#original intent

Read this. These scholars did not mince words.

The plain text of the 14th is obvious and they have records to back up the meaning intended.

The founders' "original intent" by separating powers and the use of the electoral college system (to buffer the 'will of the people') were clearly designed to prevent the thing they feared most, the abuse of power by someone in the office of chief executive that they created who managed to enamour the public.

The founders didn't intend for a mindless popularity contest for president to be sum total of our "democracy."

The framers built the Constitution on the premise that men aren’t angels, and they did not trust a president’s nominees to the Supreme Court to be impartial in determining whether he should stay in office. At the Constitutional Convention, Virginia’s George Mason thought judges “surely” ought not preside over the impeachment trials of presidents to whom they owed their jobs; Connecticut’s Roger Sherman agreed. So the framers came up with a solution: They assigned the impeachment power to the House and the power to try impeachments to the Senate.

To the Supreme Court, the framers reserved an almost exclusively ceremonial role in impeachment, assigning the chief justice to preside over the president’s trial in the Senate. Of his limited role in President Bill Clinton’s impeachment trial, then-Chief Justice William Rehnquist later said, “I did nothing in particular, and I did it very well.”

The framers, however, did not anticipate two major changes to the court that have given it a significant role in the impeachment process. The court has gone from what Alexander Hamilton famously called the “least dangerous” branch to being a muscular and often partisan powerhouse with the ability to halt a criminal investigation before the impeachment process has even begun. In addition, our increasingly broad and unwieldy law-enforcement and investigative apparatus has given today’s Supreme Court many more opportunities to supervise criminal investigations and prosecutions.

Dear Sen. Daines,

Thank you for your service in representing our shared conservative values in Washington.  I am writing because I was actually in Washington, DC recently for a family vacation and saw some troubling quotes inscribed on the walls of the Jefferson Memorial. 

Two were particularly bad.  One quote suggests our Founding Fathers advocated for the separation of church and state, or worse the freedom from religion.  I had to write down another one so that I wouldn't forget it:  "Laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind.  As that becomes more developed, more enlightened ... institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times."  The one seems to speak directly against the doctrine of original intent, which as you know is an especially effective legal theory to justify our conservative positions (especially the 2nd Amendment).  It suggests laws should change as the times and social mores change.

I am not trying to deny that Mr. Jefferson said or believed these things, I just recognize that it is very bad for our political positions!  We idolize Scalia and Gorsuch, saying the laws should be interpreted as written by the Founders -- we can't then be displaying quotes by one of the most important Founders that specifically says laws can and should change!  My son could have seen that!  Heck, Democrats might notice it!

What Does Scalia’s Death Mean Constitutionally? – KrisAnne Hall

What would Madison or Jefferson say about a new Justice? What does Scalia’s death mean Constitutionally? How should we proceed? What kind of judge are we looking for? Asking the proper questions to get the Constitutional answers.

http://krisanne-hall.podomatic.com/embed/frame/posting/2016-02-15T07_18_34-08_00?json_url=http%3A%2F%2Fkrisanne-hall.podomatic.com%2Fentry%2Fembed_params%2F2016-02-15T…

Pee Wee Herman posts Digital Theramin to his Facebook page in honor of Presidents Day @peeweeherman

For some completely inexplicable reason, Pee Wee Herman decided to post a link to a digital Theremin to his facebook page in honor of presidents day on Monday. I will not lie this move surprises me, but I guess it shouldn’t coming from this guy…

[youtube=…

Ok, not go, but its use should certainly be reduced. I know we all love the sonic, but I really think it's being overused. I agree with the War Doctor's assessment when he sees Ten and Eleven brandishing their sonics like weapons. I think it's about time the use of the sonic screwdriver was reevaluated.

Here's my reasoning. One of the reasons Doctor Who became popular and why many Brits of a certain age consider it to have been very formative is that the Doctor always solved problems with his brain. On Doctor Who, nobody ever wins a fight because they're bigger or stronger than their opponent. It showed intellect being prized over physical strength.

Now, the Doctor still doesn't get in many wrestling matches. But wouldn't you say, in a way, that in the modern world, having superior technology is the new equivalent of being bigger and stronger? The best armies nowadays aren't the ones with the biggest muscles, but the best military tech. You don't have to understand your superior technology to use it either. It's the equivalent of just having the bigger gun.