Re: Why Were You Silent, Rush, in 2003?

So you blindly DISMISS the limitations on legislative Power and declare yourself 'bored'?

Where is the Court empowered to declare legislation constitutional or unconstitutional (read: Court-worthy by your 'reasoning')?

con·sti·tu·tion·al adj of or pertaining to a constitution

The Congress has no legislative authority to simply 'make legislation'. They only have that authority/power provided it by the Constitution. For instance, Amendment I plainly states, "Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech ..." Any legislation that "abridges the freedom of speech" is unconstitutional. As such, the Congress has no authority/power to make such legislation in the first place ... and therefore cannot abide by the process found in AIS7. AIS7, of course, is not an enumeration of power, but merely the process in which legislation finding basis in the powers Congress has been provided BY the Constitution.

Regard$,
--MJ

The Constitution is the fundamental law for the federal government. If that government's own courts can arbitrarily change it's meaning, the government becomes a law unto itself --- that is a lawless government, a government of men, not of law. -- Joseph Sobran





At 12:51 PM 3/24/2011, you wrote:

I've already referred you to Article I, Section 7, and you lost my
interest in what I really thought was a good debate, with your
"apparently you can't..." drool.

A law passed by congress and signed by POTUS is constitutional law
until that other (apparently very mysterious branch - There, like it?
- to you says otherwise)

Thats it, simple as toast for most.

Apparently you can't fuck yourself.

Niether can I.

Have a nice day.

I had hoped for better.  My bad.

On Mar 24, 12:35 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> <sigh>
> Article I, Section 1, Clause 1
> All legislativePowers herein grantedshall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.
> Article I, Section 8, Clause 17
> To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Executionthe foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested bythis Constitution ...
> Article VI
> This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be madein Pursuance thereof... shall be the supreme Law of the Land;
> Amendment X
> The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.How is it you imagine that legislation where noPowers[were]herein grantedthat do not relateto the[enumerated]Powersor [any]other Powers vested in the ConstitutionAND are not madein Pursuance thereofare somehow law?The process by which legitimate legislation is affirmed into law is NOT a general grant of power to make legislation on anything whatsoever.
> Regard$,
> --MJ[E]very act of a delegated authority, contrary to the tenor of the commission under which it is exercised, is void. No legislative act, therefore, contrary to the Constitution, can be valid. To deny this,
> would be to affirm, that the deputy is greater than his principal; that the servant is above his master; that the representatives of the people are superior to the people themselves; that men acting by virtue of powers, may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid. -- Alexander HamiltonAt 12:22 PM 3/24/2011, you wrote:Uhm, no. Constitutional relates to the Constitution.
> ------------------------
> The CONSTITUTION says a bill passed by congress and signed by POTUS
> IS
> LAW!
> I mean unambiguosly.  Article I, Section 7.
> Black and white
> On Mar 24, 12:14 pm, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > At 11:20 AM 3/24/2011, you wrote:If a bill is passed by congress and signed by POTUS, it is LAW.
> > CONSTUTUTIONAL law, until the judiciary says otherwise.
> > Its black letter man!
> > Uhm, no. Constitutional relates to the Constitution.
> > Again, by this silliness the Constitution is meaningless. Instead of a Constitutionally LIMITED Republic, we are ruled by a Congress and Executive that do whatever they please until and unless a majority of those on the Court decree otherwise (and even then it does not necessarily matter).I don't like a lot of this any more than you do!  I'm just saying its
> > not unconstitutional until those empowered to determine
> > constitutionality, BY THE CONSTITUTION, say so.
> > Uhm, no. The Government does not determine what the Government may do or not do. The constitution is meaningless by such nonsensical asserion.Hell, I think the fed Dept of Education SHOULD be unconstitutional,
> > citing the very same amendment you do.  But Presidents ARE allowed to
> > create cabinet positions, ergo, departments, and until a court agrees
> > with me, its just as constitutional as any law and/or amendment passed/
> > signed/codified in the constitution or US Code.
> > [You cut off your finger.] Has your finger been 'removed' only when a doctor claims it has ... or can you assess the situation and determine for yourself?
> > Regard$,
> > --MJAn unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is, in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed. -- Norton v. Shelby, 118 US 425, 442 (1886).
> --
> Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
> * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.