Comments on: Quiz: How Well Do You Know the Constitution? http://libertymaven.com/2008/09/21/quiz-how-well-do-you-know-the-constitution/1994/ For Liberty, One Individual At A Time Fri, 18 May 2012 14:27:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: The Ron Paul agenda!! http://libertymaven.com/2008/09/21/quiz-how-well-do-you-know-the-constitution/1994/comment-page-1/#comment-8420 The Ron Paul agenda!! Sun, 15 May 2011 18:42:33 +0000 http://www.libertymaven.com/?p=1994#comment-8420 [...] [...] [...] [...]

]]> By: Ed Van Deventer Jr http://libertymaven.com/2008/09/21/quiz-how-well-do-you-know-the-constitution/1994/comment-page-1/#comment-2755 Ed Van Deventer Jr Thu, 09 Apr 2009 14:44:05 +0000 http://www.libertymaven.com/?p=1994#comment-2755 If congress breaks the US constitution how can that be over turned. Ed at edvan@evdco.net. If congress breaks the US constitution how can that be over turned. Ed at edvan@evdco.net.

]]> By: AdamH http://libertymaven.com/2008/09/21/quiz-how-well-do-you-know-the-constitution/1994/comment-page-1/#comment-1716 AdamH Wed, 05 Nov 2008 17:55:51 +0000 http://www.libertymaven.com/?p=1994#comment-1716 @RBurnett, who asked: "The simple answer given is that all legislative power must reside in the Congress, and that seems good, until we ask exactly what it is that a President does when he is commaning the armed forces in wartime. Are not those commnds of his a kind of law, of a kind of legislation?" The answer to that is eluded to in #4. The President can create commands for his employees (Executive branch, military), but cannot create commands for the People. So what he does by commanding the army is not legislation. @RBurnett, who asked: “The simple answer given is that all legislative power must reside in the Congress, and that seems good, until we ask exactly what it is that a President does when he is commaning the armed forces in wartime. Are not those commnds of his a kind of law, of a kind of legislation?”

The answer to that is eluded to in #4. The President can create commands for his employees (Executive branch, military), but cannot create commands for the People. So what he does by commanding the army is not legislation.

]]> By: RBurnett http://libertymaven.com/2008/09/21/quiz-how-well-do-you-know-the-constitution/1994/comment-page-1/#comment-1190 RBurnett Tue, 23 Sep 2008 05:09:04 +0000 http://www.libertymaven.com/?p=1994#comment-1190 Some of the questions and answers are straighforward, such as the one concerned with the term limits on the President and the minimum age for a Senator. But others, such as, say, #3 amd #4, are not. The questions are :What is "legislative power"; what is "the executive power" and what is "the judicial power" The simple answer given is that all legislative power must reside in the Congress, and that seems good, until we ask exactly what it is that a President does when he is commaning the armed forces in wartime. Are not those commnds of his a kind of law, of a kind of legislation? If all the legislative power must reside in Congrees, and yet the President also makes law when commanding the armed forces, or indeed, as the signatory on any piece of legislation, then we have a seeming contradiction or paprdox. The sam also applies to the judicial power. If the Congress passes a law that is clearly unconstitutional, say for example the idea that the Federal Reserve was an unconstitutional act, but the Court doesn't rule against that act, then hasn't the court made law? Indeed, if the Congress passed the act creating the Fed and the Court ruled it a constitutional act, has it not, yet again, made law, by which we mean aiding the Congress to go beyond the limits set in the Constitution as are viewed by the author of this questionnaire? It has been remarked by those who have studied it, that the Federalists won the debates for the new Constitution, that the anti-Federalists lost because they could not out together a coherent argument that was either for the Articles or against the Constitution. So it was with the creation of the Fed, the Dept of Education, the New Deal and the rest. Indeed, not all or even many of the Framers/Founders were in agreement with all of those things in the Constitution--George Washington himself, in a letter to LaFayette, noted that while he was no real partisan of the Constitution, thought it might work if the powers were so seperated into those three branches and, most importantly, that there was any virtue left in the body of the people. Indeed, if one compares certain phrasing common to the Articles and the Constitution, one can discover why the Fed and the rest came to be. For example, the Elastic clause, the words "necessary and proper" in the Constitution contained, in the Articles, the word "absolutely"--this word was dropped for the Constitution, making the clause "elastic"-- There's also this :James Madison, in the Federalist, noted two things. 1. that the people, if they have a passion or interst in or for something long enough, despite the auxiliary precautions aka the Constitution and the laws, will get whatever it is they want, and in this case, he used as the example, the push for paper money. 2. that all laws are written in the murky medium of human language. Even if they are written by the best, most honest and brightest, the words still need their meanings ascertained and liquidated through dicussions, legislation and court rulings--indeed, Madison noted that the Almighty was proabaly chagrined to have have His Will delivered in human language, while it was quite clear, it still had to suffer the translations in that dark and murky medium. So, the answer to most of the thorny questions is a qualified one--except as to certain straightforward questions regarding the amending procedure or the lengths of terms or the number of branches (well, even that last is in disopute as there are extra-copnstitutional things that impinge on the three branches, such as political parties, the bureaucracy and the so-called Fouth branch of government aka the free press) Anyone seen that Constitution of the United States, Annotated? Some of the questions and answers are straighforward, such as the one concerned with the term limits on the President and the minimum age for a Senator.
But others, such as, say, #3 amd #4, are not.
The questions are :What is “legislative power”; what is “the executive power” and what is “the judicial power”
The simple answer given is that all legislative power must reside in the Congress, and that seems good, until we ask exactly what it is that a President does when he is commaning the armed forces in wartime. Are not those commnds of his a kind of law, of a kind of legislation?
If all the legislative power must reside in Congrees, and yet the President also makes law when commanding the armed forces, or indeed, as the signatory on any piece of legislation, then we have a seeming contradiction or paprdox. The sam also applies to the judicial power. If the Congress passes a law that is clearly unconstitutional, say for example the idea that the Federal Reserve was an unconstitutional act, but the Court doesn’t rule against that act, then hasn’t the court made law? Indeed, if the Congress passed the act creating the Fed and the Court ruled it a constitutional act, has it not, yet again, made law, by which we mean aiding the Congress to go beyond the limits set in the Constitution as are viewed by the author of this questionnaire?
It has been remarked by those who have studied it, that the Federalists won the debates for the new Constitution, that the anti-Federalists lost because they could not out together a coherent argument that was either for the Articles or against the Constitution. So it was with the creation of the Fed, the Dept of Education, the New Deal and the rest. Indeed, not all or even many of the Framers/Founders were in agreement with all of those things in the Constitution–George Washington himself, in a letter to LaFayette, noted that while he was no real partisan of the Constitution, thought it might work if the powers were so seperated into those three branches and, most importantly, that there was any virtue left in the body of the people.
Indeed, if one compares certain phrasing common to the Articles and the Constitution, one can discover why the Fed and the rest came to be. For example, the Elastic clause, the words “necessary and proper” in the Constitution contained, in the Articles, the word “absolutely”–this word was dropped for the Constitution, making the clause “elastic”–
There’s also this :James Madison, in the Federalist, noted two things. 1. that the people, if they have a passion or interst in or for something long enough, despite the auxiliary precautions aka the Constitution and the laws, will get whatever it is they want, and in this case, he used as the example, the push for paper money. 2. that all laws are written in the murky medium of human language. Even if they are written by the best, most honest and brightest, the words still need their meanings ascertained and liquidated through dicussions, legislation and court rulings–indeed, Madison noted that the Almighty was proabaly chagrined to have have His Will delivered in human language, while it was quite clear, it still had to suffer the translations in that dark and murky medium.
So, the answer to most of the thorny questions is a qualified one–except as to certain straightforward questions regarding the amending procedure or the lengths of terms or the number of branches (well, even that last is in disopute as there are extra-copnstitutional things that impinge on the three branches, such as political parties, the bureaucracy and the so-called Fouth branch of government aka the free press)
Anyone seen that Constitution of the United States, Annotated?

]]> By: George Dewey http://libertymaven.com/2008/09/21/quiz-how-well-do-you-know-the-constitution/1994/comment-page-1/#comment-1183 George Dewey Sun, 21 Sep 2008 10:37:06 +0000 http://www.libertymaven.com/?p=1994#comment-1183 That was fun, Mike! And I learned a few things, too! That was fun, Mike! And I learned a few things, too!

]]>