(Tea Party) Constitutional fundamentalists are wackos

What supremacy clause?? Amendment X spells out states' rights.

 

I've had rather poor service by the USPS when it comes to delivering mail and packages. At least FedEx and UPS get things where they're supposed to go and it arrives when its supposed to. Of course if it's important for something to actually reach its destination and also be on time then its worth paying more for that service.

Heck, the USPS recently stopped delivering mail to businesses on Nob Hill Blvd in Yakima. This is a major business street and they just stopped. If the people want their mail they have to go to a central location of boxes to get it many blocks from where the business is. One woman that's disabled and doesn't drive has to actually rent a cab just to get her mail.

 

Yes the states have the right to take up legislation if the federal government decides not to.

 

That is completely irrelevant to your OP or my post. Your OP stated that the federal government can exercise powers that are not listed in the Constitution such as Social Security and Medicare. I stated the fact that the 10th amendment says otherwise. Now you're just throwing out a red herring -- yes, federal law trumps state law -- what does that have to do with this topic?

 

pro•gres•sive   /prəˈgrɛsɪv/
[pruh-gres-iv]

–adjective
1. favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, especially in political matters: a progressive mayor.
2. making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.
3. characterized by such progress, or by continuous improvement.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Progressives?o=100084&qsrc=2871&l=dir

Progressives are Anti-Constitutionalists as they wish to “progress” away from the Constitution and “progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods” of governance. Anyone want to live under a Liberal Experiment? Progressives can’t get necessary amendments for their fits of fancy so they must violate the Constitution and their oath-of-office (as they all must swear to be Constitutional Conservatives before they take office). Such violations are Treason, and such governance is Tyranny.

Progressives=BAD, very bad as they want to “fundamentally change” the society. Most like the US just the way it is as it safeguards individual Liberty.

 

Meaning medicare and SS were not in the constitution period. I fail to see your logic that its somehow illegal for the federal government to enact them. Congress has every authority to vote on such legislation. The supreme court has ruled.

 

So you still want to live in the 1700's then? Got it.

 

No they don't as such powers are reserved elsewhere.

 

Proof please.

 

The Supremacy Clause states that US Laws, which do not violate the Constitution, override State Law.

It has more to do with the Supreme Court overriding lower court decisions.

The tenth Amendment still applies, if a power is not enumerated, it doesn't belong to the US Government, it belongs to the States.

 

So do Youz Guys since you can't get the support to legally change the Constitution. Actually you all want to wind up on Treason changes when the Tea Party really takes over!

Why do Youz Guyz think you are smarter than the rest of us? If enough agree Youz Guyz can pass amendments to allow Democrat Social Engineering and Wealth Distribution. Not enough people want that in this country, so Youz Guyz lie, steal, intimidate, and bully to get your way. That is no longer acceptable, and in the very near future a penalty will be paid for such Treason.

 

The federal government has every authority to enact medicare and SS. Its the most constitutional of rights.

 

Article VI Clause 2

The Constitution is rather specific in establishing the Supremacy of the US Constitution and laws made under its authority.

The 10 Amendment reserves powers not delegated to Congress by the Constitution to the States or the People.

On the flip side of this though is that the States ultimately control the US Constitution and can change it at anytime for any reason and the US government cannot prevent that by any means. The States can, if they so choose, actually disband the entire United States government and return to being independent sovereign nations through a Constitutional Convention. Not saying they ever would but they certainly hold that power under Article V of the US Constitution.

http://www.findlaw.com/casecode/constitution/

 

Yea during a time when FDR was putting political pressure on the Judicial branch witch violates the premise of separate but equal branches of government, and the idea of checks and balances.

There is no power in the Constitution to enact such things and the Supreme Court can’t so invent a power as that would violate Article V.

 

The constitution needs to be brought to modernity. As revolutionary as it was, it was written at a time when many present problems were unimaginable. Programs like Universal Healthcare is a virtue I have seen work to improve the lives of the poor, but alas was not envisioned by America's FFs.

The Constitution must survive, but the United States needs to modernize.

 

LOL...tell us more!

 

Constitutional law is pretty simple.

Article 1, Section 8 of The Constitution of the United States says in part:

"Section 8. The Congress shall have power to..." Then it lists a whole bunch of stuff the government has the power to do. It does not list Social Security, or Medicare or universal healthcare. ​

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html#section8

________________________________________

Tenth Amendment of the US Constitution

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. ​

________________________________________

Notice it states "the powers not delegated..." Why, the word "power(s)" is the same word as in Article 1, Section 8 which states what the federal government can do. The Tenth Amendment states that if the power is not "delegated to the United States by the Constitution" it is reserved to the states, or people.

According to constitutional law precedent the government must first have a power, then must have a separate power to make laws in support or execution of that power. All through the Constitution you see phrases like the following:

“Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. “

“Section 2. The Congress and the several states shall have concurrent power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”

It is interesting as a side note that the Sixteenth Amendment allowing the taxing of incomes does not state the tax can be levied unevenly or in a progressive manner, AND DOES NOT HAVE an enforcement clause stating “Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.”

If you look at most expansions of government they seem to depend on the “Interstate Commerce Clause” which is below.
________________________________________

“To regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states, and with the Indian tribes;” ​

________________________________________
As you can see there is no constitutional authority for the federal government to regulate the product for interstate commerce. The clause was supposed to create a CAFTA, or Central American Free Trade Agreement. Also, back when the Constitution was written there were no income taxes collected, and the government depended on excise and sales taxes which they controlled and collected through the Interstate Commerce clause.

Over time some court decisions have hinted that the federal government has MORE powers than are enumerated. Of course the Constitution does not say such a thing and any such opinion is an extrapolation, and not an interpretation. An interpretation is an explanation of what is there, not what could be there. If you saw a picture of two people standing in a field you would interpret that the total number of people was two since that was all the information you had to work with. You would not interpret the total number of people as being three since one person MUST be hiding behind the other, as that would be ridiculous.

Article 6, Paragraph 2 declares the Constitution supreme and is below in part:

“This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land…”​

OF course it states "made, under the authority of the United States." Any law that that is trying to exercise a power reserved elsewhere is not a law "made, under the authority of the United States."

Supreme Court Justices are not supposed to make stuff up not in the Constitution. They swear the following oath: (Bold for emphases)

"I, [NAME], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will administer justice without respect to persons, and do equal right to the poor and to the rich, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as [TITLE] under the Constitution and laws of the United States. So help me God."

Of course all laws of the United States are supposed to be constitutional.

Article 3, Section 1 starts in part that: (Bold for emphases)

“judges, both of the supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behavior…”​

I

If they make rulings not supported by the text of the Constitution, or on things not “under the Constitution and laws of the United States” they have violated their oath and are not engaging in “good behavior” are they? I believe they can therefore be impeached.

 

Congress has the power to provide for the general welfare of the union. Enough said.

 

Great! Get wide support for your ideas and amend the Constitution under Article V. Otherwise your opinions are illegitimate as you are really preaching lawlessness and Treason!

Not unheard of as most Democrats share THAT view!

The Constitution can't "survive" when Democrats keep trying to destroy it!

 

Neither of those "powers" are enumerated in the articles of the Constitution.

Those are State issues.

 

See under swamps plan...We would all still have slaves. There would be no labor laws. We would be living in the 1700's simple because he thinks we must treat the constitution as a static document that never progresses.

 

I am opposed to the GOP and the Dems. And I remember when Bush destroyed the Constitution with the Patriot Act.

 

Providing for the general Welfare and common Defense are equal powers. There are plenty of enumerated powers to provide for the general Welfare as well as the common Defense. You just reject them. You think nationalized healthcare is for the general welfare, and the founders thought building post roads was for the general welfare. You are arguing that powers NOT in the Constitution are in fact there. You are lying or are incorrect.

 

Hmm so we should not even have a government funded infastructure? Highways are now unconstitutional?

 

So few on the Liberal-Left doesn't care about the Constitution.