What a sniveling idiot. Via.
What a sniveling idiot. Via.
Guest post by David Garber
The U.S. Constitution is the law of the land. Simple and yet so complicated.
Written in 1787, it was so muddled and confusing and lacking ultimately in specifics, it had to be amended within two years with the Bill of Rights (10 amendments) Why? Because the framers were human and things were forgotten, overlooked or unclear. They didn’t have Google Search or Wikipedia for easy reference.
And on 17 different occasions since then, this masterpiece was altered, further resulting in a total of 27 ratified amendments (the 18th was later rescinded by the 21st).
If the constitution was an automobile, it would be in the shop right now for a total overhaul. It would be facing major replacements for worn or outdated parts. Its vital fluids would be drained and newer liquids substituted. And even then it might not be able to pass inspection to be licensed as roadworthy.
To be quite fair, the Constitution has served us well – but in its day, so did single-shot muskets and hand-forged swords for defense. Our forefathers didn’t anticipate progress this far forward. Hell, even H.G. Welles only projected to 1984. So we’re left trying to understand what the authors of the Constitution meant – only on speculation. None of the original writers are around today to explain their intentions. They even doubted themselves with their own words “…in order to form a more perfect union…” More perfect than what?
Look at an Escher picture and ask yourself if the soldiers are marching up or down?
Look at a Rube Goldberg creation. It somehow works, but it’s far from efficient.
Now look at the Constitution. Getting the job done with an outdated, behind the times retrofit is barely holding us together.
We are guaranteed freedoms and then we pass provisions like the patriot act to restrict them. We grant the right to bear arms but don’t clearly express against whom. Some say it’s against our own tyrannical government. Others say it’s from outside invaders. Others yet say it’s our protection from everyone.
As technology advances, we need new definitions for personal rights, privileges and duties. That’s supposed to be the legislative branch of our three-piece government but all they can agree upon is to disagree. And judicial is to make sure the laws are fair but they’re hung up on legislating from the bench, not adjudicating and interpreting from the scales of blind justice. So what’s the executive branch supposed to do other than campaign? We have three pieces all right – but not of a matching suit.
How long do we have to stare at Escher or Rube Goldberg and try to use their optics as our laws? We’re going around in circles and we’re advancing to the rear. Maybe it’s time for a new path with new elected officials and a new, modern set of rules. We can’t do worse than what we’ve got already. And we’ve tried Band-Aids. They can’t stop this kind of severe hemorrhaging.
For the past 25 years, David Garber has been serving as the show runner and or writer on some of television’s biggest hits… Saved By The Bell, Power Rangers, 227, Bill Cosby Show and many other network series. His writing and producing have also netted David two very prestigious awards:the PRISM AWARD and the TV CRITICS AWARD – TV SPECIAL OF THE YEAR. Currently he’s authoring a short story series called “A Few Minutes With…”
Earlier I posted this in response to a poll that said Rick Snyder would lose his kingdom if an election were held today:
This is what happens when you try to push “financial martial law” on your state.
It looks like Michigan may be getting restless about restoring collective bargaining rights, too:
Snyder’s also earned the ire of the voters because of the perception that he’s targeting collective bargaining rights. 59% of folks in Michigan think that public employees should have the right to collective bargaining while only 32% are opposed, and 49% of voters even favor a state constitutional amendment to guarantee collective bargaining rights while 37% are opposed to such a measure. … [N]onunion households support it by a 53/39 margin as well so the voters Snyder is antagonizing on this issue go beyond who you might expect.
As Think Progress correctly points out, it’s not hard to amend the state constitution in Michigan, something that could be done to protect the unions. Even a king would have a tough time getting past that.
Poor deluded baggers, they think if they wish real hard it will make it so.
The latest in a recent string Constitution gaffes might make Republicans think twice about their earmark moratorium.
On Monday, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN) hosted a seminar for (mostly Republican) House members on the Constitution. Her special guest was Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who presided over what was reportedly a fairly dry, straightforward discussion of his legal doctrine, and answered a handful of other Constitutional questions.
At least one of these, it turned out, was embarrassingly rudimentary.
“The question of earmarks came up, whether or not the constitutionality of earmarks would be considered constitutional [sic],” Bachmann told reporters after the seminar.
“It’s up to Congress how you want to appropriate, basically,” Scalia told the members, according to Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-TX). “He pointed out historically, like when Jefferson was president, [Congress] said here’s a big pot of money, you decide where it goes, and Jefferson ended up paying up a big hunk of it to the Barbary Pirates.”
“I think the fairest thing to say was he took it for granted they were constitutional,” said Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) — one of a small handful of Democrats in attendance. “I don’t think there was any question. I can’t see how you can make an argument that they’re not Constitutional — Congress is the appropriating body.”
Raises a rather uncomfortable picture doesn’t it? Via.
Oh, this is too rich. Make sure you note who the one teen says HAS taught him the Constitution is “just a piece of paper”.
What a conglomeration of whooha. To the Republicans credit, they’re keeping the Dems in office just by their own brain adled incompetence. Let’s take a look at their “ideas”-
We recommit ourselves to the ideas of the American Founding. Through the Constitution, the Founders created an enduring framework of limited government based on the rule of law. They sought to secure national independence, provide for economic opportunity, establish true religious liberty and maintain a flourishing society of republican self-government.
Okay. The “true religious liberty” begs clarification, but of course there isn’t any in this thing.
The conservatism of the Constitution limits government’s powers but ensures that government performs its proper job effectively. It refines popular will through the filter of representation. It provides checks and balances through the several branches of government and a federal republic.
Good, keep it simple like fourth grade civics. Easier for integration of the Tea Baggers. No real change here that I can see. But that’s all there is, just a bunch of platitudes and vague regurgitating of rah rah “CONSTITUTION!!!” bullet points.
On second thought, there is one thing that stands out about the “Report”- they put it on a cool old timey template and made the “original” signatures just like the ones on the Constitution!! Well then, we must take them seriously. You can peruse it yourself here.
The Political Carnival T-Shirt
Modeled by @suzannegypsy
Lt. Col Barry Wingard is the lawyer for Gitmo detainee Fayiz Al-Kandari. For their ongoing story + related topics, please click on the link below:
Kuwaiti Citizen Detained at Guantanamo since 2002
The Political Carnival is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to amazon.com.
Photographs on The Political Carnival site (please read):
Photographs from other sources sometimes appear on TPC for humorous or illustrative purposes. As it is not our intention to use these images in any inappropriate manner or to infringe upon any rights held by others, anyone holding legal rights in the use of these images who wishes to have them taken down please contact us immediately requesting such removal, with which we will comply promptly.