Total Posts:4|Showing Posts:1-4
Jump to topic:

Elastic Clause

lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/8/2010 1:51:07 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
is the elastic clause is a blank check for congress.

"The Congress shall have Power - To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."

The U.S. isn't a true democracy, it's a republic, the framers of the constitution wanted to protect the individual from "mob-rule". The supreme court can declare a law unconstitutional. My question is when the congress and the president have the power to expand and appoint members of the supreme court (members who may share the liberal interpretation of the elastic clause) is the door not opened to unlimited governmental power?
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2010 12:00:06 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Justices are replaced on the condition of one of these things happening to them when they are there:

Death
Resignation
Impeachment

They are appointed for life by the president and a majority vote from congress.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
JimProfit
Posts: 63
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2010 12:16:13 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Why are you complaining about democracy when you're talking about monarchism?

If the president is doing the selecting of court judges etc, then it's not a democracy. Infact, the whole concept of "a republic" is just a watered down feudalism. Oh joy! Now we have "represenatives" to decide the laws and judges who intterput the laws for us! Nothing can ever go wrong with an oligarchy of elected officals doing the thinking for us!!!

I don't even like people and I'd rather have a pure democracy. A pure democracy would actually be far less prone to radical change, because it would require organizing the masses to get out and vote on everything. What a chaotic mess. This is why democrats back in the old days were confederates so they could atleast limit the criteria of their democracy down to a state.

Yes, a pure democracy would be ruled by lobbyists and charismatic conmen, but isn't it anyway? The same way rich people can bribe congressmen to vote the way they want, they can bribe the people. It actually costs MORE to bribe "the people", because you can't just go out and cut everyone a paycheck. You have to win their approval through slander, excaggeration, or just appealing to their interests. So you have to spend more money on advertising, then you do on just getting some goon to wave his pen. Our forefathers were not nice guys. There were just as many merchants and bankers as there were criminals and janitors who roseup against the crown. And just like today, the rich convinced the "tea party goers" that they were equal.

Frankly, I'd prefer we lived in a constitutional monarchy. That is to say only the constitution is the rule of law. No "states rights", no seats of power, nothing. Just these are the foundations by which we as a country live and react globally. And we should do them to their most extreme ends. Like the first ammendment, I want to chop off the penis of every single moderator who banned me on the grounds of they attacked my first ammendment. Or atleast send a swat team to his house to pin him down, open his eyes, and force him to read my pseudo science posts against homosexuality...

Same goes for the second ammendment. No assault rifle bans, no liscences or restricting, infact... food stamps should allow you to buy ammunition rounds, because you actually have a right to bare arms, so you should have all the accessibility in the world!!!

America looks more and more like Bioshock if I were running things.
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/9/2010 3:09:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 11/9/2010 12:00:06 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Justices are replaced on the condition of one of these things happening to them when they are there:

Death
Resignation
Impeachment

They are appointed for life by the president and a majority vote from congress.

The congress can set the number of justices though, so in theory if they wanted to they can expand the court appointing like minded judges
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler