Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

ellisonz

(27,709 posts)
33. There's nothing novel or implied about it...
Thu Mar 29, 2012, 08:17 PM
Mar 2012

...it wasn't like the judicial power of the courts was some nebulous concept with a vagueness of significance. The Constitution is fundamentally about the rule of law in social contract and Hartmann isn't just being a "'strict constructionist'" in his argument, he's expressing a fatally flawed argument about the basic question of where sovereignty is held under our system of government, by the people in the government and all its bodies. Our forefathers understood exactly what they meant in drafting and ratifying the Constitution of the United States, they did not consent to its effect in haste, error, or confusion.

Our system of government is not a leviathan - it is us, the people, and us alone:



Uh oh BumRushDaShow Mar 2012 #1
Yeah... ellisonz Mar 2012 #4
I missed that one. Skinner Mar 2012 #8
He also posted it in the Video forum Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #10
That's where I found it. Skinner Mar 2012 #15
Did someone say popcorn? Faygo Kid Mar 2012 #43
It's okay. ellisonz Mar 2012 #14
DU readers? Skittles Mar 2012 #2
And how does he know what readers think? muriel_volestrangler Mar 2012 #35
Looks like the vid got taken down. cbayer Mar 2012 #3
His isn't. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #12
Yup, Thom gave some of us a tongue lashing today. BeHereNow Mar 2012 #5
We watched it this morning. YellowRubberDuckie Mar 2012 #6
Well, is he right? Viva_La_Revolution Mar 2012 #7
Thank you for putting my thoughts ChazII Mar 2012 #9
He really makes a lot of sense; very intelligent and articulate man. I don't, K Gardner Mar 2012 #26
True. Posting the screen names ChazII Mar 2012 #53
He is a journalist. Journalists name their sources when quoting those sources. Vincardog Mar 2012 #61
LOL.. its a discussion forum with fake names. What purpose K Gardner Mar 2012 #63
It points directly at the opinions he is disagreeing with, that is what civilized people do. None of Vincardog Mar 2012 #65
He's wrong. ellisonz Mar 2012 #27
It's an implied power, yes. X_Digger Mar 2012 #31
There's nothing novel or implied about it... ellisonz Mar 2012 #33
Please show me where that says "has the power to decide the constitutionality of laws passed by Vincardog Mar 2012 #62
"arising under this Constitution" ellisonz Mar 2012 #64
is nowhere expressly conveyed. Right there it is settled law. ellisonz is howling at the moon Vincardog Mar 2012 #66
Don't you think that if after all this time the power of judicial review was not express... ellisonz Mar 2012 #67
The Constitution grants Congress the power to restrain the SCOTUS. Have you caught the Congress Vincardog Mar 2012 #68
That is a political argument and not a Constitutional argument. ellisonz Mar 2012 #69
Excuse me. I thought this whole thread was a constitutional argument. Think anything you want to. Vincardog Mar 2012 #71
Just because our government does not choose very often to pass an Amendment... ellisonz Mar 2012 #72
Last time I read it, the Constitution said that any authority not explicitly granted as belonging Vincardog Mar 2012 #74
I heard him live. He was right. stevedeshazer Mar 2012 #34
Hi! Viva_La_Revolution Mar 2012 #36
So his ProSense Mar 2012 #11
Yes, that was his argument Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #16
I would love ProSense Mar 2012 #19
There ya go. Ruby the Liberal Mar 2012 #21
That's his argument, but it doesn't matter. harmonicon Mar 2012 #30
Their is something very good happening here. We are talking... wandy Mar 2012 #13
Yep, and he won't respond to any posts Motown_Johnny Mar 2012 #17
Skinner, why do you say "you" and not "us" in your OP? mucifer Mar 2012 #18
I think "called you out" has a better ring to it. (nt) Skinner Mar 2012 #20
locking! fascisthunter Mar 2012 #22
Two-Hundred and Nine Years of Legal Precedent... ellisonz Mar 2012 #24
If our government was not wholly owned by the fascist corporate machine I may agree with Thom. Lint Head Mar 2012 #23
Best post of the thread. CanSocDem Mar 2012 #73
oh dear. his rant here is pathetic. And flat out wrong. cali Mar 2012 #25
For some reason I imagined Thom being a much older person NNN0LHI Mar 2012 #28
He's correct. SCOTUS even decided that they had the power to unconstituionally appoint a pResident. Zorra Mar 2012 #29
Yes! This is a perfect example for the point Thom makes! chknltl Mar 2012 #44
You understand site rules better than I. bluestate10 Mar 2012 #32
He's just trying to elevate himself by name dropping. aikoaiko Mar 2012 #37
Thank you, thank you, thank you! chknltl Mar 2012 #38
First CAPHAVOC Mar 2012 #70
especially agree with your first paragraph. chknltl Mar 2012 #75
It is not CAPHAVOC Mar 2012 #76
Sir, here is where i hope you can add your thoughts too: chknltl Mar 2012 #77
Hartmann sounds like one of those wingnuts convinced that income tax is unconstitutional muriel_volestrangler Mar 2012 #39
I think the idea is/was Johonny Mar 2012 #50
Wow, you couldn't be more wrong. But then that is why we get called out I guess. sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #56
And yet he ignores the basic wording of the constitution muriel_volestrangler Mar 2012 #57
Well, it looks like he'll be responding to some of the questions this weekend. sabrina 1 Mar 2012 #78
I knew he isn't right wing; it was his insistence on his unique interpretation muriel_volestrangler Mar 2012 #79
I don't recall you making a thread of it the many times that Thom has praised DU readers. nt Gold Metal Flake Mar 2012 #40
He's flat wrong and I can prove it... Fearless Mar 2012 #41
I guess you know better than the Founding Fathers. provis99 Mar 2012 #45
I know VERY WELL what they created yes. Fearless Mar 2012 #47
the federalist papers assert the importance of judicial review fishwax Mar 2012 #49
Will *any*body just INDULGE me and CLUE ME IN as to who the DUers are?!1 nt UTUSN Mar 2012 #42
I will *GIVE* you the LINK and TELL YOU THAT it is the first couple posters: ellisonz Mar 2012 #46
Don't recall em all. elleng was one I believe tkmorris Mar 2012 #48
If memory serves.... chknltl Mar 2012 #51
Not a Hartmann fan myself. When I listened to him more than three years ago, it was.... Tarheel_Dem Mar 2012 #52
Is this an appeal to authority? Luminous Animal Mar 2012 #54
He's got one hell of an H&M forum. Morning Dew Mar 2012 #55
I understand he is posting here now? AsahinaKimi Mar 2012 #58
RT is a great source of real news, the best in the entire U.S. just1voice Mar 2012 #59
Thom Hartmann to Trumad: ellisonz Mar 2012 #60
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Hey, Democratic Undergrou...»Reply #33