Deseret News | Reader comments: Return to original

Reader comments
Readers' forum: Letters: Return to original

Reason | 1:44 a.m. July 6, 2009

Great letter. The federal government has taken much power that it does not rightly possess, and has thus become bloated and oppressive. Compared to what we have today, the framers intended a government that was much smaller and much more limited in its scope of authority. Sadly, today the Constitution (and its intent) is routinely ignored by those who are explicitly sworn to uphold it.

Entitlement | 2:45 a.m. July 6, 2009

Our constitution has been ignored by Americans who would rather have entitlements than freedom and Democrat politicians who are all to happy to oblige them for their votes. Entitlements have become so expensive we are borrowing money from our grandchildren to pay for them. Obama's plan? More entitlements and more debt. Unsustainable and doomed to fail.

ECR | 5:08 a.m. July 6, 2009

" What we really need ...the removal from office any who would subvert it."

The last election took care of much of that problem.

Comments continue below

Stalwart Sentinel | 5:31 a.m. July 6, 2009

"The original independence was from an oppressive government... [w]hat we really need is a return to our original Constitution and the removal from office any who would subvert it."

Yes, Doug, let's return to the independence from oppressive governments by removing all who hold office who would subvert your irrational position!!!

While we're at it, could we throw in an amendment that bans excessive use of quotation marks? "separation of powers" "people" "states"

who benefitted from slavery? | 6:58 a.m. July 6, 2009

The Founding Fathers owned slaves.

No thanks, but I prefer progress and individual freedom over this original philosophy.

John Law | 7:12 a.m. July 6, 2009

Just about stepped on your own foot there and nixed the second amendment, eh?

Ultra Bob | 7:19 a.m. July 6, 2009

Just how many times must we listen to the promoters of the overthrow of the American government before it is recognized as a terrorist threat.

The return to the original level of government is impossible and even Conservative know that. Civilizations become more complicated as the size and population increase. The only way to return to the original government is to reduce our population, our technology, our world. No you can’t turn the world back to yesterday. And we don’t want to.

RedShirt | 8:03 a.m. July 6, 2009

To "ECR | 5:08 a.m." rather than have somebody who subverts the Constitution, we now have somebody who ignores it all together.

To "Ultra Bob | 7:19 a.m." you seem really sensitive today. The letter didn't promote overthrowing the government, just getting it back to what the founding fathers wanted it to be.

Mike Richards | 8:09 a.m. July 6, 2009

Ultra Bob,

Freedom to speak is just one of the Rights that you would have removed. You don't like what's said, so you cloak it under the guise of "a terrorist threat".

The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land. It is not some rubber ruler that every Tom, Dick, and Harry judge can bend as he sees fit to please "modern" society.

Giving any elected or appointed official 'super-citizen'status' is exactly what Mr. Obama's supporters want. They want us to think of him as something more than an ordinary citizen who received 53% of the popular vote and enough electoral votes to represent us for a few short years. He is still a common citizen of this country. He has no more rights than you or I. The authority of his office does not confer on him extra 'Rights', only the authority to carry out his Constitutional responsibilities.

True Conservatives do not think that this nation is out of control, but we do know that those selected to lead us *are* out of control.

Honest Luke | 8:11 a.m. July 6, 2009

Progressives want you to believe we can't restore America's greatness. They're wrong. Ultra Bob just doesn't want to work hard enough to accomplish it. It's easier to do nothing, right, Ultra Bob?

Anonymous | 8:18 a.m. July 6, 2009

Uh, you say we need "a return to our original Constitution (with amendments already ratified)." Then isn't that what we have now, a constitution with amendments already ratified? That puts us RIGHT WHERE WE ARE NOW!

"the removal from office any who would subvert it." Where were you last year?

Are you thinking this through?

Anonymous | 8:44 a.m. July 6, 2009

Who was the writer quoting when he wrote "people" or "states"?
Another AM radio junky opens his mouth and removes all doubt.

Knowwhat | 8:54 a.m. July 6, 2009

ECR, I hope you really aren't ignorant enough to believe the statement you made. There is very little difference between the pathetic administration and congress of the past and the administration and congress of the present. The only difference being name. This adminstration is perhaps even more closed and media controlling than the Nixon adminstration. Get all entrenched members of the senator and congress out and vote new in.

to mike and dishonest luke | 9:33 a.m. July 6, 2009

You fall into the classic rush ploy of "the progressives want... and Obama supporters want..." Its called a straw man. I realize that you have been blinded by AM radio idiots but using their attack style doesnt work when you dont have the hang up button for when the call doesnt go your way.

Try telling us your ideas for a better future and we will weigh those ideas. STOP telling me what I believe or want.

Changes | 9:57 a.m. July 6, 2009

It's a toss-up as to which is more free today between the free government of the US or the government of the nation we rebelled against.

I visited England a few years ago and was never bothered by the police or by the authorities. I dipped myself in the waters of Trafalgar Square without anyone telling me I couldn't.

I was free to worship according to the dictates of my own conscience, to express my opinion on Talk Radio, to travel unmolested from place to place. They had elections while I was there, with two main parties neither of which was any good, just like here.

Jud | 10:25 a.m. July 6, 2009

To me our system appears to be working well. We do have a system of checks and balances. Obama is not going to get what he wants from Congress, even with a Democratic majority. The Supreme Court is still completely independent.

no to modern slavery | 10:57 a.m. July 6, 2009

The Founding Fathers owned slaves and this is the type of entitlement and philosophy the slave-owning Right so proudly believes in to this day.
Is it any wonder their nasty slave ownership ideals are being soundly trounced at the polls each and every election?

Gus Talwynd | 11:35 a.m. July 6, 2009

It this just not another attempt to have the Constitution re-written to favor the wealthy class and the working-class conservatives who have been voting against their own interests for years?

It's not that the Constitution has been subverted. The issue is how the Constitution is not (in the conservative mind) sufficiently interpreted as conservatives would like in their favor.

If life was as conservatives would prefer, the Constitution would be trashed completely and a new Document of Privlege written to safeguard their rights and postion. There would be a Haves and Have-Nots statement so that democracy would never again be an option.

Brad | 12:33 p.m. July 6, 2009

What in the world is the writer talking about?

Ultra Bob | 5:04 p.m. July 6, 2009

Mike Richards | 8:09 a.m.

Mike: “Freedom to speak is just one of the Rights that you would have removed. You don't like what's said, so you cloak it under the guise of "a terrorist threat".

Bob: Sorry, for borrowing one of the Conservative tactics.

Mike: “The Constitution is the Supreme Law of the land. It is not some rubber ruler that every Tom, Dick, and Harry judge can bend as he sees fit to please "modern" society“.

Bob: Every judge in the United States has the Constitutional authority and obligation to interpret the Constitution, legislation and previous opinions as needed for current circumstances. That interpretation is law until overturned by a higher Judicial authority.

Mike: “True Conservatives do not think that this nation is out of control, but we do know that those selected to lead us *are* out of control”

Bob: When someone says he “knows” something about politics, he is showing his “super race” mentality, not my estimation of the person Mike Richards.

Ultra bob | 5:07 p.m. July 6, 2009

@RedShirt | 8:03 a.m. .

“What we really need is a return to our original Constitution (with amendments already ratified) and the removal from office any who would subvert it.”

Sure sounds like “throw the bums out” to me. Only a full revolution could remove all the “law on the books” that has been added over the last 200 or so years.

RE: Anonymous | 8:44 a.m. | 5:51 p.m. July 6, 2009

What does the 10th admendment say?

Your ignorance is showing.

Anonymous | 6:17 p.m. July 6, 2009

Duh - we have a President who, for the first time in a long time, IS A CONSTITUTIONAL LAW SCHOLAR! Obama taught Constitutional Law at the Chicago School of Law for a number of years! I'll take his opinion over the opinions of a bunch of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck wannabes ANY DAY OF THE WEEK!

Re: Anonymous | 7:51 p.m. July 6, 2009

We all get it, you love Obama. Most of the rest of us love our country and know that Obama is ruining it for future generations. Who cares if he is a "law scholar"? God save us from him!

RedShirt | 9:18 p.m. July 6, 2009

To "Ultra bob | 5:07 p.m." let me give you my 8:03 a.m. post again, since you couldn't get it quoted right.

To "ECR | 5:08 a.m." rather than have somebody who subverts the Constitution, we now have somebody who ignores it all together.

To "Ultra Bob | 7:19 a.m." you seem really sensitive today. The letter didn't promote overthrowing the government, just getting it back to what the founding fathers wanted it to be.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.