Everyone at one point another has thought of who is the hottest celebrity and who they’d like to spend quality naked time with. I propose thinking of the reverse. Who of the opposite sex would you least like to see naked?
My vote.
Helen Thomas. I can’t imagine a worse site. She kind of reminds me of one of the Mystics from the movie Dark Crystal only uglier.
Every time I announce to other people something I don’t want to happen to me it seems the probability of it happening to me increases exponentially. I learned that the hard way when I told my friends I didn’t want a short female Indian doctor with sharp fingers to check me for hernias two weeks ago. So to try and work this cosmic curse in my favor I’m going to announce that I hope I never see S.E. Cupp naked.
Blackhawk, if that whole reverse-psychology thing worked I would have a harem of Maxim cover girls living at my house right now. But I don’t, so it doesn’t.
I’m voting Janeane Garofalo. Fairly certain that nakedness would reveal a tat of a Medusa-like monster devouring a screaming man. Plus, I imagine that Janeane smells bad. REALLY bad.
You could be right on JG though I imagine something far more sinister. Think Quatto from Total Recall. Strangely I also imagine an unpleasant odor, kind of like a badly overheated car or microwaved salmon.
Look the Chinese have us over a barrell with this jackass in the White House. That is the problem. Trust me I’d be working over time helping companys extrocate themselves of China. Bring our manufacturing back and drill baby drill….exploit our genius for creating technology and f the world. You wanna play? Play OUR game or get the hell out of the way.
One thing we need to be really concerned about is the dollar being dropped as a reserve currency. The sudden flood of dollars currently held in reserve coming into the market from China and other nations coupled with the fact that we have already printed too much to meet our skyrocketing debt could very realistically devalue our currency so much that we could quickly find ourselves in hyper-inflation. Not to mention the always looming threat of China calling us due on what we owe, which they are more likely to do if our currency starts to decline too rapidly. Scary times folks.
I just added this to the fact-check link — people are twittering their OWN fact-checks of SNL skits. Like how Ace & Gary = not gay, not even ambiguously gay.
METRODOME: CENTER OF IT ALL
Although modern society reached its zenith Monday night during Favre vs. Packers, the world somehow continues to turn. In fact, there is something called a “base ball” game at the Metrodome Tuesday afternoon! … and Metrodome staff had plenty to do to get the venue ready in time.
Midnight — Begin changing the field over from football to baseball. Expose infield dirt. Sweep off Packers’ offensive linemen still lying on their backs. Remove any stray footballs that Adrian Peterson fumbled.
1 a.m. — Begin cleaning the stands. Extinguish the candles in Brett Favre shrines.
3 a.m. — Clear out the press box. Find other accommodations for media members still working on their 12-volume sonnets to Favre.
4 a.m. — An hour moment of quiet reflection and reverence in honor of No. 4, Brett Favre.
5 a.m. — Begin preparing the Twins and Tigers dugouts.
7 a.m. — Begin preparing Jim Leyland’s ashtray.
7:30 a.m. — Delivery of scotch to Miguel Cabrera’s locker.
8 a.m. — Light the candles in Joe Mauer shrines.
9 a.m. — Sweep away media members who fainted in front of Favre’s locker.
10 a.m. — Baseball players begin arriving at the park.
11 a.m. — Designated hitters and pitchers begin arriving at the park.
Noon — Fans passed out in the Metrodome parking lot are roused and told to change into Twins gear.
1 p.m. — Twins take batting practice.
2 p.m. — Tigers take batting practice.
3 p.m. — Tigers learn Heimlich maneuver.
4 p.m. — An hour’s moment of quiet reflection and reverence in honor of No. 4 Brett Favre.
@ JJ: We’re not the only country that has that complex. Not by a longshot. The UK has had it since World War II, the Germans have had it since then for obvious reasons, the French caught it in the 1950s. The only reason Canada *doesn’t* have it is that their entire national identity is based on saying “At least I’m not American!” Italy would probably have it, aside from a lack of introspection. (Ah, Italy: The drunken fratboy of Europe!)
So, I’ve been polishing up a set of amendments that we published on Modern Conservative months back. It was a heavily-modified “Bill of Federalism,” borrowing from Bill Barnett’s original amendments. You can find the article here, but the latest amendments are below. I would much appreciate everyone’s opinions. Personally, I think they’re the best set of proposed amendments out there. They’ve had a lot of scrutiny from some very smart people and some professionals.
Article {of Amendment 1} ~ Meaning and Supremacy of the Constitution
Section 1. The words and phrases of this Constitution shall be interpreted according to their common meaning at the time they were ratified, which meaning shall remain the same until changed pursuant to Article V; nor shall such meaning be altered by reference to the law of nations or the laws of other nations. In cases where words are susceptible of two different senses, the one strict, the other more enlarged, the one shall be adopted, which is most consonant with the apparent objects and intent of the Constitution.
Section 2. No treaty or other international agreement may enlarge the legislative power of Congress granted by this Constitution, nor govern except by legislation any activity that is confined within the United States.
Article {of Amendment 2} ~ Limits on Powers and Terms for the Supreme Court
Section 1. The Supreme Court of the United States, in exercising judicial Power in a case it has heard, is prohibited from extending its decision beyond whatever laws, treaties, or words of the Constitution the parties to the case have provided arguments for.
Section 2. All Judges appointed by the President to the Supreme Court, pursuant to section 2 of Article II, shall hold their offices for a period of fifteen years and be eligible for reappointment by the President without the Advice and Consent of the Senate.
Article {of Amendment 3} ~ Reversal of Supreme Court Rulings
Section 1. Where, in exercising Judicial power, any decision of the Supreme Court that infringes upon any of the rights of the People of the United States recognized by this Constitution, the powers reserved to the several States, or the powers legitimately delegated to Congress or the President, Congress and the President shall, in the manner laid down in the article of this amendment, have the power to render that decision void and reverse it.
Section 2. By a majority in the House of Representatives, a majority of two-thirds in the Senate and subsequent approval and signing by the President, a bill of resolution may be passed which renders void any decision of the Supreme Court and reverses it, pursuant to section 1 of the article of this amendment.
Article {of Amendment 4} ~ Repeal of the Seventeenth Article of Amendment to the Constitution
The seventeenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed. Article I, Section 3 of this Constitution is hereby reinstated and in force.
Article {of Amendment 5} ~ Approval Vote for Incumbent Delegates of the House of Representatives
The election year in which the President of the Unites States will be decided after this amendment is ratified and every such election year hence, the several States shall have on the ballot this question: ‘Are you satisfied with your statewide congressional delegation: Yea or Nay’ If a majority of eligible voters voting in that election choose Yea, nothing will occur. If the Secretaries of State from the several States certify that a majority of eligible voters, voting in the election choose Nay, the incumbent delegates to the House of Representatives prior to the election, assuming they were retained by their district in the election, will not be eligible for election during the next elections, which occur in the second year of the President’s term. The incumbent delegates will only lose their eligibility for the one election, unless they later fall again under the previous question in their service to the People. This amendment will only apply to the incumbent delegates of the House of Representatives.
Article {of Amendment 6} ~ Limits on Federal Power
Section 1. The Federal Government, except under a declaration of war, is prohibited from assuming the following responsibilities: to ensure the economic well being of any persons, real or juristic, by any means or for any period of time, to ensure the rights or presumed rights of any group as a group, to interfere with or aid education at any level.
Section 2. Congress shall not impose upon a State, or political subdivision thereof, any obligation or duty to make expenditures unless such expenditures shall be fully reimbursed by the United States; nor shall Congress place any condition on the expenditure or receipt of appropriated funds requiring a State, or political subdivision thereof, to enact a law or regulation restricting the rights of its citizens.
Section 3. The power of Congress to make all laws which are necessary and proper to regulate commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall not be construed to include the power to regulate or prohibit any activity that is confined within a single state regardless of its effects outside the State, whether it employs instrumentalities therefrom, or whether its regulation or prohibition is part of a comprehensive regulatory scheme; but Congress shall have power to regulate harmful emissions between one state and another, and to define and provide for punishment of offenses constituting acts of war or violent insurrection against the United States.
Section 4. All juristic persons and private entities, including by not limited to educational, religious, charitable, philanthropic, cultural, and community service organizations, are subject to the jurisdiction of the State in which they are chartered or incorporated. All such charters granted with in a State are subject to alteration or revocation by its legislature, as its constitution and laws allow.
Section 5. The powers and authority delegated to Congress under this Constitution shall not be delegated to any jurisdiction, administrative agency, elective office, appointed office, or other organ of government, that they may exercise such authority or powers.
Section 6. No citizen or resident of the United States may be prosecuted for a felony, or receive felony punishment, where no intent has been established to commit the crime they are prosecuted for, or where a crime is not first established as malum in se.
Section 7. All laws and regulations enforced by the Federal Government and its organs, which fall under the prohibitions of this article of amendment, shall be nullified with in four years from the date of its ratification. All expenditures of the Federal Government and its organs which fall under the prohibitions of this amendment shall be prohibited from incurring a deficit in the year of its ratification and fall by one third of the amount in that year, each year thereafter.
Article {of Amendment 7} ~ Balanced Budget
Section 1. For purposes of this article, the budget of the Federal Government for any given fiscal year shall be deemed unbalanced whenever the total amount of the debt of the United States held by the public at the close of such fiscal year is greater than the total amount of the debt of the United States held by the public at the close of the preceding fiscal year.
Section 2. For the purposes of this article, Gross Domestic Product is defined as the per annum market value of all final goods and services produced within the borders of the United States, or the compensation of persons employed with in the United States, taxes on production and imports less subsidies, and the gross operating surplus of all private businesses with in the United States.
Section 3. The several States, in such manner as the legislatures thereof may direct, shall be responsible for individually calculating and publishing the per annum market value of all final goods and services with in their own borders. The sum total of those amounts published by the several States shall constitute the monetary figure of the Gross Domestic Product to be used by Congress.
Section 4. The budget of the Federal Government and shall not become unbalanced or exceed ten percent of the Gross Domestic Product, except under a declaration of war.
Section 5. All bills presented before the Congress that would increase the total amount of monies spent or persons employed by the Federal Government, shall contain a provision at the their end for a maximum funding limit, with the total monetary value of that limit.
Section 6. If the budget of the Federal Government is unbalanced or exceeds ten percent of the Gross Domestic Product for any given fiscal year, the President may separately approve, reduce or disapprove any monetary amounts in any legislation that appropriates or authorizes the appropriation of any money drawn from the Treasury, other than money for the operation of the Congress and judiciary of the United States, and which is presented to the President during the next annual session of Congress.
Section 7. Any legislation that the President approves with changes pursuant to section 4 and section 6 of this article shall become law as modified. The President shall return with objections those portions of the legislation containing reduced or disapproved monetary amounts to the House where such legislation originated, which may then, in the manner prescribed under section 7 of Article I for bills disapproved by the President, separately reconsider those reduced or disapproved monetary amounts.
Section 8. The Congress shall have the power to implement this article by appropriate legislation.
Section 9. This article shall take effect on the first day of the next annual session of Congress following its ratification.
Article {of Amendment 8} ~ Requirements for Bills and Acts of Congress
Section 1. No law, bill, resolution, nor any act of Congress, nor any item Congress may vote on, shall exceed two thousand five hundred words, including all footnotes, amendments and signatures. Each item requiring a vote shall be twice read aloud in its entirety in session to all members present. Those members of Congress not in attendance may not vote on the item.
Section 2. For any law, bill, resolution, or any act of Congress, or any item to be voted on by Congress, a final version shall be made available in its entirety to be read by public for a minimum of ninety-six hours before a vote scheduled for that item. It shall be freely made available in both hard copy and other forms of media accessible to the public.
Section 3. The members of Congress shall be subject to any prohibitions, restrictions or conditions placed upon the People of the United States by any law, bill, resolution, or act that should be passed by Congress and become law, without exception.
HEy any of you hear the story that our illustreous allies, France, China, Russia, and Japan are conspiring with the trash from the Arab Gulf states to drop the dollar as teh currency for trading oil? What does this mean? Any of you econ. people have something to say about this? Scares the crap out of me.
Amendment 2, especially the part about giving the President the “firing” power to remove members of the Supreme Court without the Senate approval seems quite dangerous.
Amendment 2, especially the part about giving the President the “firing” power to remove members of the Supreme Court without the Senate approval seems quite dangerous.
The President cannot fire. He can only renew employment. The judge has already previously passed with the Senate’s approval when they were first appointed and *every* judge’s term ends without that presidential renewal. It’s a lighter form of term limits that makes sure the court isn’t stuck with bad justices for decades on end.
“It’s a lighter form of term limits that makes sure the court isn’t stuck with bad justices for decades on end.”
But it will not work like that. Presidents will merely use it as a way to get rid of Justices who rule against them and then, if they have a good Senate Majority, stack the court with a more friendly Justices.
Presidents will merely use it as a way to get rid of Justices who rule against them…
Some will. Some won’t. But amendment 3 provides a recourse to that problem.
…if they have a good Senate Majority, stack the court with a more friendly Justices…
Which is not all that different than what happens now, except the process happens a bit more slowly and the justices have lifetime appointments. Yes, a unprincipled president can stack the court with judges, but another president could also appoint better judges to the court. The result is that the court has a higher turnover, meaning that rulings are are once again made to be interpretations of the law, instead of becoming de facto law through the rather static makeup of the court.
And like I said, amendment 3 provides a recourse for where the court overstretches itself. That’s there to make sure that stacking the court doesn’t last for 15 year cycles. Amendments 4 and 5 give the states and the people increased power over Congress, creating a deterrent to playing such games. In all, it becomes rather impractical to make such power grabs, which may do more to restore the SC’s independence than anything else.
Repealling of the 16th ammendment. I view the 16th ammendment as a direct assault on the 10th ammendment in that the Federal Government levying taxes on the citizens of each state allows the Federal Government to bribe the states with their own money. Not to mention the obvious slippery slope of over taxation.
On your ammendment 8 I would restrict the language used in these bills. A great deal of the trouble people have is an inability to translate what is written. I feel an article requiring the bills be presented in language determined to be at or below an 8th grade reading level be added.
Repealing of the 16th amendment. I view the 16th amendment as a direct assault on the 10th amendment in that the Federal Government levying taxes on the citizens of each state allows the Federal Government to bribe the states with their own money. Not to mention the obvious slippery slope of over taxation.
I agree, but the question is one of sequence. If we cut taxation first, we now have all the massive government expenditures, without the revenue. Now we have government borrowing or printing even more money to meet those expenditures until it can sort things out and cut spending (programs like Medicare and Social Security can;t be cut overnight). We also have to worry about transitioning to a new tax system and making sure its revenue neutral when we do.
If we cut spending first, tying it to a proportional limit based on the percentage of GDP, then it’s that much easier to change taxation.
On your amendment 8 I would restrict the language used in these bills. A great deal of the trouble people have is an inability to translate what is written. I feel an article requiring the bills be presented in language determined to be at or below an 8th grade reading level be added.
Good intent, but that’s a can a worms. How do you define an “8th grade reading level”? Do you tie it to an existing standard? Do you define it in the amendment? Who’s going to read these bills and judge whether they meet this standard? Will this be the same reading standard in 50, 100 or 200 years? What happens to bills that deal with areas of law that are more technically specialized or esoteric?
By restricting the length of a bill, you restrict the complexity of the language that can be used. You’re going to eat up that 2,500 word limit pretty quickly if you get long-winded.
If they were to do this, it would bankrupt us, sink our economy and cause the US dollar to collapse. China holds trillions in US debt. The Gulf States too many economic and political ties to the US. We’re Japan’s largest trading partner, if memory serves. What that means is that China looses its largest debtor, as we default on all those loans, as well as losing their largest trading partner (and having their own economy collapse as a result). The Gulf States are now beholden to China and Russia, as well as suffering economic fallout. Japan knee-caps itself with its largest strategic ally. In short, there’s no rational reason to make such a move right now.
Moreover, this is all based on a report from the Independent, a liberal anti-US newspaper, using unnamed sources that mention secret talks. No one else has caught on to this before now? And why are these sources speaking so freely? How do we know half the details in the report aren’t wrong? How the hell do you get these particular countries to work together this closely to engineer this? There are many reasons to doubt the veracity of this report. I have no doubt that someone is engaging in a bit of saber-rattling to send a message, but if there were secret talks to do something like this, it sure as hell wouldn’t be some birdcage-lining like the Independent breaking the story.
I disagree. He is establishing that after a term of 15 years they be able to be removed and I don’t think that’s unreasonable. This lifetime term they currently enjoy is far more dangerous than what David is proposing.
Personally I’ve always believed more in the nation’s judges being able to vote a peer to the Supreme Court. It is the most logical way to do it. Every 12 years each judge’s appointment would then be put back up for a vote of their judicial peers and if they did not have a voting confidence of the majority then a new candidate would be elected to take their place. I think the President and politics need to be cut out of the Supreme Court all together to maintain the true integrity of the court.
I know I’m going to suffer many lashes for this but on some things – No, I’m not missing GWB much at all.
On two big things – Tax cuts & war against Islamo-Nazism – yeah, I’m missing him.
On a whole bunch of stuff that only grew the Nanny State – Perscription Drugs, No Child Left Behind, signing into the law the 2012 incandescent light bulb ban, Bailouts, “I’m abandoning free market principles, in order to save the free market.” – all that Democrat-like gobbledygook I don’t miss at all.
Agreed Daniel. We’ve really just went from the frying pan and into the fire.
David,
You make good points on the taxation issue and I’m of the opinion that entitlements like Social Secruity and Medicare must be done away with but obviously they must be phased out. There is simply no economic model where they are financially sustainable.
As for your question on amendment 8 my 8th grade level addition actually stems from an existing Federal Law that is enforced by CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) that states all correspondence that could potentially be viewed by Medicare beneficiaries had to be written at or below an 8th grade level (and in a size 12 font). This reading level is based off of Federal Education standards.
No. I like Mr. Bush…might even like to sit next to him in church, but I think had he stayed in office much longer the Democrat majority would be greater than it is now. I have little idea what really went on inside the WH, but it looks to me as though there were too few issues he was willing to go to the mat for. Mr. Reagan (whom I hated at the time since I was a liberal then) mobilized the entire Executive Branch to institute his programs. Mr. Obama is doing the same thing now, it seems. Man, what Mr. Bush could have done with public education if he’s been bold enough. I think his weakness in such areas has left the liberals in the Federal Government (and those outside the Government who seem to do so much of the play-calling) in a much better position to move quickly to serve Mr. Obama’s will.
Print
Digg
StumbleUpon
del.icio.us
Facebook
Yahoo! Buzz
Twitter
Google Bookmarks
Google Buzz
LinkedIn
MSN Reporter
MySpace
Orkut
Ping.fm
Reddit
RSS
Slashdot
Technorati
Tumblr
Webnews.de
Everyone at one point another has thought of who is the hottest celebrity and who they’d like to spend quality naked time with. I propose thinking of the reverse. Who of the opposite sex would you least like to see naked?
My vote.
Helen Thomas. I can’t imagine a worse site. She kind of reminds me of one of the Mystics from the movie Dark Crystal only uglier.
Paris Hilton, Megan Fox, and Lindsay Lohan.
I second Kit’s choices, and add Keira Knightley. These aren’t women, they’re stick insects. Eat something, for God’s sake.
I miss you, George.
Hell, I miss Slick Willy at this point. At least he didn’t hate me and my kind.
Every time I announce to other people something I don’t want to happen to me it seems the probability of it happening to me increases exponentially. I learned that the hard way when I told my friends I didn’t want a short female Indian doctor with sharp fingers to check me for hernias two weeks ago. So to try and work this cosmic curse in my favor I’m going to announce that I hope I never see S.E. Cupp naked.
http://images.politico.com/global/arena/cupp_se.jpg
I mean…yuck!
Blackhawk, if that whole reverse-psychology thing worked I would have a harem of Maxim cover girls living at my house right now. But I don’t, so it doesn’t.
For everyone intersted in CS Lewis, I give you http://www.republibot.com/content/science-fiction-university-temptation-c-s-lewiss-perelandra
I thought SNL’s slam on the president last week was pretty funny. Anyone see it?
Kit,
While Megan Fox is indeed aggravating she is easy on the eyes so I find that one perplexing.
I’m voting Janeane Garofalo. Fairly certain that nakedness would reveal a tat of a Medusa-like monster devouring a screaming man. Plus, I imagine that Janeane smells bad. REALLY bad.
Michael Moore. That alone just says it all.
Trzupr,
You could be right on JG though I imagine something far more sinister. Think Quatto from Total Recall. Strangely I also imagine an unpleasant odor, kind of like a badly overheated car or microwaved salmon.
Obama can’t even roll out the carpet for Dali Lama.
WWRGD (what wold Richard Gere do?)?
JJ, it’s just another part of the pattern that Obama is establishing.
Irritate China by enacting tire tariffs? Okay. By meeting with the spiritual leader of an oppressed people? Don’t hold your breath.
Look the Chinese have us over a barrell with this jackass in the White House. That is the problem. Trust me I’d be working over time helping companys extrocate themselves of China. Bring our manufacturing back and drill baby drill….exploit our genius for creating technology and f the world. You wanna play? Play OUR game or get the hell out of the way.
I swear we are the only nation in history that has some self-loathing complex.
and yeah, the Jackaninny in Chief obviously does not like democracy and self-determination.
OK the Prez was at CTC today and making a profound jackass of himself. Listen to Rush…OMG….
One thing we need to be really concerned about is the dollar being dropped as a reserve currency. The sudden flood of dollars currently held in reserve coming into the market from China and other nations coupled with the fact that we have already printed too much to meet our skyrocketing debt could very realistically devalue our currency so much that we could quickly find ourselves in hyper-inflation. Not to mention the always looming threat of China calling us due on what we owe, which they are more likely to do if our currency starts to decline too rapidly. Scary times folks.
Still not as scary as Helen Thomas nude though.
I just added this to the fact-check link — people are twittering their OWN fact-checks of SNL skits. Like how Ace & Gary = not gay, not even ambiguously gay.
JimmyC
Don’t harsh my fantasies with your pesky “reality” and “logic”. That stuff has has no place here.
ESPN Page 2′s DJ Gallo rocks…
METRODOME: CENTER OF IT ALL
Although modern society reached its zenith Monday night during Favre vs. Packers, the world somehow continues to turn. In fact, there is something called a “base ball” game at the Metrodome Tuesday afternoon! … and Metrodome staff had plenty to do to get the venue ready in time.
Midnight — Begin changing the field over from football to baseball. Expose infield dirt. Sweep off Packers’ offensive linemen still lying on their backs. Remove any stray footballs that Adrian Peterson fumbled.
1 a.m. — Begin cleaning the stands. Extinguish the candles in Brett Favre shrines.
3 a.m. — Clear out the press box. Find other accommodations for media members still working on their 12-volume sonnets to Favre.
4 a.m. — An hour moment of quiet reflection and reverence in honor of No. 4, Brett Favre.
5 a.m. — Begin preparing the Twins and Tigers dugouts.
7 a.m. — Begin preparing Jim Leyland’s ashtray.
7:30 a.m. — Delivery of scotch to Miguel Cabrera’s locker.
8 a.m. — Light the candles in Joe Mauer shrines.
9 a.m. — Sweep away media members who fainted in front of Favre’s locker.
10 a.m. — Baseball players begin arriving at the park.
11 a.m. — Designated hitters and pitchers begin arriving at the park.
Noon — Fans passed out in the Metrodome parking lot are roused and told to change into Twins gear.
1 p.m. — Twins take batting practice.
2 p.m. — Tigers take batting practice.
3 p.m. — Tigers learn Heimlich maneuver.
4 p.m. — An hour’s moment of quiet reflection and reverence in honor of No. 4 Brett Favre.
5:07 p.m. — Twins-Tigers first pitch.
That’s good stuff. The announcing on the game was hysterical! Gruden in particular had his “O” face out the whole time.
@ JJ: We’re not the only country that has that complex. Not by a longshot. The UK has had it since World War II, the Germans have had it since then for obvious reasons, the French caught it in the 1950s. The only reason Canada *doesn’t* have it is that their entire national identity is based on saying “At least I’m not American!” Italy would probably have it, aside from a lack of introspection. (Ah, Italy: The drunken fratboy of Europe!)
>>Ah, Italy: The drunken fratboy of Europe!>>
Yes! If it’s not already, “Berlusconi” should be a verb encompassing many things harmlessly lewd, lascivious or borderline skeevy.
So, I’ve been polishing up a set of amendments that we published on Modern Conservative months back. It was a heavily-modified “Bill of Federalism,” borrowing from Bill Barnett’s original amendments. You can find the article here, but the latest amendments are below. I would much appreciate everyone’s opinions. Personally, I think they’re the best set of proposed amendments out there. They’ve had a lot of scrutiny from some very smart people and some professionals.
Article {of Amendment 1} ~ Meaning and Supremacy of the Constitution
Section 1. The words and phrases of this Constitution shall be interpreted according to their common meaning at the time they were ratified, which meaning shall remain the same until changed pursuant to Article V; nor shall such meaning be altered by reference to the law of nations or the laws of other nations. In cases where words are susceptible of two different senses, the one strict, the other more enlarged, the one shall be adopted, which is most consonant with the apparent objects and intent of the Constitution.
Section 2. No treaty or other international agreement may enlarge the legislative power of Congress granted by this Constitution, nor govern except by legislation any activity that is confined within the United States.
Article {of Amendment 2} ~ Limits on Powers and Terms for the Supreme Court
Section 1. The Supreme Court of the United States, in exercising judicial Power in a case it has heard, is prohibited from extending its decision beyond whatever laws, treaties, or words of the Constitution the parties to the case have provided arguments for.
Section 2. All Judges appointed by the President to the Supreme Court, pursuant to section 2 of Article II, shall hold their offices for a period of fifteen years and be eligible for reappointment by the President without the Advice and Consent of the Senate.
Article {of Amendment 3} ~ Reversal of Supreme Court Rulings
Section 1. Where, in exercising Judicial power, any decision of the Supreme Court that infringes upon any of the rights of the People of the United States recognized by this Constitution, the powers reserved to the several States, or the powers legitimately delegated to Congress or the President, Congress and the President shall, in the manner laid down in the article of this amendment, have the power to render that decision void and reverse it.
Section 2. By a majority in the House of Representatives, a majority of two-thirds in the Senate and subsequent approval and signing by the President, a bill of resolution may be passed which renders void any decision of the Supreme Court and reverses it, pursuant to section 1 of the article of this amendment.
Article {of Amendment 4} ~ Repeal of the Seventeenth Article of Amendment to the Constitution
The seventeenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed. Article I, Section 3 of this Constitution is hereby reinstated and in force.
Article {of Amendment 5} ~ Approval Vote for Incumbent Delegates of the House of Representatives
The election year in which the President of the Unites States will be decided after this amendment is ratified and every such election year hence, the several States shall have on the ballot this question: ‘Are you satisfied with your statewide congressional delegation: Yea or Nay’ If a majority of eligible voters voting in that election choose Yea, nothing will occur. If the Secretaries of State from the several States certify that a majority of eligible voters, voting in the election choose Nay, the incumbent delegates to the House of Representatives prior to the election, assuming they were retained by their district in the election, will not be eligible for election during the next elections, which occur in the second year of the President’s term. The incumbent delegates will only lose their eligibility for the one election, unless they later fall again under the previous question in their service to the People. This amendment will only apply to the incumbent delegates of the House of Representatives.
Article {of Amendment 6} ~ Limits on Federal Power
Section 1. The Federal Government, except under a declaration of war, is prohibited from assuming the following responsibilities: to ensure the economic well being of any persons, real or juristic, by any means or for any period of time, to ensure the rights or presumed rights of any group as a group, to interfere with or aid education at any level.
Section 2. Congress shall not impose upon a State, or political subdivision thereof, any obligation or duty to make expenditures unless such expenditures shall be fully reimbursed by the United States; nor shall Congress place any condition on the expenditure or receipt of appropriated funds requiring a State, or political subdivision thereof, to enact a law or regulation restricting the rights of its citizens.
Section 3. The power of Congress to make all laws which are necessary and proper to regulate commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall not be construed to include the power to regulate or prohibit any activity that is confined within a single state regardless of its effects outside the State, whether it employs instrumentalities therefrom, or whether its regulation or prohibition is part of a comprehensive regulatory scheme; but Congress shall have power to regulate harmful emissions between one state and another, and to define and provide for punishment of offenses constituting acts of war or violent insurrection against the United States.
Section 4. All juristic persons and private entities, including by not limited to educational, religious, charitable, philanthropic, cultural, and community service organizations, are subject to the jurisdiction of the State in which they are chartered or incorporated. All such charters granted with in a State are subject to alteration or revocation by its legislature, as its constitution and laws allow.
Section 5. The powers and authority delegated to Congress under this Constitution shall not be delegated to any jurisdiction, administrative agency, elective office, appointed office, or other organ of government, that they may exercise such authority or powers.
Section 6. No citizen or resident of the United States may be prosecuted for a felony, or receive felony punishment, where no intent has been established to commit the crime they are prosecuted for, or where a crime is not first established as malum in se.
Section 7. All laws and regulations enforced by the Federal Government and its organs, which fall under the prohibitions of this article of amendment, shall be nullified with in four years from the date of its ratification. All expenditures of the Federal Government and its organs which fall under the prohibitions of this amendment shall be prohibited from incurring a deficit in the year of its ratification and fall by one third of the amount in that year, each year thereafter.
Article {of Amendment 7} ~ Balanced Budget
Section 1. For purposes of this article, the budget of the Federal Government for any given fiscal year shall be deemed unbalanced whenever the total amount of the debt of the United States held by the public at the close of such fiscal year is greater than the total amount of the debt of the United States held by the public at the close of the preceding fiscal year.
Section 2. For the purposes of this article, Gross Domestic Product is defined as the per annum market value of all final goods and services produced within the borders of the United States, or the compensation of persons employed with in the United States, taxes on production and imports less subsidies, and the gross operating surplus of all private businesses with in the United States.
Section 3. The several States, in such manner as the legislatures thereof may direct, shall be responsible for individually calculating and publishing the per annum market value of all final goods and services with in their own borders. The sum total of those amounts published by the several States shall constitute the monetary figure of the Gross Domestic Product to be used by Congress.
Section 4. The budget of the Federal Government and shall not become unbalanced or exceed ten percent of the Gross Domestic Product, except under a declaration of war.
Section 5. All bills presented before the Congress that would increase the total amount of monies spent or persons employed by the Federal Government, shall contain a provision at the their end for a maximum funding limit, with the total monetary value of that limit.
Section 6. If the budget of the Federal Government is unbalanced or exceeds ten percent of the Gross Domestic Product for any given fiscal year, the President may separately approve, reduce or disapprove any monetary amounts in any legislation that appropriates or authorizes the appropriation of any money drawn from the Treasury, other than money for the operation of the Congress and judiciary of the United States, and which is presented to the President during the next annual session of Congress.
Section 7. Any legislation that the President approves with changes pursuant to section 4 and section 6 of this article shall become law as modified. The President shall return with objections those portions of the legislation containing reduced or disapproved monetary amounts to the House where such legislation originated, which may then, in the manner prescribed under section 7 of Article I for bills disapproved by the President, separately reconsider those reduced or disapproved monetary amounts.
Section 8. The Congress shall have the power to implement this article by appropriate legislation.
Section 9. This article shall take effect on the first day of the next annual session of Congress following its ratification.
Article {of Amendment 8} ~ Requirements for Bills and Acts of Congress
Section 1. No law, bill, resolution, nor any act of Congress, nor any item Congress may vote on, shall exceed two thousand five hundred words, including all footnotes, amendments and signatures. Each item requiring a vote shall be twice read aloud in its entirety in session to all members present. Those members of Congress not in attendance may not vote on the item.
Section 2. For any law, bill, resolution, or any act of Congress, or any item to be voted on by Congress, a final version shall be made available in its entirety to be read by public for a minimum of ninety-six hours before a vote scheduled for that item. It shall be freely made available in both hard copy and other forms of media accessible to the public.
Section 3. The members of Congress shall be subject to any prohibitions, restrictions or conditions placed upon the People of the United States by any law, bill, resolution, or act that should be passed by Congress and become law, without exception.
HEy any of you hear the story that our illustreous allies, France, China, Russia, and Japan are conspiring with the trash from the Arab Gulf states to drop the dollar as teh currency for trading oil? What does this mean? Any of you econ. people have something to say about this? Scares the crap out of me.
David,
Amendment 2, especially the part about giving the President the “firing” power to remove members of the Supreme Court without the Senate approval seems quite dangerous.
Amendment 2, especially the part about giving the President the “firing” power to remove members of the Supreme Court without the Senate approval seems quite dangerous.
The President cannot fire. He can only renew employment. The judge has already previously passed with the Senate’s approval when they were first appointed and *every* judge’s term ends without that presidential renewal. It’s a lighter form of term limits that makes sure the court isn’t stuck with bad justices for decades on end.
“It’s a lighter form of term limits that makes sure the court isn’t stuck with bad justices for decades on end.”
But it will not work like that. Presidents will merely use it as a way to get rid of Justices who rule against them and then, if they have a good Senate Majority, stack the court with a more friendly Justices.
Presidents will merely use it as a way to get rid of Justices who rule against them…
Some will. Some won’t. But amendment 3 provides a recourse to that problem.
…if they have a good Senate Majority, stack the court with a more friendly Justices…
Which is not all that different than what happens now, except the process happens a bit more slowly and the justices have lifetime appointments. Yes, a unprincipled president can stack the court with judges, but another president could also appoint better judges to the court. The result is that the court has a higher turnover, meaning that rulings are are once again made to be interpretations of the law, instead of becoming de facto law through the rather static makeup of the court.
And like I said, amendment 3 provides a recourse for where the court overstretches itself. That’s there to make sure that stacking the court doesn’t last for 15 year cycles. Amendments 4 and 5 give the states and the people increased power over Congress, creating a deterrent to playing such games. In all, it becomes rather impractical to make such power grabs, which may do more to restore the SC’s independence than anything else.
You are giving to much power to the Chief Executive, when he already has enough power.
The president already appoints justices. That increased power is joined with another check in amendment 3.
While term limits is perhaps a good idea, I think giving the President alone the power is just a tad too dangerous.
Good stuff David. My 2 cents:
Repealling of the 16th ammendment. I view the 16th ammendment as a direct assault on the 10th ammendment in that the Federal Government levying taxes on the citizens of each state allows the Federal Government to bribe the states with their own money. Not to mention the obvious slippery slope of over taxation.
On your ammendment 8 I would restrict the language used in these bills. A great deal of the trouble people have is an inability to translate what is written. I feel an article requiring the bills be presented in language determined to be at or below an 8th grade reading level be added.
Repealing of the 16th amendment. I view the 16th amendment as a direct assault on the 10th amendment in that the Federal Government levying taxes on the citizens of each state allows the Federal Government to bribe the states with their own money. Not to mention the obvious slippery slope of over taxation.
I agree, but the question is one of sequence. If we cut taxation first, we now have all the massive government expenditures, without the revenue. Now we have government borrowing or printing even more money to meet those expenditures until it can sort things out and cut spending (programs like Medicare and Social Security can;t be cut overnight). We also have to worry about transitioning to a new tax system and making sure its revenue neutral when we do.
If we cut spending first, tying it to a proportional limit based on the percentage of GDP, then it’s that much easier to change taxation.
On your amendment 8 I would restrict the language used in these bills. A great deal of the trouble people have is an inability to translate what is written. I feel an article requiring the bills be presented in language determined to be at or below an 8th grade reading level be added.
Good intent, but that’s a can a worms. How do you define an “8th grade reading level”? Do you tie it to an existing standard? Do you define it in the amendment? Who’s going to read these bills and judge whether they meet this standard? Will this be the same reading standard in 50, 100 or 200 years? What happens to bills that deal with areas of law that are more technically specialized or esoteric?
By restricting the length of a bill, you restrict the complexity of the language that can be used. You’re going to eat up that 2,500 word limit pretty quickly if you get long-winded.
If they were to do this, it would bankrupt us, sink our economy and cause the US dollar to collapse. China holds trillions in US debt. The Gulf States too many economic and political ties to the US. We’re Japan’s largest trading partner, if memory serves. What that means is that China looses its largest debtor, as we default on all those loans, as well as losing their largest trading partner (and having their own economy collapse as a result). The Gulf States are now beholden to China and Russia, as well as suffering economic fallout. Japan knee-caps itself with its largest strategic ally. In short, there’s no rational reason to make such a move right now.
Moreover, this is all based on a report from the Independent, a liberal anti-US newspaper, using unnamed sources that mention secret talks. No one else has caught on to this before now? And why are these sources speaking so freely? How do we know half the details in the report aren’t wrong? How the hell do you get these particular countries to work together this closely to engineer this? There are many reasons to doubt the veracity of this report. I have no doubt that someone is engaging in a bit of saber-rattling to send a message, but if there were secret talks to do something like this, it sure as hell wouldn’t be some birdcage-lining like the Independent breaking the story.
Kit,
I disagree. He is establishing that after a term of 15 years they be able to be removed and I don’t think that’s unreasonable. This lifetime term they currently enjoy is far more dangerous than what David is proposing.
Personally I’ve always believed more in the nation’s judges being able to vote a peer to the Supreme Court. It is the most logical way to do it. Every 12 years each judge’s appointment would then be put back up for a vote of their judicial peers and if they did not have a voting confidence of the majority then a new candidate would be elected to take their place. I think the President and politics need to be cut out of the Supreme Court all together to maintain the true integrity of the court.
I know I’m going to suffer many lashes for this but on some things – No, I’m not missing GWB much at all.
On two big things – Tax cuts & war against Islamo-Nazism – yeah, I’m missing him.
On a whole bunch of stuff that only grew the Nanny State – Perscription Drugs, No Child Left Behind, signing into the law the 2012 incandescent light bulb ban, Bailouts, “I’m abandoning free market principles, in order to save the free market.” – all that Democrat-like gobbledygook I don’t miss at all.
Agreed Daniel. We’ve really just went from the frying pan and into the fire.
David,
You make good points on the taxation issue and I’m of the opinion that entitlements like Social Secruity and Medicare must be done away with but obviously they must be phased out. There is simply no economic model where they are financially sustainable.
As for your question on amendment 8 my 8th grade level addition actually stems from an existing Federal Law that is enforced by CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) that states all correspondence that could potentially be viewed by Medicare beneficiaries had to be written at or below an 8th grade level (and in a size 12 font). This reading level is based off of Federal Education standards.
I’ll have to look up the specific law, but tying constitutional amendments to statutory standards is not generally a goo idea.
Evan’s on RedEye!
No. I like Mr. Bush…might even like to sit next to him in church, but I think had he stayed in office much longer the Democrat majority would be greater than it is now. I have little idea what really went on inside the WH, but it looks to me as though there were too few issues he was willing to go to the mat for. Mr. Reagan (whom I hated at the time since I was a liberal then) mobilized the entire Executive Branch to institute his programs. Mr. Obama is doing the same thing now, it seems. Man, what Mr. Bush could have done with public education if he’s been bold enough. I think his weakness in such areas has left the liberals in the Federal Government (and those outside the Government who seem to do so much of the play-calling) in a much better position to move quickly to serve Mr. Obama’s will.