PDA

View Full Version : "Constitution = guideline" according to my Rep




skfornh
04-02-2014, 10:43 PM
note i have removed a name from the text of this thread but it's published in both of the urls

Yesterday a popular conservative blog in my state published this piece reminding me of what one of my Republican state representatives was overheard saying on the house floor last year...


Progressive view of The Proper Role of Government – and your subservience to it.
by Skip

Daniel Henniger of the Wall Street Journal sums up these micro-totalitarians, perfect examples of the Progressive philosophy: “The essence of modern Democratic Progressivism is: You will participate in what we have created for you, and you will comply with the law’s demands.” A permanent collection – This next one is the GBR banning all smoking from all campuses in the Georgia University system:

[my rep]: “The Constitution is a guideline”

Remember, it is just a piece of paper….ignore it at OUR peril.

full article at: http://granitegrok.com/blog/2014/04/progressive-view-of-the-proper-role-of-government-and-your-subservience-to-it#more-78229

The following is the blog's reaction from when the story first broke. They really rip into her:


I,________, do solemnly swear, that I will bear faith and true allegiance to the ‘Guidelines?’
by Steve MacDonald

Has ignorance reared its ugly head again in the New Hampshire Legislature Yeah, yeah, more times per day than we could count with all those people there. Actually, I’m referring to [my rep], Rockingham 14 who seems to have a questionable view of her relationship to the constitution. According to [my rep], the constitution is really just a guideline and we have House Rep George Lambert (Hills – 44) to thank for sharing that news with us.

From Facebook.


“House quote of the day “the constitution is a guideline” not a requirement. – and yes she said “I swore to uphold the guideline” if it is just a guideline, how will it’s protections actually defend you…”

full article at: http://granitegrok.com/blog/2013/02/i________-do-solemnly-swear-that-i-will-bear-faith-and-true-allegiance-to-the-guidelines

This kind of rhetoric is exactly why I am running for state rep. Please consider making a small donation to my campaign @ shemkellogg.com

Spikender
04-03-2014, 12:03 AM
Granted, that's kinder than most politicians are in reference to the Constitution.

MichaelDavis
04-03-2014, 04:38 PM
Go Shem, go! Have any of the incumbents announced they aren't running for re-election?

skfornh
04-17-2014, 06:53 PM
Granted, that's kinder than most politicians are in reference to the Constitution.

ehh wouldn't say "most"


Go Shem, go! Have any of the incumbents announced they aren't running for re-election?

i know that two of the four are. no word from the other two

Spikender
04-17-2014, 10:24 PM
ehh wouldn't say "most"

Most seems like the best word to use here.

Don't wanna say all, because that's assuming too much and a generalization.

Don't wanna say some, because we all know that's bullshit.

In my opinion, the majority would shit on the Constitution every chance they get, even while singing praises of it.

heavenlyboy34
04-17-2014, 10:31 PM
In practice, the constitution has always been more of a guideline than a strict charter/blueprint/etc. RP himself, for example, generally supports a slightly slimmed down model of the military as we know it, but the constituion doesn't allow for that. It allows for militias and a navy. Anything beyond that is strictly for war time. (on paper, of course)

heavenlyboy34
04-17-2014, 10:33 PM
Hey Shem-do you have to wear a suit to be a rep? /curious

Ecolibertarian
04-17-2014, 11:12 PM
Gee, I was all in a snit about Obama tearing apart the Constitution. I feel much better knowing that he's just thinking outside the box.

Vanguard101
04-17-2014, 11:45 PM
Do you have any endorsements yet?

mrsat_98
04-18-2014, 03:43 AM
John from had a slightly different view of the constitution.

Revelation 20
New International Version (NIV)
The Thousand Years

20 And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. 2 He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. 3 He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.

otherone
04-20-2014, 07:48 AM
20 And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. 2 He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years. 3 He threw him into the Abyss, and locked and sealed it over him, to keep him from deceiving the nations anymore until the thousand years were ended. After that, he must be set free for a short time.

http://www.addictedtosmoke.com/wp-content/uploads/Pot-Smoking.jpeg

Carson
04-20-2014, 08:56 AM
I'm thinking the Constitution is the rules set down that the government must rule by.

Anything outside is Unconstitutional government and it is every citizens duty to stop it.

GunnyFreedom
04-20-2014, 10:32 AM
In practice, the constitution has always been more of a guideline than a strict charter/blueprint/etc. RP himself, for example, generally supports a slightly slimmed down model of the military as we know it, but the constituion doesn't allow for that. It allows for militias and a navy. Anything beyond that is strictly for war time. (on paper, of course)

Or it's possible that like me, he sees a gradual reduction in the Army as an intermediate first step towards the ultimate goal of restoring a Constitutional militia based defense.

Oh, and the Founders also included a Corps of Marines under the Navy. The Marines were in fact the first official "branch" that was created, on November 10th 1775, and then attached (mostly but not entirely) to privateers. The Navy and Marines are the only legitimately Constitutional branches of the military today. :)