Our Constitution Under Attack

[Pace Cap'n]

Not everyone values our constitution...

7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard A. Posner, a Reagan appointee, argues in "Not a Suicide Pact: the Constitution in a Time of National Emergency" (Oxford 2006) that in a terrorism-induced choice between individual freedoms and collective security, the Constitution was never intended to side with the first at the expense of the second.

In his new book, "Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution Goes Wrong" (Oxford 2006), Levinson argues that it's time for us all to convene another constitutional convention (this time, with air conditioning) to undertake wholesale changes to what he says is an unworkable Constitution.

Professor Ackerman, the Yalie, also doesn't want to be "blindly devoted" to the document we all are taught in public school to be blindly devoted to. All he argues for, in his new book "Before the Next Attack: Preserving Civil Liberties in an Age of Terrorism" (Yale 2006), is that we come up with an "emergency" Constitution (really a series of new constitutional provisions) that will help guide us when the next terrorism attack surely comes.

WTF?

Link (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/24/opinion/courtwatch/main2117497.shtml)

Commentary follows the article.

[46zilzal]

[QUOTE=Pace Cap'n]Not everyone values our constitution...

so? free country people have opinions many of which none of us like.

[JustRalph]

[QUOTE=Pace Cap'n]Not everyone values our constitution...

so? free country people have opinions many of which none of us like.

well, that is clear as mud............!

WTF, Over?

[ljb]

WTF back at ya !
Sorry, just couldn't resist. :)

[46zilzal]

opinions put NOTHING in danger. Only when someone ACTS on an opinion is it a potential danger.

[bigmack]

A couple of weeks ago I caught on CSPAN a forum with Antonin Scalia & the Pres of The ACLU. The sharpest of minds could barely hold a candle to AScalia and at times I almost felt sorry for the ACLU woman. In any event, his adherence to orginalism in terms of contitutional interpretation is to my minds eye, the only way to go.

When she alluded to the need for constitutional flexibility he cautioned, if we open up that door, that flexibility can go both ways.

1791, what a year!

[kenwoodallpromos]

If the Consititution worked. it would not need amendments. Istallling then deleting alcohol prohibition proved stupid people make stupid laws.

[skate]

opinions put NOTHING in danger. Only when someone ACTS on an opinion is it a potential danger.

beautiful...

oh, so everything is honkey, fine and dandy. i picture this gal sitting under three guys with sword in hand. she aint worried cause their opinion is ziltch. then suddenly they chop off her head.
Now she can worry

[Pace Cap'n]

How often do you suppose a freakin' FEDERAL JUDGE acts on his opinion?

[PlanB]

With the Bush regime I'm more concerned with how his Supreme Court
appointees & hunting pals re-define our founding fathers. That's my
worry. It's like big business WINS WINS and WE the PEOPLE LOSE LOSE.
Now I work for a major money player (Thank You Buddha) but on the legal
end I'd like to see ONE Supreme decision for the little guy.

[skate]

ok again planb;

so you want "what?" the gov. to take care of the little guy instead of the little guy taking care of him/her self?
that would fit the democratic model.
like, we should pay for stem cell and then maybe cover All medical procerdures.

hey, might as well, cause we are going in that direction. forget this capitalism crap, right?
ya, we start up a new deal, called communism, wadda ya think?

[Tom]

The Little Guy impresses me as someone who can take care of himself. :rolleyes:

[PlanB]

no way. I just think a fair playing field is needed. Do you see the huge
corporate profits & the legal cases won by big business & the use of PEOPLE
money to finance Bush's adventurism & what do WE get in return? Phone
record snooping? Social programs cut? re: stem cell research, JUST STAY
AWAY MR BUSH, don't pay anything cause guess what, "I can raise ~100B
without a sweat." -------- But no, Bush creates a BUSINESS climate that
makes major scientists run to China, India etc. It's your naivete about
the major interplay between Business & Politics that astound me.

[Secretariat]

If the Consititution worked. it would not need amendments. Istallling then deleting alcohol prohibition proved stupid people make stupid laws.

I don't know. Getting rid of slavery seemed the right thing to do. I'm also a strong supporter of a Balanced Budget Amendment except in a national emergency situation such as war declared by Congress. It's pretty tough to get an amendment through.

Times change and the open ended option of amendments seems to me a good approach.

[46zilzal]

beautiful...

oh, so everything is honkey, fine and dandy. i picture this gal sitting under three guys with sword in hand. she aint worried cause their opinion is ziltch. then suddenly they chop off her head.
Now she can worry

and just when and where did that happen in North America??

[kenwoodallpromos]

I don't know. Getting rid of slavery seemed the right thing to do. I'm also a strong supporter of a Balanced Budget Amendment except in a national emergency situation such as war declared by Congress. It's pretty tough to get an amendment through.

Times change and the open ended option of amendments seems to me a good approach.
Yes we need a certain flexibility. But if we have decent politicians we would not need a balanced budget amendment.

[Lefty]

no way. I just think a fair playing field is needed. Do you see the huge
corporate profits & the legal cases won by big business & the use of PEOPLE
money to finance Bush's adventurism & what do WE get in return? Phone
record snooping? Social programs cut? re: stem cell research, JUST STAY
AWAY MR BUSH, don't pay anything cause guess what, "I can raise ~100B
without a sweat." -------- But no, Bush creates a BUSINESS climate that
makes major scientists run to China, India etc. It's your naivete about
the major interplay between Business & Politics that astound me.
Seems to me i've seen courts award plaintiffs lots of money for their stupid actions from corps.
Stem cell research is not illegal. Privat corps can do it if they want. Them might be backing off cause so far, results haven't been promising.
Social prgms cut? Whicjh ones? Sounds like a step in right direction. May I remind you that corps provide jobs and things we need and over50% of us have some stock. Derek do you still work on Wall St? Isn't your job dependent on selling stock in corps? Hmmmmm?