- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Do we have any real constitutional checks and balances in this country?
Posted on 2/25/14 at 8:42 am
Posted on 2/25/14 at 8:42 am
It seems as if most of what the government does is unconstitutional. Even some very blatantly unconstitutional laws that are controversial... nothing ever comes of it.
They can pretty much do whatever it is they want.
They can pretty much do whatever it is they want.
9
Posted on 2/25/14 at 8:43 am to PrimeTime Money
Nullificatio......oh. 
Posted on 2/25/14 at 8:51 am to PrimeTime Money
Impeach Obama!
Posted on 2/25/14 at 8:53 am to PrimeTime Money
The constitution is only as good as the men and women who adhere to and enforce its provisions. Unfortunately right now in America we are led by a group of corrupt miscreants, morons and cowards.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:01 am to Rohan2Reed
The constitution is a 'living breathing' document. Today, for most politicians it has evolved into a document that says "Hey! Do any damn thing you want to!"
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:07 am to PrimeTime Money
quote:
Do we have any real constitutional checks and balances in this country?
No. Unfortunately the Constitution can be interpolated by whoever is in power. Presidential appointments of judges might be the most powerful aspect of the Executive Branch in terms of directing the course of our nation.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:13 am to PrimeTime Money
Well the idea is that the branches check each other. When they all agree on expanding federal power, you know since they are all national institutions, there isn't much to be done.
A lot of this is made worse by not requiring a balanced budget. D's get spending, R's get low taxes; everybody's happy!!! No need to check anything!!!
Until our kids and grand-kids take it in the shorts.
A lot of this is made worse by not requiring a balanced budget. D's get spending, R's get low taxes; everybody's happy!!! No need to check anything!!!
Until our kids and grand-kids take it in the shorts.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:15 am to PrimeTime Money
We are probably set up about as well as a state can be set up.
It works as long as the people are good.
When the people stop holding the rope, it falls apart.
I think we are now too big to really succeed. It's impossible to represent "everyone's" interests when everyone is so diverse and information so available. The problem is that we are also too big to fail, in that no one will make the reasonable decision to increase the ability of the separate states to create the state that makes sense for them and reflects the will of their people. So too big to fail and too big to succeed....implosion is coming.
It works as long as the people are good.
When the people stop holding the rope, it falls apart.
I think we are now too big to really succeed. It's impossible to represent "everyone's" interests when everyone is so diverse and information so available. The problem is that we are also too big to fail, in that no one will make the reasonable decision to increase the ability of the separate states to create the state that makes sense for them and reflects the will of their people. So too big to fail and too big to succeed....implosion is coming.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:18 am to Zach
quote:
The constitution is a 'living breathing' document.
Yea, and because of the people in charge, it's sucking the air out of the room leaving the citizenry gasping for air.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:22 am to PrimeTime Money
quote:
It seems as if most of what the government does is unconstitutional.
Everything and every act has the potential to be constitutional through a clever interpretation of the commerce clause. It's like what Humpty Dumpty told Alice in "Through the Looking Glass." Words mean only what they were intended to mean when they were said or written. Nothing more and nothing less. The only important thing is who is master.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:26 am to PrimeTime Money
We have rubberstamps. All you need is the right ruling, and then you have judicial precedent. Objections won't matter after that.
The question arises "Why was the government put in charge of checking itself?"
The question arises "Why was the government put in charge of checking itself?"
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:35 am to PrimeTime Money
quote:
Do we have any real constitutional checks and balances in this country?
No, the system has been broken for some time. Unfortunately with each new person in power we see them push the boundaries further and further.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:44 am to Patrick O Rly
quote:
The question arises "Why was the government put in charge of checking itself?"
Exactly. The flaw IMHO is that the Executive Branch appoints the members of the Judicial Branch. Local judges are elected. I see no reason why judges in the Judicial Branch shouldn't be elected also to protect the Constitution based on the will of the people. The Supreme Court judges should be national elections serving no more than 2 terms. The other federal judges should be elected in the regions that they represent. To pretend that these appointments are non-partisan is a farce.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:46 am to Patrick O Rly
quote:
The question arises "Why was the government put in charge of checking itself
THIS
I have started to believe the Federal judiciary is a sham with regards to deciding cases involving the Federal government.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:50 am to weagle99
One thought that just came to me:
State courts handle all cases involving the Feds, and the Feds handle cases involving the states.
State courts handle all cases involving the Feds, and the Feds handle cases involving the states.
Posted on 2/25/14 at 10:59 am to BigJim
quote:
Well the idea is that the branches check each other. When they all agree on expanding federal power, you know since they are all national institutions, there isn't much to be done.
I've always found it odd that there is no way to recall a Justice. "We the People" can petition for recalls or pressure elected officials into performing various tasks (Impeachment proceedings, for example) to balance or check power in the Legislative and Executive branches, but we have no power to demand redress from the Judicial. That's a very dangerous short-coming and becomes even moreso as government is allowed to expand.
The only two recourses I can see for a big enough check are : (1)the Board of Governors call a Constitutional Convention or (2)outright rebellion. Sadly (for the state of our Union) neither are likely to ever happen.
This post was edited on 2/25/14 at 11:01 am
Posted on 2/25/14 at 11:19 am to Patrick O Rly
We can't trust people enough to let them be free but we can totally trust them with power.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News