Seven ways Rick Perry wants to change the Constitution

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by likemyorbs, Aug 19, 2011.

  1. likemyorbs macrumors 68000

    likemyorbs

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #1
    Looks like the republicans really don't want to win anything in 2012. If the constitution doesn't fit your ideologies, change it! What an idiot. And btw, adding an amendment to ban gay marriage and abortion is unconstitutional. And I'm curious to know how exactly he intends to balance the budget if he repeals the federal income tax. Seriously, do conservatives have functioning brains or do they just talk out of their asses? Douche.


    http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/seven-ways-rick-perry-wants-change-constitution-131634517.html
     
  2. Gelfin macrumors 68020

    Gelfin

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2001
    Location:
    Denver, CO
    #2
    Note, please, a man who wants to claim for himself the authority to rewrite our nation in sweeping ways, often heedless (I can't prove "ignorant") of the the rationale for the status quo, and who has the temerity to label himself "conservative."

    I assume he means to set himself up as a dictator, since he couldn't get 3/4 of states to consent to any of those things except the balanced budget amendment, which historically is more likely practical to implement under a Democratic administration anyway. Either that or he means to be a ranting buffoon of a President who intends to spend his entire term railing against the will of the people in the name of the people.
     
  3. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #3
    Candidates like this guy are quite simply evil. There is no other way to look at it. Conservative, my ass. These people want to be dictators. This is absolutely insane. There is a reason the supreme court is set up the way it is, so that they interpret laws without concern for popular opinion.
     
  4. likemyorbs thread starter macrumors 68000

    likemyorbs

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #4
    Rick Perry+Michele Bachmann=Adolf Hitler
     
  5. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #5
    I didn't want to say it- but yes, you're right. This is exactly how the Nazis did it. They destroyed their own country first, then moved to destroy others. This is seriously scary stuff. That these people are being taken seriously by their own party as candidates should scare the hell out of us all. We cannot write these people off as too crazy to get elected. No one thought W would get elected and look what that did. We actually started a war. If any of these maniacs get near the White House, they will do their best to do what they say they want to do. This election is going to be a wake up call.
     
  6. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #6
    Technically speaking it would not be unconstitutional since changing it is which limits the power of the court and changes the rules they have to play by.
    Thing is none of those would ever make it out of senate and the house.

    Perry is scum for many reasons. These are just part of it.
     
  7. likemyorbs thread starter macrumors 68000

    likemyorbs

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #7
    Most Germans probably thought Hitler was too crazy to get elected too, that went well...

    That's true, and it's hard to comprehend doing that. Technically speaking, they can just scrap the whole constitution and start a new one from scratch. Just like Hitler.
     
  8. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #8
    You are correct. That's exactly what happened.
     
  9. Andeavor macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2010
    #9
    Unlike Americans now, the Germans were quite desperate for someone to lead the country, they would've followed Howdy Doody if he promised to do the job.
     
  10. eawmp1 macrumors 601

    eawmp1

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    Location:
    FL
    #10
    I think you underestimate a significant segment of U.S. society that wants ideological change in the country. While we are not post-WWI Depression Era broke, there is disparity between the haves and have-nots. We have a lack of a reasoned counter voice openly calling the ideological wing of the Tea Party on its BS.

    A series of events led to the rise of a charismatic leader in Germany in the early 20th century. I am always amazed when people say it couldn't happen here. While I think it unlikely, I am not naive enough to completely discount the possibility.
     
  11. Shrink macrumors G3

    Shrink

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    New England, USA
    #11



    There was a study done some years ago (sorry, I don't have the reference.)
    People were shown the Bill of Rights and were asked if they would endorse it, and what it was. The vast majority said they would not endorse the ideas, and said they thought the ideas presented we communist ideas.
    There are an unfortunate number of people who want a "strong leader" Not bad in and of itself - it's all in the definition of "strong leader" - and the freedoms they are willing to give up in the name of order.
    It has been said, and I would agree, that freedom and democracy are a messy business. Dictatorships are much neater, and frequently more efficient (I believe the trains did run on time in Italy under Mussolini).

    BUT AT WHAT COST!!!
     
  12. iJohnHenry macrumors P6

    iJohnHenry

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2008
    Location:
    On tenterhooks
    #12
    We had one, by the name of Trudeau, he of the "Watch me!!" and "Fuddle duddle." lines.

    Fortunately he was viewed by most as benevolent, but not all. ;)
     
  13. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #13
    Ban Federal Income tax- now that is a way to fix the budget problem! No more election of U.S. Senators, instead have them appointed by the State Legislature. What exactly would that solve?

    1. Abolish lifetime tenure for federal judges by amending Article III, Section I of the Constitution.

    2. Congress should have the power to override Supreme Court decisions with a two-thirds vote.

    3. Scrap the federal income tax by repealing the Sixteenth Amendment.

    4. End the direct election of senators by repealing the Seventeenth Amendment.

    5. Require the federal government to balance its budget every year.

    6. The federal Constitution should define marriage as between one man and one woman in all 50 states.

    7. Abortion should be made illegal throughout the country.
     
  14. Heilage macrumors 68030

    Heilage

    Joined:
    May 1, 2009
  15. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #15
    "Conservative" is a word I wish the media would stop using. Perry and Bachmann are from the radical right. And it is no secret why a radical faction would want to erode judicial independence.

    The Rule of Law is very inconvenient for a radical movement.

    In this case, the goal would seem to be to establish a theocracy, although I don't really think that is the actual agenda. (Let me look around the world for a theocratic model they could copy. Well, there is Iran.) In fact, I think they want to return to the happy world :rolleyes: of Woodrow Wilson, Warren Harding, and Calvin Coolidge, when the poor and minorities of all kinds understood their place in the social order, and the rich (WASPs of course) could do whatever the hell they wanted.
     
  16. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #16
    As scary as these extreme right wingers are, I hold Obama partially accountable for their rise. His leadership just plain sucks.
     
  17. Shrink macrumors G3

    Shrink

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    New England, USA
    #17

    Why don't we just tear up the whole constitution. This piece by piece gutting is just a waste of time. Just burn it, and appoint some christian fundamentalist emperor. Then you would have the country you want and would do away with that pesky freedom of expression. We would all just become christians - much simpler than having all those other dopey religions. And, of course, just do away with those godless atheists.
     
  18. zioxide macrumors 603

    zioxide

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #18
    why cant these people just **** off and die already? they are ruining this country. :mad::mad::mad:
     
  19. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #19
    Anyone else find it interesting that 'conservative' posters never chime in on threads like this one? I think it's a sign of how indefensible the extreme right has become. There's simply no way to spin anything positive out of BPP's off the charts extremism.

    It's really unfortunate that all Republican candidates have to bow to the Tea Party or be totally destroyed by them.
     
  20. CorvusCamenarum macrumors 65816

    CorvusCamenarum

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2004
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #20
    Given that we have 27 amendments to the Constitution, your premise that people wanting to change it are idiotic douchers seems a bit shaky.
     
  21. likemyorbs thread starter macrumors 68000

    likemyorbs

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    NJ
    #21
    ^^ There ya go...

     
  22. Rodimus Prime macrumors G4

    Rodimus Prime

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    #22
    Well the first 10 amendments (aka bill of rights) I would not really call amendments. The constitutions was passed on the promise that those were going to be added.

    We have added 2 voting right amendments (race and sex) You have the slavery 2 (end slavery and defines citizenship)
    Sovereignty immunity one (11)


    Of the 27 amendments really only 2 of them I would call crap and that is the two addressing Prohibition.

    Also considering that there has only been 27 amendments in a little less than 250 years should say something. Most of them for the most part are pretty good and really I would only call 16 of them really amendments as 1-10 were promised any how and were going to be added and the 11th really should of been there.
    Of those 16 only 2 of them would call truly crap.

    Now compare that to some states. Virginia being the most messed up. Texas also being one of the worse. There are amendments to the Texas Constitution every election. Hell part of the Texas Constitution is considered untranslatable because it is so messed up.
     
  23. Eraserhead macrumors G4

    Eraserhead

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2005
    Location:
    UK
    #23
    There is a third voting rights one, the 26th, which reduced the voting age to 18. And arguably the 23rd which gave voting rights to Washington DC.
     
  24. Ugg, Aug 20, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2011

    Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #24
    I'm going to agree with Rodimus, there are really only 17. When you divide 235 by 17 you get 14. If you eliminate the slavery ones as well as Prohibition, then that brings the number closer to 20. In other words, one amendment every two decades doesn't seem all that outstanding especially since they were created to create or clarify rights, not remove them.

    Perry doesn't only want one, but seven. Don't you think that's a sign of his extremism, of the degree that the Tea Party (funded by the Koch brothers) has hijacked American politics?

    Can you defend any of Perry's seven changes? Or, are you here simply to be snarky. If that's the case, then you've proven my point, haven't you?
     
  25. Huntn macrumors G5

    Huntn

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Location:
    The Misty Mountains
    #25
    They won't be satisfied until the job is complete. You can blame stupid voters and you can blame Obama for not getting mad and using his position as President to verbally kick the **** out of these people. Why not? They are all ready kicking the **** out of him. When is he going to get it? These people are like die-hard terrorists. They don't negotiate.
     

Share This Page