Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 133

Thread: After some wrangling, U.S. Constitution is read in House

  1. #111
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,945

    Re: After some wrangling, U.S. Constitution is read in House

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    It is, to me, only something to make hay out of because they tried to make hay out of the reading of the Constitution to begin with.
    Which they are doing. But you're not complaining about them doing that, you're complaining that they're not doing it in the way you WANT, and thus are making a giant deal out of it by refusing to alow yourself to even VENTURE into any other possible avenues of thought as to what their intentions and sattements may've meant.

    I do think that the notion, as a whole, is stupid and useless and hollow. My argument is that if you're going to trumpet such behavior and then turn around at the last minute and do it half-way, that's even worse than the original useless, hollow stupidity.
    They're not doing it "half way", they're doing it in a way that makes sense in the scope of why they're doing it. They're doing it to remind people what the Constitution says with regards to their jobs as the legislation so that they can hopefully instill a desire to return to practicing constitutional legislative processes...something thing, rightly or wrongly, feel has been lacking.

    With that as the point, there's little purpose in including portions of the constitution that have absolutely no baring on legislating constitutionally because they aren't constitutional provisions any longer. Again, if their goal was simply to give people a history lesson of the Constitution you'd be right...but that was not their stated goal. However, YOU dislike the process and dislike how they're doing it, so you ignore thier own words and reality and instead assume there is only one possible way they could've meant or believed their statement to be and that only YOUR interpritation of how that could be met is capable of being the "non half-way" method of doing it.

  2. #112
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,945

    Re: After some wrangling, U.S. Constitution is read in House

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    I think my problem with not reading them is that it seems like it is trying to sweep our less savory history under the carpet.

    After thinking about it, this is somewhat emotional reasoning on my part, and looking back at my comments in light of your pointing out the obvious to me in post #105, however, I realize that I was trying to use the ammendment process argument to justify my distaste for the appearance of sweeping our les savory history under the carpet.

    I still find it distasteful to remove those portions from the reading, but I don't have a very strong argumetn for why it is distasteful to me other than the way it appears to me.
    I can see how that's distasteful. I can even see how someone could look at this and think that may be what they are attempting to do at first glance. What I have issues with is people who don't just think that it may be, but act and make statements as if its unquestionably what they're doing and that they're doing it for immoral or unethical or unsavory reasons. Which, thankfully, it seems you've at least accepted that while it may appear one way to you, that it is not a definite and is based off nothing but your appearance from your own view of it rather than any actual statements or even additional action on the part of those doing it.

  3. #113
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,639

    Re: After some wrangling, U.S. Constitution is read in House

    The democrats are showing why they are as clueless and classless as Palin.

    The appropriate response to this would have been a simple..."we agree...great idea...go!!!" Instead they get into these mindless idiotic arguments about why...which version (as if they havent been governing by the current version for the last four years). Its just ****ing stoopid.

  4. #114
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    dimensionally transcendental
    Last Seen
    08-15-11 @ 04:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,153

    Re: After some wrangling, U.S. Constitution is read in House

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    The democrats are showing why they are as clueless and classless as Palin.

    The appropriate response to this would have been a simple..."we agree...great idea...go!!!" Instead they get into these mindless idiotic arguments about why...which version (as if they havent been governing by the current version for the last four years). Its just ****ing stoopid.
    this.... in spades.

  5. #115
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,324

    Re: After some wrangling, U.S. Constitution is read in House

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    The democrats are showing why they are as clueless and classless as Palin.

    The appropriate response to this would have been a simple..."we agree...great idea...go!!!" Instead they get into these mindless idiotic arguments about why...which version (as if they havent been governing by the current version for the last four years). Its just ****ing stoopid.
    Who didn't see that coming?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  6. #116
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Naperville, IL
    Last Seen
    09-24-12 @ 02:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    11,963

    Re: After some wrangling, U.S. Constitution is read in House

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    Thank you for this thought-provoking contribution. I can't imagine how the discussion took place without your wit here to put everything in perspective.
    Look at what you're all talking about... Teabaggers posturing for their dimwitted voters.

    Nothing's going to change, a minor shift in power. Last time this happened, the GOP only proved themselves all too easily corrupted.

    The far-righties forget that their hero Newtie was fined something like $300K and ended up stepping down in shame... And then came the 'Hammer'??

    It's sickening watching ex-lobbyists and car salesmen voted into office via a corporate funded power-grab (the Tea Party) read something they'll wipe their ass with over the next two years.

    Stop kidding yourselves...

  7. #117
    Shankmasta Killa
    TacticalEvilDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western NY and Geneva, CH
    Last Seen
    08-30-15 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,444

    Re: After some wrangling, U.S. Constitution is read in House

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Which they are doing. But you're not complaining about them doing that, you're complaining that they're not doing it in the way you WANT
    No, I'm pointing out the fact that they're not doing what they said they were going to do.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    They're not doing it "half way", they're doing it in a way that makes sense in the scope of why they're doing it. They're doing it to remind people what the Constitution says with regards to their jobs as the legislation so that they can hopefully instill a desire to return to practicing constitutional legislative processes...something thing, rightly or wrongly, feel has been lacking.
    If they were doing it to remind people what the Constitution says with regards to their jobs, then they would've stuck to the parts that actually defined the scope of their authority. Instead they made a big deal out of reading the whole thing -- and then didn't.

    This isn't about my interpretation of anything -- they said they were going to do a very specific thing, and then they failed to do so.
    I'm already gearing up for Finger Vote 2014.

    Just for reference, means my post was a giant steaming pile of sarcasm.

  8. #118
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,945

    Re: After some wrangling, U.S. Constitution is read in House

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    No, I'm pointing out the fact that they're not doing what they said they were going to do.
    Really? They stated they would read every line of the constitution verbatim, or did they say they'd read the constitution? Are they not reading the constitution? Am I missing something and they're standing up there quoting Tolkien? Because if so, then I get your point completely.

    If they were doing it to remind people what the Constitution says with regards to their jobs, then they would've stuck to the parts that actually defined the scope of their authority. Instead they made a big deal out of reading the whole thing -- and then didn't.
    Actually, you'd read the part that deals with the scope of their jobs and the scope of the jobs of other branches, to firmly establish what is your responsability and what is specifically laid out as OTHER peoples responsabilities. One of the issues Republicans have been having is over reaching of the Congress, and by showing clearly what is their and what isn't theirs that addresses that.

    However, reading stuff that doesn't apply, in any way, anymore doesn't address that issue at all.

    This isn't about my interpretation of anything -- they said they were going to do a very specific thing, and then they failed to do so.[/QUOTE]

  9. #119
    Shankmasta Killa
    TacticalEvilDan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Western NY and Geneva, CH
    Last Seen
    08-30-15 @ 04:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,444

    Re: After some wrangling, U.S. Constitution is read in House

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Really? They stated they would read every line of the constitution verbatim, or did they say they'd read the constitution? Are they not reading the constitution? Am I missing something and they're standing up there quoting Tolkien? Because if so, then I get your point completely.
    Oh, for crying out loud... When you say you're going to read something, that means you're going to read it from start to finish, not that you're going to read selectively. I remember hearing the words, "A reading from the book of" every Sunday for a long, long time for that very reason.

    If they'd said they were going to read from portions of the Constitution, or that they were going to read selected passages, or read from the Constitution as it pertains to the House of Representatives, this thread would not exist.

    So, like I said:

    Quote Originally Posted by TacticalEvilDan View Post
    This isn't about my interpretation of anything -- they said they were going to do a very specific thing, and then they failed to do so.
    I'm already gearing up for Finger Vote 2014.

    Just for reference, means my post was a giant steaming pile of sarcasm.

  10. #120
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: After some wrangling, U.S. Constitution is read in House

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    I can see how that's distasteful. I can even see how someone could look at this and think that may be what they are attempting to do at first glance. What I have issues with is people who don't just think that it may be, but act and make statements as if its unquestionably what they're doing and that they're doing it for immoral or unethical or unsavory reasons. Which, thankfully, it seems you've at least accepted that while it may appear one way to you, that it is not a definite and is based off nothing but your appearance from your own view of it rather than any actual statements or even additional action on the part of those doing it.
    I'm all for getting back ot the legislative roots, and I'd also be inclined to add even more than just reading the Constitution (I think both parties would be better served if they reaquanted themselves with teh Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers, especially).

    Omitting portions just seems wrong to me, even if they are no longer applicable. I'v ebeen thinking more about it, and I can present a better case for why it bothers me now.

    The ommitted portions still have historical value as far as our legislative roots go. The 3/5ths compromise is a great example of how compromise between two totally opposed groups has been the norm, not the exception, for example. Even when the "compromise" is one that was very contentious topic at the time.

    But it's not just the 3/5ths compromise part that should be included in the reading.

    For example, the 17th ammendment superceded article 1, section 3, clause 1. This is a very important clause with regard to our legislative roots and the 17th is an example of us moving towards a different style of government than what we originally had (state sovereingty vs. greater centralization). But the 17th was adopted as a response to corruption (something that is also quite important to "remember").

    As a person who's beliefs are anti-federalist in nature, removing portions like that is like removing my prefered positions from consideration. It's not like we can't return to the less centralized system of government we originally had.

    I believe that this context is of immense value when discussing our legislative roots and constitutionality.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •