Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
So What Would You REALLY do
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Glocktogo" data-source="post: 1763347" data-attributes="member: 1132"><p>This is the crux of the current problem. Too few take the oath seriously. It's just a ceremonial requirement and not really binding upon those in power. At least that's what they think. Politicians have been wiping their butts with the Constitution for decades. Can anyone on here tell me the last time a politician was actually taken to task for circumventing the Constitution? Can anyone on here even tell us what the penalty for violating their oath is? </p><p></p><p>Until we learn to hold these usurpers accountable for their actions, it will never stop. Take POTUS for example. Do we really need a Constitutional Amendment which specifically states that the U.S. government may not force its citizens to buy a specific product from the government or private entities? Does he really think the Founding Fathers would've been OK with the British Monarchy telling the colonists that they must purchase insurance from approved vendors? Isn't he supposed to be a constitutional scholar? </p><p></p><p>JB Books may not care about the rule of law, but many of us still do. No one in office should be looking for any ways to circumvent, reframe or wordsmith the Constitution to allow government mandated activities at the fringes of permissibility. The Constitution is not a grey area, it's a hard, bright line. This far, no further. If a law is deemed unconstitutional, that means someone violated the Constitution and their oath. They should be held accountable, as opposed to merely being thwarted and returned to their task of subverting it in ever increasingly inventive ways. </p><p></p><p>Exactly 280 people violated the Constitution and their oath of office by passing the PPACA into law. Those 280 people should be called on the carpet and impeached or censured. Why will it not happen? Because the fox is guarding the henhouse. It's so rare in American politics that it's almost impossible. I believe we're well past the point where we need a Constitutional Amendment regarding the decision making process regarding these oath violations. Congress has failed their responsibilities in this area, so they should be stripped of this power. It should be turned over to an outside group or entity that will faithfully and fully execute that authority, rather than ignore it as Congress has.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Glocktogo, post: 1763347, member: 1132"] This is the crux of the current problem. Too few take the oath seriously. It's just a ceremonial requirement and not really binding upon those in power. At least that's what they think. Politicians have been wiping their butts with the Constitution for decades. Can anyone on here tell me the last time a politician was actually taken to task for circumventing the Constitution? Can anyone on here even tell us what the penalty for violating their oath is? Until we learn to hold these usurpers accountable for their actions, it will never stop. Take POTUS for example. Do we really need a Constitutional Amendment which specifically states that the U.S. government may not force its citizens to buy a specific product from the government or private entities? Does he really think the Founding Fathers would've been OK with the British Monarchy telling the colonists that they must purchase insurance from approved vendors? Isn't he supposed to be a constitutional scholar? JB Books may not care about the rule of law, but many of us still do. No one in office should be looking for any ways to circumvent, reframe or wordsmith the Constitution to allow government mandated activities at the fringes of permissibility. The Constitution is not a grey area, it's a hard, bright line. This far, no further. If a law is deemed unconstitutional, that means someone violated the Constitution and their oath. They should be held accountable, as opposed to merely being thwarted and returned to their task of subverting it in ever increasingly inventive ways. Exactly 280 people violated the Constitution and their oath of office by passing the PPACA into law. Those 280 people should be called on the carpet and impeached or censured. Why will it not happen? Because the fox is guarding the henhouse. It's so rare in American politics that it's almost impossible. I believe we're well past the point where we need a Constitutional Amendment regarding the decision making process regarding these oath violations. Congress has failed their responsibilities in this area, so they should be stripped of this power. It should be turned over to an outside group or entity that will faithfully and fully execute that authority, rather than ignore it as Congress has. [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
So What Would You REALLY do
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom