• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Washin

Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Unitedwestand13 said:
You have a beef with Oliver Wendell Holmes jr., one of the greatest of the Supreme Court justices of all time?
Click to expand...

Yes, I do.

This quote proves he was a complete moron.

We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not felt to be such by those concerned, to prevent our being swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes.
Click to expand...
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Beaudreaux said:
Those 1930's/40's rulings expanded the Commerce Clause from being restricted to Interstate Commerce, as the clause is actually written, to also include Intrastate Commerce. That needs to be corrected.
Click to expand...

Gibbons v. Ogden set the standard of applying the commerce clause.
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

TheGoverness said:
...What?
Click to expand...

Awhile ago it was proposed we do one here and it seemed like a good idea and alot of members were interested. Long story short, it was a hot mess.
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Beaudreaux said:
I agree with number 1.
Number 2 could be a problem in times of war, unless that is made an exception to the amendment.
Number 3 and 4 are fine.
Number 5 is what the article is about already, and should not be brought up since Article 5 already allows for this with a 3/4 vote of the states by amending the Constitution.
Number 6 is ridiculous - Marbury v. Madison - it's been the law of the land since 1803. The founding fathers didn't try to change this, and neither should we.
Number 7 is okay.
Number 8? States already have standing if a federal action impacts the state, so I don't understand where this one's coming from?
Number 9 is Nullification, which is antithetical to a Constitutional Republic based on a federalist system. In other words, if this is what we want, we may as well shut the federal government down completely (including the military), and have the states become independent nations that deal with the other states by treaty instead.

Should we convene a Constitutional Convention, only pain and suffering will ensue if all of the points in that list are brought up for a vote, and it may lead to a second civil war before it's all over.

A very limited Constitutional Convention, with only one or two amendments may be possible to accomplish without tearing the country apart. But, it would have to be LIMITED to the one or two amendments, or it would get completely out of hand, and our country may not survive.
Click to expand...
Well, there's a problem with the bolded that's similar to what happens when The Church opens up a Papal enclave:

No one knows exactly where it will go, or where it will end-up! :doh
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Unitedwestand13 said:
Source please? What decision did you cite?
Click to expand...

Buck v. Bell. It was a about a woman that was raped and to avoid discovery her family committed her for being feeble mnded(she wasn't obviously). Idiot boy here in the end agreed with them and she was sterilized for being raped and not being able to control herself from getting pregnant.
 
Last edited:
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Unitedwestand13 said:
Gibbons v. Ogden set the standard of applying the commerce clause.
Click to expand...

It didn't deal with Intrastate Commerce, other than regulation of commercial navigation which can reasonably be anticipated to effect other states or foreign governments therefore the federal government holds supremacy for regulation of travel.

Subsequent courts (the ones I was talking about) have used this ruling and bastardized it to allow the federal government to regulate purely intrastate transactions that do not have, will not have, and cannot even come close to imagining that they would effect any other state, much less a foreign nation. That's what I'm saying needs to be fixed.
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Chomsky said:
[/b]Well, there's a problem with the bolded that's similar to what happens when The Church opens up a Papal enclave:

No one knows exactly where it will go, or where it will end-up! :doh
Click to expand...

Exactly. If you open up a can of worms, you can't claim to be surprised when you get worms all over the floor.
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Beaudreaux said:
It didn't deal with Intrastate Commerce, other than regulation of commercial navigation which can reasonably be anticipated to effect other states or foreign governments therefore the federal government holds supremacy for regulation of travel.

Subsequent courts (the ones I was talking about) have used this ruling and bastardized it to allow the federal government to regulate purely intrastate transactions that do not have, will not have, and cannot even come close to imagining that they would effect any other state, much less a foreign nation. That's what I'm saying needs to be fixed.
Click to expand...

The 1930s and 1940s Supreme Court decisions ended the travesty of the lochner era.

Besides, aren't the boundaries of interstate and intrastate commerce starting to blur now?
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

WCH said:
How do you know it wasn't an attempt by the Feds to gauge public response?

Gov. Abbott did this at the request on concern citizens, not on his own. You know, like a good governor does.
Click to expand...

Because that's paranoid bull****.

A good governor does not play into the paranoid fantasies of a bunch of whackjobs.
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Henrin said:
Buck v. Bell. It was a about a woman that was raped and to avoid discovery her family committed her for being feeble mnded(she wasn't obviously). Idiot boy here in the end agreed with them and she was sterilized for being raped and not being able to control herself from getting pregnant.
Click to expand...

That is one decision, albeit a stupid one, but do you disagree with him as being a advocate of common law?
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

nota bene said:
Have you ever read what Houston's argument was? Sam Houston's Proslavery Argument Against Secession

Do you understand that in the lead-up to the Civil War, Texas was a very young state that had been a republic and that those times are NOT necessarily comparable to 2016?
Click to expand...

Yeah, his argument amounted to "if we rebel and lose, slavery is ****ed, if we stay we might be able to preserve it for a while" but whether that argument was based out of any real love of slavery or pragmatic support for the union can be debated.
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

WCH said:
If you are unfamiliar with what a Constitutional Convention is, it’s pretty simple. Article V of the Constitution makes it clear that Congress has the power to amend the Constitution by adding Amendments.
Click to expand...


Seems you are unfamiliar with the Constitution.


Congress does not have the power to amend the Constitution.



>>>>
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Unitedwestand13 said:
That is one decision, albeit a stupid one, but do you disagree with him as being a advocate of common law?
Click to expand...

It was beyond stupid. The Virginia law had no standing whatsoever and his comparison is invalid on its face. Also, the principle behind it; in that, the government can sterilize you if you sleep around or your mentally incompetent is completely insane and violates just about every right people have.

As for your question, yes, I generally think Holmes was a complete moron that couldn't read.
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Beaudreaux said:
I can foresee a time where the Commerce Clause rulings from the 1930's and 1940's would be overturned by future courts, or by amendment to the Constitution. FDR's laws that were upheld as constitutional by the FDR era SCOTUS, are specious at best and will eventually go the way of Plessy v. Ferguson.
Click to expand...
I can see your position here, and while I'm personally limited in legal training - there might be Constitutional theory to support this (many seem to believe there is).

But when examining the details of the effects it would have, I think it might be hard to find the political will to accomplish it.

And argh, Plessy v Ferduson - yish!
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Unitedwestand13 said:
The 1930s and 1940s Supreme Court decisions ended the travesty of the lochner era.

Besides, aren't the boundaries of interstate and intrastate commerce starting to blur now?
Click to expand...

They shouldn't be blurred.

Here's a real life situation that I had to deal with: If I sell some of my land to my son, I shouldn't have to get the EPA and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to give me approval to do so just because I have a pond in my pasture... but right now, I do. In fact, I had to get the EPA and USACE to come out and inspect my dam when I built it, and I had to pay a fee to get a USACE permit before I could close the valve and let it fill up. All I should have had to do was get my state to sign off, which I also had to do, in addition to getting the feds to sign off and give me a permit. The federal government should have nothing to do with me building a pond on my private land that even if the dam failed, the water couldn't even come close to making it to the state line.
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Henrin said:
It was beyond stupid. The Virginia law had no standing whatsoever and his comparison is invalid on it's face. Also, the principle behind it; in that, the government can sterilize you if you sleep around or your mentally incompetent is completely insane and violates just about every right people have.

As for your question, yes, I generally think Holmes was a complete moron that couldn't read.
Click to expand...

That was not my question.

Oliver Wendell Holmes was a champion of common law, and was often in in disagreement with those who advocated natural law.
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Unitedwestand13 said:
Doesn't federal law trump state law?
Click to expand...

US Constitution, Article IV, Clause 2:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing [sic] in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Tigerace117 said:
Because that's paranoid bull****.

A good governor does not play into the paranoid fantasies of a bunch of whackjobs.
Click to expand...

The bulk of the exercise was IN TX... all over the state. WE have every right to observe the goings-on of such a large event to insure the security of our citizenry.
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Beaudreaux said:
They shouldn't be blurred.

Here's a real life situation that I had to deal with: If I sell some of my land to my son, I shouldn't have to get the EPA and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to give me approval to do so just because I have a pond in my pasture... but right now, I do. In fact, I had to get the EPA and USACE to come out and inspect my dam when I built it, and I had to pay a fee to get a USACE permit before I could close the valve and let it fill up. All I should have had to do was get my state to sign off, which I also had to do, in addition to getting the feds to sign off and give me a permit. The federal government should have nothing to do with me building a pond on my private land that even if the dam failed, the water couldn't even come close to making it to the state line.
Click to expand...

I need some geographical data for context: where did the water come from? A river?
 
Re: Its Happening – Texas Governor Calling For Convention Of The States To Rein In Wa

Unitedwestand13 said:
I did not capitalize the word, so I was not using it as a proper noun. ;)
Click to expand...

I have to disagree with you here, and agree with AZ, you did say it, and you need to take a drink. That's the rule.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom