Republican 'Pledge' on the Constitution Is Just Wacky says Wack Job Harvard Graduate

I used to subscribe to US News.  It was the centrist national weekly that just laid the facts down (unlike Newsweek or Time).  But those days are gone.  US News recently became a monthly and Newsweek was sold for a buck...it's not worth that.

Now we see another reason why US News is whacked...Susan Milligan.

Republican 'Pledge' on the Constitution Is Just Wacky - Susan Milligan (usnews.com)

Of all the promises in the GOP’s “Pledge to America,” the most potentially troublesome is the demand that all legislation include a clause stating exactly how the proposed law is provided for in the U.S. Constitution.


On its face, this sounds reasonable, especially to the element of the Tea Party movement that believes the country’s troubles would ease if we all just got back to what the Founding Fathers envisioned and codified in the Constitution. Set aside, for a moment, the fact that the Founding Fathers were a group of white, wealthy men who hardly represent the pluralistic society America has become (in part because of freedoms derived from interpretations of the Constitution over time). The idea is just wacky.

No Susan, weither they were white, black or purple is illrelivant.  They established a republic...to borrow the phrase of Ben Franklin, "...if you can keep it."

So the GOP wants a strict reading of the Constitution? Too bad, Air Force. The Constitution only provides for the creation of an Army and a Navy. And--assuming a back-to-basics reading of the Constitution includes all those amendments--how can Congress determine the extent to which the Bill of Rights supersedes other national interests and just common sense? The legal battles over elements of the Patriot Act merely underscore how unclear the lines are. That’s why judges and justices are there.

No, if a judge can show how a particular act violates the law they he can invalidate it. However, judges of recentl have been finding rights in the Constitution which we cannot see. The greatest example of this, of course, is Roe vs Wade. There is nothing in teh Constitution about any medical procedure. And a judge should, in the words of Judge Bork, "defer to the legislatue where the constitution is silent."

BTY Susan, the Air Force was originally part of the Army and then separated by the Key West Agreement of 1947.  I think that would fall under "provide for the common defense" and "necessary and proper".

Congress has been known to try to undo a court decision the ruling party doesn’t like. But this pledge goes a step further, usurping the very role of the judiciary in determining whether laws pass constitutional muster. The separation of powers is one of the most critical elements of our democracy, bringing checks and balances on the power of each branch. The judicial branch can handle the constitutional questions. The legislative branch should stick to legislating.

Sue, you obviously missed something at your college.  The Constitution was written by laymen, not warped minded constitution scholars.  It was supposed to be read by common people (e.g. citizen legislatures the founders envisioned serving in the Congress, not the professional leeches we have as politicians now.)and understood.  And that is what we in the Conservative movement (not to be confused with the Republican leadership) want the Congress brought back to.  But I can see why Sue has problems with reality:

Susan Milligan is a political and foreign affairs writer. She is currently a fellow at the Institute of Politics at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government.

Haaaaaavaaaaaaaard....that says enough.  Too bad that a once great news weekly has gone down so much.