“Just where in the Constitution of the United States does it say that a president has the authority to extract vast sums of money from a private enterprise and distribute it as he sees fit to whomever he deems worthy of compensation? Nowhere . . .

“If our laws and our institutions determine that BP ought to pay $20 billion — or $50 billion or $100 billion — then so be it.

“But the Constitution says that private property is not to be confiscated by the government without ‘due process of law.’

“Technically, it has not been confiscated by Barack Obama, but that is a distinction without a difference.

“With vastly expanded powers of government available at the discretion of politicians and bureaucrats, private individuals and organizations can be forced into accepting the imposition of powers that were never granted to the government by the Constitution.”

I’ll clap for the Wolfman if you’ll join the Party of Know, however fleetingly, and read some accurate history on the Founders and slavery. Here’s a starting point: http://www.wallbuilders.com/LIBissuesArticles.asp?id=122.

Yes, the Founders were skeptical of anything that infringed the rights of the people – including corruption and influence peddling on the one hand and government control of the economy on the other. And you’re right – circumstances themselves fall beyond the realm of constitutionality. But how the government responds to them can be either constitutional, when it acts within the limits proscribed by the Constitution, or unconstitutional, when it acts beyond those limits – which is how the Obamacracy tends to act.

The Constitution is a “living document” only in that it can be amended through the means provided. But your heroes rely on the courts to mutilate it through the invention of laws, such as the fictitious right to privacy that underlies the legalization of abortion.

Just to make you feel good – I was a Bush critic when called for. But to blame problems of Obama’s creation on Bush, or to blame the results of hm exacerbating problems that Bush failed to resolve, is to miss the point entirely. It makes as much sense as buying a used car, driving it like a lunatic, and then blaming the previous owner for the consequences.

Well, maybe a few were…

Who writes ALL LAWS and, has the power to TAX ?
1)the Executive branch of government,
2)the Congressional branch of government,
3)the Judicial branch of government.

Of course, you obviously do not know or are displaying obfuscation , as all liars and the woefully unlearned do !!

THINK MACHIAVELLIAN !!!!

Saul Alinsky would be proud. When confronted, you first dismiss the argument, marginalize the message and then attack the person without providing any real answer or fact. I do not know you Don, I will not make any assumptions about your character.

The Founders did want the Constitution to be a living document that would adjust to the changing times – in order to prevent the corruption of the men/women that made up the government. That corruption could come from corporate influence (lobbyists) or from simple human nature that thrives on power.

You may remember from civics class that the Founders actually built into the Constitution the process for the document itself to change with the times. Just like the creation of three branches of government helped check overstepping at the federal level, the amendment process was also designed to check federal overreach.

Here is a refresher:

Article V of the Constitution spells out the processes by which amendments can be proposed and ratified.

To Propose Amendments:
1. Two-thirds of both houses of Congress vote to propose an amendment, or
2. Two-thirds of the state legislatures ask Congress to call a national convention to propose amendments. (This method has never been used.)

To Ratify Amendments
1. Three-fourths of the state legislatures approve it, or
2. Ratifying conventions in three-fourths of the states approve it. This method has been used only once — to ratify the 21st Amendment — repealing Prohibition.

The Supreme Court has stated that ratification must be within “some reasonable time after the proposal.” Beginning with the 18th amendment, it has been customary for Congress to set a definite period for ratification. In the case of the 18th, 20th, 21st, and 22nd amendments, the period set was 7 years, but there has been no determination as to just how long a “reasonable time” might extend.

Of the thousands of proposals that have been made to amend the Constitution, only 33 obtained the necessary two-thirds vote in Congress. Of those 33, only 27 amendments (including the Bill of Rights) have been ratified.

Don, if you and your Progressive friends want to move the country ‘forward’ then be open and honest about your intentions, call for a constitutional convention and debate amendments in the open. Explain that ‘Hope and Change’ was always meant to ‘fundamentally transform’ the country into something that much more resembles the European Union.

As a true patriot Don, you should denounce any political party – D’s or R’s who expand the role of government outside of the amendment process as provided in Article V.

Dear Jim,Marcy,Carleton, or who ever you are, the Z is on purpose. I do it to further addle your brain !
Your presumption that I cannot spell is base.

Empirically,Hitler , was elected also…so much for your inextricable try.

My advise: try a lot harder with me…a lot harder !

Ty, “days” doesn’t have a “z”… just as a heads up.

Unionist Donald , would say ,” so f—— what, I still have my do nothing union job. Let the others eat scat “.
Yes indeed, reality to Donald, is that he is employed and that is ALL that matters to his kind!

Toledo, to him and his ilk are nothing more than a place to get wealthy by utilizing the populace that is OVERWHELMINGLY DEMONRAT, and utterly and completely POLITICALLY & ECONOMICALLY IGNORANT !!

You can thank the Yellow Blade, Demonrats, and thug unionists, for the perpetual IGNORANCE, Toledo’s citizens are fed by these wholesalers of radical, America hating madness !
It certainly doesn’t come from anywhere else !