General Discussion

WillyT

(72,631 posts)

56. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!!

Reply to MsPithy (Reply #55)

Fri Jun 14, 2013, 03:09 PM

Jun 2013

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

136 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So which Amendment is it that permits subordination of the Constitution to "safety from terrorism?" [View all] markpkessinger Jun 2013 OP

Eloquently stated, and well written. I applaud your position and agree with every point. Melinda Jun 2013 #1

constitution kardonb Jun 2013 #70

History is replete with fallen republics; with "terrorism" and oppressive govts. Melinda Jun 2013 #92

Well, go on, try it.... ReRe Jun 2013 #103

Thank you for making it an OP! Hydra Jun 2013 #2

Perfectly stated magellan Jun 2013 #3

Hear, hear! woo me with science Jun 2013 #4

This needs to be spread damnedifIknow Jun 2013 #5

Well stated. 99Forever Jun 2013 #6

What's the scariest is the selection of the term "terrorism". Perfect for morphing into snappyturtle Jun 2013 #7

Yep. Already KeystoneXL protesters have been so labeled Myrina Jun 2013 #61

I agree...OWS? nt snappyturtle Jun 2013 #89

I would not be surprised one bit... HooptieWagon Jun 2013 #104

The 1st Amendment... ReRe Jun 2013 #106

What a superb post. You speak for me. n/t Psephos Jun 2013 #8

It's the amendment where a bunch of people mindwalker_i Jun 2013 #9

K&R JDPriestly Jun 2013 #10

Very well said. Thank you for understanding the meaning of a free society. sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #11

K&R for truth. nt Mnemosyne Jun 2013 #12

Oh yes, I'm fully aware that it's a sham... markpkessinger Jun 2013 #13

I had a feeling you probably did. sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #14

Things that make you go hmmm.... SammyWinstonJack Jun 2013 #118

Very well put. JayhawkSD Jun 2013 #15

Seriously... ReRe Jun 2013 #16

Well said. ohheckyeah Jun 2013 #17

Exactly right TheKentuckian Jun 2013 #18

It's simply a matter of courage. Maedhros Jun 2013 #19

Where are the Obamabots? MsPithy Jun 2013 #20

They are trying to figure out LondonReign2 Jun 2013 #40

Daisy....daisy.... Safetykitten Jun 2013 #122

It's right there in the fourth amendment. ConservativeDemocrat Jun 2013 #21

Actually, the question of what is or is not Constitutional . . . markpkessinger Jun 2013 #23

Brilliant LondonReign2 Jun 2013 #41

Um, the same John Adams who passed the Alien and Sedition Act? Moonwalk Jun 2013 #71

You speak of the Phucking Phounding Phathers of Philadelphia as if they could envision . . Major Hogwash Jun 2013 #46

Bullshit! MsPithy Jun 2013 #55

+ 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!! WillyT Jun 2013 #56

George Washington owned slaves. Major Hogwash Jun 2013 #58

Wow! News flash! People are complicated! MsPithy Jun 2013 #119

The fact that the we even have any Amendments is proof that the original Constitution is NOT DontTreadOnMe Jun 2013 #123

Or terror or the atomic bomb! treestar Jun 2013 #77

Excellent point about reanimating James Madison or John Adams. MsPithy Jun 2013 #63

It is strictly the courts that decide treestar Jun 2013 #76

Madison and Adams already were in favor of a court with no accountability or check ConservativeDemocrat Jun 2013 #85

Keep it real! randome Jun 2013 #28

+1. Most reasonable answer of the day. graham4anything Jun 2013 #30

I just posted my question as a separate OP and would be thrilled if you would comment. reusrename Jun 2013 #32

As I just posted elsewhere, this is rather thin gruel. reusrename Jun 2013 #31

What our government is doing is unreasonable RC Jun 2013 #33

So why has the Patriot act in effect made them NOT reasonable by tearing down FISA and warrants? cascadiance Jun 2013 #35

You highlighted "unreasonable"... Prospero1 Jun 2013 #42

Do a law review article on it treestar Jun 2013 #79

... more caterwauling. MsPithy Jun 2013 #50

Until the Supreme Court deems the secret FISA courts unconstitutional... kentuck Jun 2013 #53

You conveniently avoided addressing an important part: bvar22 Jun 2013 #62

Actually, I didn't. Because it's a moot point. ConservativeDemocrat Jun 2013 #100

More embarrassing blather and diversion. bvar22 Jun 2013 #108

I'm sorry you feel so embarrassed... ConservativeDemocrat Jun 2013 #125

Lol, and what does any of this have to do what actually happened? sabrina 1 Jun 2013 #133

It is clear you didn't take my advice to avoid making shit up... ConservativeDemocrat Jun 2013 #135

That Onion piece is great. treestar Jun 2013 #74

C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community agent46 Jun 2013 #80

You are technically correct...... Swede Atlanta Jun 2013 #90

Except . . . TomClash Jun 2013 #98

The courts decide is "reasonable" and "unreasonable" sibelian Jun 2013 #102

I applaud your post and agree with what you say but iemitsu Jun 2013 #22

Thank you -- an excellent addendum! n/t markpkessinger Jun 2013 #24

Where are the guys who said "give me liberty or give me death?" thesquanderer Jun 2013 #25

There are some people who would rather die than have the government treestar Jun 2013 #81

The only terrorists around here are the cops! xtraxritical Jun 2013 #26

The Classified One MNBrewer Jun 2013 #27

Which amendment says specifically, bullets and today's guns and stand your ground is legal? graham4anything Jun 2013 #29

I think you are misunderstanding how the bill of rights works... hughee99 Jun 2013 #43

You're right ..... oldhippie Jun 2013 #52

Just playing to G4A's love of heredity rule. n/t hughee99 Jun 2013 #54

The Fight for Freedom is Joined pmorlan1 Jun 2013 #34

You've got to be kidding me... mzteris Jun 2013 #37

Seriously? markpkessinger Jun 2013 #94

I'm only blithely dismissing mzteris Jun 2013 #109

Is this intrusion on your freedom treestar Jun 2013 #83

Excellent post malaise Jun 2013 #36

I think it's called the Patriot Amendment. Or something like that. nt Zorra Jun 2013 #38

Just fyi...the Patriot Act is not an amendment to the Constitution. DearHeart Jun 2013 #121

lol! I know that very well; my post was intended as sardonic humor. Zorra Jun 2013 #124

The founders wrote a special FISA-type version of the constitution, that we're not allowed to see. hughee99 Jun 2013 #39

Dunno much about "subordinate"....... suston96 Jun 2013 #44

All of the Amendments are subject to subordination, interpretation, bending just a bit... AndyA Jun 2013 #45

It's under the Amendment OnyxCollie Jun 2013 #47

+100000000000000000 woo me with science Jun 2013 #120

Until the Congress has taken every plausible step to constitutionally keep safe us from gun indepat Jun 2013 #48

If they didn't suspend Constitutional rights, they'd have to face a truth they do not want to gtar100 Jun 2013 #49

Bruce Cockburn came up with a nice lyric that examines this phenomenon Maedhros Jun 2013 #59

A great and insightful tune. FiveGoodMen Jun 2013 #96

Excellent post. Just scroll down to the bottom where it says "Kissinger Amendment" n/t Catherina Jun 2013 #51

Finally, someone timdog44 Jun 2013 #57

Best essay ever. Thank you. Myrina Jun 2013 #60

This... TommyCelt Jun 2013 #64

K&R! Fire Walk With Me Jun 2013 #65

The one that has yet to be leaked. Tierra_y_Libertad Jun 2013 #66

Hear, hear ybbor Jun 2013 #67

the Cheney-Bush amendment carolinayellowdog Jun 2013 #68

How much azmom Jun 2013 #69

They didn't have these problems in 1787 treestar Jun 2013 #72

'The “general welfare” clause is mentioned twice in the U.S. Constitution, elleng Jun 2013 #73

Legally, there is no prior protectio from criminal acts n/t markpkessinger Jun 2013 #75

Maybe/Maybe not: elleng Jun 2013 #82

Yes. There must be some balance between the extremes treestar Jun 2013 #84

I am not familar with the latter position, if you can think of the name of the person that made GoneFishin Jun 2013 #111

It follows with the ones who think all leaks are good treestar Jun 2013 #115

Wow - Standing up for the Bill of Rights is now an "extreme" position . . . markpkessinger Jun 2013 #114

those are your labels treestar Jun 2013 #116

Ye of little faith nadinbrzezinski Jun 2013 #78

Clarity. Thank you. Kick! glinda Jun 2013 #86

. blkmusclmachine Jun 2013 #87

The Constitution is being held hostage. blkmusclmachine Jun 2013 #88

Very well said. 1-Old-Man Jun 2013 #91

Obviously, there isn't any such amendment FiveGoodMen Jun 2013 #93

Indeed n/t markpkessinger Jun 2013 #95

Well that's a long post but you apparently dont understand that the terrorist will get us rhett o rick Jun 2013 #97

Where in the constitution does it say Zimmy can shoot a kid coward style and it would have not even graham4anything Jun 2013 #101

Did you miss my sarcastic intent? nm rhett o rick Jun 2013 #107

Pass the Ranch, please. cherokeeprogressive Jun 2013 #113

The 'Oligarchy' clause... NorthCarolina Jun 2013 #99

The cost of freedom Democracyinkind Jun 2013 #105

It's kinda like looking for that part thefool_wa Jun 2013 #110

"Security" appears in the Second Amendment, but it is no irony... Eleanors38 Jun 2013 #112

Ask Congress Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2013 #117

There isn't one, and the Constitution was very obviously not subordinated. gulliver Jun 2013 #126

Thank you for this excellent exposition, I just joined the Du because my friend in St Louis sent me hoodunit Jun 2013 #127

Thank you and welcome! n/t markpkessinger Jun 2013 #129

Welcome to DU, hoodunit! Rhiannon12866 Jun 2013 #134

Safety was elevated to #1 priority for PROFITS, not for safety's sake grasswire Jun 2013 #128

Precisely! n/t markpkessinger Jun 2013 #130

I suggest an omnibus/blanket amendment to the constitution. lumberjack_jeff Jun 2013 #131

LOL! n/t markpkessinger Jun 2013 #132

The reason phone call CONTENT is considered 'covered' under the 4th is because of the Courts ... brett_jv Jun 2013 #136