• 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!

The Constitution Relies Too Much On Men Of Honor

Your opinion can hardly be called "even handed" and seriously undermines any accusation from you of not being able to "examine all of the situation"

I am the only person alive who has an even hand of thinking. I am the only person who figured out that the three-part government model is inaccurate and that there is a more logical formula for dividing the government.

United States Fourth Continental Congress

The founders, and subsequent generations, have only had one simple formula to work with, and it is mistakenly used to formulate separate "branches," where as, what it actually describes are the three phases for processing law, which would then be the subdivisions of the proper branches. The proper branches of government are supposed to be demarcated by the main partitions of civil law: sovereignty, martial, diplomacy, commerce, trust, and property law. The founders were probably unable to determine the main partitions, and they were definitely unable to organize the proper separation, because of the stricter qualification standards that such specifications would prescribe - they just did not have the information revealed to determine the peer groups, nor the sophisticated manpower available to recruit, during the founding eras of the nation and adjoining states.

You get that through your ****ing head, you stupid dumb **** racist.

Only a racist would be against having a constitutional convention that gathers the diversity of people that the founders could not gather. And no doubt, you do not want to have a constitutional convention. Nobody at Debate Politics wants to do it, except me. I am the only person accepting of the diversity to hear their ideas for making this a better government for the people, by the people, of the people.
 
Last edited:
I am the only person alive who has an even hand of thinking....

That statement alone is enough to dismiss you


You get that through your ****ing head, you stupid dumb **** racist.

Only a racist would be against having a constitutional convention that gathers the diversity of people that the founders could not gather. And no doubt, you do not want to have a constitutional convention. Nobody at Debate Politics wants to do it, except me. I am the only person accepting of the diversity to hear their ideas for making this a better government for the people, by the people, of the people.


Reported.
 
You didn't mean it to be a tricky question, or for anyone to critically analyze it, but a perfect government charter is not useful if all of the government officers are dishonorable lying cheaters.

The subsisting United States Constitution is an erroneous charter, and the founders knew it to be so, because they were aware that they did not have all of the information necessary to compose a more reliable charter, nor the sophisticated man power. George Washington is credited with having commenced the Third Continental Congress with the ambition to do the best that they could do.

Furthermore, the Federalist Papers, if you can comprehend them, has a lot of descriptions of the inadequacies; but the problem is that contemporary pundits/politicians use these descriptions to vilify their partisan adversaries as being corrupt.

The checks and balances are conflicted and not balanced. The founders, and subsequent generations, have only had one simple formula to work with, and it is mistakenly used to formulate separate "branches," where as, what it actually describes are the three phases for processing law, which would then be the subdivisions of the proper branches. The proper branches of government are supposed to be demarcated by the main partitions of civil law: sovereignty, martial, diplomacy, commerce, trust, and property law. The founders were probably unable to determine the main partitions, and they were definitely unable to organize the proper separation, because of the stricter qualification standards that such specifications would prescribe - they just did not have the information revealed to determine the peer groups, nor the sophisticated manpower available to recruit, during the founding eras of the nation and adjoining states.

​Trickle down economics is not a campaign policy - it is an inevitable and constant aspect of social systems - the "food chain." Consequently, because the irregular subsisting three-part system, with its complicated and incomprehensible unaligned subdivisions, is tasked with processing modern detailed law under the stress of tremendous diversity and advanced sophisticated media personalities irresponsibly determined to exploit the inadequacies in their self-aggrandizing efforts to reveal that the system is "broken;" what we have, now, is a semi-chaotic mess that is politely referred to as “political gridlock” at the federal level, that trickles down in the forms of government corruption and hypocrisy, social hysteria and disorder, and eventually leads to individual frustration that sometimes ends with violent acts that are sometimes premeditated and prosecuted as domestic terrorism - cellular rebellion. Because some people believe that they know how to exploit the inadequacies in such a way that it will shock society to reorder the social order - "I'll teach them," is their rant. The problem being nobody has a reordering plan.

Yes, the Constitution is only useful if there are some honorable people in the government, and although, Trump is a business con-man, he is not a criminal. He used to patronize the presidential politicians for favors, just like many other rich people who contribute large sums of money to the politician's campaigns. He knows that Hillary Clinton is corrupt - she promised Trump that she would win in 2008, because she had the dirt on Obama. She lied and kept pushing the lie even after Obama was elected to the presidency.

Trump is only not a criminal because there is no one that will convict him of his crimes. He, and his family, bilk a charity and no one goes to jail. How about you or I try that and see what happens.
 
Trump is only not a criminal because there is no one that will convict him of his crimes. He, and his family, bilk a charity and no one goes to jail. How about you or I try that and see what happens.

If Trump loses next November, he better have a good lawyer ready.
 
Our country is like an aircraft carrier and not a jet ski. It takes us a long time to make a turn but we eventually do.

So we will eventually get rid of these crooks and men with no honor. It just takes a while.
 
Our country is like an aircraft carrier and not a jet ski. It takes us a long time to make a turn but we eventually do.

So we will eventually get rid of these crooks and men with no honor. It just takes a while.

Hopefully it will take one day next November, then another day in 2022 and they we'll have the Presidency, the House and the Senate
 
Hopefully it will take one day next November, then another day in 2022 and they we'll have the Presidency, the House and the Senate

i could see Dems winning the House and Presidency. Not sure about the Senate.
 
Good question and the answer is not an easy one. First, the founders did envision a nation ruled by honorable men, men like themselves for instance. But they also saw that honorable men can abuse power so they put in checks and balances and the impeachment clause. They also feared factionalism which is another way of saying political parties. Why? Because they believed that if we split into camps, the truth and the law and morality will be sacrificed to the tribe sooner or later. But yet they themselves formed tribes almost immediately proving their point about honorable men turning into something else fairly quickly. So the answer is yes, with a big "but". In essence, this question is at the heart of the Trump impeachment.
 
Our country is like an aircraft carrier and not a jet ski. It takes us a long time to make a turn but we eventually do.

So we will eventually get rid of these crooks and men with no honor. It just takes a while.

I agree with you under one slight change; women of honor is far more likely to happen.
 
How many men of honor are in the government? Not very many. The men of honor are run out after one term.
 
Back
Top Bottom