Constitution Question I just read...

[Cebu_4_2]

New Constitution? What was changed? I thought it was only changed once and that was in 1884 for the worse.

http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_17028794?nclick_check=1

CONSTITUTIONALLY BULLISH

We are glad that the U.S. Constitution is being read in Congress and debated by the people sworn to uphold it. What's not to like? While one side — the conservatives — claims its policies are supported by a close reading, who's to say liberals couldn't make a similar case?

We're bullish on Constitution talk. And we offer these fun facts from the U.S. National Archives, where the original founding documents are stored, preserved and displayed.

# Deputies to the Constitutional Convention assembled in Philadelphia in May of 1787.

# There were about 55 deputies representing 12 states; Rhode Island did not send a deputy. They came and went; there was never a vote of more than 11 states.

# Benjamin Franklin was 81 but the average age of the delegates was 44.

# George Washington presided, James Madison was regarded as a pre-eminent author and Thomas Jefferson was serving as Minster to France.

# The Constitution was drafted in fewer than 100 working days.

# It contains 4,654 words, counting signatures.

# It became binding upon the states upon ratification by New Hampshire — the ninth state to ratify — on June 21, 1788.

# Washington was inaugurated as the first president under the new Constitution on April 30, 1789.

# Our constitution is considered "rigid" because it cannot be changed as easily as an ordinary law, as can the constitution of Great Britain.

# W.E. Gladstone, 19th century British prime minister, called the U.S. Constitution "the most wonderful work ever struck off at a given time by the brain and purpose of man.''

# The United States government possesses only such powers as are granted to it by the Constitution.

# Only one amendment — the 18th, which prohibited the manufacture, sale and transportation of "intoxicating liquors'' — has been repealed.

[sirgonzo420]

Every amendment alters the constitution. It becomes "new" with each alteration. The same with the government. Each government composed of new players becomes a new government.

You should be aware that the reading of the U.S. constitution on the House floor was not the EXACT wording. Instead they appear to have eliminated text no longer considered worthy of attention.




Care to elaborate?

[sirgonzo420]

Care to elaborate?
Nope. It is shoonra's comment on another forum. To validate it would require word for word comparison of every word spoken on the House floor to the original document so I choose to accept her comment at face value.


I see.

I didn't watch them read it, and I don't care to compare either.

Anyway, it was silly for them to even read it, seeing as how they hold it in such low regard... not to mention the fact that they (allegedly) abridged it.

[Cebu_4_2]

Considering they haven't read it in 222 years I think it is a step in the right direction.

Does anyone have the video link where they were reading about who can become president when a woman interrupted saying "except obama, except obama"?

I want to add that one to my collection ;D

[big country]

I believe Fox reported that they left out the section refering to blacks (slaves?) to be counted as 3/5ths of a person for purposes of representation. (which, in my understanding, was actually a BENEFIT to blacks (slaves?) at the time)

They also left out the prohibition ammendment



Also, in regards to the OP I believe that factiod is in reference to Washington being the first constitutional president. The word new is put there because the constitution was NEW at that time? Thats how I read it anyways?

[joe_momma]

The 3/5 compromise was to give the South (where most slaves were held) some credit for the black population when assigning delegates to the House of Representatives.

Slavery was still legal in many Northern States/Colonies, but relatively few slaves were present - (small scale farming and [skilled] industry work are not economical using slaves - small scale farms tended to have more of an indentured servant relationship with slaves.)

By the time of the war of Northern Aggression, even the South was beginning to realize that slave run plantations were not terribly profitable - perhaps even money losing - you could get more work for less using immigrants (and not have to feed them when there was no work to be done).

[SLV^GLD]

By the time of the war of Northern Aggression, even the South was beginning to realize that slave run plantations were not terribly profitable - perhaps even money losing - you could get more work for less using the new and improving machines resulting from the Industrial Revolution (and not have to feed them when there was no work to be done).
Very cogent response that generally furrows some brows but I made a small correction.

[madfranks]

And we offer these fun facts from the U.S. National Archives, where the original founding documents are stored, preserved and displayed...

# The United States government possesses only such powers as are granted to it by the Constitution.

Ha ha ha.