Quote:
Originally Posted by lookout123
To be fair, Radar's point has often been that those public facilities shouldn't exist in the first place NOT that it's unfair he should have to pay for something he wants to exist.
The thing is that Radar's interpretation of the constitution (and yes, Radar - that's all it is - YOUR interpretation, if it was hard fact there would be no debate)and the basis for the founding of this country lead him to these extreme views. There is no point in arguing the very real details of our social and political machines with someone who begins with the view that it is all illegitimate and ends with you're a poopy head. Only frustration can come from it.
|
My views are not extreme. Those who think it's ok for them to steal from others to suit their own desires are the extremists, not me.
Also, NO it is not my "interpretation" of the Constitution. I don't interpret the Constitution because it means what it says and it says the federal government may not be involved in, or legislate over areas that are not enumerated in the Constitution. End of story. I don't interpret the Constitution...I read it and unlike most people
(including many on the supreme court), I actually understand it.
Each and every single thing the federal government does that is not enumerated in the Constitution is unconstitutional and illegitimate, PERIOD. End of story. There is no gray area.