Read, listen, speak, VOTE!!!!
One thing a lot of people miss is the primary and local elections. The people who do turn out are riled up, and a lot of the riling up is done by these far-right groups. So if only ten percent of the public comes out to vote for, say, school board and the Democratic Senatorial primary, and most of those are fundies, then guess who's made some pretty significant choices for the rest of your community?
2006-07-05 04:44:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by GreenEyedLilo 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Hold it! The Entire US Constitution is a document based on the notion that power has to be shared. It divides the power into three distinct functions of government and assigns areas of responsibilities to each branch of our federal government. The three Branch's of government are the Legislature, the Courts, and the Executive Branch.
This division in our government is to insure that just one person, party or organization can not seize the levers of power in the United States.
However, The Bush Administration has amazingly declared that the President in time of War can control almost all of the Federal Government except the Post Office and they are rethinking the Post Office exception.
Any questions about this, please direct to Mr. Bolton in the United Nations. He will kindly explain the law to you.
2006-07-05 05:02:13
·
answer #2
·
answered by zclifton2 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
We have to trust the Supreme Court to protect the Constitution - they're usually pretty good at that, considering it's their entire purpose. And we also have to hope that there are always enough reasonable people in America to prevent ridiculous theocratic constitutional amendments from getting on the books and therefore handcuffing the Supreme Court.
2006-07-05 04:43:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Tiger 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
And nothing in the Constitution protects us from Left wing liberal fanatics either. This government has not established nor is it forcing a particular religion down your throat. So it is meeting its requirements. What you can do is set the kool aid aside and look at things in a realistic way and from both sides. I am so over the one-sided view of the supposed "liberal". What a joke.
2006-07-05 04:45:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
of direction. The bill of Rights become enacted in a time even as a nicely-prepared protection force wasn't considerably a lot less helpful than a nationwide protection force of similar length. The modern warfare, in spite of everything, become fought oftentimes between a protection force and an imperial military, with the protection force popping out helpful. the second one change secure the flexibility of one of those protection force to type back, might want to the favor get up. even if the Founders did not assume the variety of warfare machines able to killing thousands and thousands with the frenzy of a button, and costing more advantageous than the existence earning of thousands of complication-free people apiece. there become no Colonial-era equivalent to an F-15, or a nuclear submarine, or an ICBM - and not in any respect even the most ardent "accurate to submit to hands" type thinks that persons will have the ability to purchase and administration this stuff. So the second one change has genuinely fallen from a needed area of our equipment of assessments and balances to an truly formalized secure practices of searching and shooting hobbyists, basically Constitutionally holding your accurate to bag some interest on the weekend or save a Glock on your nightstand to sense problematic. that is not useful interior of an same way it become written to be. That being stated, the fashionable argument is, might want to we be eagerly snuffing out all of us rights that are not significant interior of an same way they become once? might want to our default position on human being freedom be, "if that is not needed to the operation of the authorities, we would want to continually have as few freedoms as achievable?"
2016-10-14 03:41:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
'Usurped'? C'mon, get a grip. That's not even close to reality.
Because, if you had any historical perspective, you'd see that the founders of this nation, the writers of the founding documents, and the men who were the first government officeholders were what you would today call 'ultra-right wing fundamentalist religious fanatics'. George Bush's references to God and religion pale in comparison to, for example, George Washington's.
But today, we have a bunch of chicken little sky-is-falling anti-religion fanatics whining and puling about any reference to God. [sigh]
2006-07-05 05:12:13
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
yep, your learning, your system of government has been corrupt, and exploited since it's creation.
you need to tear it up and write a new one, then have a referendum to let the people approve it.
I would recommend the Venezuelan constitution as a good basis for your new Constitution.
Only then will you have a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
2006-07-05 04:51:25
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Check out the book "Original Intent" for what our Founding Fathers had in mind when they wrote the Constitution.
2006-07-05 04:40:32
·
answer #8
·
answered by irishharpist 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Separation of Church and State? Don't see that in my copy. Atheist are becoming a religion. Should we exclude them too.
2006-07-05 04:42:33
·
answer #9
·
answered by Luchador 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
How does right wing North America Grab you? You can always move to Cuba.
2006-07-05 05:09:52
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋