<p>So that’s code for: it doesn’t mean what the paper says, it means what I beleive it says, right?</p>
<p>What about the 14th amendment?</p>
<p>Mini, you’re such a name-dropper. In case anyone is wondering about United States v. Miller, here’s where we stand. Moving in the right direction.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel102501.shtml[/url]”>http://www.nationalreview.com/kopel/kopel102501.shtml</a></p>
<p>Maize, but, but, but…they know what’s right as Hillary does! You can’t be Christian and Republican, too, doesn’t common sense tell you that? </p>
<p>But here’s the good news. Less than half of the Country are great Christians who are for “individuals and freeom” (as defined by them).</p>
<p>Driver -</p>
<p>National Rifle Association shivers in their boots anytime one of their rich backers proposes challenging Miller. My gun-toting rich friend tells me they send out an entire SWAT team to visit millionaires who offer them megabucks to make the challenge, trying to calm them down and steer them in another direction.</p>
<p>Gun control is here to stay, the Supreme Court has spoken quite clearly on the Second Amendment, and despite the twisting and turnings of those who won’t enlist in our “militia” (there’s plenty of opportunity these days), the meaning is quite clear, and made even more clear by the 15 or so challenges to Miller (all of them different) made before 1984, and which the Court dismisssed out of hand.</p>
<p>I believe the Constitution, in its relative simplicity of a document, compared to the extremely lengthy documents of other countries that micromanage and are often rewrittehn, is a living document that evolves–sorry, I know “evolution” is a dirty word to some–to have bearing as social institutions and technology evolve. So-called “strict constructionists” have much in common with Islamic fundamentalists who say that if it’s not in the Qu’ran, it can’t be countenanced. Of course, many of today’s theocrats have so much in common with Islamic fundamentalists that the joke wearies as it progresses.</p>
<p>I find that people who complain about “activist judges” are simply those who want judicial activism in a different direction, but that’s penny-ante hypocrisy by the standards of the day.</p>
<p>And, Xiggi, my friend, the last person posing a “centrist” to get elected was none other than the person at the top of the current malignancy. It ill behooves you to complain about anyone else doing so.</p>
<p>Finally, as a practical matter, I do think the current interpretation of the right of the Feds to control guns is correct but that politically speaking it’s a moot argument. The rural/urban split on the issue is one of those things that actually as some basis in reality-based politics, “guns” having completely different meanings in the two environments…it’s a case of one-size-fits-all solutions working <em>really</em> badly. </p>
<p>Oh, as to gay marriage…I have yet had anyone explain to me how their straight marriage is threatened by gays getting married. Or even how their religion is. The anti-gay riff is a bit of ugly bigotry and the only consolation is that the numbers say it’s going to fall into the into the dustbin of history in exactly the same way that the prejudices against interracial marriage have over the last generation.</p>
<p>DadX, as recently as a year ago I would have agreed with your assesssment of a HRC presidential campaign. I’ve been watching the numbers, however, and have changed my mind. My opinion doesn’t really matter, however, just as the sun rises in the east every day. If HRC runs, she will get the nomination: no one can match her for $$$$, staff, organization, and star power. She will fill a ballroom with thousands while others are struggling to fill out 100 in a Holiday Inn ballroom. As to a general election, jury is still out. But the numbers are interesting. The other interesting thing is that early straw polls among activists show surprising strength for Wesley Clark. An interesting straw in the wind, if you will.</p>
<p>I just love how I get put down for being a liberal, but did I bad mouth any body…no, but I got put down…interesting how certain people feel to need to denigrate others…shows alot more about them than about me…</p>
<p>and Maizeandblue, you are a real piece of work…Please, do not drive on the road, do not drink the water, do not flush the toliet, don’t get that polio shot, we paid for that</p>
<p>Oh, yeah, about having the government having me pay for other people’s problems…I just love paying over priced contractors in Iraq, who I am paying about 5 times the rate I would pay a soldier. If that ain’t a redistribution of wealth I don’t know what is.</p>
<p>And the constitution was designed to grow and flex, as it has…hey, I bet you still think blacks are 3/5 of a person…</p>
<p>And the constitution didn’t take into account women voting, but the people voted to let us vote…the constitution didn’t take into account the president only having ten years in office, but that was changed.</p>
<p>So from your logic, we would still have slavery, women couldn’t vote, the president could be president forever, the president and vp could be from different parties, and it would be okay to not let “certain” people have rights…</p>
<p>Mini, 1984 was a long time ago. I can see you didn’t bother reading the link I posted. The times are changing, and federal judges who make things up as they go along are going to be history, not soon enough, but soon.</p>
<p>Edit: CGM, you forgot to mention the gulags and concentration camps. Get with the talking points.</p>
<p>Well gosh citygirlsmom, you were kind of hard on poor Isabel…No one is denegrating you for being a liberal, but I for one have a problem with your definition of liberal and associated self righetousness.</p>
<p>“And, Xiggi, my friend, the last person posing a “centrist” to get elected was none other than the person at the top of the current malignancy. It ill behooves you to complain about anyone else doing so.”</p>
<p>TheDad, the topic of this thread is Hillary Clinton. When we were discussing the Kerry-Bush, I was castigated for asking to compare the record of the Clinton I and Clinton II administrations. Feel free to join I-Dad in decrying the false centrist position of President Bush. In turn, I will continue to view Hillary as the politican she is: one of the most cynical, selfish, and utterly wicked who ever held public office -even if this seems to upset Cheers.</p>
<p>I’d also like to repeat what I said the day after the elections. The democrats should spend some time trying to understand WHY people like me are rejecting the candidates the party insists on putting on the ballot. Your problem is not that voters elected a poor president such as Bush, but that your party is unable to find a better candidate. And please, do not Ohio me; the popular vote spoke clearly. It may have been fun to deride the southern bible-toting morons, publish funny JesusLand maps, and bask in the supposed intellectual superiority of the blue states, but it did not change the outcome -nor the size of Jesusland! </p>
<p>Put a contemptible candidate such as Hillary on the ballot will only show how little the dems understand what the majority of the country wants …or does not want. </p>
<p>As former Speaker of the House Jim Wright said many years ago, " If Clinton is the solution, it must a very screwy question."</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s why I think I could vote for her. It would be a refreshing change from candidates without a political bone in their bodies (Gore and what’s his name, the senator from Mass. who ran this last time).</p>
<p>This is a very sad, discouraging thread.</p>
<p>Speaking of college and personal ambition for the next generation: And for Whatever anyone thinks of Bill and Hilliary Clinton; These people are pretty much average people with extra smarts, that had nothing except ambition and hard work, that created deep passion amongst people. They should be held as an example of average Americans who have average problems and yet rise above all others. I am truly amazed that Chelsey has not been yet corrupted by the personal attacks on her family. I wouldn’t blame her if she becomes like one of her family’s attackers.</p>
<p>The most miserable, disgusting thing I’ve seen in politics was listening to Rush Limbaush trash a teenage Chelsea Clinton. I just wanted to cry.</p>
<p>For the record, the second most miserable thing I’ve seen was the Republican’s orchestrated trashing of Kerry’s military service. To my way of thinking, the guy has the gonads to go serve his country in Viet Nam, he deserves to be respected for that.</p>
<p>I thought that took the cake until the Dems attacked Cheney’s gay daughter in a political debate. That was so out of bounds that I decided, on the spot, that I could not vote for such a morally-bankrupt candidacy. I watched the debate with my jaw hanging open.</p>
<p>Bill and Hill. average people???</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ll look past the personal attack. Now, can you find me where I said going to war in Iraq was the right thing to do?</p>
<p>
<br>
Then why wasn’t that anywhere to be found in its text? Why isn’t that anywhere in the history books of the constitutional convention. Why would they be dumbfounded if you brought a founding father here today and tried to even explain judicial review (let alone the “judicial legislating” that activist judges now partake in.</p>
<p>
Hence it was amended…</p>
<p>
Once again - that’s why the relevant amendments were added.</p>
<p>If there’s a guarantee to gay marriage in the constitution - why not go through the process to remove all doubt and add it to the text? Like I said, you beleive in democracy (but only when democracy confirms leftist dogma), right? Likewise about abortion, etc, etc.</p>
<p>…or do you really not understand the difference between an amendment and an activist judge?</p>
<p>Back to Hillary. If she runs, I will vote for her and I will campaign for her in anyway I can. Her chances are slim in the current world, but oh how things can change…I have been around long enough to know that. The best thing that happens in this wicked world is that we all move on to the great maker. Room opens up for new ideas. And the old go into that “dustbin of history” described by thedad.</p>
<p>And yes, with little education, the world’s population does tend to recycle ideas as well. One thing I have learned is that if it is bad today, it can be better tomorrow. Nothing stays the same forever. Change is the constant.</p>
<p>I mean if you told me that the “monkey trial” would be revisited when I saw the Spencer Tracy film as a teenager, I would have been horrified! But this too shall pass.</p>
<p>“Finally, as a practical matter, I do think the current interpretation of the right of the Feds to control guns is correct but that politically speaking it’s a moot argument. The rural/urban split on the issue is one of those things that actually as some basis in reality-based politics, “guns” having completely different meanings in the two environments…it’s a case of one-size-fits-all solutions working <em>really</em> badly.”</p>
<p>BINGO. Having lived in both environments, I can attest to the radically different viewpoints on guns. In rural areas, shooting skeet is a sport; however, those Northern city types think of all guns as Saturday-night-specials. </p>
<p>As for strict constructionalists… I do somewhat agree with them. If a right is not found within the Constitution, that right is certainly NOT precluded from being put into law; it just happens via amendment or law-making. IMO, the only time the strict constructionalists fall apart is where they refuse to see the judiciary as a means to control the “tyranny of the majority.”</p>
<p>You use words to insult, in a subtle way, Maize, and call me stupid. You are not worth my time. You don’t say stupid, but saying I don’t know the difference about things is the same thing.</p>
<p>And yes, zagat, it was an attack. I defended myself for being attacked. But then that is all some people know how to do. Call names, Give people labels. And yes, I am a liberal. And being a liberal has many many forms, that is what is so great about being in America. My ideas can be voiced. But if all someone can do is call me stupid, then I choose to leave.</p>
<p>I am out of here.</p>
<p>Maize and citygirl - you both can dish it out pretty well…but why bother? No one is going to change anyone’s mind about these touchy subjects, especially on a web site…
Meanwhile, I just keep “appreciating” the troops (not “supporting” them in this unjust “war”) by writing my checks to the long neglected Veteran’s Hospitals and the wounded soldiers lying there and make sure my sons will be overseas when the draft is reenacted.</p>
<p>And la-la-la, my hands are over my ears for all of you ready to lambast me for being “Unpatriotic” because I refuse to be bullied into your line follow of thinking…</p>
<p>An interesting new take on the book, and the Hillary candicacy. </p>
<p><a href=“http://www.townhall.com/columnists/tonyblankley/tb20050622.shtml[/url]”>http://www.townhall.com/columnists/tonyblankley/tb20050622.shtml</a></p>