Conservatives clueless about the Constitution

Big surprise here.The rhetoric that our conservative friends spew always has this one characteristic, they claim to be the side that favors Constitutional Law and respecting the Constitution, yet they trivialize it every chance they get and are horrifically ignorant about it.

Here's a classic example, despite how many conservatives will line up and say they love/respect the Constitution, they'll also line up and graciously applaud this moronic depiction of Jesus descending from heaven and bringing it to our founding fathers:



The #1 bologna complaint that our conservative friends had about the Affordable Care Act was that it was not Constitutional. How did that work out? Oh that's right, slam dunk for the Obama Administration. Democrats knew it was Constitutional all along, and so did everyone else who had an ounce of common sense or even the slightest grasp of the provisions within the bill. The only naysayers were our conservative friends, who haven't read the Affordable Care Act, and haven't read the Constitution.

Ironic that these ignorant conservatives are the same folk who routinely chastise Obama on this issue, not considering the fact that Obama used to literally be a Constitutional Law professor. Obama doesn't just know the Constitution, he understood and taught about it. Republicans simply can't be taken seriously when they argue about something they are utterly clueless about, and truly believe that the Constitution was written and hand-delivered by Jesus.

 

At least they bring up the Constitution. Liberals threw it out the window a long time ago and are "making it up as they go along."

Conservative view: "Does the Constitution allow me to do this?"

Liberal view: "Does the Constitution say I can't do this?"

Also, in case you didn't know, the AFA was neither constitutional or unconstitutional until it was ruled upon. So saying you knew it was constitutional is nonsense. What you meant to say is that you assumed the court would side in your favor.

 

Mindlessly bringing it up when they are clueless about it in the first place, isn't a valid argument.

If a mechanic were to diagnose a problem and offer a solution to fix your motor vehicle (for instance, say that you need a new engine), it wouldn't make sense to tell him: "You're trampling the Constitution". Yet this is precisely what conservatives do and how they frame their argument.

Just because conservatives make the CLAIM that Obama/democrats are "Trampling the Constitution", that doesn't magically make it so. Justice Roberts illustrated this spectacularly.

Conservatives threw it out the window a long time ago and are "making it up as they go along.".

We can do this all day, see above.

Wrong.

Conservative view: I don't care if the Constitution ALLOWS democrats to do this, I'm going to falsely say otherwise.

Liberal View: "Does the Constitution allow me to do this?"

Obama and the democrats knew from day 1 that the Constitution allowed for the Affordable Care Act, and they were right. Justice Roberts didn't hope on the bandwagon and falsely say otherwise.

 

Didn't our last conservative president W. take a massive dump on the Constitution in the name of "protecting" America? FAIL POST

 

As opposed to metaphorically?

Anyway, conservatives are annoying and ignorant. They support "freedom" and "liberty" by name, but then when something comes up that they don't like, e.g. letting gays marry each other, then they suddenly want dictatorial laws to prevent that.

 

Democrats have thrown this around also you know. Look at when the District of Columbia tried to ban handguns. All the liberals said it was constitutional and BAM it got struck down.

I fail to see what point your trying to make. Whenever an issue goes to the Supreme Court your going to have one side saying its constitutional and the other saying its not. Both democrats and republicans have been on the winning and losing side of these arguments.

Also, I have never seen that picture thrown around and I study political science.

 

Speaking of "haven't read the bill," have you already forgotten Nancy Pelosi's famous words about it?

 

Didn't Obama do this with NDAA...FAIL POST

 

From my perspective it goes more like.

Democratic view: "How can I make the constitution say I can do this?

Republican view: "How can I make the constitution say I can do this?"

Whig view: "How can I make the constitution say I can do this?"

Democratic Republican view: "How can I make the constitution say I can do this?"

Federalist view: "How can I make the constitution say I can do this?"

 

Well you can't really argue with that I suppose.

 

Both sides promote the constitution when it suits their needs and ignore it when it doesn't. This happens on both sides and neither side it worse than the other, it just depends on the issue at hand.

For example, ask any conservative about the part of the consitution that forces states to recognize contracts from other states and how this includes marriages, so a gay couple who gets married in one state must be allowed marriage rights in all states, regardless of whether gay marriage is allowed in the state they live in or not. They will rant about this being a violation of the rights of the states. The states do not have the right to pass law's that violate the US constitution, so it's not a violation of anything.

The big liberal one is unions. Many liberals rant about corporate money in elections, but still want to allow unions to donate. You can not give one private institute special rights. Either they all are allowed to donate or none are. This also should be the case with Citizens United, however, and unions should have unlimited donatiom rights as well.

 

You don't want me to challenge you on this, homie. You'll lose. I've done this several times on here already. When we go issue for issue, liberals always come out exponenentially more restrictive and anti-liberty than conservatives. You guys won't even let people eat what they want.

 

republicans do not understand the constitution, i think they use it like they use religions... only when it suits them

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2008/10/palin-fears-med/

"Palin told WMAL-AM that her criticism of Obama's associations, like those with 1960s radical Bill Ayers and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, should not be considered negative attacks. Rather, for reporters or columnists to suggest that it is going negative may constitute an attack that threatens a candidate's free speech rights under the Constitution, Palin said."

 

conservatives really do not understand the constitution

"The Palin Principle – Bible trumps Constitution"

http://www.secularnewsdaily.com/201...nt-to-base-law-on-bible-and-ten-commandments/

"Go back to what our founders and our founding documents meant — they’re quite clear — that we would create law based on the God of the bible and the ten commandments." - Palin

 

Ah Sarah Palin.. The gift that keeps on giving. Common Mitt give her another chance.

 

You're conveniently ignoring the Democrats' near pathological tendency to vacillate back and forth between "separation of church and state" and "the Constitution is a living document."

If you want to point the finger at someone for using the Constitution only when it suits them, perhaps you should look in the mirror first.

 

Wow, you are so ignorant. Obamacare was justified by the Obama administration using the commerce clause. The court unanimously held that it wasn't constitutional under the commerce clause, but by a 5-4 decision decided that the government had the authority through tax powers.

 

The separation of church and state is a living document interpretation of the constitution. One of the earliest examples of officials interpreting the constitution implies something it does not literally state. It has been established numerous times by supreme court precedence. There's nothing contradictory about saying the constitution is a living document, and using legal precedence to establish what it has grown up to be. That's the central principle of the living document interpretation actually.

 

I'm ignorant because I refuse to subscribe to the republican notion that the Constitution was written and hand-delivered by Jesus?

Verrilli also justified it via the taxation perspective, however it got little attention from the Justices.

1. You would of known that, had you of actually followed what was being discussed in the oral arguments.
2. You would of known that the Affordable Care Act was Constitutional had you of bothered to actually read the provisions within it.
3. 1 and 2 are based on the assumption that you even understand the Constitution.

The court held that it was constitutional. Justice Roberts wasn't the partisan muppet that republicans thought he would be.

 

Not only are many conservatives clueless about the constitution, it's safe to say that many actually hate it. The constitution prevents our conservative friends from literally turning the US into an ecclesiastical society dominated by Christianity.

Heck, even in 2009 Texas (R) Governor Rick Perry talked about the state seceding from the United States. Nothing more emphatically says "I HATE America and the Constitution" like passionately advocating secession.

 

quite fankly, I would welcome texas leaving the union. It would be fun to watch it fall and beg to be let back in. It barely is able to fund itself without federal money, and it is not able to sustain a viable economy by itself. It would be fun to see all of the anti-fed hicks begging for aid.

 

Who is it that says we should rewrite the Constitution because it's out of date? Who is it that says the Second Amendment doesn't give us the right to own guns? Who is it that says the First says separation? Who is it that only believes in free speech when it's only on their side?

 

Basically, this. That conservatives (and before a con (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)es, I'm only mentioning them because I've literally never heard a liberal (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) about the constitution) constantly whine about the constitution is amusing, considering it's been a rarity for me to actually find one that REALLY knows the constitution. It's basically just a GOP gimmick.

I also find it insulting that cons assume that me being a lib = hating the constitution. It's moronic and ignorant. I love the constitution, I respect the constitution. I have an app on my phone that is the text of the constitution, the Federalist Papers, and Madison's journal. I carry a pocket constitution and Declaration of Independence everywhere I go.

 

First of all Conservatives don't believe that Jesus came down from heaven and gave our Constitution to us. That was a painting of an artist that was trying to say that many religious men had a hand in writing up, or approving our Constitution. Many of the signers were religious. That should have become clear to you if you had only realized that many of the men in that picture weren't even alive when the Constitution was written.

 

Thomas Jefferson.

Nobody I've ever heard.

Thomas Jefferson.

Everyone in America, Republican and Democrat?