Steele Claims Kagan Supported Statement Suggesting Constitution Was 'Defective'

Not to mention the Anti-Gay Marriage amendment!

Diane Wood she isn't. thats for sure.

I'm waiting for you to enlighten us mere mortals with your brilliance. Please tell us morons why the 3/5ths language was included and why the Constitution was probably the greatest governing document in human history. People who are not you are obviously ignorant and hate the Constitution.. or perhaps your ego is significantly more developed than your reading comprehension skills, since no one was saying that the Constitution sucked, rather that it was not perfect. Perfection doesn't require Amendments. OK, now educate us on the 3/5ths clause and the probable greatness of the Constitution, Mr. Jefferson (and I don't mean George).

Vincent F, you are quite welcome and I am happy to have a discussion with you. I also hope you’ve accepted my apology.

As to the Constitution being ‘…a flawed document built upon a compromise…’ is there ANY political decision made where there has been no compromise (besides in a fascist/dictatorship style government)? With regard to the Constitution, I posit that ‘flawed’ is a poor choice of a verb. Perhaps ‘incomplete’ would be better and the amendments process was the foresight of the framers knowing they were incapable of addressing all of the problems or situations that would develop years in the future. The intent being that if a law is not explicitly mentioned in the Constitution it is NOT constitutional unless amended. One major hot button subject would be abortion. Show me the word (or allusion to this subject) within the text. I don’t believe it’s there. This doesn’t mean the procedure SHOULD be illegal only that it should be decided individually State by the State.

600,000 dead a big deal? I hope that was a rhetorical question. If it takes anyone longer then the time to read or hear that statement and answer ‘Hell yes it is’ has some problems that I doubt anyone here has the credentials to assist them with. Certainly not I.

As to your comment “The GOP gave up on civil rights for blacks (and every other non-white, non-male, non-Christian) at least 50 yrs ago.” I disagree. That’s a pretty broad brush stroke. I would point out there were individuals in both parties wanting to maintain slavery. However, the vote break down was: For the Senate; Democrat Party: 46-21 (69%-31%) and Republican Party: 27-6 (82%-18%). For the House; Democrat Party: 153-91(63%-37%), Republican Party: 136-35 (80%-20%). This was 1964. Even Lyndon Johnson praised Republicans and made a statement that civil rights would never have passed without Republican support. I would think the percentages would have been reversed for the Republicans had they indeed given up or were apathetic towards civil rights.

My personal opinion on ‘…slave states could retain their peculiar institution, but that future states and federal territories would not be permitted to have slavery…’ would have ensured non-ratification of the “incomplete” Constitution since subsequent adding of States would have diluted the slave States political power. Not to mention that a statement like that could be misconstrued as endorsement for slavery even if in a limited capacity. That aside, assuming it did pass with that language which, would have also been a compromise, we could still have “legal” slavery today. I think that would have a larger blemish on the USA than the fact that we allowed slavery to exist at all. As it is, can anyone argue that we were not willing to pay a large price to end something that most knew was wrong? It is documented that many owners treated their slaves quite well. Many, I’m sure, did that to keep their “stock” healthy but I think many also did so because they knew that releasing their slaves was potentially a death sentence as they had to make their way to a Free State with little or no support. Many slaves choose to remain with their owners instead of attempting the trek to a Free State.

I further disagree with your statement (paraphrased) that ‘…republicans perpetuate racism and racial fears of the white majority, it continues to discriminate against women and homosexuals, it attempts to delegitimize any Muslim or Hispanic as a potential loyal US citizen…’ What evidence do you feel supports this view? Mind you I am looking for systemic evidence, not individuals that make stupid or ill advised comments. We could go back-and-forth with those jibes forever.