"Strict Constructionists" EDIT the Constitution before reading it.

[Craig234]

I always wonder what happened to the chick in that...was she as F'd up as the OP? I doubt it, but am curious...

Her injuries to the head were severe; she became a Republican.

Actually, she wasn't badly hurt, I saw it on The Amazing Race.

 

[chucky2]

Actually she came out of it relatively unharmed. Little shiner is all, IIRC.

Ouch...lucky lady, seems like it could have been a lot worse easily...

That would take WAY more than a surprise high speed melon to the face. The melon isn't even as F'd up as the OP. Parts of the melon retained their integrity. Small parts. Very small parts. But still.

That's where I was sort of going actually, but in a different tangent: Could be the chick got brain damage, but, likely, not as bad as the OP...

Hopium and Changium is strong sh1t kids, smoke at your own risk...

Chuck

 

[chucky2]

Her injuries to the head were severe; she became a Republican.

Actually, she wasn't badly hurt, I saw it on The Amazing Race.

So she was a liberal Democrat, had sense knocked into her, and is now a Republican? Surprised you'd even admit that... :whiste:

 

[Amused]

Her injuries to the head were severe; she became a Republican.

Actually, she wasn't badly hurt, I saw it on The Amazing Race.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

No, dumbass, the original intent of the Constitution explicitly included the amendment process (Article V). It was NEVER intented to be a fixed document. This whole thread is such an epic failure.

I think the whole Constitution "thing" doesn't really register. For example, the Constitution was intended to put limits on what government could do. It's hard to imagine that those who put the people secondary to government can fully appreciate our Constitution. It's like a duck making fun of a tire.

 

[theeedude]

Constitution is a living, breathing document.

 

[Amused]

Constitution is a living, breathing document.

No, it is the law of the land. It is ONLY amendable through specifically outlined procedures. Unless amendmnded, it is neither living, nor breathing. (The code phrase for "means whatever the fuck we want it to mean)

But that's okay, Sence... I know you're hurting from the reaming you've taken for being a dumbass in this thread. It'll heal.

 

[theeedude]

No, it is the law of the land. It is ONLY amendable through specifically outlined procedures. Unless amendmnded, it is neither living, nor breathing. (The code phrase for "means whatever the fuck we want it to mean)

So the original intent doesn't matter? Fine by me

But that's okay, Sence... I know you're hurting from the reaming you've taken for being a dumbass in this thread. It'll heal.

I wouldn't know, but you have a lot of experience being a thread dumbass, so I'll take your word for it.

 

[Amused]

So the original intent doesn't matter? Fine by me


I wouldn't know, but you have a lot of experience being a thread dumbass, so I'll take your word for it.

Original intent changes ONLY with Constitutional Amendments.

The parts they changed or left out were AMENDED by Constitutional Amendments.

Try again. Or better yet, just admit your thread backfired horribly.

 

[Mursilis]

I think the whole Constitution "thing" doesn't really register. For example, the Constitution was intended to put limits on what government could do. It's hard to imagine that those who put the people secondary to government can fully appreciate our Constitution. It's like a duck making fun of a tire.

That's what perplexes me about big-government liberals - their basic model appears so obviously contradictory, at least to me. So many liberals were complaining (rightly) during the Bush years about massive gov't over-reach - things like torture, illegal wiretaps, subversion of the Constitution, etc. And yet, after seeing and complaining about abuses of gov't power under the prior administration, they're back to trusting gov't to manage things like health care, our retirements, etc? Really? Here's a hint, libs (with apologies to Acton) - power corrupts everyone,not just the folks with (R) after their names.

 

[Mursilis]

Constitution is a living, breathing document.

As long as it's amended properly, sure.

 

[theeedude]

Original intent changes ONLY with Constitutional Amendments.

The parts they changed or left out were AMENDED by Constitutional Amendments.

Try again. Or better yet, just admit your thread backfired horribly.

Rewriting English again?
Original intent is the intent of the Constitution as Originally written by the Founders. It's not rocket surgery, unless you are a Republican.

 

[bfdd]

Rewriting English again?
Original intent is the intent of the Constitution as Originally written by the Founders. It's not rocket surgery, unless you are a Republican.

And part of that "original intent" is to be able to modify the document through the amendment process. This process can cause newer amendments to supersede obsolete amendments or change them. So leaving out the parts that are no longer relevant due to the new "changes" is perfectly fine as the old shit is completely left out. The only time trying to "divine" the "original intent" is important is when reading what was wrote. If something was written in 1850, then we must view it with 1850s eyes, not 2011 eyes. This seems to be a huge problem for a lot of "liberals" I talk to. They are constantly viewing the past with todays eyes and not the eyes of yesteryear.

 

[ConstipatedVigilante]

Rewriting English again?
Original intent is the intent of the Constitution as Originally written by the Founders. It's not rocket surgery, unless you are a Republican.

The founders created the amendment process because they knew they weren't infallible. They knew that things would change over time, and as such they wanted the Constitution to be able to change with them, whether or not the changes superseded parts of the original document. THAT is original intent.

 

[Amused]

Rewriting English again?
Original intent is the intent of the Constitution as Originally written by the Founders. It's not rocket surgery, unless you are a Republican.

Dude, are you a glutton for punishment, or what???

Article V
The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which may be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article, and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

LOL, I'll keep this thread in mind if we have a P&N thread backfire award this year.

 

[Infohawk]

LOL, I'll keep this thread in mind if we have a P&N thread backfire award this year.

Seconded. Good stuff. Not as good as hearing him defend illegal immigration in the name of cheaper fruits and vegetables though.

 

[chucky2]

I agree, that is even better...but so far for 2011, this is definitely top backfire thread.

Congrats OP!!!

 

[boomerang]

Rewriting English again?
Original intent is the intent of the Constitution as Originally written by the Founders. It's not rocket surgery, unless you are a Republican.

 

[Craig234]

That's what perplexes me about big-government liberals - their basic model appears so obviously contradictory, at least to me. So many liberals were complaining (rightly) during the Bush years about massive gov't over-reach - things like torture, illegal wiretaps, subversion of the Constitution, etc. And yet, after seeing and complaining about abuses of gov't power under the prior administration, they're back to trusting gov't to manage things like health care, our retirements, etc? Really? Here's a hint, libs (with apologies to Acton) - power corrupts everyone,not just the folks with (R) after their names.

Yes, "torture, illegal wiretaps, supbversion of the constitution" is equally corrupt as the providing of people's needs of healthcare and a retirement income.

 

[theeedude]

Seconded. Good stuff. Not as good as hearing him defend illegal immigration in the name of cheaper fruits and vegetables though.

Feeble conservative minds think alike :thumbsup:

 

[Amused]

Feeble conservative minds think alike :thumbsup:

 

[nick1985]

lol wow

 

[theeedude]

Yeah, stick to using someone else's material. :thumbsup:

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Feeble conservative minds think alike :thumbsup:

LOL, I love it when senseamp owns himself and then resorts to name calling. I almost feel bad for you. Ok, no, I really don't.