Get today's headlines via email
Afternoon edition
Deseret News Family Deals
In Opinion
Across Site
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: The...
- Readers' forum: A changing Constitution
- Michael Gerson: Egypt's craziness is...
- George F. Will: Is it bribery or just...
- Mackenzie Eaglen: Obama's proposed...
- My view: The climate is right to tear...
- Readers' forum: Incorporate Millcreek
- Charles Krauthammer: The Gospel...
- Readers' forum: Teachers came first
- In our opinion: Editorial: Protecting...
In Opinion
Across Site
- In our opinion: Editorial: Protecting...
- Evangelicals and Mormons: Can we talk?
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: The...
- Charles Krauthammer: The Gospel...
- Readers' forum: A changing Constitution
- My view: The climate is right to tear...
- In our opinion: Tinkering with...
- George F. Will: Is it bribery or just...
- Readers' forum: Rights of conscience
- Mackenzie Eaglen: Obama's proposed...
In Opinion
Across Site
- Obama's assault on the poor
62 - Evangelicals and Mormons: Can we talk?
53 - Letters: Bush's failed policies
52 - Letters: Teachers not overpaid
30 - Letters: Home equity loans
28 - Economic chaos ahead
25 - GOP no longer leads on defense
24 - Letters: Rights of conscience
23 - Letters: A changing Constitution
22 - Letter: Taxing our children
21







The last election took care of much of that problem.
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"
No thanks, but I prefer progress and individual freedom over this original philosophy.
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.
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.
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.
"the removal from office any who would subvert it." Where were you last year?
Are you thinking this through?
Another AM radio junky opens his mouth and removes all doubt.
Try telling us your ideas for a better future and we will weigh those ideas. STOP telling me what I believe or want.
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.
Is it any wonder their nasty slave ownership ideals are being soundly trounced at the polls each and every election?
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.
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.