[mcgowanjm]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', 'G')oddamn bureaucrats.

[Jotapay]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mcgowanjm', 'A')t least 2MMT of corn has been left in the fields of
Illinois, Iowa, N/S Dakota, Nebraska.

[mcgowanjm]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Jotapay', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mcgowanjm', 'A')t least 2MMT of corn has been left in the fields of
Illinois, Iowa, N/S Dakota, Nebraska.

[Ludi]

At least that seems to be the consensus among Tea Party, even here in Texas where we have so many socialist cooperatives.

Can someone enlighten me about how socialism is unconstitutional?

Thanks!

[Cog]

What the Tea Party is saying is, that if the federal government is creating mandates and spending that have no authorization in the US Constitution, then the federal government is acting outside their authority. The Tenth Amendment reserves those rights to the states.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he 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.

[Windmills]

But then you have this:

The Necessary and Proper Clause is the provision in Article One of the United States Constitution, section 8, clause 18:

“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."

However, I personally consider arguments in a democracy that attempt to place ultimate power in the Constitution or the supposed desires of the Founders to be a waste of time in determining what should or shouldn't be done. In a democracy, the will of the people may change the Constitution, so if there is some finding by an activist right-wing court that socialist programs are "unconstitutional," then we have the power to change the Constitution. That's democracy. The same applies to being beaten over the head by "Founding Fathers" arguments. Fine. So they believed this and that. Big deal. This is a demoracy, we can change what we want, when we want, however often we want.

Dead guys and pieces of paper don't get to vote. People do. What can or can't be done is ultimately up to the people, not to either of the former.

[Cog]

Wow, another person, like George Bush, who wants to throw the Constitution in the burn pile. Tell me. If I want to pass a law that makes free speech illegal because that is what the community wants, it that ok with you?

The Constitution was written to limit the power of the federal government, vis-a -vis personal liberties and to designate its responsibilities. It wasn't created to empower more government.

[americandream]

Given the colonial background against which this document was drawn up, the desire to be free of vested and hereditary interests of the kind we still find in Europe and which are increasingly coming to the fore in the US with the corruptions that follow, such as a political sysem almost entirely dominated by these increasingly self serving interests, and their use of populism such as the tea partyism to push said deeper vesting of their recently acquired privilege, I would argue that the Constitution especially contemplated the risks posed by wolves in sheeps clothing such as the Tea Party and that it is the Tea Party's ultimate agenda that is unconstitutional.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'A')t least that seems to be the consensus among Tea Party, even here in Texas where we have so many socialist cooperatives.

Can someone enlighten me about how socialism is unconstitutional?

Thanks!

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', 'W')hat the Tea Party is saying is, that if the federal government is creating mandates and spending that have no authorization in the US Constitution, then the federal government is acting outside their authority. The Tenth Amendment reserves those rights to the states.

[careinke]

Wndmill,
The clause you cited only gives the congress power to enact laws relating to the "Foregoing powers" (ie the powers specifically stated just prior to the refrenced clause) and other powers written into the constitution.

Also as you well know in any contract that is ammended, the ammendment takes precident over the original contract. Since the 10th ammendment is ammending the constitution, in the case of a conflict, the ammendment has prcedence.

There are provisions and procedures for ammending the constitution. Just saying the constitution is just a waste of time is not one of them. Like it or not, the constitution is the US's ultimate authority. But feel free to try and change it.

Ludi,
Of course the state has the right to be socialist, as long as it does not conflict with the constitution. Take twenty minutes and actually read the constitution, it will save you some questions.

americandream,
Could you please tell me what the "Ultimate Goals of the Tea Party" are and why you think they are unconstitutional. As far as I know, the "Ultimate Goal" of the Tea Party is less taxes and a smaller federal government. I don't think that is unconstitutional. References would be nice.

[Cog]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Cog', 'W')hat the Tea Party is saying is, that if the federal government is creating mandates and spending that have no authorization in the US Constitution, then the federal government is acting outside their authority. The Tenth Amendment reserves those rights to the states.

[rangerone314]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'A')t least that seems to be the consensus among Tea Party, even here in Texas where we have so many socialist cooperatives.

Can someone enlighten me about how socialism is unconstitutional?

Thanks!

[dinopello]

Has anyone tried to challenge social security/medicare in the courts ? The Supremes can declare it unconstitutional if it is.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', 'H')as anyone tried to challenge social security/medicare in the courts ? The Supremes can declare it unconstitutional if it is.

[Pops]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', 'H')as anyone tried to challenge social security/medicare in the courts ? The Supremes can declare it unconstitutional if it is.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '
')
If there is a way for a corps to make money from SS/MC (duh) you can bet Roberts will try to make it so.

[americandream]

Basic rule of statutory interpretation in legal systems based on the English Model.

Context as well as the language of the statute must fall to be considered where possible. And all provisions must be read subject to the intent gleaned therein. Intention may be gleaned but may not be imposed.

An amendment cannot be read to thwart the intent of legislation (where that may be gleaned).
What was the context of the drafting of this document and consequently what was its intent? Given it's foundational basis one may argue that determining it's intent in applying a provision is an essential first step.

On the basis of the intent that I believe may be reasonably gleaned, I would in fact argue that any attempt to entrench a hierarchical class must run at odds with your Constitution. If the effect of the Tea Party's government is in fact to privilege the already privileged in a manner that may result in the sort of thing the framers were seeking to avoid in America (by the means they choose to use), the Tea Party may be construed as running counter to its intent. If on the other hand, a socialist party were construed to be enhancing the intent of the Constitution, the reverse may well be argued to apply.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('careinke', 'W')ndmill,
The clause you cited only gives the congress power to enact laws relating to the "Foregoing powers" (ie the powers specifically stated just prior to the refrenced clause) and other powers written into the constitution.

Also as you well know in any contract that is ammended, the ammendment takes precident over the original contract. Since the 10th ammendment is ammending the constitution, in the case of a conflict, the ammendment has prcedence.

There are provisions and procedures for ammending the constitution. Just saying the constitution is just a waste of time is not one of them. Like it or not, the constitution is the US's ultimate authority. But feel free to try and change it.

Ludi,
Of course the state has the right to be socialist, as long as it does not conflict with the constitution. Take twenty minutes and actually read the constitution, it will save you some questions.

americandream,
Could you please tell me what the "Ultimate Goals of the Tea Party" are and why you think they are unconstitutional. As far as I know, the "Ultimate Goal" of the Tea Party is less taxes and a smaller federal government. I don't think that is unconstitutional. References would be nice.

[americandream]

Good lawyering helps.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('dinopello', 'H')as anyone tried to challenge social security/medicare in the courts ? The Supremes can declare it unconstitutional if it is.

[Pops]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('americandream', 'G')ood lawyering helps.

[Sixstrings]

God I'm so sick of this "socialist" BS.

The right used to be content with "liberal" for a dirty word, then all the Democrats became Republicans and so now "socialist" is the boogeyman du jour. But the thing is, we don't even have any socialists in this country. And before someone shouts "Bernie Sanders," I mean a REAL socialist bloc, that actually has power.

And even if we did have a lot of "socialists," why is that so scary? Socialism means things like affordable education without a lifetime of bankster debt slavery. Socialism means universal healthcare and not getting dumped in the gutter by a corporate hospital because your Mastercard declined. Socialism means living wages, union protection, workers' rights -- a whole bunch of things that would benefit 95% of everyone in this country.

So to all of you who are scared of socialism, what exactly are you so afraid of? Does five weeks of paid vacation per year terrify you? Would a 30 hour workweek with full time pay give you nightmares? Honestly, I don't get it, somebody explain to me why it's so scary.