAT! Get real! 100 years from now, I hope people will be saying, do you actually want to go back to a time when the Democrat party wanted freedom to kill any healthy late term Baby for any reason? All under the excuse of Privacy? Yes there are inhumane things that happen from every generation, and the Constitution can be twisted to allow it. This is why Conservatives want to interpret the law, not legislate it. |
