Is Obama a Socialist?

[Thorne]

Yes they were.

Proof?

... I hope not by provoking another world war like it did the first time.

A rag-tag bunch of rebels did all that?

We obtained the colonies by conquest and settlement. Not necessarily noble means of acquisition, but far better than stealing from one's own compatriots: that's treachery.

Only if you fail!

A beautiful, adaptable, versatile document can still be fundamentally flawed if its provisions are found wanting ...

Well I for one would appreciate someone showing me how the US Constitution is fundamentally flawed. Is it because it protects us from a tyrannical government? Is it because it allows us freedoms rarely seen in the world before it's formation? Is it because of the built in checks and balances which keep the government more-or-less under control? Just what is the big "flaw" here?

You final statement reeks of the rantings of the radical right, which does not represent the People at all, but simply a vocal minority paranoid at the prospect of a legally constituted government actually taking its role and responsibilities seriously.

I'm not claiming that either side is in the right here. The radical right is as bad as the radical left. The moderate middle is shrinking. And if the government were,indeed, taking its role and responsibilities seriously, they would not be trying to tear down that Constitution which they swore to uphold and defend! And that goes for conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, left wing and right wing. I play no favorites.

[MMI]

Proof?

Wikipedia says:

The Ten Commandments, or Decalogue, is a list of religious and moral imperatives that, according to the Hebrew Bible, were spoken by God (referred to in several names) to the people of Israel from the mountain referred to as Mount Sinai or Horeb, and later authored by God and given to Moses in the form of two stone tablets.

Now, Thorne, prove your assertion that they are not divine in origin

A rag-tag bunch of rebels did all that?

If you regard George Washington and the Virginia Militia a rag-tag bunch of rebels, yes.

Only if you fail!

No, always. Just because you escape justice doesn't make you innocent

Well I for one would appreciate someone showing me how the US Constitution is fundamentally flawed. Is it because it protects us from a tyrannical government? Is it because it allows us freedoms rarely seen in the world before it's formation? Is it because of the built in checks and balances which keep the government more-or-less under control? Just what is the big "flaw" here?

I have absolutely no idea, but apparently that nice Mr Obama thinks so. I'm just saying that the Constitution is obviously not perfect, because it is an eighteenth century historical document, it is man-made, and it had already had to be amended.

I'm not claiming that either side is in the right here. The radical right is as bad as the radical left. The moderate middle is shrinking. And if the government were,indeed, taking its role and responsibilities seriously, they would not be trying to tear down that Constitution which they swore to uphold and defend! And that goes for conservatives and liberals, Republicans and Democrats, left wing and right wing. I play no favorites.

Upholding the Constitution does not prevent its amendment. Amending the Constitution is not "tearing it down", because the new laws will rely on that same Constituion for their validity.

[Thorne]

Wikipedia says:

The Ten Commandments, or Decalogue, is a list of religious and moral imperatives that, according to the Hebrew Bible, were spoken by God (referred to in several names) to the people of Israel from the mountain referred to as Mount Sinai or Horeb, and later authored by God and given to Moses in the form of two stone tablets.

Now, Thorne, prove your assertion that they are not divine in origin

I think I'll move this portion to the Religion forum, where it is more appropriate.

If you regard George Washington and the Virginia Militia a rag-tag bunch of rebels, yes.

I'm quite sure the British generals regarded them as such.

No, always. Just because you escape justice doesn't make you innocent

Whose justice?

I have absolutely no idea, but apparently that nice Mr Obama thinks so. I'm just saying that the Constitution is obviously not perfect, because it is an eighteenth century historical document, it is man-made, and it had already had to be amended.

I never claimed it was perfect, and it may even have flaws in it. But fundamentally flawed? That implies he would like to toss it out completely.

[MMI]

I never claimed it was perfect, and it may even have flaws in it. But fundamentally flawed? That implies he would like to toss it out completely.

Maybe he would, but I doubt it. I didn't choose those words, and I don't know what caused him to use them.

However, he'll need a Constitution to validate whatever new laws he wants to introduce.

[Thorne]

However, he'll need a Constitution to validate whatever new laws he wants to introduce.

Unless he's planning on setting up a dictatorship. (And no, I don't for one second believe that.)

[DuncanONeil]

I do not believe "that nice Mr Obama" desires to amend the Constitution. I believe that the and the other Progressives wish to dispose of it.

Wikipedia says:

The Ten Commandments, or Decalogue, is a list of religious and moral imperatives that, according to the Hebrew Bible, were spoken by God (referred to in several names) to the people of Israel from the mountain referred to as Mount Sinai or Horeb, and later authored by God and given to Moses in the form of two stone tablets.

Now, Thorne, prove your assertion that they are not divine in origin



If you regard George Washington and the Virginia Militia a rag-tag bunch of rebels, yes.




No, always. Just because you escape justice doesn't make you innocent




I have absolutely no idea, but apparently that nice Mr Obama thinks so. I'm just saying that the Constitution is obviously not perfect, because it is an eighteenth century historical document, it is man-made, and it had already had to be amended.




Upholding the Constitution does not prevent its amendment. Amending the Constitution is not "tearing it down", because the new laws will rely on that same Constituion for their validity.