U. S. Contstitution
First Prev
of 5
Next Last
Paul Revere

United States

#1 Jul 15, 2014
Do people understand that the constitution was wrote by our founding fathers , not for the government but to protect the citizens from an over reaching govt. Our congressmen need to read it and follow it and we the people need to make sure they follow it.
Or vote them out.
NSA, CIA, FBI, DOH, EPA, IRS, ATF, DEA - we have way too many of these tax payer hungry departments.
Master Chinn

Nicholasville, KY

#2 Jul 15, 2014
We wouldn't be here without them. Yes, they need over site, and in the last 25 years they probably haven't had as much as we should have been doing. But the simple fact is that there are groups of people and countries out to do us harm for simply having the freedoms that those officers put their lives on the line to protect.
Saul

Russell, KY

#3 Jul 15, 2014
Master Chinn wrote:
We wouldn't be here without them. Yes, they need over site, and in the last 25 years they probably haven't had as much as we should have been doing. But the simple fact is that there are groups of people and countries out to do us harm for simply having the freedoms that those officers put their lives on the line to protect.
It is highly apparent that you come from the school of Marx/Engles, Lennin, Dewey, Alinsky, Cloward-Piven, Obama & Bush (Yes I said Bush Too, while not a Marxist he implemented the Patriot Act which finally gave the Marxist Agenda a means of establishing a foothold in The U.S.)

There is NO legitimate reason for the existence of 95% of the aforementioned agencies. The only purpose of these agencies ensure CONTROL of the populace and yes that is YOU!
Paul Revere

United States

#4 Jul 15, 2014
Yeah, they're doing a real good job (sarcasm). How do we know exactly who is coming across our open southern border. IRS targeting conservative groups, Mexican drug cartel using weapons against us that we (Eric Holder) gave them. I believe we could protect ourselves just fine by securing the border and let all the other countries fight amongst themselves.
Master Chinn

Nicholasville, KY

#5 Jul 15, 2014
Saul wrote:
<quoted text>It is highly apparent that you come from the school of Marx/Engles, Lennin, Dewey, Alinsky, Cloward-Piven, Obama & Bush (Yes I said Bush Too, while not a Marxist he implemented the Patriot Act which finally gave the Marxist Agenda a means of establishing a foothold in The U.S.)

There is NO legitimate reason for the existence of 95% of the aforementioned agencies. The only purpose of these agencies ensure CONTROL of the populace and yes that is YOU!
I'm sorry, but you're are completely incorrect about me. Over site yes, the lack of all of those agencies would be the fall of our way of life. Period! If you believe otherwise go live in a third world country and see if you like it better.
Horan

United States

#6 Jul 15, 2014
Paul Revere wrote:
Do people understand that the constitution was wrote by our founding fathers , not for the government but to protect the citizens from an over reaching govt. Our congressmen need to read it and follow it and we the people need to make sure they follow it.
Or vote them out.
NSA, CIA, FBI, DOH, EPA, IRS, ATF, DEA - we have way too many of these tax payer hungry departments.
You need a history lesson. The constitution was written in secrecy. Had word got out, our forefather who wrote it would have been hanged for treason. The constitution convention was intended to restructure the Articles of Confederation, our first guiding document. But it had not provided any power to a central government. The country could not even man a military under the AOC. So it was scraped and a new constitution written. It was in a fact a diplomatic coup as the president under the AOC was un-seated, the entire government dismantled and re-established. If you would actually read the US Constitution you would find it mostly deals with enumerated powers given to each branch of the federal government. It has very little to say about the states or the citizenry of the country. Now that you understand that let me give you a homework assignment, see if you can find why such agencies that you listed are constitutional even though there formation was never mentioned in the aforementioned document.
Paul Revere

United States

#7 Jul 15, 2014
It deals with keeping the powers of the government limited! Our forefathers didnt want our govt. to end up like the govt. they left in Britain. It split the power of the Govt. into three branches to balance power and to keep one branch from having to much power. They also added the 2nd amendment to give the citizens of the country the ability to defend themselves from a govt. that might become tyrannical, because that's what happens when a govt. gets too much power, or one party gets too much power, they like to keep it.
my opinion

London, KY

#8 Jul 15, 2014
Kentucky is nothing but an insulting conflict to the Constitution ! You have to pay a lawyer for justice here. Nothing about this state is geared to observe civil rights or otherwise !
Horan

United States

#9 Jul 15, 2014
Paul Revere wrote:
It deals with keeping the powers of the government limited! Our forefathers didnt want our govt. to end up like the govt. they left in Britain. It split the power of the Govt. into three branches to balance power and to keep one branch from having to much power. They also added the 2nd amendment to give the citizens of the country the ability to defend themselves from a govt. that might become tyrannical, because that's what happens when a govt. gets too much power, or one party gets too much power, they like to keep it.
That's a beautiful fantasy you have there, but it's not reality today any more than it was 238 years ago. The body of the constitution indeeds divides the power of the federal government, and it enumerates those powers pretty clearly. While the bill of rights was necessary for adaptation it was not part of the original document and that is where limitations on government come in to play. I see you didn't address my last homework assignment, by the way you do understand there is a difference in government departments and agencies right, let me assign you another; if the second amendment is/was intended to protect the citizens against a tyrannical gov't as you claim, then was the south constitutionally within there rights to secede from the union? If so, why was there a civil war if the southern states acted within their rights?
Horan

United States

#10 Jul 15, 2014
I will save you some time on that last assignment. No they were not. It has long been settled that constitution binds the states and it's citizenry to the United States of America. Any state or citizen that brings arms to bear against the country is treason. So this silly argument that the 2nd amendment is to allow the people to take up arms against the country flies in the face of established law. This is also enumerated within the constitution, so it not only case law it is original document law. The gun lobby knowingly disseminates this disinformation so people who don't actually have a clue will spew it forth like John 3:16 any chance they get in the hopes that the person the are spewing it towards either is in agreement, is as uneducated on the subject as you or finally as a diversion to avoid addressing other issues such as the first question I asked you, why do agencies exist if they are unconstitutional?
Paul Revere

United States

#11 Jul 15, 2014
The excessive amount of agencies are all redundant, they could be consolidated, and is there really a need to record citizens emails and phone calls? This is a waste of tax payers money. A Tax code that is too complicated, calling for an inflated IRS that squanders our tax money themselves. The list can go on and on, we need to rein in our inflated govt. then we could cut taxes. If the govt. is so worried about national security, why the wide open southern border? Oh yeah, if you are a public employee, working for the govt., why do you need to be in a union? And I stand by the true reason for our constitution.
Horan

United States

#13 Jul 15, 2014
Paul Revere wrote:
The excessive amount of agencies are all redundant, they could be consolidated, and is there really a need to record citizens emails and phone calls? This is a waste of tax payers money. A Tax code that is too complicated, calling for an inflated IRS that squanders our tax money themselves. The list can go on and on, we need to rein in our inflated govt. then we could cut taxes. If the govt. is so worried about national security, why the wide open southern border? Oh yeah, if you are a public employee, working for the govt., why do you need to be in a union? And I stand by the true reason for our constitution.
You said:
Paul Revere
Do people understand that the constitution was wrote by our founding fathers , not for the government but to protect the citizens from an over reaching govt.

That simply is not true. It's not to protect us from an over-reaching government. Please show me where in the constitution it says such a thing?

Look at the preamble:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union (not a more perfect insurrection against a tyrannical government), establish justice (this is done with those agencies and things you are railing against), insure domestic tranquility (no insurrections), provide for the common defence, promote the general welfare (I guess healthcare doesn't apply here), and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

You are so twisted up by the rhetoric do you even take time to read the words? The preamble sets the stage for the reason behind the constitution. It is the foundation on which the the framework of this nation, the constitution, is built. So please, show me where it say; to protect you from an over-reaching government? To bear arms against such a government? Where does it say government is bad and needs to be reigned in?

I don't agree with everything the government does and funds but, I don't believe there is anyone more un-patriotic than one who wraps himself in the words flag and constitution then doesn't have the common decency to read let alone understand it.

You so-called strict constitutionalist seem to miss a simple point: if we went back to the government the way it was on the day of ratification there would be NO government! It didn't exist yet. So my friend, wrap your head around this, the constitution is all about expanding government! That's what it's for. It tell us how to expand government. It says nothing about reducing it. Nothing. Not one word.
Horan

United States

#14 Jul 15, 2014
Paul Revere wrote:
The excessive amount of agencies are all redundant, they could be consolidated, and is there really a need to record citizens emails and phone calls? This is a waste of tax payers money. A Tax code that is too complicated, calling for an inflated IRS that squanders our tax money themselves. The list can go on and on, we need to rein in our inflated govt. then we could cut taxes. If the govt. is so worried about national security, why the wide open southern border? Oh yeah, if you are a public employee, working for the govt., why do you need to be in a union? And I stand by the true reason for our constitution.
What does any of that have to do with the constitution? Again, there is no government reform clause! There is no enumerated power saying congress shall shut down if it doesn't control spending, in fact there are explicit rules against that very act! Would you please read the document you are wrapping yourself in before you start making such foolish comments.
Groundhog

Ironton, OH

#15 Jul 15, 2014
Master Chinn wrote:
We wouldn't be here without them. Yes, they need over site, and in the last 25 years they probably haven't had as much as we should have been doing. But the simple fact is that there are groups of people and countries out to do us harm for simply having the freedoms that those officers put their lives on the line to protect.
Other country's are not attacking us because we are free. They attack us because we stick our nose in everything everybody does and they are sick of it. It is not our job to police the world. And officers step all over our rights every day. They are swore to uphold the constitution but that just simply ain't the case. They make their own rules and if you don't obey them (even though you are acting within your rights) you will be arrested anyway. They are a bunch of bullies and thugs with badges. You are living in a dreamworld. That is the problem with our country today. People like you need to get their head out of the sand and educate yourself before it's too late.
Woo

United States

#16 Jul 16, 2014
Groundhog wrote:
<quoted text>
Other country's are not attacking us because we are free. They attack us because we stick our nose in everything everybody does and they are sick of it. It is not our job to police the world. And officers step all over our rights every day. They are swore to uphold the constitution but that just simply ain't the case. They make their own rules and if you don't obey them (even though you are acting within your rights) you will be arrested anyway. They are a bunch of bullies and thugs with badges. You are living in a dreamworld. That is the problem with our country today. People like you need to get their head out of the sand and educate yourself before it's too late.
We all know who you are. If the cops bully you it's because you look like a druggie or a thug and/or you live in a high crime area. I bet and. Yea let me guess, you were just walking down the street at midnight not doing nothing and a cop stopped and asked you what you were doing. Yea, you bet. You were probably headed to your dealer place or out to steal something and they just got to you before you did it. Ever notice a nice car pulled over or a man or woman dressed nicely getting questioned by the cops? Probably not. That's because it's pretty easy to tell who is out for an evening walk and who is up to no good. It's also obvious if a person is driving a newer car, or even an older one in good condition that person has a job and respects their property. So they aren't all drugged out like some gangsta wannabe driving a broke down 1974 Oldsmobuick. Get a job and and you will be happy the police are bullying the thugs and pill head thieves around here. And I bet dollars to donuts not a single right of yours has been violate by the local police.
Groundhog

Ironton, OH

#17 Jul 16, 2014
Woo wrote:
<quoted text>
We all know who you are. If the cops bully you it's because you look like a druggie or a thug and/or you live in a high crime area. I bet and. Yea let me guess, you were just walking down the street at midnight not doing nothing and a cop stopped and asked you what you were doing. Yea, you bet. You were probably headed to your dealer place or out to steal something and they just got to you before you did it. Ever notice a nice car pulled over or a man or woman dressed nicely getting questioned by the cops? Probably not. That's because it's pretty easy to tell who is out for an evening walk and who is up to no good. It's also obvious if a person is driving a newer car, or even an older one in good condition that person has a job and respects their property. So they aren't all drugged out like some gangsta wannabe driving a broke down 1974 Oldsmobuick. Get a job and and you will be happy the police are bullying the thugs and pill head thieves around here. And I bet dollars to donuts not a single right of yours has been violate by the local police.
You don't have a clue what you are talking about. I do work and have a new truck. That has nothin to do with it. It's not even about me. You obviously don't watch tv or read or talk to anybody because most people know that law enforcement DO NOT uphold the constitution that they are swore to do. I'm not talking about druggies. I think they should get exactly what they deserve. I'm talking about everybody. It don't matter who it is. Law enforcement stomp all over our personal rights and don't think twice about it. And if you don't think they do you need to wake up.
Saul

Russell, KY

#18 Jul 16, 2014
Master Chinn wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sorry, but you're are completely incorrect about me. Over site yes, the lack of all of those agencies would be the fall of our way of life. Period! If you believe otherwise go live in a third world country and see if you like it better.
Much more of the "Obama Agenda" and we won't have to move to a "Third World Country" think Cloward-Piven... Obama's creating a third world nation in our own back yard.

Progressives: Proudly tearing everything down in a failed attempt to build us up for over 100 years!
Groundhog

Fairfax, VA

#20 Jul 17, 2014
Woo wrote:
<quoted text>
Sounds to me you watch too much tv. The police don't just mess with people for something to do. They have better things to do with their time. If the mess with someone it's because there is something suspicious about them and they want to find out what it is and they are usually right.
You just said it yourself. A police officers suspicion alone does not give them the right to detain or identify somebody. And you said they are "usually right"? What about the people they are wrong about? So in your own words that means innocent people are detained and identified for no reason other than a police officers suspicion. That is a clear violation of ones rights and that means the police are violating the constitution. This is going on more than you know. It happens every day.
Groundhog

Fairfax, VA

#22 Jul 17, 2014
Woo wrote:
<quoted text>
The police can detain anyone for 72 and they don't even have to be anything suspicious about it. They can ask you to identify yourself at anytime and you are required to provided them with name and DOB. No violation there. So what are you talking a about? Sounds to me it's you who doesnt know your rights.
That is completely false. 72 what? And if you are not accused of a crime you do not have to identify yourself. It is you that don't know your rights and that is why we lose more and more of them everyday because people like you thinks it's ok to lay down and do anything these so called law officers say.
Please

London, KY

#23 Jul 17, 2014
Groundhog wrote:
<quoted text>
That is completely false. 72 what? And if you are not accused of a crime you do not have to identify yourself. It is you that don't know your rights and that is why we lose more and more of them everyday because people like you thinks it's ok to lay down and do anything these so called law officers say.
Actually you have to provide identification to the police anytime they request it whether you are charged with a crime or not. You're Tea Party identification card doesn't count, so if I were you I'd consider carry a picture ID.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Ashland Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What is with Russell Rowsey? 8 min Cow-Town 3
I've been happily writing "F--- Trump" everywhe... 1 hr democrat 40
Bruce apartments 1 hr Brother Cleetus B... 6
Shooter's Bar & Grill. 1 hr Customer 6
Justin Reeder 1 hr my name is me 1
Who got Jack at castle apt?? 2 hr OMW2FYB 1
Fake news .... 2 hr The Original Jo Jo 3

Ashland Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Ashland Mortgages