In response to:

The War Between the Amendments

aebe Wrote: Jan 17, 2013 9:32 AM
It is the duty of the Supreme Court to strike down any law which does not walk hand in hand with the Constitution.If the Judges are going to abdicate,they might as well go home,and we can use the building for something else.An indoor skateboard park,perhaps.A bunch of scruffy kids would raise the tone of the neighborhood.
markinalpine Wrote: Jan 17, 2013 4:01 PM
And to look good to the new york slime, the washington compost, and anyone else in the State Run Media.
Seawolf Wrote: Jan 17, 2013 9:46 AM
The constitution is not a hard read...if it were followed most of these fools in DC would be out of a job. It's them constantly trying to justify their existance and the cushy jobs they have created for themselves that is the problem..Lawyers writing laws for other lawyers to make money by "interpreting" them. The longer it goes on the more twisted and confused it gets which is why we are where we are today. Madison had it right from the start.
poorgrandchildren.com2 Wrote: Jan 17, 2013 9:46 AM
They disagree. They believe their duty is to rubberstamp all acts of Congress and look regal while posing for pictures in their black robes.

The horrific Newtown, Conn., mass shooting has unleashed a frenzy to pass new gun-control legislation. But the war over restricting firearms is not just between liberals and conservatives; it also pits the first two amendments to the U.S. Constitution against each other.

Apparently, in the sequential thinking of James Madison and the Founding Fathers, the right to free expression and the guarantee to own arms were the two most important personal liberties. But now these two cherished rights seem to be at odds with each other and have caused bitter exchanges between interpreters of the Constitution.

Many liberals believe there is...