by Smitty
The First and Second Amendments were exactly that: not components of the original draft Constitution.
Does anyone seriously think that, without those bedrock protections, that this country would have met its Progressive demise much sooner, and that the Tea Parties would be as beat down as Iran’s Green Revolution?
I usually don’t enjoy the counter-factual. After all, so what? We have the Constitution we have. Yet the prescience of those long-dead Founding Fathers astounds. Too, I daresay all of our current crisis has its roots in the Progressive straying from the document. Repentance will occur over the next seven months, ye Americans.
Amen, Brother, Amen…
Amen, Brother, Amen…
I think you meant to say, “…that this country would not have met its Progressive demise…”
I think you meant to say, “…that this country would not have met its Progressive demise…”
“Repentance will occur over the next seven months, ye Americans. Cue the ‘It’s Too Late To Apologize’ video.
http://polisio.com/?cat=49
“Repentance will occur over the next seven months, ye Americans. Cue the ‘It’s Too Late To Apologize’ video.
http://polisio.com/?cat=49
we’ve had enough. We’ll have our say at every election, and on every street corner carrying signs and talking with folks, and at our places of employment and worship. We aren’t silent anymore.
we’ve had enough. We’ll have our say at every election, and on every street corner carrying signs and talking with folks, and at our places of employment and worship. We aren’t silent anymore.
You have far too simple a view of history and the forces that move and shape it. Ascribing all anti- or un-Constitutional maneuvers in our history — even our recent history — to the catch-all “Progressive” is insufficient and really pretty lame.
You have far too simple a view of history and the forces that move and shape it. Ascribing all anti- or un-Constitutional maneuvers in our history — even our recent history — to the catch-all “Progressive” is insufficient and really pretty lame.
You have far too simple a view of history and the forces that move and shape it. Ascribing all anti- or un-Constitutional maneuvers in our history — even our recent history — to the catch-all “Progressive” is insufficient and really pretty lame.
@Phil,
A fair cop. However, the premise “Ascribing all anti- or un-Constitutional maneuvers in our history … to the catch-all ‘Progressive’ is insufficient” is non-falsifiable: irrespective of the volume of argument proffered, you can always claim it not enough.
Whatever you want to label the bi-partisan tendency to gather power in DC, it is crushing the country under unread legislation and debt. If “Progressive” hurts your feelings, what then would you call this overturning of the Federalism inherent in the Constitution?
@Phil,
A fair cop. However, the premise “Ascribing all anti- or un-Constitutional maneuvers in our history … to the catch-all ‘Progressive’ is insufficient” is non-falsifiable: irrespective of the volume of argument proffered, you can always claim it not enough.
Whatever you want to label the bi-partisan tendency to gather power in DC, it is crushing the country under unread legislation and debt. If “Progressive” hurts your feelings, what then would you call this overturning of the Federalism inherent in the Constitution?