Will Dems EVER Expose The Right's Big Lie: A Monopoly of Original Intent

[ulTRAX]

The Right claims to have a monopoly on Original Intent and the Dems refuse to counter this claim by engaging in any real debate. In the process they surrender this issue to the Right. For example Kerry, to my knowledge never tried to educate the public on just why judges like Scalia must be opposed. All he talked of was the right to choose... not that Scalia has a radical doctrine and he believes it's his DUTY to prevent ANY new rights from being legally established. The 9th amendment be damned.

The Democrats and the Left MUST to go on the offensive on this issue. The Right's claims against the legitimacy of programs like Social Security need to be exposed. For example... was there any constitutional authority to create the NIH or build the interstate highway system? Was there constitutional authority to go to the moon? Is there any constitutional authority to become an imperial power?

At what point do we look at the Preamble to the Constitution for guidance in interpretation?

The Right's hypocrisy also needs to be exposed. As Pat Buchanan says... there was no constitutional authority to invade Iraq... and I might add to break international treaties in the process. According to the Constitution those international treaties are also the supreme law of the land.

[Warpy]

1. Perhaps they will address this stuff

once that gaggle of GOP moles known as the DLC is out of power. The party right now is a bunch of scared old maids in trousers who are all terrified of upsetting the GOP scams that are lowering their taxes and fattening their portfolios.

Those twits haven't represented the needs of the people, the party or the country in decades.

[ulTRAX]

4. and the DNC is any better?

While I have nothing but contempt for the DLC... my feelings about the Democratic Party generally are not that much higher. The issues I'm raising a systemic throughout the entire party, not just DLC.

[bowens43]

2. Original intent is irrelevent.

The founding fathers themselves believed and stated that once the Constitution was accepted by the people that 'Original Intent' should play no roll in subsequent efforts to interpret the meaning of the text.

The entire 'Original Intent' argument made by the conservatives is bogus.

[ulTRAX]

3. that's quite a claim.........source please...... n/m

[eallen]

5. The 9th amendment directs a liberal interpretation of civil liberties.

Since it was part of the original Bill of Rights, that direction would seem to be original intent.

[ulTRAX]

8. scalia would say.....

Scalia would claim that the only rights covered by the Constitution are those believed to be rights at the time the Bill of Rights was ratified. It's a ridiculous claim since the entire point of the 9th is that we were not granted rights by government. They were an unalienable part of being human. Scalia has found the perfect cover for his own bigotry.

[eallen]

10. Then he should be pro-choice -- abortion wasn't banned until late 19th c.

[ulTRAX]

11. scalia has found.......

As I said earlier, Scalia has found the perfect cover for his own bigotry. He can pick and choose what rights he believes other Americans should have based upon selective historical references.

BTW... do you have a source for your claim?

[eallen]

12. No, but I'm sure one is easily found.

This isn't some obscure history. There was a big turn to the puritanical following the Civil War. Laws against liquor, culminating in Prohibition. Laws against birth control. Laws against abortion. The libertarian-puritan divide split the early feminists, as well as the later ones. Doing a quick search on Amazon turns up this book:

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0195026160/qid=1110840465/sr=1-2/ref=sr_1_2/002-0366795-0437625?v=glance&s=books

[ulTRAX]

13. thanks.......

I'll check it out. If true it does throw another wrench in Scalia's self-serving distortions of history.

[Al-CIAda]

6. WHEN will they grow a fucking SPINE???!

Its seems they are content to play 'opposition'.

[bvar22]

7. When WE hold them accountable.

A stake must be driven through the argument that we need to keep electing these same Dems because they are better than republicans. This only buys more of the same.

Explain to me again why I should support anyone who will work against the interests of the Working Class, Labor, the Middle Class, and the poor.

Its time to expel the $$$Money Changers from our temple!

[ulTRAX]

9. The Dems are not even a worthy opposition party

The Dems can't keep passing off constituent issues as principle. If they do they surrender by default the bigger philosophical arguments to the Right. By the bigger issues I mean from debating the Constitution, to markets, to democracy to where we want to see the US in 50 years.