I am a lawer so i know it says that in the constatosion. Why doesn't gerge bush use it too lock up the librals?
2007-05-10 05:34:45 · 25 answers · asked by gopaokay 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
A good "lawer" could find spell check. I am no "lawer", but that is nowhere written in the Constitution, maybe your "constatosion" is different.
2007-05-10 05:49:15 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
There are no amendmants in the Constitution (constatosion, whatever), only amendments, and the First Amendment doesn't mention unpatriotic (unpatratic, whatever) people at all, except to guarantee them the right to assemble peaceably, to speak freely, to petition the government for redress of grievances, and to worship if and as they choose.
It's extremely difficult for me to believe that a lawyer would a) misread so much strange meaning into what is a pretty clear sentence, and b) misspell his own vocation ("lawer?!?).
2007-05-10 12:51:11 · answer #2 · answered by oimwoomwio 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
???
An illiterate lawyer, are you?
It does NOT say, in the First Amendment, or anywhere else in the Constitution, that the government can lock up people who disagree with the president.
It isn't the liberals, who actually support the Constitution, who are unpatriotic.
It's those who think it's proper to lock up over one hundred million citizens based on their political views who are anti-American.
I understand that the Chinese government routinely locks up people merely for disagreeing with their policies or actions.
You'd like it more there; I suggest you move there.
Preferably tomorrow.
(I don't care whether you claim to be a lawyer; I've actually read the Constitution, so have no reason to take your word for it.)
2007-05-10 15:25:08 · answer #3 · answered by tehabwa 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Please point out where.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Lawyers have 7 years of higher ed...they usually need to learn to spell to get there.
2007-05-10 12:38:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
The first amendment is about free speech, even if it is misspelled. As an attorney you should know the importance of good spelling and a good argument. Your question makes you look illiterate.
2007-05-10 13:41:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I am sorry, but your credibility is in question when you say you are a lawyer. You most certainly do not write and spell like a lawyer. Furthermore, I think you should provide a different source other than saying you are a lawyer.
2007-05-10 12:40:44 · answer #6 · answered by furrryyy 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Come on now. A lawyer has a higher education than to misspell George, constitution, liberals,unpatriotic, and knows when to use too, to, or two.
2007-05-10 13:03:07 · answer #7 · answered by JB 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You must have graduated with "gerge" bush too. I say lock up the Repubs, and let's get this party started.
2007-05-10 12:43:43 · answer #8 · answered by World Peace Now 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because liberals are not unpatriotic. You must have graduated pretty low in your class in law school, if you even are a lawyer, or you would know the real definition of a traitor.
As an attorney one would think you would know to capitalize a proper name. Somehow I have my doubts of your credibility.
Nice rant. Didn't fly.
2007-05-10 12:41:27 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
If you were a lawyer, you'd know how to spell.
maybe George Bush's 1st Amendment he'd like to write will say that, ours doesn't
2007-05-10 12:41:10 · answer #10 · answered by Deidre K 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋