in referring to the constitution. I think it may be 2nd hand information from an aide, but is it verifiable?
2006-09-16 16:57:12 · 9 answers · asked by Ford Prefect 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml
thanks for the link Constitution guy
2006-09-16 17:08:00 · update #1
i'm also thinking about Att. Gen. Gonzales and his comments to committee "the Constitution is an outdated document"...that quote is very very verifiable and can't be ignored bt the people refusing to accept reality (unless they really are in fantasy land)
2006-09-16 17:12:19 · update #2
to all those thinking that the constitution is outdated: if we don't believe that the constitution is a living breathing document (even if Justice Scalia thinks otherwise) what is left...is this even America anymore?
2006-09-16 17:14:39 · update #3
“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face. It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”
-George W. Bush, 43rd President, United States
P.S. Obviously he would only have said this in the heat of the moment and would naturally want to limit the damage after the event. However, if he was misquoted then you can be certain that the people involved in making the claim would be prosecuted for slander - the fact that they have not gives credibility to the claim.
In any even, whether he said these words or not his administration's success in introducing the so called 'Patriot Act' have taken dangerous steps towards turning the Constitution into "just a goddamned piece of paper"
2006-09-16 17:02:15 · answer #1 · answered by Bring back Democracy 3 · 4⤊ 3⤋
If Capitol Hill Blue is your source, then I think it's probably not true at all. I personally loathe Bush, but I cannot credit that he would be stupid enough to say such a thing, even in a room full of Republicans.
It's fairly obvious that he doesn't care much about the Constitution or the Law. All those signing statements he has used to make sure that the law would not apply to anything he wanted to do is pretty much evidence that he thinks the office of the President is above the rule of law. And its fairly obvious, with warrantless wiretaps and pushing through unpopular appointees by between-congress shenanigans, that he's not interested in the Constitution that much. To modify a popular quote from the 60s, he apparently believes that he's going to have to destroy the Constitution in order to save it.
2006-09-17 01:22:44 · answer #2 · answered by Chredon 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Unfortunatly GW ain't too far off. The constitution was drafted to change along with the times. But we see it as set in stone. It was intended to be amended as was needed for the growth of the US. It was drafted to a much simpler time not for todays matters. I am not defending what he said, after all he is an idiot, and an embarrassment to the american people.
2006-09-17 03:39:29 · answer #3 · answered by bobby h 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No...lol. If he had it would be the lead story by every liberal news source in the country. I know the President is seen to be a stupid man, but no one is that stupid. But, GW is a hella lot smarter than people give him credit for. I think his simpleton act is just that, an act.
As for the constitution it is just a piece of paper now. The meanings as presented by the crafters of the document were lost long ago. Do you really think the framers meant to protect the First Amendment rights of a perverted 60 year old man as he video tapes an 18 year old girl having sex with rabid German shepherds as a roomful of drunken frat boys watch on performing a circle jerk? Those who ratified the Constitution would be appalled by the Courts interpretation of their original meanings.
2006-09-17 00:09:13 · answer #4 · answered by Mr Mojo Risin 4 · 2⤊ 5⤋
It is second-hand information, from a couple of different aides, who will not go officially on the record (anymore) because they were threatened with losing their jobs is they did.
2006-09-17 00:06:55 · answer #5 · answered by coragryph 7 · 4⤊ 3⤋
Yes and yes
2006-09-17 00:01:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
No, That was some Clinton/Carter appointee federal judge.
2006-09-17 00:12:53 · answer #7 · answered by Michael 6 · 2⤊ 4⤋
I would have to day 'no', just as we would never hear the end of it
2006-09-16 23:59:55 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 4⤋
myth, started by liberals.
2006-09-17 00:00:42 · answer #9 · answered by Huevos Rancheros 6 · 1⤊ 6⤋