name a dozen people you would trust to rewrite the constitution

[Pop23]

All 5 of my personalities.

 

[The T]

The progressive constitution....

You will obey.

There, done

Sent from my Chinese Supercomputer made from XBox parts Bush sent to China

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AOfbnGkuGc"]Everybody Loves Hypnotoad - YouTube[/ame]

​

 

[ScienceRocks]

People that wish to harm and weaken America should be denied...Anyone that would defund infrastructure, science or r&d....

Sorry it isn't the 18th century anymore. Needs to be said!

 

[NightFox]

Can you name a dozen people you would trust to rewrite the constitution?

ok, simplify: name 5

• Linus Torvalds, how cool would a Constitution written in C be? especially given the fact that none of the douche bag lawyers and politicians could understand it.
  
• Stefan Molyneux, having a Constitution that abolishes government altogether would be a nice change of pace.
  
• Walt Whitman, a poetic Constitution would be a lot more fun to read than the one we have now.
  
• Dr. Seuss, 'cause then most of the sheeple would have a shot at understanding what it says.
  
• Daenerys Targaryen, she's hot and she's a badass what else do you need to know?
  

"Of freedom and of pleasure, Nothing ever lasts forever.... Everybody wants to rule the world" -- Tears for Fears, Everybody wants to Rule the World

 

[eagle1462010]

President Obama of course

John Kerry, Joe Biden and Hillary

They pay no attention to the Constitution anyway. They don't honor their oath.

 

[pvsi]

Can you name a dozen people you would trust to rewrite the constitution?

ok, simplify: name 5

1. Myself.
2. Putin (laugh all you want, but his rating is higher even with Americans than any recent US president)
3/4 Louis Farrakhan and David Duke as long as they work in combination with each other and I can be the meditator to encourage them to work things out
5. My wife.

 

[The T]

People that wish to harm and weaken America should be denied...Anyone that would defund infrastructure, science or r&d....

Sorry it isn't the 18th century anymore. Needs to be said!

One note Matt. Socialist to the core.

The principles of the Constitution are sound...YOU however, aren't. YOU are a Marxist in waiting.

 

[emilynghiem]

Can you name a dozen people you would trust to rewrite the constitution?

ok, simplify: name 5

1. [MENTION=15512]Dante[/MENTION], 2. [MENTION=22295]emilynghiem[/MENTION], 3. [MENTION=26838]Ropey[/MENTION], 4, [MENTION=18990]Barb[/MENTION], 5 [MENTION=20450]MarcATL[/MENTION]

Now THIS is by far the greatest compliment I have ever read regarding trust in judgment.

Not just about the Constitution, which I would leave as is and mostly resolve issues of interpretation. But putting me in the same list with Dante, next to whom
I am honored even to be regarded as a "special troll" in his shadows
-- now that is truly a special honor. Hats off to you and everyone at USMB
contributing to government reformation.

I would trust a consensus of the people to decide the minimal amount of government and reforms needed, while leaving the rest to the people to organize through local structures.
=========================================

OK well I might add an amendment about consent of the governed,
no taxation without representation (and mediating conflicts involving religious
or political beliefs to reach a consensus where these issues come up).

See old draft copied below as an example.
I think it is faster just to teach the First Amendment as guaranteeing redress of grievances, not just petitioning government, but a responsibility to resolve conflicts by democratic process.

And I believe the duties of Vice President could be expanded in the foreseen
movement to shift overreaching burdens of federal govt back to the states, parties or people. Maybe by coordinating with parties, or the progressive movement to add "Peace" to the Dept of Justice, where the VP could appointing mediators to oversee conflict resolution through the senate judiciary committee to check judicial rulings and other govt complaints against the Constitution. Not sure if that can be done through committees or needs any Constitutional changes, since it's really the Fed, IRS and other agencies created by Acts that were stretching or breaching the limits of the Constitution.

But I would push for the MINIMAL legislation or procedural changes needed to restore Constitutional checks and balances on the legal and political systems that got out of hand.

Thanks Drifter, but I would not even trust me, but insist on 100% consensus among heads and reps of every party, state and level of government if we were to make corrections.

To touch anything in the Constitution is like restoring the Mona Lisa.
Only if there were anything marring it, and the minimal contact at that.
=========================================================

PROPOSED AMENDMENT
ON JUDICIAL FREEDOM

Pursuant to Articles I, II, and III and Amendment I, the separation of legislative, judicial, and executive powers of government, and of church and state authority, shall neither be applied nor denied to disparage the equal right of all citizens to protection of the laws.

The consent of the governed, being necessary for the just powers of government to represent the authority of the people, the right to seek mediation and consensus to resolve disputes by consent of the parties, shall not be denied, but shall be invoked by written oath of petitioning parties to abide by consensus decision with dissenting parties affected, where all participating parties agree to resolve all objections so that consensus can be reached.

Pursuant to the above, the judicial freedom to select counsel, mediators, and judges to resolve a dispute, to the satisfaction of all parties, shall neither be exercised nor denied to obstruct justice, deny equal rights, or abridge free and equal access to due process of law.

Pursuant to the First and Fourteenth Amendments, political beliefs and differences in ideology shall be considered equal under law as religious beliefs and subject to the same rules of law and limitations; where Congress shall make no law construed or enforced to impose or deny political beliefs of individuals, nor shall obstruct the democratic process of resolving political conflicts by consensus to protect and represent all interests equally.

---------------------------------------------
RE: TEXAS CONSTITUTION

Article 1 Section 2
"All political power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their benefit. The faith of the people of Texas stands pledged to the preservation of a republican form of government, and, subject to this limitation [and the consent of the governed], they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient."

Pursuant to this Section, the right of the people to seek self-government or representation by party, and to mediate to resolve disputes with governing authorities and jurisdiction, shall not be denied to parties or persons agreeing to abide equally by the Code of Ethics for Government Service, Constitutional laws and procedures; and to resolve all conflicts and objections to reach a consensus on policies without coercion but fully informed consent.

 

[emilynghiem]

Can you name a dozen people you would trust to rewrite the constitution?

ok, simplify: name 5

To clean up govt and get back to the original structure with minimal changes:
* Jon Roland, Libertarian, Constitution Center
* Ralph Nader, to write up the minimal changes for a review board to check govt
for Constitutional and ethical violations, corrections and restitution
* heads of the Democrat, Republican, Green, Libertarian, Tea Parties, etc.
to form a consensus on how to delegate areas of disagreement locally to parties
* consensus body through all law schools, with input from all people and parties organized online by choice of affiliation and representation
* heads of all religious, political or govt/legal reform organizations that specialize in different areas where abuses have gone unchecked

I would trust a consensus of all people, so I would use academic departments, parties, and other affiliations to organize people by groups, issues, and system of representation

 

[Big Black Dog]

The Constitution doesn't need to be re-written. We need to follow the one we have. It's worked just fine except for politicians who refuse to follow it's guidelines.

 

[Pete7469]

President Obama of course

John Kerry, Joe Biden and Hillary

They would be quick about it.

They'd just toss a copy of Das Kapital, Kritik der politischen Ökonomie on the desk and proceed with setting up the gulags.

 

[alan1]

Can you name a dozen people you would trust to rewrite the constitution?

ok, simplify: name 5

I'm not sure why you think it needs to be rewritten.
I wish I could name dozen politicians that followed it as it is currently written.

 

[Pete7469]

Can you name a dozen people you would trust to rewrite the constitution?

ok, simplify: name 5

No one is talking about rewriting the Constitution, numskull.

I wouldn't even trust half the Founding Fathers to write the document in the first place. The fact that they botched the job is all the evidence needed to demonstrate that my judgment is correct.

Interesting take.

I wouldn't say they "botched the job", I'd say they had to compromise with people who were motivated more by politics and power than actually establishing a foundation that truly resrained government.

Kinda like the current RINO clowns.

As far as I'm concerned the Constitution only has one flaw in that it was not more concrete about the structure of government the 10th amendment should have been more restrictive on the federal level. The 17th Amendment never should have been passed.

 

[blackhawk]

I would trust no one today to rewrite it the original writers were honestly and sincerely trying to come up with something that had the best interest of the people and the nation in mind I don't believe there is anyone today who could or even would attempt to do that.

 

[bripat9643]

name a dozen people you would trust to rewrite the constitution

Given the fact the Constitution is in no need of being ‘rewritten,’ the answer is zero, where being trusted or not is irrelevant.

In a sense you are correct, but the USSC and liberal presidents have already rewritten it, so you point is moot. Most of what the federal government does isn't permitted by the Constitution.

 

[bripat9643]

Rewriting the Constitution is illegal just as it should be. The only legal way to change it is through the amendment process which involves everyone.

No, it can be rewritten, you can have a constitutional convention and it says in the document if you need to replace it, replace it. The only thing I would change would be the judiciary to be a lot less powerful as the founders intended

Nope. Don't think so. That would require the approval and participation of all the States to be covered by the new constitution. No way all the States are going to agree on anything. The last time it was tried we ended up with a war that lasted several years and the same Constitution.

The Civil War was not an attempt to rewrite the Constitution.

 

[bripat9643]

No one is talking about rewriting the Constitution, numskull.

I wouldn't even trust half the Founding Fathers to write the document in the first place. The fact that they botched the job is all the evidence needed to demonstrate that my judgment is correct.

wingnuttery on display

Seriously man...Bri is a waste of oxygen.

Meaning I don't listen to idiocies.

 

[Avatar4321]

Why do we have to rewrite it???

How about just following it?!!

I'd be quite happy with that.

 

[dcraelin]

Don't think I can name a dozen but a few would be

Daniel Lazare ...... author of 'The Frozen Republic: How the Constitution Is Paralyzing Democracy'

Kevin Price Phillips .......(born 30 November 1940) is an American writer and commentator on politics, economics, and history. Formerly a Republican Party strategist before becoming an Independent, Phillips became disaffected with the party from the 1990s, and became a scathing critic..............author of 'The Emerging Republican Majority' .....and 'Arrogant Capital: Washington, Wall Street and the Frustration of American Politics'

Ralph Nader

Ron Paul

 

[candycorn]

The Constitution doesn't need to be re-written. We need to follow the one we have. It's worked just fine except for politicians who refuse to follow it's guidelines.

What guideline is there for the Majority/Minority leaders? None. They are not in the constitution but in a very real way, these are the people who stymie bills that will embarrass their party and try to pass bills that will embarrass the other party. Any benefit to the American people is purely accidental. The point is that this is what politics has devolved into; parties before people. And while I am against term limits as a way to get rid of politicians, the two parties have set up a binary system of governance where third parties do not have a real chance not only at winning elections but even for influencing the debate. The Commission on Presidential Debates is exhibit A. The states have outsourced elections to the Parties to where they appoint their own electors, have separate primaries, the Party in power draws the district maps to benefit themselves and NOBODY else,

Where is the "guideline" written that they shouldn't do that? Not in the Constitution... This is why it is waaaaaaaay past time to give the genius document a voice where it is silent. Politicians under enormous pressure to produce or under influence for enormous personal gain have found a way to game the system and take advantage of the loopholes in the document. If this were the Friars Club or the local University frat house, the only ones who get hammered are the members. But we're all members of this organization we call America.