View Single Post
  #19  
Old 10-28-2012, 02:32 AM
Its just a shame I was agreeing with all the angry liberals at Bush when he was in office but now it seems the 'question authority' liberals are nowhere to be found now that a guy with a 'D' next to his name is in the White House. Just like I was ticked off at some so called 'conservatives' for sitting back and not caring what Bush was doing.

"Extension of Federal powers are only bad when the other guy does it!" You may love all that power now but you can't always guarantee it's going to be like-minded people controlling the levers of government. It's like how my left-wing friends suddenly discovered the concepts of federalism when they didn't want Bush making "wrong" decisions for the entire country.

That is the prime, number one reason why government power MUST be limited and why the Founding Fathers specifically listed a LIMITED set of enumerated powers instead of a broad declaration of do whatever you feel like as long as you have the votes. We are not supposed to be a democracy. We are supposed to be a constitutional republic.

The government isn't supposed to be too powerful or swift change. It's intentionally relatively weak compared to other governments around the world and intentionally slow to change. It's supposed to be a relatively consistent bedrock that allows the times change around it while people know they can expect relative consistency under the law. That's done in order to prevent tyranny of the majority. If government were supposed to operate swiftly, why bother having a constitution? Why not just let our representatives vote and whatever they say goes (just like you're arguing under the "general welfare" clause) that way government can swiftly change with the times?

And yes, the Constitution CAN change. It's called the amendment process and it exists for precisely that reason. And it's intentionally difficult for precisely the reasons I outlined above. It's not convenient. But that's the whole point.