So you think the Constitution is simple? A plain-reading gives it's obvious intent?

[Ardentfrost]

Maybe we're not suggesting different things so much... I find the constitution to be very readable, despite some of the older language. It's not written like modern law, which is completely unreadable.

However, if it were completely clear given JUST that document (without looking at original intent, federalist/anti-federalist papers, history surrounding that era, etc...) then there wouldn't be a need for things such as Constitutional Studies. However, the constitution was always meant to be interpreted. Hell, the damn ink was barely dry before the Supreme Court had to decide its first case based on Constitutional interpretation.

[Rouger2]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

It's awesome to pick out small snippets of larger answers to try to make some point.

To address most of those (except the first one, I simply don't have a copy of the federalist papers on hand), it is the job of the courts to interpret and uphold the constitution, as it always has been. To ask for something like a list of things that the President isn't allowed to do is excessive and reaching because there are more laws today than there were at founding. So that's more stuff the president can't do without being impeached.

He is right you just keep proving his point.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

People being stupid shouldn't speak to what is clear and unclear about the Constitution

These are people who have graduated from Yale Law, Harvard Business School...have read the constitutional multiple times...yet they're stupid?

I can imagine what you think of people who are less educated...88% of Americans (did not go beyond 4 year degree)

Pretty elitist, "oh I can read the constitution simply and the intent is obvious, but everyone else, they're just ignorant or stupid"

Sounds more like a VIEWPOINT or INTERPRETATION than an actual statement of fact

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

Maybe we're not suggesting different things so much... I find the constitution to be very readable, despite some of the older language. It's not written like modern law, which is completely unreadable.

However, if it were completely clear given JUST that document (without looking at original intent, federalist/anti-federalist papers, history surrounding that era, etc...) then there wouldn't be a need for things such as Constitutional Studies. However, the constitution was always meant to be interpreted. Hell, the damn ink was barely dry before the Supreme Court had to decide its first case based on Constitutional interpretation.

Maybe you'd like to dis-associate yourself from this viewpoint that is held quite frequently by libertarians and right-wingers

Originally Posted by Joe_Cool

Maybe they should have spent more time READING THE CONSTITUTION.

(talking about anyone who has ever studied law)

Originally Posted by Joe_Cool

Once again, I'm fluent in English, so I don't need a court to tell me what the Constitution says. I can read it and know that the federal government has no Constitutional authority to institute such programs.

(He is talking about federal aid to students)


The sentiment is obvious, he clearly believes the constitution is a simple document that can be clearly read and has obvious intent, and there is no need for "interpretation" from anyone, legal or otherwise, because it is so obvious that his viewpoint is the correct one...and anyone who was intelligent and took their time reading the document would come to his exact same conclusions on constitutional matters

He is not alone, it's a frequent talking point on far-right radio (from what I read online) and I've certainly seen it in offtopic about 1000x

[Rouger2]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

The term "unconstitutional" is used a lot by Dems and Repubs... it doesn't mean they're always correct in its usage

I've heard a few different quotes from GWB where he said something was unconstitutional (in regards to his and Congress' job in the war), and I don't think any of them was correct usage.

The Dems don't know what is constitional nor the republican's or the president such a easy to interpret document shouldn't be so hard to pin down.

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

The sentiment is obvious, he clearly believes the constitution is a simple document that can be clearly read and has obvious intent, and there is no need for "interpretation" from anyone, legal or otherwise, because it is so obvious that his viewpoint is the correct one...and anyone who was intelligent and took their time reading the document would come to his exact same conclusions on constitutional matters

He is not alone, it's a frequent talking point on far-right radio (from what I read online) and I've certainly seen it in offtopic about 1000x

That people think this scares me, seriously. I mean, we all have our differing political opinions, some very strongly held, but deep down everyone knows that things are up for debate...and the truth is found somewhere in the middle of it all.

But when people see an unclear document like the Constitution, a document that has been argued over since its inception by the brightest minds in the country, and that no one can agree what it means, and they literally cannot even fathom that the confusion is due to inherent ambiguity, it suggests a level of delusion that is alarming...on par with hearing voices or hallucinations. It's as if, for these people, subjective opinion and objective reality have merged, such they truly believe their subjective opinion IS objective reality.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

These are people who have graduated from Yale Law, Harvard Business School...have read the constitutional multiple times...yet they're stupid?

I can imagine what you think of people who are less educated...88% of Americans (did not go beyond 4 year degree)

Pretty elitist, "oh I can read the constitution simply and the intent is obvious, but everyone else, they're just ignorant or stupid"

Sounds more like a VIEWPOINT or INTERPRETATION than an actual statement of fact

The fact that you think education means someone is smart is pretty bad. I know lots of people who are idiots and got through college. I know people who are really smart who never stepped foot in a college.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

The fact that you think education means someone is smart is pretty bad. I know lots of people who are idiots and got through college. I know people who are really smart who never stepped foot in a college.

Graduating in the top half of your class at Yale Law does mean you are smart, there's no way around it

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Graduating in the top half of your class at Yale Law does mean you are smart, there's no way around it

I respectfully disagree. I've known some dumbasses that graduated at the top of their class. The ability to memorize shit does not equate to smarts.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

I respectfully disagree. I've known some dumbasses that graduated at the top of their class. The ability to memorize shit does not equate to smarts.

at the idea that Yale Law is just "having an ability to memorize shit"

You can have a keen intellect and a photographic memory and fail out of Yale Law easily

You really have friends that graduated at the top of Yale Law and are dumbasses, I'd love to meet them

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

at the idea that Yale Law is just "having an ability to memorize shit"

You can have a keen intellect and a photographic memory and fail out of Yale Law easily

You really have friends that graduated at the top of Yale Law and are dumbasses, I'd love to meet them

at your insistence to generalize a group of people

[Ardentfrost]

Additionally, aren't we talking about GWB here? Didn't he get D's and shit in school? I mean, that doesn't exactly support your point.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

Additionally, aren't we talking about GWB here? Didn't he get D's and shit in school? I mean, that doesn't exactly support your point.

Undergrad and Law School are completely different

GWB got rejected from the UTexas Law and supposedly some private schools and had to go into business school

A lot of politicians did not finish in the top of their class, infact I've found it very hard to find a politician with a JD who graduated from a top 5 school with honors

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Undergrad and Law School are completely different

GWB got rejected from the UTexas Law and supposedly some private schools and had to go into business school

A lot of politicians did not finish in the top of their class, infact I've found it very hard to find a politician with a JD who graduated from a top 5 school with honors

So, we've wasted posts in this thread talking about shit that doesn't mater

[Thorgrim]

You still didn't seperate yourself from the above quotes

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

You still didn't seperate yourself from the above quotes

I still stand by them. Although I'm sure most Yale Law grads are quite intelligent, 100% of anything never happens. It's statistically infeasible.

I still don't see how we got on that subject. You were saying something about politicians using the word "unconstitutional" and I said "stupid people using the word doesn't make the word use correct" and you started talking about Yale grads or something. Then you just said very few politicians graduate in the tops of their class and from top 5 schools (whatever that means)... so it's like we're talking in circles about nothing in particular. Just random thoughts.

[SpicyMcVoodoo]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Undergrad and Law School are completely different

GWB got rejected from the UTexas Law and supposedly some private schools and had to go into business school

A lot of politicians did not finish in the top of their class, infact I've found it very hard to find a politician with a JD who graduated from a top 5 school with honors

University of Chicago Law School > Barack Obama

Barack Obama received his bachelor of arts degree in political science from Columbia in 1983, and his J.D., magna cum laude, from Harvard Law School in 1991.

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by SpicyMcVoodoo

University of Chicago Law School > Barack Obama

I think there's no question that Obama is a very intelligent person...he was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review

If elected he'll be the smartest president since Nixon, and that's a big compliment to be compared to him intellectually

Also even though he may not win, I don't think anyone doubts that he is destined for greatness, it's a shame he's only been out of law school 15 years or so and has just been in the Senate over 2 years

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost