living wage ? if you want a living wage get a living job! stop expecting a caddilac salary for a chevy of a job!
redwolf - 06:07am on 07/22/2007
Health care, a “living wage” and internet access (none of which appears in the Constitution) are “rights.” But owning a firearm, something that is explicitly named as a right in the Constitution...is now a “privilege” according to Edwards.
Please remember that Monsieur Edwards is a lawyer. He ought to know better! (That is the reason his attack on Judge Charles Pickering was so reprehensible.) The alternatives are that he is an incompetent lawyer or a world class liar. I would not trust this man’s opinion on a parking ticket violation!
Proof - 06:07am on 07/22/2007
BTW, If little Johnnie Breck Girl were to swear to uphold the Constitution, exactly what would he be swearing to uphold???
Proof - 06:07am on 07/22/2007
If little Johnnie Breck Girl were to swear to uphold the Constitution, exactly what would he be swearing to uphold???
He would be swearing to uphold that living, breathing, evolving document that can be read to mean whatever you want it to mean.
Elisa - 10:07am on 07/22/2007
He would be swearing to uphold that living, breathing, evolving document that can be read to mean whatever you want it to mean.
Ah! I had a rubber ruler like that once! I could always stretch it to make the dimensions fit!
Proof - 10:07am on 07/22/2007
A lawyer assumes there are no absolutes, that the law only means what they can convince the court at any moment in time and under different circumstances that it means. So, Edwards starts with the belief he can sway the people to hear his definitions of things and support his case.
Liberals believe the Constitution is a living document and absent the Constitutionally mandated Amendment process, activist legislators and jurists can interpret the meaning based on changing social mores, international norms and in any way that advances their political agenda. They rail at any attempt to appeal to Original Intent of the Framers and they show positive contempt for those Rights not in line with their agenda and they are constantly advancing unenumerated rights and enshrining them into settled case law.
Therefore, one should not be surprised that Edwards sees rights in the Constitution that are not specifically enumerated and denies rights that are, I would be shocked to see him recognize anything in the Bill of Rights, at keast as written.
Neiman - 10:07am on 07/22/2007
Ahh! Proof, you sound like a natural politician
Anna - 10:07am on 07/22/2007
you sound like a natural politician
As opposed to an un -natural politician? What would that be? One who told the truth?
Proof - 11:07am on 07/22/2007
Any “right” that can be taken away is a privilege. A constitution, a promise on paper or written in stone, a play on words cannot alter that fact. You can vote for change, you can revolt as a last resort, but to believe that your so-called rights are somehow god-given and unchangeable is pure folly. Get real and stay there.
John Foland - 11:07am on 07/22/2007
Any “right” that can be taken away is a privilege.
Your ability to breathe can be taken away by a murderer, does that make life a privelege?
living wage ? if you want a living wage get a living job! stop expecting a caddilac salary for a chevy of a job!
Please remember that Monsieur Edwards is a lawyer. He ought to know better! (That is the reason his attack on Judge Charles Pickering was so reprehensible.) The alternatives are that he is an incompetent lawyer or a world class liar. I would not trust this man’s opinion on a parking ticket violation!
BTW, If little Johnnie Breck Girl were to swear to uphold the Constitution, exactly what would he be swearing to uphold???
He would be swearing to uphold that living, breathing, evolving document that can be read to mean whatever you want it to mean.
A lawyer assumes there are no absolutes, that the law only means what they can convince the court at any moment in time and under different circumstances that it means. So, Edwards starts with the belief he can sway the people to hear his definitions of things and support his case.
Liberals believe the Constitution is a living document and absent the Constitutionally mandated Amendment process, activist legislators and jurists can interpret the meaning based on changing social mores, international norms and in any way that advances their political agenda. They rail at any attempt to appeal to Original Intent of the Framers and they show positive contempt for those Rights not in line with their agenda and they are constantly advancing unenumerated rights and enshrining them into settled case law.
Therefore, one should not be surprised that Edwards sees rights in the Constitution that are not specifically enumerated and denies rights that are, I would be shocked to see him recognize anything in the Bill of Rights, at keast as written.
Ahh! Proof, you sound like a natural politician
As opposed to an un -natural politician? What would that be? One who told the truth?
Any “right” that can be taken away is a privilege. A constitution, a promise on paper or written in stone, a play on words cannot alter that fact. You can vote for change, you can revolt as a last resort, but to believe that your so-called rights are somehow god-given and unchangeable is pure folly. Get real and stay there.
Your ability to breathe can be taken away by a murderer, does that make life a privelege?