Link: Walter E. Williams: To Hell With Our Constitution - Page 2

BamaNation · February 12th, 2009, 03:19 PM

there was a discussion today in the class I teach on IT & Ethics. We're talking about NSA & privacy rights etc. One of the students was arguing that 'if we're not guilty we shouldn't mind that the gov't wiretaps our phones...the constitution is great and everything but it doesn't deal with today's problems"

To which my argument was, 'then the Constitution should be dealt with constitutionally...meaning, enact amendments to the Constitution as necessary.

It amazes me that the left wants a 'living breathing' constitution (meaning that judges can interpret it as liberally as they want) but then objects to things like wiretapping on US citizens, etc.

When you have a 'living breathing' constitution, it just becomes whoever is president at the moment (and the judiciary) to interpret it.

Displaced Bama Fan · February 12th, 2009, 03:57 PM

Sounds like its time we start over.

TDBama78 · February 12th, 2009, 05:35 PM

	Quote:	BamaNation
	It amazes me that the left wants a 'living breathing' constitution (meaning that judges can interpret it as liberally as they want) but then objects to things like wiretapping on US citizens, etc. When you have a 'living breathing' constitution, it just becomes whoever is president at the moment (and the judiciary) to interpret it.

you said a mouth full right there.

Tidewater · February 12th, 2009, 06:16 PM

	Quote:	BamaNation
	there was a discussion today in the class I teach on IT & Ethics. We're talking about NSA & privacy rights etc. One of the students was arguing that 'if we're not guilty we shouldn't mind that the gov't wiretaps our phones...the constitution is great and everything but it doesn't deal with today's problems" To which my argument was, 'then the Constitution should be dealt with constitutionally...meaning, enact amendments to the Constitution as necessary. It amazes me that the left wants a 'living breathing' constitution (meaning that judges can interpret it as liberally as they want) but then objects to things like wiretapping on US citizens, etc. When you have a 'living breathing' constitution, it just becomes whoever is president at the moment (and the judiciary) to interpret it.

I have always wondered if "living Constitution" judges believe that their rulings are living documents themselves. I mean, if a judge says that a state cannot enact a law outlawing something, can a subsequent judge rule that when the earlier judge said a state cannot, did he really mean that a state could?

Tidewater · February 12th, 2009, 06:31 PM

The Only Good Constitution is a Dead Constitution.

RhodeIslandRed · February 12th, 2009, 09:32 PM

There's really nothing fundamentally wrong with the Constitution. The problem is the people who are in charge of enforcing it. Things haven't been right for a long time. The real policy makers in Washington aren't really concerned for the well-being of its citizens. And if we let them draw up a new constitution, do we expect any real changes?

The recent example is TARP I. We've seen how $350 billion has been squandered. Do we really expect anything different from TARP II? From the face of it, I think not. Make no mistake. I think these men in Washington are brilliant. They know where and how to right the errors that got us here today. I just don't think they really want to.

Ark-Tider · February 13th, 2009, 12:47 AM

	Quote:	RhodeIslandRed
	I think these men in Washington are brilliant. They know where and how to right the errors that got us here today. I just don't think they really want to.

They know that a weak economy means more political power.

TRUTIDE · February 13th, 2009, 01:10 AM

	Quote:	RhodeIslandRed
	There's really nothing fundamentally wrong with the Constitution. The problem is the people who are in charge of enforcing it. Things haven't been right for a long time. The real policy makers in Washington aren't really concerned for the well-being of its citizens. And if we let them draw up a new constitution, do we expect any real changes? The recent example is TARP I. We've seen how $350 billion has been squandered. Do we really expect anything different from TARP II? From the face of it, I think not. Make no mistake. I think these men in Washington are brilliant. They know where and how to right the errors that got us here today. I just don't think they really want to.

Ditto! These guys know what they are doing and how to do it. Maybe term limits would not give them as much time to master it.