Reply to a comment

Reply to this comment

Mayor_McCheese writes:

in response to WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot:

liberator100,
As I said. RP does not have all the answers but he believes in the constitution, is a true free market capitalist, sees the country spending its way to being the Euro Zone, and wants to end the BS wars. Whats wrong with that. I guess that you want 4 more years of the same 30 years we've had. That is understandable if you are a boomer. You've lived the greatest credit/leverage cycle ever in the history of the world. Most of it was not real (in terms of GDP, job creation, housing, etc) and now the next two generations are going to live the exact opposite. Deleveraging. Thanks! Make sure you thank your kids and grand kids. You saying RP is clueless only shows your ignorance. Actually listen to what he says, not what the media tells you.

McCheese says I heard it on fox news or from Rush. I'm not from the baby boom generation and that is an insult to me. Rush, Beck, FOX, CNN, is BS. Just something to keep the Boomer generation distracted from the real issues. I have to say that it has worked flawlessly! The government and bankers are going to fleece this flock effortlessly. Almost exactly like they have the Greeks, and soon the rest of the Euro nations, Japan, etc, etc. I'm sure you believe that Corzine isn't a crook, and the government works for you and not people like Corzine, Mozillo, etc.

The constitution is a framework for government. It lists individual rights the writers wanted the people to have. Mr. McCheese is maybe a future appointee to the supreme court? They have been interpreting and amending the constitution for many years. Had McCheese been there it would have all been figured out by now. I will be waiting for the Hamburgler to appoint you and the Fry Guys to confirm you.

Thanks WTF. I'm not sure I would want to be one of the Supremes though.

The Constitution is more than simply a framework, it has actual words that were written by our Founding Fathers. Yes, it has been interpreted over the years, but the basis for that inrterpretation is written into the document. This principle of judicial review has been validated by every SC justice and evey govenment since the earliest case (Marbuy v. Madison).

I only mention this because there is actually a great misunderstanding among many peoole of what the Constituion actually says. It is far more than a framework, and has been ammended several times since the founding. It was in fact designed to be amended and its writers expected it to be that way.

Actually, you may be surprised to learn that the Constitution, on its signing actually TOOK AWAY many of the "state's rights" that a lot of the Right Wingers preach about. The Constitution replaced the Articles of Confederation which was much more consistent with the concept of State's Rights. It wasn't working which is why they replaced it with the Constitution.

Like you, I am not a Baby Boomer either. I'm a lot younger. And, I actually do believe that Corzine has some explaining to do - his is either a crime or gross negligence - either way, given his experience, he ought to be in some very hot water.

Share your thoughts

Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.

Comments can be shared on Facebook and Yahoo!. Add both options by connecting your profiles.

Features