Today is Constitution Day........

[Lost Cause]

How you gonna celebrate the greatest document for government ever conceived? Any favorite text that you want to quote from it? Any comment about the concept of it's principles?
(please, leave out the slave issue bullshit, I'm really tired of that empty argument)



On Sept. 17, 1787, the Constitutional Convention, meeting in Philadelphia for four months, agreed on the final draft of this special, inspired document and submitted to the several states for ratification. It was ratified June 21, 1788, when New Hampshire approved it as the ninth state. Congress, acting under the Articles of Confederation, declared the Constitution the law of the land March 4, 1789.

By general assent and resolution of the Congress, Sept. 17 has been designated as Constitution Day ever since – designated, but not necessarily acknowledged or observed.

We celebrate many holidays in America today – Independence Day, presidential birthdays, Veterans Day, Memorial Day. Yet, no one even acknowledges Constitution Day anymore. That's tragic.

America has forgotten the two concepts that made her special as a nation – two unique factors that set her apart from the world from the start.

First, the Founding Fathers wrote a Constitution that strictly limited the role of the federal government in the lives of Americans. The idea that Washington had some role in education, redistribution of wealth, setting minimum wage requirements, nationalizing millions of acres of land, taxing income and subsidizing government-approved artists would have been anathema to the men who fought so valiantly for freedom against an over-reaching foreign tyranny.

Secondly, the framers of that Constitution spoke eloquently about the fact that only a moral people – a nation of Godly people with common spiritual and social values – were capable of self-government. They could not have envisioned the depths of depravity, licentiousness and vice to which our society has fallen – yet they warned about it.

And that's the beauty of the Constitution. It strictly limits what government can do. The trouble is that Americans have forgotten this. They've been dumbed down by government schools and a government-media complex to believe that Uncle Sam is there to solve all their problems – from how much they get paid, to what they spend on health care, to how they should raise their own children.

While the Constitution is every bit as symbolic as the flag, it is also literally a substantive guidepost to maintaining – or now, perhaps, to recovering – America's freedom. But it can only serve that function if we as a nation abide by it, pay heed to it, live by its code and its spirit.

Which symbol is really worth dying for? The flag is not my pick. After all, it is just a symbol. Symbols, of course, are important. But the Constitution is more. It is both symbol and substance. And its substance is being desecrated by some of those so piously concerned about the symbolic desecration of the flag.

A Portrait of America survey found that less than half of American adults would vote for the Constitution if it were on the ballot today. To that, I say, thank God there is no requirement for a referendum on the Constitution. A more recent poll showed close to half of Americans don't believe in the basic First Amendment guarantees of freedom of speech, assembly, religion and the press.

The Constitution, coupled with the Declaration of Independence, represents more of a national creed than a simple founding document for the nation.


www.house.gov/Constitution/Constitution.html

 

[sch00lteacher]

God bless the most important document in the world. As far as I am concerned anyhow...

 

[Lost Cause]

If it wasn't so long, I'd have a tattoo!

All that, and written on hemp paper! Irony is so..........ironic!

 

[Lost Cause]

Ignorance is bliss.....

I guess the "dumbing down" education works! Seems nobody but a few enjoy the uniqueness of our document, but then that would soften their ignorant "America Bashing" positions!

*We The People.......

 

[70/30]

Ashcroft, "don't need any toilet paper, managing just fine without it."

 

[Problem Child]

Re: Ignorance is bliss.....

I guess the "dumbing down" education works! Seems nobody but a few enjoy the uniqueness of our document, but then that would soften their ignorant "America Bashing" positions!

*We The People.......

Or maybe the fact that you made the thread at 3:39 a.m. EST had something to do with the fact that it's only had 3 hits before you bumped it just now, ya think?

 

[Laurel]

Ashcroft, "don't need any toilet paper, managing just fine without it."

Exactly.

 

[PunkGrrl18]

whats wrong with america bashing? i dont think theres anything wrong with thinking you dont owe any loyalty to the flag or to the country, so you were born here, so what. oooo lets see how much i can go......it is our responsibility for the attacks, we gave them weapons, trained them to fly planes, we stabbed ourselves in the back, take responsibility for your actions government!

(if this offends people...boohoo )

 

[Spinaroonie]

Please click my lower link in my sig.

 

[Unclebill]

Originally posted by 70/30
Ashcroft, "don't need any toilet paper, managing just fine without it."

You insight is stunning in its intellectual revelation.

 

[Problem Child]

whats wrong with america bashing? i dont think theres anything wrong with thinking you dont owe any loyalty to the flag or to the country, so you were born here, so what. oooo lets see how much i can go......it is our responsibility for the attacks, we gave them weapons, trained them to fly planes, we stabbed ourselves in the back, take responsibility for your actions government!

(if this offends people...boohoo )

You're an idiot.

 

[Problem Child]

Please click my lower link in my sig.

It doesn't work. Doesn't matter because when I clicked it before it wasn't proof of any trampling of rights, but rather a laundry list of accusations. No links to the text of laws, or quotes, or anything that actually would lead one to believe that our rights are being stripped away as you are always talking about.

Mind you, this doesn't mean I don't agree with you in principal on this one particular subject. What it means is that you have a bad habit of spouting conspiratorial claptrap and rarely have any hard evidence to back it up, and this severely damages your credibility and puts you in a class along with other people here who aren't taken seriously like REDWAVE.

 

[HeavyStick]

whats wrong with america bashing? i dont think theres anything wrong with thinking you dont owe any loyalty to the flag or to the country, so you were born here, so what. oooo lets see how much i can go......it is our responsibility for the attacks, we gave them weapons, trained them to fly planes, we stabbed ourselves in the back, take responsibility for your actions government!

(if this offends people...boohoo )

point to the rock that covered your hole

 

[Spinaroonie]

It doesn't work.

Dang it, no longer family fun!

 

[70/30]

You insight is stunning in its intellectual revelation.

Ashcroft handled Jose Padilla situation very poorly. Padilla still hasn't been charged, if a miracle happened and he actually received a trial, now it'd be a disaster. Certain things no longer register...

From John King
CNN Washington

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The White House has made clear to the Justice Department that it believes the announcement of the arrest of the so-called "dirty bomb" suspect Jose Padilla could have been handled better, several senior administration officials said Wednesday.

In the view of the White House, they said, it would have been best if Attorney General John Ashcroft, who was traveling in Russia, had let deputies back in Washington make the announcement,

The officials, however, said they did not view the discussions as the sign of any major disagreement and described them more, as one put it, as "internal discussions based on how it played out and perhaps how it could have been handled a little bit better."

The White House was involved in discussions Sunday night and Monday morning in which it was decided to announce the arrest because of the president's decision to have Padilla -- identified initially by his adopted name, Abdullah al Muhajir transferred from Justice Department custody to the military and held as an "enemy combatant."

The president's decision was made because of a legal deadline.

Because both Ashcroft and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld were traveling, the initial plan was for the developments to be announced in Washington by their deputies, Deputy Attorney General Larry Thompson and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, along with FBI Director Robert Mueller.

"But Justice decided this was a big deal and that the first word should come from the attorney general," one White House official said. Those plans were passed on to the White House and there was no attempt to stop Ashcroft from making the announcement in Moscow.

But after the fact, some senior administration officials questioned the move, noting that Ashcroft delivered the statement from a dark studio and took no questions. And some thought his language suggested the plot was more advanced than others in the administration have said.

Two senior officials said that if Ashcroft's statement is read in its entirety, it is plain he did make clear the plot was in its initial stages. "But in hindsight it is clear that was not the best way to do it -- that it would have been better to let the deputies make the announcement and answer some questions to put it all in context," one senior official said.

Asked if the White House believed Ashcroft exaggerated the threat, this official pointed to remarks by Bush calling Padilla "a threat to the nation" and "a would-be killer."

Said the official: "The attorney general said nothing inaccurate. But doing it that way gave it sort of an ominous look and feeling. We think it would have been better left to the deputies. That said, the attorney general has the full and complete support of the president and everyone in this building."

 

[70/30]

Steven Hatfill has effectively been blacklisted by the Department of Justice without even being a suspect for any crime. This caused him to lose his job and much chance for future employment in his chosen field.

Hatfill's LSU employment ended
By Christopher Newton
ASSOCIATED PRESS
http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20020905-74768435.htm

Steven J. Hatfill's firing at Louisiana State University came after the Justice Department told the college it could not use the scientist on projects funded by grants from the agency, which has called Mr. Hatfill a "person of interest" in the anthrax attacks.
LSU spokesman Greg Sands said Mr. Hatfill's supervisor, Steven Guillot, received e-mail Aug. 1 directing him to "cease and desist" from using Mr. Hatfill on Justice Department-funded projects.
The next day, Mr. Hatfill was placed on administrative leave as director of LSU's National Center for Biomedical Research and Training. The center receives most of its money from the Justice Department.
Mr. Sands said Mr. Guillot did not alert senior administration officials to the e-mail until Tuesday, when Mr. Hatfill was fired by the university. Mr. Sands said the decision to fire Mr. Hatfill was made before senior school officials learned about the e-mail.
LSU Chancellor Mark A. Emmert made no mention of the e-mail in a statement Tuesday announcing Mr. Hatfill's firing.
"The university is making no judgment as to Dr. Hatfill's guilt or innocence regarding the FBI investigation," Mr. Emmert said.
"Our ultimate concerns are the ability of the university to fulfill its role and mission as a land-grant university," he said. "In considering all of these objectives, I have concluded that it is clearly in the best interest of LSU to terminate this relationship."
Department officials declined comment on the e-mail, though a law enforcement official confirmed it was sent.
Mr. Hatfill's attorneys referred questions to spokesman Pat Clawson, who did not immediately return messages yesterday. Mr. Clawson said Tuesday that LSU officials gave Mr. Hatfill no explanation for the firing.
Mr. Hatfill blamed the FBI's anthrax investigation for his termination.
"My life has been completely and utterly destroyed by [Attorney General] John Ashcroft and the FBI," Mr. Hatfill said in a statement Tuesday. "I do not understand why they are doing this to me. My professional reputation is in tatters. All I have left are my savings, and they will be exhausted soon because of my legal bills."
Meanwhile, an anthrax scare sounded in Massachusetts yesterday after several police departments received envelopes containing an unidentified white powder, the state fire department reported.
Fire department spokeswoman Jennifer Mieth said hazardous material response teams had been sent to "numerous" police departments, and the FBI and state health officials had been alerted.
Five persons were killed by anthrax-tainted letters sent through the mail last fall. The FBI has identified Mr. Hatfill as a "person of interest" in its investigation but has said he is no more or less important than about 30 fellow scientists and researchers with the expertise and opportunity to conduct the attacks.
Mr. Hatfill, however, has been treated differently than the rest. FBI and Postal Service agents searched his apartment in Frederick, Md., twice, the second time with a search warrant. His photo was the only one circulated last month in the Princeton, N.J., neighborhood where investigators believe the anthrax letters may have been mailed.
Mr. Hatfill, 48, worked until 1999 for Fort Detrick's Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases in Maryland. It is the primary custodian of the virulent Ames strain of anthrax found in the anthrax letters.
Mr. Hatfill and another scientist, Joseph Soukup, commissioned a study of a hypothetical anthrax attack in February 1999 as employees of defense contractor Science Applications International Corp., said Ben Haddad, spokesman for the San Diego-based company.

 

[PunkGrrl18]

You're an idiot.

no im not

 

[teddybear4play]

Any favorite text that you want to quote from it?

So many rights have been read into the Constitution that I think it's interesting to note this:

Amendment X. The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Any comment about the concept of it's principles?

Well, the Constitution, at least most of it, is merely a procedural document. The things of real interest to me are the Preamble (which I memorized in seventh grade and can still recite) and the Bill Of Rights, which listed all the things government could not do.

I also think it absolutely appropriate that "constitution," as a word, means "that which something is made up of." So it's only fair that the "constitution" of the United States Of America is that glorious document.

TB4p

 

[Unclebill]

Originally posted by 70/30
Steven Hatfill has effectively been blacklisted by the Department of Justice without even being a suspect for any crime. . .

With the available information, this seems like a royal screwup. I'm not quite sure what you point is with the other article.

Being possessed of exceptional Constitutional knowledge, perhaps you can cite for me the circumstance under which denial of habeas corpus is germane.

Originally posted by teddybear4play
. . . the Bill Of Rights, which listed all the things government could not do.

And to be clear, understand that was NEVER intended to be a complete enumeration of a citizen's rights. Some of the founders opposed the Bill of Rights specifically because they feared it would at some point be represented as that complete enumeration.

 

[teddybear4play]

And to be clear, understand that was NEVER intended to be a complete enumeration of a citizen's rights. Some of the founders opposed the Bill of Rights specifically because they feared it would at some point be represented as that complete enumeration.

Which is precisely why I mentioned Amendment X: it basically states that those powers not granted to the federal government were the exclusive domain of the states or the people. A master stroke that sadly has gone ignored for the last century or so.

The Founders envisioned the dilemma you state and also attempted to answer it with Amendment IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

But who gives a shit what they think?

TB4p

 

[Lost Cause]

Can't have one without the other...

I have a hard time saying Constitution without adding Bill of Rights as both to me, are of equal importance!
It's easy to point to a gray area of law, and say they're violating the Constitution without specific facts. In the present war we are in, with the Tribunal system in effect, it's hard to say this is/is not, legal. I'm not saying that they're bending the law, but you cannot point at one person and say he/she is responsible for this.
We have let the government dictate how things are, since we're too lazy to give a fuck about voting, or can't figure out the machines or chads!
All types of groups with a cause are screaming bloody murder on perception, not facts. I would welcome putting every motherfucking enemy affiliate in "protective custody" until deportation. I want the network to guess who's where, and talking to whom. I think that the arrests here are a direct result of keeping others guessing.
I trust the executive/legislative/senate will keep a close eye on our Constitutional rights, for their own self interest in elections.

*"There's lies, damned lies, and statistics!" Mark Twain

 

[Unclebill]

Re: Can't have one without the other...

Originally posted by Lost Cause
I have a hard time saying Constitution without adding Bill of Rights as both to me, are of equal importance!
It's easy to point to a gray area of law, and say they're violating the Constitution without specific facts. In the present war we are in, with the Tribunal system in effect, it's hard to say this is/is not, legal. I'm not saying that they're bending the law, but you cannot point at one person and say he/she is responsible for this.
We have let the government dictate how things are, since we're too lazy to give a fuck about voting, or can't figure out the machines or chads!
All types of groups with a cause are screaming bloody murder on perception, not facts. I would welcome putting every motherfucking enemy affiliate in "protective custody" until deportation. I want the network to guess who's where, and talking to whom. I think that the arrests here are a direct result of keeping others guessing.
I trust the executive/legislative/senate will keep a close eye on our Constitutional rights, for their own self interest in elections.

*"There's lies, damned lies, and statistics!" Mark Twain

The reason it's so easy to say and get away withouht being challenged is because so few people have even a cursory familiarity with the Constitution.

Under the present circumstance of being at war, there are some things permitted by the Constitution of which many people are unaware.

Most probably don't know that the tribunal system is specifically identified as a legitimate power of the Federal government.

And if you think the tribunals are bending the law, take a close look at Article I Section 8 in which the legitimate powers of Congress are enumerated and tell me how they have adhered to Constitutional constraints considering the legislation in many of the areas where laws clearly defy the legitimate powers authorized to Congress.

For example, show me one place where the Constitution permits Congress to regulate a business endeavor or to dictate what a citizen may or may not consume. Where does Congress get the authority to dictate who may speak about a candidate for political office? or where they have the authority to limit that for which a person may spend their own money?

Trusting these people to protect your rights is like hiring Dillinger to be your bank security service.

I do certainly appreciate the caustically witty insight and observation of Mr. Clemens (see my sign line).

 

[Laurel]

Re: Re: Can't have one without the other...

Under the present circumstance of being at war, there are some things permitted by the Constitution of which many people are unaware.

At war? When did we declare war? With whom?