And all this time you thought that the Constitution meant something sacred.. Ha! It, like that other sacred text the bible.. can/must be interpreted to suit the occasion. And on this occasion.. trumps will be done.
All too often rights are in the eye of the beholder. I have a recurring discussion with a friend on Facebook who insists that the “occupiers” in Seattle need to be dealt with using force, but at the same time tells me that the guys who took over federal lands at gunpoint were patriots who were within their rights to do it. I’ve tried to point out that under our Constitution you can’t draw a distinction, both parties must have equal justice under the law or you don’t have rule of law at all, but he doesn’t get it. As far as he’s concerned, might makes right. And I end up asking him, then why have a Constitution at all?
Templo S.U.D. over 4 years ago
touché, Carl
blunebottle over 4 years ago
Bingo!
RussellRogerBe1 over 4 years ago
goodbye freedoms, hello security, oops… now neither exists…
e.groves over 4 years ago
Elections.
rickmac1937 Premium Member over 4 years ago
Right on Carl
MichaelHelwig over 4 years ago
Deering and Newcombe just won the internet.
Michael G. over 4 years ago
>Tapping my nose, furiously<
Alberta Oil Premium Member over 4 years ago
And all this time you thought that the Constitution meant something sacred.. Ha! It, like that other sacred text the bible.. can/must be interpreted to suit the occasion. And on this occasion.. trumps will be done.
ocarol7 Premium Member over 4 years ago
Buffoonery is not remotely presidential and our supposed leader respects nothing but his own outsized ego….. Toddlers can’t read the Constitution-
InquireWithin over 4 years ago
All too often rights are in the eye of the beholder. I have a recurring discussion with a friend on Facebook who insists that the “occupiers” in Seattle need to be dealt with using force, but at the same time tells me that the guys who took over federal lands at gunpoint were patriots who were within their rights to do it. I’ve tried to point out that under our Constitution you can’t draw a distinction, both parties must have equal justice under the law or you don’t have rule of law at all, but he doesn’t get it. As far as he’s concerned, might makes right. And I end up asking him, then why have a Constitution at all?
johbjacob over 4 years ago
Excellent. You guys nailed it.