| Author | Message | ||
     Davegess |
The KEY to the whole deal is that we all agree to follow the law and to dispute the ones we don't agree with through the ballot box. If we don't win we don't take up weapons we try to win next time. As soon as we decide that we are going to circumvent this process the whole thing falls apart. It is a wonder to me that it has lasted as long as it has. There were sevearl points in the first 100 years where it looked like it might all come apart, the Civil War being the worst one. Hope can pull of another 250 years! | ||
| Sifo |
The KEY to the whole deal is that we all agree to follow the law and to dispute the ones we don't agree with through the ballot box. If we don't win we don't take up weapons we try to win next time. As soon as we decide that we are going to circumvent this process the whole thing falls apart. It is a wonder to me that it has lasted as long as it has. There were sevearl points in the first 100 years where it looked like it might all come apart, the Civil War being the worst one. Hope can pull of another 250 years! I agree 100%. The problem is that right now (for decades actually, think Roe v. Wade) the progressives have been putting judges in place that are willing to ignore written law to provide what they like call "social justice". That is tyranny. | ||
| Court |
>>>>Unfortunately nearly every discussion devolves into a fit of yelling past one another. Which accounts for some of the most valuable resources we've had over the years being long gone and others simply not placing much stock in the content. | ||
| Davegess |
the court has been deciding what the founders meant since the very beginning. The Constitution is very vague and quite deliberately so. It would not have been adapted if it was more clear. It was a near thing getting it accepted in the first place. Sometimes you agree with them and sometimes you don't. But you have to accept it or the whole deal collapses. Tyranny would be if there was no way for the people to appoint the judges. As it is, and this is one of the beauties of the Constitution, they act as a damper on the elected representatives. Because they are appointed for life the prevailing will of the majority AT THE TIME THEY WERE APPOINTED continues to influence the law of the land even after the majority has changed their collective mind. It is hugely important that this remain the case as it stabilizes the entire system and prevents wild swings in what is legal or not. Look at the things Roosevelt could not get past the Supreme Court (I am a huge fan of his but if he had been allowed to carry out all that he wanted I could have been very bad). Without the Court he would have moved the country much farther to the left. I often don't agree with the rulings this conservative Supreme Court makes BUT they are the final arbiters and I agree to abide by their rulings while trying to elect Presidents who will appoint different judges. | ||
| Sifo |
While I appreciate the concept that they should not be open to political influence for fear of being removed, lifetime appointments with virtually zero accountability to anyone is a great amount of power. The old adage about power corrupting must be looked at very carefully when handing out this sort of power. When they start looking to "International law" to justify decisions, or just plain ignore our laws to go with their gut feelings it becomes arbitrary. That is the very definition of tyranny. Literally! | ||
| Davegess |
I think the current system works pretty well. Every judge in federal court can have a decision reviewed by a higher court if the people involved in the case wish to pursue this. There is no tyranny if the ruling can be overturned on appeal. Some of the rulings are downright weird but they usually don't survive review. Some of the judges are weird and there are a few who, while still sitting on the bench, never hear any significant cases because the lawyers for both sides simply avoid them because of this. The final word comes from a panel of nine appointed by several different Presidents. These Presidents have differing agendas and political pressures influencing there appointments. The current court leans to the right a bit IMHO and has done so pretty regularly since Reagan. If goes back to that dampening thing. The Court during Reagan's terms was liberal pretty much up to the end and kept the conservative movement at time in check. When Clinton came to office the Reagan appointees kept the liberal movement in check. I think it works pretty well and don't see any functioning examples that are any better. | ||
| Buellkowski |
English (Common) Law vs. Civil (Codified) Law. Look up the distinction. The U.S. operates under common law jurisprudence. Always has. Some of you appear to take a civil law approach when viewing the Constitution. That's not how we do things around these parts. | ||
| Cityxslicker |
I really think alot of things could be solved by hitting congress with a good 1 - 2 punch. Term limits. No more than three consecutive terms through either house. And no more ability to make self vote on wages. Wages should be put back to nominal GS rates based on experience, say GS-12 to start. Let the IRS have their fun with perks, bribes, soft 'gifts'. Drain the swamp at the ballot box. And forgo the card blanche politicians get for their crimes (drugs, embezzlement, ethics violations, traffic stuff, murder and of course disclosure of classified info) * I cant believe NSA hasnt squashed WikiLeaks by now. | ||
| Davegess |
Professional long term politicos are indeed a problem BUT if we have serious term limits the only people who have a chance to really understand the complex problems will be long time professional staff and lobbyists. Just setting term limits without addressing that issue will simply move our problem and perhaps make it worse. Reducing the pay also has consequences, if don't pay for good people you often don't get good people. Personally I would like to see redistricting moved out of the hands of congress. The way it works now is we get increasingly partisan districts. Each congress tries to make more "safe" districts that their party can't lose. The result is less moderate legislators. If you district was not solidly Republican or Democratic you would need to attract the voters in the middle and congress would work better as a result. | ||
| Doug_s |
Doug_s Congratulations! The more we discuss this the more you are backtracking on the influence of Glass-Steagall. You've made it from being the cause to being partly responsible. That's progress! was fannie & freddie going speculative also a large contributor? You still seem to be missing something. The real problem wasn't Fannie & Freddie being speculative. The real problem was encouraging individuals to be speculative in purchasing their housing. That is the root cause of the whole mortgage crisis. It wasn't until individuals were defaulting in large numbers that we had a crisis. Glass-Steagall had nothing to do with that. no, i am not backtracking, when i say that repeal of g-s was partly responsible. i am aware that nothing happens in a wacuum. i still believe the crisis would not have been a crisis if g-s were still in force. and, i agree that a big problem was encouraging folks to be speculative in their housing purchases. this was done to help those making the loans and selling them, not to help the indiwidual homeowners. doug s. | ||
| Doug_s |
The problem is that right now (for decades actually, think Roe v. Wade) the progressives have been putting judges in place that are willing to ignore written law to provide what they like call "social justice". That is tyranny. this might be true, if it were not for the fact that the present court is wery right wing, and has been one of the most judicially active courts in decades. what is progressive in giving a corporation the same free speech rights as a person? and how is this done w/o contorting the meaning of freedom of speech and what it applies to? does anyone really believe that the founding fathers thought freedom of speech should apply to inanimate objects?  the fact is, that giving total absolute power to the supreme court justices is exactly what the constitution says... sometimes ya like it, sometimes not. me too. doug s. | ||
| Doug_s |
While I appreciate the concept that they should not be open to political influence for fear of being removed, lifetime appointments with virtually zero accountability to anyone is a great amount of power. The old adage about power corrupting must be looked at very carefully when handing out this sort of power. When they start looking to "International law" to justify decisions, or just plain ignore our laws to go with their gut feelings it becomes arbitrary. That is the very definition of tyranny. Literally! see above - this is exactly what the constitution had in mind. want to change it? we need a constitutional amendment, ratified by 3/4ths of the states. of course, you also need a constitutional amendment to make marijuana illegal, like was done for alcohol, so who knows?  doug s. | ||
| Sifo |
I think it works pretty well and don't see any functioning examples that are any better. I have to agree with you that our system is one of the best in recorded history. I'm simply pointing out one of the problems with the system. It's a problem that I honestly don't see a good solution to, but that doesn't mean there's no problem. The founders did an amazing job of looking back in history and creating a government that was well balanced and fairly free from excesses of power. Reading their writings it becomes clear that they had much debate on how to achieve this balance. It's also clear that they also knew that any system could be subverted and become tyrannical. This is the reason for the second amendment protecting militia groups. They were also very aware of the difference between a militia and a standing military. They wanted the militia as a last defense of the people should the government become tyrannical. Just look to the Declaration of Independence...
This was written not only to document their grievances against King George, but also for future generations to understand that they must be constantly vigilant against the pressure of those in power to become tyrannical. The Supreme Court is probably the one area of our system that is most open to tyranny. Their job is to interpret written law and resolve discrepancies in the written law. When they start creating law where none exists, or ignoring written law, they have ventured off into tyranny. | ||
| Buellkowski |
Which SCOTUS cases do you believe the Court "created" law where none existed or "ignored" written law? | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
It was true that the Judges were designed to be life time to avoid political influence, but that design was predicated upon a strict constructionist design. Once the judges stray from that design, they claim powers not granted to them. Legislation from the bench was never the design of the founders. Legislation from the Oval Office was also never the design of the founders. | ||
| Sifo |
no, i am not backtracking, when i say that repeal of g-s was partly responsible. In this thread you wrote in response to Ft_bstrd...
You were clearly stating that the mortgage crisis was caused primarily by the repeal of Glass_Steagall and continued to represent it in that fashion. Now all of a sudden you are claiming it was a lesser part of the problem. Sorry pal, liars suck. I've given you plenty of opportunity to have a real dialog. You have failed miserably. You have chosen to ignore facts, even the facts that you have brought into the discussion. You've worn out your welcome of dialog with me. Done. | ||
| Sifo |
Which SCOTUS cases do you believe the Court "created" law where none existed or "ignored" written law? Roe v. Wade for one. | ||
| Drkside79 |
Sifo In Roe vs Wade they did neither. They overturned a law prohibiting it. And expanded the right of privacy to include it. That's what they are here for imo Oh and the public has always supported the decision as well.  | ||
| Doug_s |
some interesting quotes: A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. Albert Einstein I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others. Thomas Jefferson Guard against the impostures of pretended patriotism. George Washington Labor to keep alive in your breast that little spark of celestial fire, called conscience. George Washington The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. Thomas Jefferson Allow the president to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion, and you allow him to do so whenever he may choose to say he deems it necessary for such a purpose - and you allow him to make war at pleasure. Abraham Lincoln The gov't of the US is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion. The United States of America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy. George Washington America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves. Abraham Lincoln Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better. This is a most valuable - a most sacred right - a right, which we hope and believe, is to liberate the world. Abraham Lincoln As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master. This expresses my idea of democracy. Abraham Lincoln Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear. Thomas Jefferson Whenever a man believes that he has the exact truth from God, there is in that man no spirit of compromise. He has not the modesty born of the imperfections of human nature; he has the arrogance of theological certainty and the tyranny born of ignorant assurance. Believing himself to be the slave of God, he imitates his master, and of all tyrants the worst is a slave in power. Robert Ingersoll “Of all the varieties of virtues, liberalism is the most beloved.” Aristotle "There never was a good war or a bad peace.” Benjamin Franklin, a leading American author, political theorist, politician Law is order in liberty, and without order liberty is social chaos.” Archbishop John Ireland, founder of the University of St. Thomas in Houston, USA. "The basis of a democratic state is liberty.” Aristotle, a Greek philosopher and teacher of Alexander the Great “If you want to be free, there is but one way; it is to guarantee an equally full measure of liberty to all your neighbors. There is no other.” Carl Schurz, a political reformer and the first German-born American to enter the US Senate “All great things are simple, and many can be expressed in single words: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope. ” late UK Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill “Democracy is an impossible thing until the power is shared by all, but let not democracy degenerate into mobocracy.” Mahatma Gandhi "He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would fully suffice. This disgrace to civilization should be done away with at once. Heroism at command, senseless brutality, deplorable love-of-country stance, how violently I hate all this, how despiceable an ignoreable war is; I would rather be torn to shreds than be a part of so base an action! It is my conviction that killing under the cloak of war is nothing but an act of murder." -- Albert Einstein "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones." -- Albert Einstein "You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war." --Albert Einstein All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. Thomas Jefferson All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression. Thomas Jefferson An association of men who will not quarrel with one another is a thing which has never yet existed, from the greatest confederacy of nations down to a town meeting or a vestry. Thomas Jefferson A government of laws, and not of men. John Adams Abuse of words has been the great instrument of sophistry and chicanery, of party, faction, and division of society. John Adams Democracy... while it lasts is more bloody than either aristocracy or monarchy. Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There is never a democracy that did not commit suicide. John Adams Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. John Adams Fear is the foundation of most governments. John Adams A wise man will desire no more than what he may get justly, use soberly, distribute cheerfully, and leave con-tently. - Benjamin Franklin Let your Discourse with Men of Business be Short and Comprehensive. George Washington Power always thinks... that it is doing God's service when it is violating all his laws. John Adams It has been my experience that folks who have no vices have very few virtues. Abraham Lincoln It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. Abraham Lincoln Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto. Thomas Jefferson Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power. Abraham Lincoln The way to see by Faith is to shut the eye of Reason. - Benjamin Franklin Success has ruined many a man. - Benjamin Franklin There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty. John Adams The right of a nation to kill a tyrant in case of necessity can no more be doubted than to hang a robber, or kill a flea. John Adams Over grown military establishments are under any form of government inauspicious to liberty, and are to be regarded as particularly hostile to republican liberty. George Washington The greatest monarch on the proudest throne is obliged to sit upon his own arse. - Benjamin Franklin The administration of justice is the firmest pillar of government. George Washington Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote. Ben Franklin Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Abraham Lincoln All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America arise, not from defects in their Constitution or Confederation, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from the downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation. John Adams Few men have virtue to withstand the highest bidder. George Washington Conquest is not in our principles. It is inconsistent with our government. Thomas Jefferson Difference of opinion is advantageous in religion. The several sects perform the office of a Censor - over each other. Thomas Jefferson Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves are its only safe depositories. Thomas Jefferson Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor. Thomas Jefferson Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. Thomas Jefferson I abhor war and view it as the greatest scourge of mankind. Thomas Jefferson I believe that every human mind feels pleasure in doing good to another. Thomas Jefferson Every one desires to live long, but no one would be old. Abraham Lincoln I destroy my enemies when I make them my friends. Abraham Lincoln In great contests each party claims to act in accordance with the will of God. Both may be, and one must be wrong. Abraham Lincoln I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature. Thomas Jefferson I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country. Thomas Jefferson An investment in knowledge pays the best interest. Benjamin Franklin Where the press is free and every man able to read, all is safe. Thomas Jefferson This will be the best security for maintaining our liberties. A nation of well-informed men who have been taught to know and prize the rights which God has given them cannot be enslaved. It is in the religion of ignorance that tyranny begins. Ben Franklin Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government. Thomas Jefferson Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty. Thomas Jefferson As people do better, they start voting like Republicans -- unless they have too much education and vote Democratic, which proves there can be too much of a good thing. Karl Rove doug s. | ||
| Doug_s |
no, i am not backtracking, when i say that repeal of g-s was partly responsible. In this thread you wrote in response to Ft_bstrd... quote: Posted on Wednesday, August 11, 2010 - 12:41 pm: There is a reason the HOUSING costs have spiraled out of control. GOVERNMENT INTERVENTION INTO THE FREE MARKET. don't you mean the UN-intervention of the government w/its repeal of the Glass-Steagall act? doug s. You were clearly stating that the mortgage crisis was caused primarily by the repeal of Glass_Steagall and continued to represent it in that fashion. Now all of a sudden you are claiming it was a lesser part of the problem. Sorry pal, liars suck. I've given you plenty of opportunity to have a real dialog. You have failed miserably. You have chosen to ignore facts, even the facts that you have brought into the discussion. You've worn out your welcome of dialog with me. Done. hey sifo, no liar here. again, if you think you have a "gotcha" moment, trying to nit-pick minutiae of what i am saying, think again. if you can think, that is. yust because i know that repeal of g-s was not the sole cause of the meltdown, does not mean that i do not believe that it was a major cause of it. i believed it before, and i still believe it. what i was "clearly stating", in response to fatty's statement, was that i think deregulation, not regulation was a major cause in the financial meltdown. but, why deal with what it is that i am saying, when you can so much more easily obfuscate w/tortured attempts at twisting what i believe, by nitpicking every last word? and by hurling lame insults, like i am lying?  everyone here w/even half a brain, understands what i believe, even if they disagree w/me. they do not need to stoop to your level. you say "done". promise? doug s. | ||
| Sifo |
Sifo In Roe vs Wade they did neither. They overturned a law prohibiting it. And expanded the right of privacy to include it. That's what they are here for imo Oh and the public has always supported the decision as well.  We could argue polling on Roe v. Wade, but that really is another issue. The whole privacy thing shouldn't be the deciding factor on any medical procedure. The court simply used that as a way to side step the fact that they were striking down a legitimate law that prohibited the killing of an unborn human being. It is the very definition of Judicial activism. | ||
| Drkside79 |
Agree i say we banish any talk of abortion to anywhere but here. Lets talk instead about how ridiculous woman look in skinny jeans while throwing up sideways peace signs and making the duck face at the camera. Much more fun IMO  | ||
| Doug_s |
sifo, you are a liar. show me anything where it states a 3 month old fetus is a human being. anywhere outside some religious bs that is... it's not judicial activism when the courts allow a woman the liberty to decide what she does w/a 3 month old fetus inside her own body. and, i defy you find one pro choice individual that is not also pro life. calling the anti-choice movement pro-life is inferring the pro-choice folks are not. nothing could be further from the truth. i know that's not your opinion, but that all it is - your OPINION. doug s. | ||
| Sifo |
Drkside, Here's an article that deals with the issue of the Supreme Court and international law. I have no problem with skipping a certain unmentionable part. It really has little to do with this discussion. http://www.examiner.com/scotus-in-washington-dc/su preme-court-justice-s-inconsistency-on-internation al-law I can even ignore that the article focuses on a specific judge. Don't get me wrong, if the court were to go outside of our laws and decide something in a way that I favor, there will be a part of me that is happy with that decision. That's a flaw in our system and myself and there's another part of me that just knows we are losing a bit of something great whenever that happens. We are supposed to be a nation of laws. The laws have been written down so that everyone can read and understand them so that they can go before a judge, plead their case and point to the statutes that are applicable. The opposition has the same opportunity in pleading their side of the case. It is then left up to the judge to make a decision based upon those statutes or other statutes from within our system of written law. That is what keeps us from being ruled by tyranny. When a judge starts to look outside of our written laws, whether it be looking to laws of other nations, or simply to what their gut tells them, no matter how noble the intent, we have gone from being a nation governed by it's laws toward a nation governed by tyranny. Remember tyranny is arbitrary application of law. This is what we had under King George. Judges were appointed and heard cases. They had the authority to make decisions and that was the law. The problem was that the next case may be arbitrarily decided in a different manner and that too was the law. That's not to say that either judge did anything legally or even morally wrong. It's just that they are left to their own ideologies to make their decisions. Surely you don't want to be arrested for speeding on your motorcycle with no idea what the speed limit is because there are no written laws on that matter. The cop would plead the case against you and you would plead your case and the judge then has to decide if you were going too fast or not. Would you be comfortable with that? | ||
| Buellkowski |
I'll write it again, Sifo: English (Common) Law vs. Civil (Codified) Law. Look up the distinction. The U.S. operates under common law jurisprudence. Always has. Some of you appear to take a civil law approach when viewing the Constitution. That's not how we do things around these parts. Even the Code of Hammurabi, chiseled onto stone obelisks, couldn't possibly codify laws for every single dispute brought to judgment. Nor does the Constitution. | ||
| Sifo |
Buellkowski, There's no doubt that our legal system relies heavily on precedence, but you can't possibly be taking the position that precedence of a legal system outside of our legal system should be looked at over our own precedence, can you? Perhaps offering more than "look it up" will get you a better response if you want anyone to respond at all. Please feel free to make your point and back it with what ever material you feel is appropriate. | ||
| Buellkowski |
Judicial decisions in our common law system can be based on many precedential sources, even English cases from hundreds of years ago. I wonder how many law professors consider that tyrannical? How can a court decision be considered tyrannical if has been brought before appellate and SCOTUS courts? | ||
| Sifo |
How can a court decision be considered tyrannical if has been brought before appellate and SCOTUS courts? Why would it not be possible to consider a decision by the SCOTUS tyrannical. Is the SCOTUS somehow divinely immune from tyranny? | ||
| Buellkowski |
Is the SCOTUS somehow divinely immune from tyranny? I'll let you know after I read The Five Thousand Year Leap. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The framers provided the Judiciary ONLY ONE role, to determine if a law passed by Congress and ratified by the President was Constitutional. That's it. The Constitution was then to be read as written not interpreted for what isn't written. That's it. Everything else is simply a warping and mutilation of the intent of the framers. International law is irrelevant. What the French or Greeks or Portuguese do in their countries with their laws has absolutely no bearing on US law. The Constitution was intended to be the only legal backstop. If it isn't specifically provided for in the Constitution, that role is reserved for the individual states. Social Security is Unconstitutional Farm Subsidies are Unconstitutional Medicare is Unconstitutional Universal Health Care is Unconstitutional The NEA is Unconstitutional No child left behind is Unconstitutional Article 1, Section 8 10th Amendment It ain't hard. Where we went off the rails was allowing interpretive reading of the Constitution. Consider how political the Supreme Court has become. Consider how non-political it would be were it not being used to project political power into the future. It wouldn't matter what your political leaning were if the only thing you could do is rule whether the legislation under review was or was not specifically provided for under the Constitution. The reason the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court has become so political is because the court has lost its way and is now reading into the law what isn't there and legislating. The Kelo v. New London case is prime over reach and a twisting of the 5th Amendment, "nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation". This decision provided justification for ANY commercial venture, public or private, that has ANY public benefit and required the seizing of personal property to occur. In the end on the Kelo case, the private developer never completed the project, the development was never built, and the justification for the seizure never came to fruition. The government can not seize property simply because there might be a development some day that might have some public benefit some time. |
