Skip to main content

Happy Friday and welcome to the seventh installment of the Dog’s Friday Constitutional series! In this series the Dog is reading through the entire Constitution, clause by clause, and talking about what the meaning of each seems to be. Interpretation of the Constitution is a real field of expertise, and it is not the Dog’s field. So, if you find that the old hound has gone off the rails with his interpretation, make a comment and everyone can learn something!

If you are coming in at the middle of the series and want to read the rest (don’t you have a life?) you can find them at the these links:

Friday Constitutional 1 – Preamble, Article One, Sections 1 and 2
Friday Constitutional 2 – Article One, Sections 3 and 4
Friday Constitutional 3 – Article One, Sections 5 and 6
Friday Constitutional 4 – Article One; Sections 7 and 8
Friday Constitutional 5- Article One, Sections 9 And 10
Friday Constitutional 6 - Article Two, Section One, Clauses 1-3

Last week we left off at Article Two, Section One, Clause Four.

Section One

Clause Four:

The Congress may determine the Time of choosing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.

This clause gives the Congress the power to decide when the States must pick the Electors for the Electoral College and when they have to cast their votes for President. It also makes it clear that it has to be the same day for each in every state. This seems like a way to make sure that the early Electors were not swayed by the votes of other Electors.


Clause Five:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

This is the clause that the Wingnuts have been trying to sue over to prevent President Elect Obama from taking office, on the spurious claim that he is some how not a natural born citizen of this nation. As you can see the arguments about British dual citizenship are completely bogus. This clause does not mention that chance one way or the other. It leaves it up for interpretation, but it seems to the Dog that if you were born in the United States, regardless of any other citizenship you might be entitled to, you have met the standard.

It also lays out that you must be 35 years old and have, if you were here prior to the ratification of the Constitution, been a citizen for at least 14 years. This is the highest age and citizenship requirement for federal office, which makes sense as it is the highest office.

Clause Six:

In Case of the Removal of the President from Office, or of his Death, Resignation, or Inability to discharge the Powers and Duties of the said Office,the Same shall devolve on the Vice President, and the Congress may by Law provide for the Case of Removal, Death, Resignation or Inability, both of the President and Vice President, declaring what Officer shall then act as President, and such Officer shall act accordingly, until the Disability be removed, or a President shall be elected.

Clause Six provides for the section of the Vice President if for any reason the President is no longer able to serve. The 25th Amendment changed this by allowing a president, or the Vice President and a majority of the executive branch Secretaries states to the Senate that the president is unable to discharge his office, that the Vice President will take over as President until he or she can resume their office. This Amendment was ratified in 1967 when the State of Nevada voted to ratify it.

It also allows the Congress to determine who would be the replacement if both the President and the Vice President were removed or unable to discharge their office. Currently that person is the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Clause Seven:

The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them.

This clause discusses the way that a President is to be paid. It prevents any State or the United State as a whole from paying him or her anything other than this salary. It also prevents any increase or decrease of salary during the time of service by the President. This last part seem to be a way of keeping the Congress from putting the political screws to the President by messing with his pay.

Clause Eight:

Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:--"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

This clause details the entire oath of office for the President. Note that it is carefully non-religious. It does not require swearing (usually done on a holy book) and it has not "so help me God". It is also a major point for those that advocate for the impeachment of President Bush. In his term of office one of the things that we are sure has happened is the assault on the Constitution. Unfortunately there is a built in defense for the criminal Bush, in that his abilities are obviously very meager and so he may have protected it to the best of those lame abilities.


Section Two

Clause One:

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

Clause One is the "Commander and Chief" clause. It gives the president the power over the Army and Navy and the Militias of the States. It seems that those who are strong 2nd Amendment literalists always forget the other places that Militias are mentioned in the Constitution. This clause would seem to argue against the Supreme Courts recent decisions, but we will leave that to when we talk about Amendments.

There is also the prevision for the President to require written opinions from the Secretaries of the executive branch departments. The Dog finds that interesting as it seems to allow the President to make these folks commit to what they say in a way that can be referred to in the future. That would prevent them from saying one thing to him and another to Congress. Again we see the Framers reaching in a board, general way for accountability by the officers of the nation.

This is also where the President gets his pardon power. Now some of the more aggressive impeachment advocates have made the case that we should impeach now, as this would prevent the President from making the proactive pardons that we fear will prevent the investigation of torture. If you look closely at the wording, it does not say that a Impeached President could not issue pardons, but rather that he can not pardon or reprieve those that have been impeached.


Clause Two:

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

This is the "Advise and Consent" clause. It makes it pretty clear that it takes 2/3 of the Senators present at the time of the vote, to make any treaties, or appointments to the head of departments, or the Supreme Court or Ambassadorships. In fact until the Congress passed legislation that allowed the delegation of some offices any appointment was required to follow this method.

Conservatives during the Bush administration have made much of the Consent part of the clause. It is a typical of Repug thinking that they try to redefine this to mean that the Senate must give its consent to whomever the President nominates. This is clearly not the intent of the Framers. If it were they would have worded it differently. Instead a plain reading shows that the Senates job was and is to advise the President on his choices and if they agree then give their consent.

Clause Three:

The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session.

This is the clause that allows Recess appointments. Until this administration (how many time will the Dog have to say that in this series?) it was generally used to fill vacancies of critical importance. The abuse of this clause by the criminal Bush is what as made the Senate stay in pro forma secession for the last two years. President Bush used this power to force unacceptable appointments onto the nation.

When such a recess appointment is done, the appointee is only allowed to serve until the end of the Congress in which he or she is appointed. This was why Ambassador Bolton only served for two years are UN Ambassador.

Section Three

He shall from time to time give to the Congress Information of the State of the Union, and recommend to their Consideration such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient; he may, on extraordinary Occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them, and in Case of Disagreement between them, with Respect to the Time of Adjournment, he may adjourn them to such Time as he shall think proper; he shall receive Ambassadors and other public Ministers; he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed, and shall Commission all the Officers of the United States.

This section only has the single clause above. It makes the prevision for the State of the Union address, though it does not require it be only once a year or even every year. It gives the President the power to call both houses of Congress into session, but only under extraordinary circumstances. This section most likely means in times when war is going to be declared or has been declared on us.

It also makes clear that it is the Presidents responsibility to execute all laws faithfully. This is where the criminal Bush administration signing statements get into trouble. The Constitution makes no provision for the President to not execute a law in any fashion other than the way it is written. It would seem to the Dog that signing statements in and of themselves might be reason for impeachment as they conflict with this Section, and his oath of office.

Section Four:

The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

The Dog knows that he has talked a lot about impeachment today (it seems to go with this president, no?) but this is the clause that seems to give the most credence to those that want to impeach the criminal President Bush. If you notice the wording it says " Shall be removed from office" not may, not should but shall. The war crimes that Bush and his henchmen have admitted to have to meet the bar of "High Crimes". It is a sad fact that the Framers never considered that there might be so partisan a body in the Senate that if these types of crimes were committed ideology would override their commitment to the Constitution. Every Repug Senator that would never vote to convict and remove the gang of criminals that have run this country for the last eight years has earned the everlasting scorn of the Framers.

We will call it a day right here. Up next Article Three and the Judicial Branch!

Well citizens, any thoughts? The floor is yours.

Originally posted to Something the Dog Said on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:14 AM PST.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tips? Flames? (20+ / 0-)

    Emotional Outbursts?

    Getting Dems together and keeping them that way is like trying to herd cats, hopped up on crank, through LA, during an earthquake, in the rain. -6.25, -6.10

    by Something the Dog Said on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:14:28 AM PST

    •   I don't see how this mention changes the meaning (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cn4st4datrees

      of militia.

      It seems that those who are strong 2nd Amendment literalists always forget the other places that Militias are mentioned in the Constitution. This clause would seem to argue against the Supreme Courts recent decisions, but we will leave that to when we talk about Amendments.

      The militia of the states are not armed by the states. If anything, this section hilights the difference between the standing army and the militia. The militia is only under federal control only when they are called to service by the U.S. government.

      Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a Republican. But I repeat myself. - President Harry Truman

      by notrouble on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 08:16:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Right, but the 2nd Amendment says (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        notrouble, cn4st4datrees

        "For the purposes of a well ordered militia" it seems to me that the purpose of allowing the private ownership of weapons is solely for the use by citizens in a militia that is directed by the State, or the Fed in cases where they are called up.

        It is not like my opinion matters, though. The Supreme Court has ruled and until time has passed and new circumstances occur it is a right that devolves to the private citizen. The law is the law, after all.

        Getting Dems together and keeping them that way is like trying to herd cats, hopped up on crank, through LA, during an earthquake, in the rain. -6.25, -6.10

        by Something the Dog Said on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 08:22:38 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Tipped and recc'd for your educational (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Something the Dog Said

      efforts, once again.

      Madison is spinning in his grave.  What Bush & Co. have done over the last eight years is exactly what the impeachment provisions were meant for.

      All too sadly, it looks like Bush is going to get away with it.

      (heavy sigh)

      Peace.

      If we're not willing to boldly refute the lies, the lies will stand as truth. (-6.75, -6.72)

      by cn4st4datrees on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 09:50:42 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  He may get off without being impeached (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cn4st4datrees

        but I don't think he is going to be so lucky on War Crimes. As bad as it is for us to fail to impeach, it will be worse if we do not draw the line at War Crimes.

        I might be naive, but I think we will get the rat fucks.

        Getting Dems together and keeping them that way is like trying to herd cats, hopped up on crank, through LA, during an earthquake, in the rain. -6.25, -6.10

        by Something the Dog Said on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 09:59:31 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh, we'll probably get 'em all right. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Something the Dog Said

          And slap 'em with a sternly worded letter.

          It's sad.  When the Dems retook congress back in 2006, that's when impeachment should have taken place.

          Instead, it was taken "off the table".

          Nancy Pelosi, I'm going to hold you accountable for that breach of justice.

          If we're not willing to boldly refute the lies, the lies will stand as truth. (-6.75, -6.72)

          by cn4st4datrees on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 10:08:58 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, we were going lose is the problem. (0+ / 0-)

            If we lost that would validate what they did as acceptable. As heinous as it is to let them go on impeachment, I still think that it was the right call.

            Getting Dems together and keeping them that way is like trying to herd cats, hopped up on crank, through LA, during an earthquake, in the rain. -6.25, -6.10

            by Something the Dog Said on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 10:18:58 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  You're diaries are excellent, thanks n/t (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Something the Dog Said

      "We don't throw the first punch, but we'll throw the last." -Barack Obama

      by PJHood on Sat Dec 20, 2008 at 12:39:00 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  The more I read these (9+ / 0-)

    the more I realize how brilliant our forefathers were, something I didn't appreciate as much in my youth.

    "Mothers should negotiate between nations. The mothers of the fighting countries would agree: Stop this killing now. Stop it now." Yoshikuni Taki

    by Velocity on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:22:55 AM PST

  •  Great work... the diary and the Constitution! :) (5+ / 0-)

    Especially needed in these trying times...

    Get to the 14th Amendment soon!

    And many, many thanks.

  •  "Shall be removed...for...high Crimes (5+ / 0-)

    and Misdemeanors."

    So every Senator--R and Dem--who did not act on this clause has been derelict in his or her duty, in my opinion.

    It is a sad fact that the Framers never considered that there might be so partisan a body in the Senate that if these types of crimes were committed ideology would override their commitment to the Constitution.

    So true, Something the Dog Said. The Senators have betrayed the oath they took to uphold and defend the Constitution. They have forsaken their responsibility to those of us who elected them, to their country, and to the Framers who spilled blood to create this country and this document.

    Now, going forward, if we don't prosecute the officials for those crimes in another court--especially for the egregious war crimes of torture, which violate international law--we have permanently betrayed the fundamental essence of this country. And we will never be able to get it back.

    We are all droogie6655321 now.

    by earicicle on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:28:34 AM PST

    •  Yes, I wrote twice about torture (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Velocity, Sui Juris, ExStr8, MsWings, earicicle

      this week and sadly I think that I will have to do so for a long time to come.

      Our system of law only works if we make it work for and on all of us. It did not come apart all at once, so it will not be fixed all at once either, but it must be fixed or something very special will be lost.

      Getting Dems together and keeping them that way is like trying to herd cats, hopped up on crank, through LA, during an earthquake, in the rain. -6.25, -6.10

      by Something the Dog Said on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:30:42 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Busy week; sorry I missed the diaries... (3+ / 0-)

        Jonathan Turley said something on Countdown that scared me: A commission--which I know is a BS way of avoiding prosecutions anyway--will take just long enough that the statute of limitations could expire on many of the key torture decisions. (I think 8 years?) So I'm even more upset at the idea that the supposed "compromise" idea of a "9/11-style" commission could actually provide full cover for all these criminals getting away SCOT-FREE.

        We are all droogie6655321 now.

        by earicicle on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:36:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  aoeu (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          earicicle

          There is no statute of limitations on murder, so if anybody died while being tortured there would still be that.

          MCCAIN: My friends, some of this $700 billion ends up in the hands of terrorist organizations.

          by TealVeal on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:44:39 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I think we're at 100+ who have died (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Something the Dog Said

            in custody so far.

            Good point, TealVeal. But as with Al Capone, it was easier to get him on the tax evasion than the murders. I have a feeling prosecuting the DECIDERS for the actual deaths is going to be extremely tough. Having them go down for making the illegal policies that led to the deaths: good enough for me.

            We are all droogie6655321 now.

            by earicicle on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:53:59 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I thought that there was (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              earicicle

              no statue of limitation on War Crimes? After all the whole reasoning behind their actions was that it was war and the Commander and Chief can do just about anything in war time.

              Getting Dems together and keeping them that way is like trying to herd cats, hopped up on crank, through LA, during an earthquake, in the rain. -6.25, -6.10

              by Something the Dog Said on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:55:45 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I hope not! (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Something the Dog Said

                My legal background: zero. Just know what Turley said...and I was shocked. Maybe the limitations apply to some of the lesser things that would be more easily prosecutable. I don't know! What I do know: criminals must be held to account.

                We are all droogie6655321 now.

                by earicicle on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 08:18:15 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Well, JT is (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  earicicle

                  the man when it comes to the Constitution. But there is a differnce in our laws and international laws. That might be where the confusion is coming in.

                  Getting Dems together and keeping them that way is like trying to herd cats, hopped up on crank, through LA, during an earthquake, in the rain. -6.25, -6.10

                  by Something the Dog Said on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 08:23:40 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

      •  I hate to say it, but I'm afraid we as a (4+ / 0-)

        society might be too far gone to to fix it. Too many of us still care more about American Idol and the Super Bowl than nasty stuff (that doesn't touch us personally) like torture and starvation and homelessness to work to get us back on track. And many of us who do care are using all of our energy just to keep our heads above water.

        Sorry - I think someone poured super cynic juice in my cornflakes this morning.

        / gloom and doom

        "You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do." Anne Lamott

        by MsWings on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:41:17 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  I think that you and da Dog are misreading this (2+ / 0-)

      The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

      This specifies a penalty, in the event that an Officer subject to Article II is impeached and convicted.

      It places no obligation on Congress. If there were any such language, obligating the House to impeach or the Senate to convict, it would be in Article I. But there isn't.

      It amounts to prosecutorial discretion. Congress may impeach an Officer for "Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors," but they are not required to do so. If they do, and the Officer in question is convicted, then he (or she) shall be removed from Office.

      --Shannon

      "It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees." -- Emiliano Zapata Salazar
      "Dissent is patriotic. Blind obedience is treason." --me

      by Leftie Gunner on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 02:39:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  It's a stinking shame this isn't a standard (11+ / 0-)

    part of the high school education in the U.S. The average high school graduate doesn't know the difference between the constitution and the declaration of independence.

    The Dog is providing a public service. Nice. Good doggy.

    "You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do." Anne Lamott

    by MsWings on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:28:56 AM PST

    •  Bark! And where is my sqeaky toy? (5+ / 0-)

      It really is sad. I have to admit that while I did know the difference, until I started this I had not read the whole thing.

      How we can expect an electorate to make good decisions with such a low amount of information on how things are set up is beyond me. I think that we should include the Constitution in graduation testing.

      Getting Dems together and keeping them that way is like trying to herd cats, hopped up on crank, through LA, during an earthquake, in the rain. -6.25, -6.10

      by Something the Dog Said on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 07:32:32 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Civics Class (3+ / 0-)

      When I was in Junior High (1976-78) the most dreaded class for 9th graders was "Civics".  It was a whole year of learning about government from the local level to the federal level.  Tho it was tedious at the time, I still remember a lot of it.

      I don't know if this was just a unique feature of my local school district or not.  I do know that sometime in the last 30 years somebody decided that "Civics" class was a waste of time and not part of basic education.

      If you want an eye opener about compulsory education in the good ol' USA google "John Taylor Gatto".

      That government is best which governs least. Henry Thoreau

      by rockhead on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 08:12:13 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  We had government (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MsWings

        and Civics. Civics was supposedly a more advanced class, but it was only a semester.

        Getting Dems together and keeping them that way is like trying to herd cats, hopped up on crank, through LA, during an earthquake, in the rain. -6.25, -6.10

        by Something the Dog Said on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 08:14:08 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Mine was in eighth grade. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Something the Dog Said, MsWings

        Three weeks on the Constitution alone.  Three weeks.

        Only the "eggheads" enjoyed it.  It was, ahem, torture for everyone else.

        But... I learned.

        No US high school student should be allowed to graduate without passing US Government and especially without passing a class section on the Constitution.

        If we're not willing to boldly refute the lies, the lies will stand as truth. (-6.75, -6.72)

        by cn4st4datrees on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 09:59:18 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  NC schools still have it - 10th grade, civics (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Something the Dog Said

        and economics. Unfortunately what's covered is very basic and very few teachers know as much as The Dog has provided here, it seems.

        "You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do." Anne Lamott

        by MsWings on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 11:44:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Quite appreciated (6+ / 0-)

    Now only if we could get people to pay half as much attention to these as they do the latest sob-diary.

  •  Unfortunately, (4+ / 0-)

    I think you're tying "Shall" to the wrong thing in section four.

    "Shall" prescribes the removal from office UPON impeachment and conviction, but doesn't force them to pursue impeachment and conviction in the first place.  

    But I'm not even a lawyer, so who knows...

  •  thanks Dog (2+ / 0-)

    and thanks for the links, i missed last friday.
    i've got my hard copy of the constitution here, it's been dusted off and has been perched on a shelf within arm's reach of this desk since you started these.
    ;-)

    "I aimed at the public's heart, and by accident I hit it in the stomach." - Upton Sinclair

    by kathleen518 on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 08:11:24 AM PST

  •  Thank You For "Reading The Constitution" To Us. (3+ / 0-)

    I just discovered your Constitution series, and I'm sorry I don't have the time today to go back and read them all.

    The Constitution, as the founding document of these United States, is the most important document we have.  Unfortunately, passing a test on the meaning of this document is not a requirement for inauguration as president, vice president, to say nothing of most of our congressional representatives.

    I'm sure Bush never bothered to read the document.  Cheney may have read it but doesn't agree with it.

    Many congressional representatives are lawyers, and presumably had to pass a Constitutional Law class, but if they read the document, apparently they don't believe in it either.

    In Venezuela, where I am teaching English, the government handed out copies of the Constitution to all the citizens and posted it, section by section, in the newspapers.  I understand they even had sections posted on shopping bags so everyone would see it.

    I think we have to make sure that every high school student has a course in the Constitution -- and every soldier in our military.

    The American electorate has been deliberately "dumbed down" by those who want to keep us all the equivalent of barefoot and pregnant.  The Obama campaign has been important in waking people up to awareness about the issues, as has the economic meltdown.

    Again, thanks for your Constitution series.

    Organize and Fight Back! Join Kossacksnetworking.ning.com

    by Justina on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 08:48:55 AM PST

    •  Thank you! I hope you come and comment on (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      cn4st4datrees

      the rest, if you have time!

      We do need to be informed, but the war on expertise is a pernicious thing. Once you begin to discount reason and thought and knowledge, your society is big trouble.

      Getting Dems together and keeping them that way is like trying to herd cats, hopped up on crank, through LA, during an earthquake, in the rain. -6.25, -6.10

      by Something the Dog Said on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 08:51:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well, at least we know there will be one (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Something the Dog Said

      President who's read the Constitution.

      What's his name again?

      Barack something, I believe.

      If we're not willing to boldly refute the lies, the lies will stand as truth. (-6.75, -6.72)

      by cn4st4datrees on Fri Dec 19, 2008 at 10:13:30 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site