smokedoper
Active Member
I was hanging with you untill you mentioned Andrew. I personally wouldn't vote him in as dogcatcher, no offense. I'm for the constitution, but a modern interpretation, one that fits modern times. The founding fathers expressly wanted this document to be a living document, one with provisions to fit the times. They never could have concieved of the society as it is. The basic tenents of the constitution are solid. They just need to be able to fit into todays society. Napolitano is too strict when interpreting it.
Actually, Thomas Jefferson did conceive of a society like this. He worried that the Federal Government would take away the rights of the States and Citizens of not only this country but others as well. That dictators would run this country if the citizens didn't stand up and stop them. Even though he helped form the government, write the Bill of Rights, The Constitution, etc., he was outspoken about the fact of what he was helping start could possibly end up being a bad thing for generations to come.