LBCC –  A Panel Discussion on the United States Constitution

LBCC – A Panel Discussion on the United States Constitution

Articles, Blog , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 1 Comment


welcome to our panel discussion on the
US Constitution in honor a which is this past Monday this event
is being sponsored by the history and political science department here at Long Beach City College lady in
a gene boss lame faster political science and I’m
honored to serve as chair of the history and political science department here at the college I will serve as
moderator today are now briefly on our program and then introduce our panelists then we
can get down to business together I can get wired in the back that would help a lot
but Israel after all there are similar do
this time %eh in alphabetical order will make a
two- to three-minute opening statement when opening statements include I will
pose questions to the pay less in hopes of injecting some spirited and thoughtful discussion panelists will
have to keep the responses to me and to each other to no more than a minute at a time so we can get a number of
issues discussed today at about 12:45 will open a special night
with the audience members in the audience will have an
opportunity to pose a question will make a statement to the panel in a
pan or any and all the cables with and have an opportunity to respond to those
questions or statements when I am there are two birdies our
panelists them to switch to this different devices if they can figure out
how to use it and we’ll little just put these people are taking
taking them in alphabetical order already clear red black and should our he went we’ll visit a little is that
your lab at Heald doctor daddy is a professor of history
at or Beach City College race start since May 1881 the older a degree in
Delhi Valley College bana in history at Cal State Northridge get a PhD in History from the University
of California Irvine AP has published many reviews in historical journals as deliver papers at the curb this is
the American Historical Association the Pacific Coast bridger the
Organization of American historians in 2005 he helped establish Long Beach
community studies program at Long Beach City College that they got nobody is a member of the
board of directors bloody just Oracle society is currently working on a bill when the
history the City Long Beach was corrupt her doctor Craig hendrix the work is tentatively entitled federal
city is that time in 1889 he delivered an
address to the Long Beach City College Associated
Student Body entitled grow has the constitutional expired
there was gross he suggests ok Constitution Day 2012 we consider holding a futile for the
persecutions unfortunate demise it was that we don’t have a West battle that this is an associate
professor in political science in the parlor
political science here he earned his doctorate at the
University of California Santa Barbara it will teach you a worldwide City
College since 2000 professor Douglas is also a nationally
noted political commentator his essays have appeared at per page
magazine PG media PJ Media Real Clear Politics .co that it was not the berlin that the Lehman has been teaching early
in modern American history world each city college for sixteen years hear his doctorate at UCLA it is prince
with the love studying graduate school was an early American history the period
which are caused it Asian was created although it will is that you’re so it’s a little dot 2002
received her Bachelors of Arts degree with a double major in Political Science
in Psychology from the University of Michigan and they went on to receive a juris
doctorate from the University of Notre Dame she was a practicing civil litigator in
Southern California for several years when she decided to go
back to school earned her Masters in Business Administration doctor to really enjoy it a professional
commitment to support a certain legal aid programs it was conducted many seminars in
various aspects of civil law to her peers she was part a Cal State Long Beach
Western School of Law southwestern in the University of
Southern California in the air is a business law contracts
preparation civil procedure in legal writing since 1989 doctor to lose been teaching
business law in international business law at Long
Beach City College interesting that certainly not least Lee burial is back to everyone a doctor pellegrino is relentless in
Long Beach City College right here the app we’re really bad at that there is no
teaching here for 15 years jail several degrees from the University
of Southern California including a PhD with an emphasis in law and public
policy I know she’s done a lot of work in constitutional law then early political science as well as
that Masters in Public Administration when you need to have a little
management in addition to per education doctor Pellegrini has
worked in national state and local government she prides herself on balancing her
academic training with real-world practical experience know each pair was to share their
opening statements it will start in alphabetical order with
Professor battle you’ll can you hear me 0 about now on is a road for the Michael but that time about now area so you gotta get close to
this thing you can take it off the hook it’s true
just do them every app I was at I thank you for inviting me to
be able to spend in with more on the Constitution it is
the two hundred and twenty-fifth anniversary have that great document I’m but I’d like to begin by bringing up what ralph Waldo Emerson I’m soon is an important to our culture because he was the guy who said you told
us that we all deserve to have an original
relationship with the universe and what he meant by
that was Matt we should be the creators of the
world that we live in not just in the e-readers other past so yes it’s two hundred and twenty-five
years of the Constitution by I’m we need to think critically about
that document and when it is delivered to us as the
fundamental law of the land yeah I was rolling through campus and I
happened to see and student Pittsburgh and behind my back
Pittsburgh which was a political science textbook was the Libyan constitution you know home I had to laugh system the Constitution is a system a
fundamental rules and principles a Venetian a staid or body panel big the germans the powers emptiness up the government and
guarantees certain rights to the people with the
night administrative unit but Justin generic
definition in the batsmen with history lamp
insurance peace and security to society constitutions appeared as an alternative to you are true /param 100 per Mon early American history in that’s weird
bed the Constitution was written in in which arose from experience but
Americans mad with the arbitrary rule other monarch Buckingham England George
the third me written constitution was an innovation designed to control
how your and thereby preserve liberty and freedom for those in the system was was seen as
necessary ya know James Madison’s famous quotation if men
were angels we should not need government the
government was necessary to chant and I’m trustworthy human nature up the masses but also at the Leeds this was madison’s
great insight a new constitution represent a deal said
abuse and downs for the political authorities to buy as well as an outline of the structure
and function of government an office building in retrospect the
idea the founding fathers could design a
system of constitutional government was a massive generational concede and an illusion madison has to be
injured if Penn was necessary to control me n mind control the government the founding
fathers answered was a kind of political science there was news panel they call the remembered up counter boys
that is to say use a system of checks and balances
within the government to try and keep the government in check
but unfortunately that system checks and
balances a has broken down so many times we have to wonder about banana banana palms it was
apparent to thoughtful observers as early as the mid-nineteenth century
the constitutional they know you control power well president Paul blanch turned and
undeclared war against Mexico in Stampede at the congress into preparation a groomer after a two-hour
repeated not exactly the control group the
president in that moment and we have assumed okay the heavens blew the whistle I in his name is a autobiography called
the education and madams which I recommend I love you is must
reading for every college student when Adams realized was that the Constitution couldn’t control
privately held that is to say the rise above the Reg
the rise the plutocracy in 1900 performs the billion dollar
corporation appeared in american in 1999 but first 500 billion dollar corporation appeared in america I was Microsoft
constitutional government couldn’t prevent mass concentrations
welcome pal now in private hands and it led to a new
agenda and for government which was to try and
control past Private Wealth through an expanded
government okay I’m but because we are witnessing
in our lifetimes that project has spilled mover constitutional government has made
many compromises with state power and this is especially around the issue
of the president’s taking this into words which began with no human after all guns
in baton cream or didn’t even ask Congress for approval
it’s only gotten worse so what we’ve seen in our own times as
the rise above national security state along with the
plutocracy yeah I’m the man’s and accounting for but we just don’t get it not happy but constant okay doctor
douglas going in alphabetical order in in Jim 110 done right I think it’s on don’t
look at me the whole your alright arm I prepare brief comments i’d hope I’m
not overshadowed by mine distinguished
colleague professor delgadio but arm when I N received the invitation to
participate at today’s panel from professor goss want the questions that he had posed to
us as panelist was is the Constitution an anachronism and I thought to myself who invented
done much not professor bar someone somewhere down
the line had this idea that the Constitution is
an anachronism and so I thought to myself while I was
getting ready to prepare up the Commons know the constitution’s
not an anachronism the Constitution is the
law up the land constitution is twofold former attorney general ed Meese
dedicated to the preservation a personal liberty political freedom economic opportunity and the not arrives
with which we r endowed by our Creator on world but why do we celebrated why don’t we all gather here today
pac-10 standing-room-only crowd to discuss our
Constitution you must think is wanna wonderful
document were at least will be a bar tension whether or not we
can preserve the Liberty that it was designed to put up MSN to I mean I say that liberty Lawson palatable freedom that frankly we take
for granted on Tuesday morning when I stopped to get
my coffee left up of it %uh southern lebanon they
have all the papers parade out the New York Times is
buffeted by the paper sometimes I do but look at the new york times and had a
picture the front page topic to the top of the page up a group with him a group in that had
taken their let them citizenship they had there not
position sure alone on September 17 Monday that day much different look really important day
for them not only that doubly so because they swore there there a leading to the Constitution on the two
hundred and twenty-fifth brewed beer will not document was signed up but
there was a fabulous time and so ayash I asked most often sometimes ask my
students why is it then that immigrant keep flooding or sure they must have some signs done wall
United States isn’t perfect we r a dreadful whose preload a Prussian
slavery in perhaps imperialism in genocide
depending on who you talk to maybe ask if you know american spike that his pre much a bit we’ve been
trying to amend to atone for overcome people still come to assure at least a
million a year some from 1.52 million people come here every year
well because the realize that while the United teaches is not perfect no democracy is flawed it the least worst daughter to there
isn’t a better system out there show for good designed and we’ve had this constitution
for 29 $25 usual known as you to be doing
the job is not perfect and help to additional common along those lines in a few minutes of
break your mind other distinguished colleagues on the panel okay thank you
know professor David Lee Min thanks gene I’m happy to be here with you today I
think it’s totally appropriate that it’s the Department of History and Political
Science that is sponsoring this event because we are two fields that focus on the
Constitution although I think we focus on the Constitution from pretty
different perspectives and I’d like to just say a word or two
about I’ll looking at the constitution from a
historical perspective as professor Goss said my field is early
American history II studied at UCLA I had a a wonderful seminar that
I remember with a constitutional specialist are and I really AM convinced from those
years studying early American history that the idea up constitutionalism are the idea that you have a written constitution that sets the rules
love what government can do that really is
one of the two great accomplishments the im revolutionary era and even though
we’re a relatively young nation the very oldest continue in continuously surviving
written constitutions come from that era actually the oldest Constitution that
still in effect is not the US Constitution the constitution to the state of
Massachusetts but it has remained essentially the same with a few
amendments in 1781 and if you look at this time period it’s
fascinating how this idea a constitutionalism developed overtime first the idea that Constitution needs to predate government
you can’t have the government itself set the rules have what government can do
know you need a special convention up the people
that’s an innovation that comes from the Revolutionary era the idea that a it has to be written
down the idea that even after you’ve written
it down you gotta send it back to the people and had ratified all that was a it seems very common to us but that
was brand-new at the time that really is a huge a comp and I do think that this focus on
constitution writing the fact that you had people who were devoted to writing constitutions even
while they were fighting a war against Great Britain that was far from being a sure thing that shows
how that really shows the key concern at
this whole era night is how do you have a government gets done
what it needs to get done without being a threat to liberty and they worked on that really really
hard and they thought that they came up with a solution and it’s a solution that has
lasted for a long time the day we celebrate as americans I
think we celebrate the answers that they came up to this issue how do you have a
government gets done what it needs to get done and not threaten Liberty well
you have as Professor delgadio talked about you
have a system of checks and balances or you have a set love up rules these are things that government can’t
mess with that’s what the Bill of Rights really is all about these are things writes that the people that government
can’t touch right and I do think that especially in
today’s political climate if you are a small government type and
especially let’s say from kinda the Tea Party perspective I have a feeling that you celebrate the US Constitution for the limits that
it places on government or maybe you in to turn it around maybe you lament
the way that its original intent in your view has been baby so burdensome weights over the past two hundred years I do think
that it’s interesting though that at the time that the US
Constitution was written that’s not the way people saw it at the
time that’s not the way was seen by most
americans instead it’s fascinating at that time this constitution that we’re celebrating
was seen as creating a much more powerful government a much
more centralized government then the nation had ever had before and
frankly a government that was simply in their view too far removed from the
people so you know there was a huge debate about this constitution in mostly came from
folks that said no this is this is creating too much power so I
just raise that to suggest that when we talk
about the Constitution we’re approaching it from a pretty
different perspective then perhaps two hundred years ago he did doctor lehman professor o’toole when professor got at me too be a panelist here I thought I wanted jumped at the chance to share with you why each about sitting here today should
be celebrating what I believe is the best living
document we have the US Constitution when our framers
trapped in this document if you take a look at it and analyze it article by article it’s
fascinating it starts with we that people so it interesting because it’s about a we should all taking
interest because this document applies to us it was written by yes and it was 4s now that’s an exciting start it should
capture your interest it should capture attention and at the
business lawyer in the group you I’m not a content expert on the US Constitution but everything it represents is something that we
should appreciate value and truly take the time to
celebrate and we look at the way the Constitution was initially drafted it had you know the question was posed by
Professor guys we take a look at it do you believe that this constitution is relevant are significant today
absolutely without doubt and I’ll tell you why when the people that’s I S created a
system that’s organized by the people and for
the people it’s pretty exciting to be a part of it
to live it we died for it and we’re going to
continue to preserve it article one is the legislative branch I bring this up because for many
students in my class were discussing contract this is a a
good one but I want them to get a perspective at how the systems function the
legislative branch is most closed as far as the connection
to the people cuz we the People Act who’s in congress
and that makes the legislature then you have the executive branch at
the national constituency that is as the nation electing who’s the
president vice president and the represented department
secretaries then you have the judicial branch the
judicial branch is very important branch has become more
important in recent years probably more powerful
in recent years but all three branches are for a
particular purpose the legislature with what do they do
they legislate what does that mean the a nap lives they make wise what is the executive
branch do it enforces the lies what is the
judiciary branch in it interprets the lies their
restrictions that each branch so not one branch has complete control and ultimately with that in mind We the
People whose elected to have these three
organizations run the country represent us in Iran’s but when the
framers drafted the Constitution be realized it was not a perfect
document because even though we had a really good
system that hugh have the people have a structure where they are heard we wanted certain personal rights to be
protected those right where than later modified an
amended and the first and I’m sure many of you
are familiar with them they’re called the bill a bright the great thing about the Constitution
is it is self-correcting as old as this
document is the framers drafted it so that indeed if
society needed to you modify or change society or culture or thinking which we all know is necessary there is a system in place to do that so
we had the first bill a bright which enabled me sitting here in front
and you today doctor am at Douglas was just talking about this wire immigrant walking to this country right
now at 27 amendments to the Constitution I can proudly say I’m a first generation
immigrant I was not born in this country as you
can see it that means I’m a minority you can see
I’m email but what you now know about me your brief introduction for those tins
and had me I’m lawyer and those identities that represent me
minority immigrant email and now a lawyer and now I’m a teacher a blot
those opportunities could not be afforded to me it wasn’t that I got to be blessed enough to be part of this
country and have the protection and those right afforded to me by the
Constitution cell you should really celebrate take a
look around everyone likes different that’s a good
thing embraced that and appreciate that we’re all here today
and we’re allowed to voice our opinions as different as they may be you may not
have to agree with me but you have the right to to think differently is not nice appreciate how wonderful this document
thank you thank you the best road your and
professor pelagreeny please after professor gazans mom beaten I just wanna spend a minute or
two and address a few these things and talk about the changing the
Constitution arm oftentimes you here you know it’s
outdated all is it relevant arm I’m actually sort
of shocked in some context that we would even remotely
consider that’d is irrelevant arm people come here for those liberties and
freedoms the opportunities as arm 200 I was talking about are here
this is the place you get them and how do you get them you get them because the
protections of that document and well some people say well you know
what throw the baby out with the bathwater
and get rid of the whole document and start over arm the free murders were humble they believe that the Constitution could
last and in doing so might need to change so when they wrote the Constitution they
put in that document an amendment process we
can amend it we can change it we can arm tweakin if you will according
to today’s standards looking at who we are and how we changed
as a nation looking at our our economy and our people arm so is it relevant my answer is
absolutely unequivocally yes I believe it is the document that
provides for the freedoms and all the values that they talked
about early on under lock limited government and harm equality of opportunity all those things
are protected by that simple piece of paper if you
will and getting rid a bit would mean unbelievable hardship we tend to forget to 125 years later what the framers and the revolutionaries
went through to create this country if you look at the 56 framers of the
Constitution with 56 signers I love the Declaration
of Independence and the signers of the constitution we’re talking about wealthy educated
people who laid everything they had everything they
owned on the line to create a new system a new document and my question becomes if there’s even the tiniest
consideration arm getting rid of them the current constitution in its format
are we prepared to pay that price again are we prepared for revolution are we
prepared for arm the absolute complete risk everything we have do come up with
something once again brand new because this is what they did
back then they came up with something brand new and the lady everything on the line to
do that an you know walking around with your coffee
in your newspaper is something that may become a thing of
the past we choose to try to up completely uproot our system I think the amendment
process and the ability of the court to interpret certain elements in the constitution
give us plenty latitude for what we need to change with the
times as it were and I agree with my
colleagues about you know immigration and people still wanting to come to this
country and what a great country is and we may
not be perfect home a quote oft quoted in many sources I most recently
read it in a a a pat conroy book was arm the idea that
america is a good enough country to die for even if she is wrong and our
Constitution puts us in a position our own saying yes the Freedom Center offered arm the
strength of character this nation is held in that document
back help asap thank you professor pelagreeny now I’m
going to as moderator begin asking a series of
questions to the panelists and I’d like to have been limit their
responses to about a minute more or less so we can get number question a accomplished here
today and I like you reverse the alphabetical
order since you’re having a everything last I think we’ll start with you and
then work down alphabetically I I think we
kinda dealt with one other question couple the questions I came prepared ass
today in the opening statements ongoing it job ahead to something involving a the
amendment process a a number because the tissue eliminates
the been proposed in recent decades the many them with quite a bit a public
support most in the failed I remember the
balanced budget amendment in the nineteen eighties I think it came
out what a voter to shorten the US Senate from meet meeting the two-thirds requirement
in going out to the states but it failed as well is the
Constitution too difficult to change with her
amendment process my response to that would be that it isn’t it needs to be difficult to
change we can’t willy nilly take the
Constitution of the United States and arm andean and remove things from day to day it was
never meant to be that type of document we found that out
with the constitution and the City Calif which has been amended more than 500
times and quite frankly is a mess so if we’d stick to big issues right equal rights up voting for all citizens those types
of things and not get down to little tiny minutiae we can insurer the history on this document a throw to min agree on the framers up the Constitution whether it was
deliberate or not I’m very happy that it doesn’t take a snap at the thing you’re to make an
amendment it takes two-thirds vote up congress and then
three-fourths a fifty to get an amendment to the
Constitution the reason being is it’s not supposed to
be easy it’s not supposed to be easy to change
something that has lasted this long that is given
as the rights we have at the Society progresses guess what there is change that’s
necessary but together to create a more perfect
union keep it at that level it dead take all %uh which is the boys that congress and
three Ford state at the lot I have agreement but it can happen and it will if the boys are the people wanted to be
done so think it’s its it’s a good system professor does apart has a limit gonna go out for the
record I do think that this is a good question
and it does break me that we haven’t had many changes to the constitution long
time and when I think back to the beginnings love the United States under the
Constitution I’m not sure that that was expected that it would be so infrequent because we had quite a
few constituted amendments are very early on but I do think you’re right we have a
system in which the stars have to be totally aligned for a change to come about and that does
reflect this kinda got fear about powerful
government where we started from but a I think we would all amid on this
panel that there are sometimes that that has
really hamstrung arsons really hard to do something that even %uh the majority of american people
might see years a valuable change but it’s just professor Douglas I’m agree with professor lehman arm some fun the Constitution creates such interns obstacles to political
chained up people complain frequently that we have
perpetual gridlock and can’t change the constitution without super super majorities you need
to do to both chambers to vote for the amendment and then you need 34 should the state
legislatures to approve an amendment and is extremely difficult to do the
Constitution been changed tack on the 17 times since 1791 we are the first ten
amendments to the bill right but then very few amendments after that and so I think about the but I think about the
theory and I think a switch and router and professor
pelagreeny discussed as that the founder worried about majoritarian
power that they want to place limits on the
ability of im popular and powerful majorities to perhaps passed legislation to change
the laws that would trample the rights above individual so so if you look at it from that point you
that your arm sometimes we have a lot to gridlock perhaps gridlock the price to pay for a conservative
document I mean construed even assumes that it’s loaded changer not to be as david said Ashby the stars
alanis be something burning something really important to the nation
as a whole to get the will to get the consensus to
change it as you go daddy: be boo okay I completely agree with what I’ve never
been to Spain with said this document other I would go a lot farther and say
this document was designed to make it difficult to change that was
the point and I’m good document missus buoyant
about the anti democratic knee-jerk up the
Constitution fun part is when I believe in democracy
when the constructed this is not a government big
booty call the Republic not a democracy and that was intentional
insult you can combine all the major flaws and at the end democratic features
of this document brings out the electoral college we hope
the idea of senators representing needs as opposed to people which has the absurdity up morning million
californians represented by two senators and two senators representing roaming which has mark Hosenball don’t know how
do you do with a stunning brunette trying to change these agree just
violations %uh majoritarian principal well the
founders buy domains and you know if you look at the history
of the amendments to the Constitution you only get that boom and when there’s
dramatic political com conflict going on in the Republic when the Constitution was ratified ten
amendments when I was because Salimi Americans at
that time the guy with the founding father said and he said wait a minute there are no
widespread madness document and personal boundaries when it
just didn’t happen Alexander Hamilton meet federal number 84 warning signs you don’t need a
place in this document you didn’t put in the
constitution defame individual right ones read him his group buttons the money if you’re under arrest someone who was
charged with the crime don’t think we’re really start in many
ways with the amendments to the constitution that up now with some of the creatures and the
majoritarian features like direct elections are senators greed but we still have senators behind I
don’t understand it so the founders Gujarat a ratification process and an amendment
passes that add to our difficulties rather than help
us and they didn’t intentionally they get it will go back to the recorder in your take the
for the next question professor delgadio on most Americans are aware of the importance that the
constitution was just mention that if you are an immigrant in you are taking euro as a new citizen you taking it to the
Constitution and sometimes I believe that maybe
somebody’s immigrants who are accomplishing this know more about the
constitution and some a bus um it’s pretty obvious that many
Americans are not immediately familiar with its text words precept should our k
to 12 educational system place more emphasis on teaching the
Constitution one I’m gonna really know about the system
the better off we are installed me was about this document bed humanism in this situation spaces
which is exactly where the founders one has to be so we need to know more about the
Constitution believing the reality we don’t leave me illusions we battled
we’ve got to do with this abram well resurrected that we’ve attached to the
spot amid and we’ve attached to this country when
you see the ruling so important to mention it was the
United I’m the room president was the question is should we should our K-twelve
educational system place more emphasis on teaching
specifically the Constitution we have six courses
above them above the mine talk you still coming out of high school that there’s not much detailed discussion of
the Constitution itself okay are I thought about not question when I was preparing my
Commons a lot of young people and I would put
myself in that workout ago when I was 18 years old I wasn’t worried about anything except having the time a proper
planning a new girlfriend at the time so you know you want to have a good time
but I wasn’t worried about the Constitution
I wasn’t worried about you Washington gridlock in these on democratic senate 0 or whatever
so I would all be out there needs to be more tension and educational system to our basic
charter our constitution but don’t stop there
students a prop not Road the decoration
independence when they come into college %uh they don’t know %uh the history don’t know frankly are our political cultural value but let me
say one other thing about those arm I mean the Senate perhaps is anachronistic it tution but it serves its purpose would the
constitution’s thought that this particular body will be the least directly in ruled by the passions all what they
thought was the mob when you talk about how the Constitution professor delgadio talked about the Constitution is one
democratic the founders of you were dead that perplexes to might be to democratic
if you do find mark cream terms on popular majorities auspey to get a super powerful majority faction in are James Madison’s word that control all that into to Shinto power and two
plus to write a smaller groupings are people which or what he called political
maneuverings to the Constitution is built up versions dramatically through relatively
indirectly elected into shit like the senate but also the president the electoral
college which isn’t a rock into tution designed to take a fact to preserve livery through shocking are more populist based institutions like the house
representative pp it’s a difficult balance to strike
but contra you noticed a two-front fractions had 12 political regimes since 1789 the pp just now for political stability
since I forgot 1958 your show under the French First Republic we’re
still working on our first constitution to keep you don’t
count the Articles of Confederation something has work overtime to not only guarantee liberty for people but adopt to abandoned undemocratic racist sexist institutions that work the norm in the
eighteenth-century are can I have another minute don’t know
I gotta one minute I’m with your next comment edited professor lame and I have to say says unfortunately professors lehman and
Douglas are going to be leaving at around 14 class start or after this question I think we’re
gonna turn this over the audience so at least they can feel the couple questions
from you before a the where they have to leave
professor lehman I do think that what we heard from
professor delgadio and professor Douglas kinda point2 I’ll when you talk about the
Constitution it is pretty there’s some really complicated issues
that are out there and I think I work with fifth-grade teachers in here in Long Beach Unified School
District and I do think that when you’re teaching the Constitution at
the in the k12 especially in the a elementary school level the tendency
is OK we’ll talk about the the Bill of Rights
about the rights that come from the Constitution but if you talk about the Constitution
as as ken said and as Julien said there are some complicated
things it we are not told in in high school about
this kinda anti democratic aspect up the up the constitution were not told that
the Alexander Hamilton gave a speech in
which he said the people who are turbulent in changing they can seldom
judge or determine right so did this was a document that was written by people
who were concerned about a about too much popular influence in
government but the fascinating thing is that they
created a document that in the and would provide for exactly that for an ability for ordinary people to
express their their views and i really believe that
Besser a tool him in a go back into wrecked the answer
to the question that was asked which is do I don’t believe that more attention should be given a sparse
instruction with the US Constitution with did you
take in the current through 12th grade absolutely I we can
change that let you can start preschool till your last breath %uh to be educated in knowing you’re right in the spirit of
the law as a lawyer its there’s always a good
time to learn it doesn’t matter if you’re one it
doesn’t matter if you’re a hundred or anywhere in between on there are different methods and
manners in which to give that instruction but I can say this as an educator in the law verses in actual practice
thing lawyer how many student Flash client in my knee career truly understand their rights they down they don’t it’s a very its it seems strange to say that it did
it really is named about k to 12 the wonderful thing about the US
Constitution is its are public be it is what makes us Americans it is what makes this
country you need and the opportunity to learn about it is
there for all about so I really do believe the sooner we
start the better because all we learn is more information about what we have the
opportunity to do whether we agree or we don’t so absolutely I think that instruction
should begin as soon as possible that’s pelagreeny I will keep my remarks
short so we can move on the answer to the question is yes we
definitely should spend more time on the Constitution I agreed with doctor douglas that we
should talk about the Declaration of Independence which in my classes I we see how many
read it and I’m lucky to get two or three students who’ve actually read the one and a half
page document before coming to class so there’s no question I would also add
to that government employees I made a phone call
recently City Long Beach live in the city and was inquiring about
something and I was specifically told I needed to
do XYZ and I question that and the woman on the
other end the phone said where the government you have to do
whatever we tell you no I would add that all national state and local government
employees at some point be required to take either a political science class or
learn about the Constitution and the declaration on that note that now we’re gonna turn this over to
audience questions and statements I believe we have a
microphone set up over here is that correct though those we would
like to address the panel please come over to
this microphone will it take you one at a time heat your questions or statements very
short into the point no speeches and letter
panel a feel it as you do yessir I yes I said a question as far as
our do you think shays rebellion was I’ll the actual thing that made the
Constitution possible as far as I know know what it is today compared to how it
started off at who think that was it a tipping point
absolutely that was the thing that convinced a number of people that
something had to be done because the the idea that a a and uprising like that could happen in
what we believed was a republic was just a
very scary so now a chaise rip well just real really but you have to take his return if you
want %uh that’s when he had a citizens and now Pennsylvania I but Pittsburgh’s arm farmers rebelling against the government
saying you cannot foreclose our houses and had
a IR uprising against the government and the articles Inc of Confederation was the original document was trying to
refer to you were changed to the Constitution because are the checks and balances they
put in place to stop the uprisings against the
government and the therefore the government will be
as too powerful as well we’re limiting it
all goes well it wasn’t he did a busy please the fear there was
that the national government wasn’t powerful
enough to respond to this uprising so I’d like to say something about that
to change rebellion was a product other have an austerity program because the state of Massachusetts had
run up big debts in fighting the American Revolution and it wanted to pay off those debts
that’s very quickly so they raise taxes on farmers and the
fans could pay the taxes they took the property solely Americans in Massachusetts jump
ball bearings and took the position that we have the
right to defend our property against the government suppressive and it was bad act that movement they produced be scared the crap outta
love the elites a bad time rapport with the ones where he batted they wanted the movie and the result was this counterrevolution which is the Constitution United States who else would like to respond okay next question please my question is the if the constitutional the
constitutional laws written stuff why is it that when a person goes to
trial special been a lawyer that you assume that if you had above
the fender or you don’t put a hundred thousand dollars
into your case you’re not gonna win and it’s proven with cases that we see you
know that and that she’s been a hundred thousand dollars your night unit fair trial you deserve
thank you for your question bad is a good question but I want to clarify what you’re trying to
ask I’m I know what you’re asking is a
perception what you feel know that it’s pretty incredible that the bill a bright has introduced to
all others as american citizens you’re not you know you’ve heard the
phrase your anything until you’re proven guilty we have a right to a trial by jury we also have a right to due process we also have a right to if you are in a
criminal here at a defendant in a criminal case
you do have a right to legal representation there’s mean if you look at the media
you look at the news many people feel if i cant afford a good attorney I don’t have the dream
team the cash for that multi-million-dollar loaded attorney
smoke-and-mirrors I’m not gonna get when i won I’m not
going to be able to and I i’m stack the servant I’m here’s the deal you have an opportunity
in this country to have your representation paid for you by the people at the state and speaking from personal experience I had an opportunity to work in the
public defender’s office as well as their district attorney’s
office and I’ll tell you something we work hard we fight for our client it doesn’t matter that the check is
consistent and it’s not increased because someone
can pay me more I’m doing the job because I want to make
sure that you get your rights protected that
is why we take the L stowed to devalue someone who has taking the oath to
protect your rights Tuesday well I really don’t have the money for a
better attorney at that the slap in the face this is
from someone you lead I been in this bad a criminal arena as an attorney and as the military as a civil attorney you can make what
she wanted it but many people that step up to the plate
can make a lot of money in criminal defense if they’re on their
own but many people choose to uphold the right that we are good
granted by wave that Bill of Rights do the
Constitution to protect defendants no know that we’re doing what we can because we love this country 10 anyone
else for feel that question presser pelagreeny I would also say that while the
Constitution guarantees you all the things that doctor to was talking about and all those rights are absolute arm we also as the popular serve this nation have a choice
to participate are too many times people will sit back
and say my lawyer my congressman my this person
this person didn’t do for me what they should have done and my question always is what did you
do I did you participate in your criminal
defense did you go to the library and look up are whatever information you want
libraries there you can pull the book off the shelf absolutely free of charge is not gonna
cost anybody a penny K I did you write your congressman did
you write your city council member did you go to the Board of Trustees
meeting here and make a statement about your education and so while you know we can talk about
the Constitution and the rights that it provides us it also gives us that freedom of choice and if we’re not taking are
opportunities there to participate then certainly we need to question our role in the outcome up whatever the
situation is the next question I forgot my
instructions for media services after you’ve given your question I have
to restate its so the cameras can pick it up a so my question is is the Constitution
itself vulnerable to outside pressure for example not the political side but
people who on the political side are the being
pressured into forcing amendments or not as humans do their own gain the the question is is
the Constitution itself at risk from being a approach by outside interest re: I think commercial interests or
something of that nature will address that question arm I keep the question Derby up question I’ll undue interest-group influence on
the political process and therefore on our constitutional liberties arm it’s
a controversial thing arm depends on how you look at it on a
few years ago and I forgot exactly but the the Supreme Court ruled that
corporations have love first-amendment right to contributing
I’ll funding to the political process
campaign contributions been very controversial has been devised to for a lot of people arm a lot of people
on the left argued that corporations don’t how of
first amendment right in the Suns have an individual in terms
of free speech but the PRU poor health ruled that that
they have corporations out that right therefore do corporations and and big
business hub too much power too much in moon the respond to that is done arm speech is is not counteracted with more speech up
corporations don’t always wondered when you powerful but often the little guy wins on the little
person one by be able to participate and mobilize a
coalition of interest to be able to combat that gonna speak and if you see what’s happening right
now the people who are calling frankly not just to earned Corbridge speech but
also to perhaps past are either laws or perhaps amend the Constitution to prohibit
unpopular opinions of people in the world like Nancy Pelosi even President Obama would like to look for Speed show up
work on improvements oh no don’t limit speech people should have more speech the not
to do too unpopular speech were too powerful
speech is more speech not loves anyone else will address this
question up as filigree arm my question would be is outside
influence the problem because it would depend on
how you’re going to define an outside influence if you’re going to find an outside
influence on the constitutional the constitutional processes including
interest groups then you’re basically saying that people
should not be able to participate because you all join interest groups to
join the Sierra Club when you join your professional organization and you join them for what purpose to
have influence have influence over the political
process most of us don’t have the time to do it ourselves we don’t have the
time to go door-to-door or to go to each individual
congressional office to make a stand on what we think so we join
interest-group you work for corporation if you were stockholder in a corporation
all those entities do have pressure in the
political process because they’re all representing ultimately the people and so to say that
there aren’t any I think would be incorrect and to see
that there shouldn’t be I believe is also incorrect again it’s a
choice we all make choices what we join what we participate in but
anything that ultimately represents the people should be considered in the process be
about will I think that’s an excellent
question and you know Madison tell with this
question in the Federalist Papers I urge you all to read the Federalist Papers because it’s one
of the three critical documents for understanding early American history along with the declaration in the
constitution but in the Federalist Papers what medicine says is look you can’t get rid of interest groups
these outside forces have been that you be obliterating liberty and freedom
if you tried to do that so what did the founders do they came up
with the system of checks and balances the idea being that by fracturing
authority between two houses of congress in between a
legislature and executive and then a at this year E that somehow
that would prevent abuse by those different
interest groups in mass was very upfront about his
understanding at risk groups he said there are large ones that represent the
Reg and there are small ones and that will be the principal conflict
in your society 10 sounds like a marxist doesn’t the problem is bed private wealth has become so
contradicted in this country but basically what do you get you get
the best government the money can buy and that’s where we’re stuck though the founders avail this with their
design wealthy is simply purchased every branch
of our government next question please everyone seems pretty adamant about the
way the Constitution is now would in the near future very bad is
that that there was a noble about it being change how do you think
that will affect the overall structure America on clear to restate that a if the future there’s a a wholesale movement for
change long the population a what it what
impact would that have on the system that correct who was feel that so2 court that’s sad a very broad area
because it depends on what that changes but if
you’re had pertaining to is there I think you’re coming from is
there a possibility that we can change is that where you’re
asking or in particular what type it change by
people to the pursuit of happiness too literal and
they felt like maybe we should brighten it up or make it more specific so it doesn’t become a problem so how do
you think that will change like people’s overall perception
American how do you think that will change the structure well at that that the interesting
question well first about know that’s the purpose document that
your re when you’re talking about the pursuit of
happiness the Declaration of Independence cleary said we have unalienable unalienable right
life liberty and the pursuit of happiness the wonderful thing about those right it depends your perception may be different
for what constitutes pursuit of happiness purses mine and the reason I believe the
founders framed this structure in this language
is because we aren’t very different everyone’s different everyone has a different interpretation
and the pursuit of happiness but in response to your question Wade if there’s enough that one change this
is Tim is that in place as it stands to have a
modification again it difficult to make that happen but it’s meant to be difficult because
you want to make sure that a structured in a document that is lasted where many governments look
around there’s not a key means anymore pain but we still have a president and it still
run with separation of powers checks and
balances for the people by the people we have a
national election if the people do want change there are
structures to make those men in Tappan but again I think when you’re in
referencing it’s important to say the pursuit of happiness do the documents written so that my
person I can go ahead and achieve my dream
which may not be the same dream is you but we have be
ability and opportunity to achieve your dream and my dream the way it’s written so am again if
you’re dealing with modifications as bars a movement toward something more
specific I I think obviously it’s drafted that it
could happen but it’s written to you incorporate everyone’s individual person compressor
does in let me China a little thus discussion we’ve been having a special
about young people %um and participation in you refer to what’s going to happen
in the future and not just questions Oprah should
happen is but again back up on all the major the question Liberty arm young people
need to take ownership love their system every generation come comes along comes a time in the life
that generation that they will become the nation’s leaders sometimes I doubt
that young people today are are being educated or beam I’ll in power with the skills they need
to sustain livery almost were about powerful cooperation professional
delgadio Hills all week about powerful government and
how to the people protect the government should be to you gentlemen up to excuse
myself to go to Clark are one is the Obamacare legislation
that was passed in 2010 and the Supreme Court judge
recently upheld down the ruling was controversially on
whether or not government can’t compel individual to buy a product in the marketplace
known the supreme court said well you know
they can because have the power to talk to people on the demand it was a shock but there will be more challenges to
Obamacare going forward the biggest challenge one more controversial
challengers is the requirement not insurance companies pay for
contraceptive hell and I think conclude things like a a
birth control and options to abortion to russians our primal I’ll intrude wonders Ramada
jumped the Obama administration does not exempt
pick up a turd and its institutions hospitals and from
a program that are affiliated with the Church day she this is a violation of the First
Amendment both under the united states was sworn into a ball to put out the
Constitution annisten on you not on an issue on not
on that issue does not seem to care about to control
into people who are catholic and whether not they
will be forced to permit people abortion in their health care programs the second
concern it presidential the problems of has
taken it upon himself to try to plan Obama taken Bonhams all to decide which
American solution will live word on in 2011 in September
11 the president United States Barack Obama made the decision himself to execution Americans solution on wall
Lockie on y la ke is the radical Imam who had are here Mosconi harder are teachings in the United States and then
he fled the country after September 11 to move to you man
and 2011 United age one Predator drone missiles
and took out his vehicle and killed on lalaki on Lougheed was an American
citizen on we’re lucky was not a participant in
September 11 while United government taking upon
himself and the administration deciding it that
you can assassinate what weeks but we political
opponent upon her with the disagreements and I
want to quell the justice department and the official legal counsel in the
white house has said that while the fifth amendment guarantee of due process applied to the case of them were lucky
it could be shot is fine by Antoine deliberations inside the
deputy branch to another word due process decided not
by individuals and not by the court but the white house sure I think back to
the question of participation do you want you know honesty to survive
as democracy if the people well we can allow more more power
government March Barack Obama but Dick Cheney in and president bush in
any future president decides that we can beat any country do we want and that we can expect yet you any
american that want because we’d we see them as a threat to
national security dot the big problem not like to see would
professional got you would like to see a tuna very calm it well I want to comment on
the question which to addressed the issue up we can reproduce if we could just change
this document is RK think the worst written were trapped
with and you know this idea the pursuit of
happiness if you think about it it’s a description of motivation its its its attributing to americans
this idea that they’re all going to define happiness in whatever way but nope you
go back to the founding fathers who after all work Thomas Jefferson
Jefferson wasn’t at the Constitutional Convention he was the author up the declaration
where you get this idea that pursuit happiness is what a fundamental
right of Americans in the writings have someone like
Alexander Hamilton who we really are so highly you know he doesn’t have a very
flattering you with americans actually says in one of the Federalist
Papers that Americans are ambitious been did and repetitious you can apply those
terms yourself do you see yourself in those terms that are you on I maybe you have a different view of
yourself even have a positive and optimistic you love yourself and that based on voanews to elements of human nature perhaps we could do something to produce
a better system a fundamental laws in this
country we can win in the electoral college you get a little ascended what a waste
of time matters we can have a unique camera legislature
majority rule and then maybe we can empower congress
actually do things plus no match now the government actually
does things for us like I think you would other countries after a five-week vacation once a year as i sat in so I think that there’s tremendous possibly
never rapidly than ourselves you have to free ourselves from the
assumptions that the founders have left us with the back and we are because one of those people I don’t
think of myself as that kind of a person the next question wat a.m. do you think the Constitution is to
be changed or perhaps more people choosing to be educated a on the constitution and what about our
politicians who seem to circumvent you know the document which one you with three different
question there which is your when you want to focus on at when general does it need to be
changed okay the question is does the
Constitution need to be changed and the right now right yes second we are is are better solution AVC even just be in the people okay let’s go with the the need to be
changed when first okay but that’s a good question okay school um for small the question is somewhat
vague doesn’t need to be changed how when we change the constitution we
have to change it to do something very specific so to say does it need to be changed is
like saying it would we like it to rain tomorrow in
the center how so in asking this question I would say doesn’t need to be changed to do
something what would you like it to be doing that it isn’t doing how would you like it to be changed
verses are you just trying to throw the whole thing out and start over that’s not change that’s Constitutional
Convention hey arm more education always helps
people to understand if more people had more education maybe
more people would want to change it so you don’t no what the connection
between those two things is gonna be though that’s that’s that would be my
man known as was I have another question but did you have something specific in
mind love no I mean I it seems to work
perfectly okay so you like it the way it is that
okay Pittsburgh for 200 years why change it
okay so that’s really a question why change it okay okay and I think that would be for
doctoral Guardian he’s the one that seems to be more in
favor of change but often I’m not persuaded that it’s worked
perfectly for two hundred and something years in fact didn’t work so probably why was there so
the war you know which was not was wasn’t I don’t break down at this system what
was it something like seventy eight years after its conception so and is it has been amended on numerous
occasions I think it should be amended additionally by doing things like how
many positive right to bolt a national right to vote in the constitution we learned in 2010
in go over medium bush that damn proud to say that man’s
name but we learned imagine that decision that Americans do not have in their
constitutional right to vote too when their rights to vote in in state
constitutions but there’s nothing in the federal government the left yet to the states but you know
what I think we all deserve the right to vote what do you think yeah I’m sure they’re not everybody
would agree with me on that but the reasons for them so that’s one
thing you know I recommend that you read
really interesting book it’s not very big less than 200 pages
its by political scientist name robert dole it is but I love it is pro-democratic is
the American Constitution it’s a great book in it existed into all
these issues we could see the evolution up the constitution in
orbit sprouts we have to free herself from the
rhetoric that says is the greatest document was
overproduced and we’re so blessed and I but I’m sorry it’s not too he was produced by human
beings who had certain interests and they
designed the to protect those interests and we’re human beings and we have
interest and we should design a to protect our interests that’s all I’m sayin it in another old couple years 10 games I I need to
follow bad BK’s I am proud to say I think it’d it is the
greatest document I’m gonna tell you my professor an be kept you have the right in its fabulous to hear you’re right why you
believe you now this is an antiquated document you would not have that ability two boys
that right without the present document as it is
red bath why this is so important it gives people that want the document
to change modify claim it antiquated whatever negative comments you wanna
make about it the document allows you to make those claims bad is something
that you should appreciate without it be for this constitution was
drafted if you talked about I don’t like the
government guess right a lot that you can say whatever you feel about the
government ok that’s right forget hiring me he not
gonna get one and it’s not certainly paid by the state remember that it’s bad enough to be able to criticise
but know that the right to criticize in voice your opinion and disagree we have the right to
disagree we we can agree to disagree but those right are contained within the document that
has lasted for over 200 years and another question we need other kid
Edge’s comment like to agree with total a specifically because a under with this okay of regeneration
board here close to change it would be change it to a buddy somebody else’s self-interest as
well so Excel or next question please my question is am does the constitutions
to provide for us situations a uncertainty bar
nation-state and a particular example they would be
the Patriot Act in how a time you know the whole
violation of privacy and you know because essentially the
government’s must protect us in and all circumstances
but in that particular case or maybe you can
relate to know the case does is to provide us integers the insurgency miss you like
restate that question a what a law was passed a number of
years ago after 911 call the Patriot Act which enabled our intelligence agencies about
domestic and in international to collect information and
murders that information and that enable them to do more to track
people per suspected of being involved in terrorism a and not in your concern is that that
might have been unconstitutional yes like is so you want
us to address that question institutions to protect those individuals min certain certain sense alright good question what’s the start don’t doctor billy
breen your worked with you I’m contemplating for a moment in does the Constitution so protect as well
again it’s a document and there’s that the reverse is the reality which is
always something Mitt are sometimes we can rectify in our
system arm you know the Patriot Act was put into
place at a specific time for specific purpose on the majority of
the members who voted in favor never read it so they didn’t even know what they were
voting for I’m not sure we could find one american who’s ever read the
entirety of the act or could explain it to anybody which certainly makes it difficult to
you say what senator what they could use it
for or against Americans arm but generally your
question have does does the Constitution still protect us
my answer would be yes because ultimately if you feel that the
Patriot Act man-made law so to speak arm you can challenge it you can
challenge that law against the Constitution and say what
you’re trying to do government with this law is unconstitutional and there is a former redress for that
so is it swift no are you going to get the
result you necessarily individually Juan maybe not but
ultimately I believe that the Constitution still
does protect our rights and our freedoms and you know congress in government and
they get carried away in emotional win all that and so
occasionally laws get past that we would question but there is a process
so vaguely yes hid to follow up with that the answer
would be yet as well on bed to understand it in a in a little bit
more a simplistic terms because many viewers
think he’d react what is it many view do have some idea you can opine academics the rise warn
against to is two min is this invasion in our
Privacy is it not too much government interference the
bottom line is we were we were faced with something we’ve never
been base with before on the presidential powers were expanded to respond to terrorism pain on is it the best system it’s not perfect it’s not the best but
it’s the best we have for defense if you don’t like it there is systems that we can channel to make a change but the number one thing that people
have to remember is the Constitution made from the people by the people it’s
there to what protect the people so sometimes bodies have to be made in response to you and a change in
culture a changing environment I we didn’t have
all the different forces against death that
we’re dealing with today as a result you the Constitution as all the dead within the berries and
structures that have been but departed examine allowed
us to have some sort of response to the terrorism that was created again had many people feel that that response in definitely infringed on your
personal rights what’s nice is you have the ability to
voice your opinion and try to get something repealed so
there is a process sound yet anyone else we’re tackling Yahoo I’d like to respond I have to say
that I don’t believe that the white americans are being protected I
think being violated every day and this is not new you know what
someone said earlier that the first amendment is an absolute rate
I Got News period president hasn’t been an absolute raid
since 1919 when the Supreme Court ruled your
freedom of speech could be limited under certain
circumstances in that case war you know there’s always
been a tension between liberty in and security that’s you know that’s
going to happen and it’s going to be played out over
time but since 1919 the first amendment is an absolute there
are circumstances under which you cannot speak out sign smart now for the really bad news everybody every daily people the National Security Administration
collection when not playing 6 truly mean emailed phone call text messages and you can you
pick up an electronic device here getting that and they’re storing
all that information in warehouses in Utah and they can do
data mining to see what your saying oh you pick up
some words are using the word bomb I may be using the word credited or some
other word but they’re interested in finding out
who is using it because I urge you never to say I think she’s the bomb right think he’s
the bomb again just don’t use those words in your
vocabulary everyday 1.6 trillion messages collected by the
government next question please I just want to
thank you guys for speaking today arm I wanted to go on clarifying that
this on the forefathers wanted to make this on
country a Republic and I to democracy because
Obama what’s like what’s going on the Middle East words the mob rule at the mob have not been rises again to
the store could bring down the whole society and I like
your sister reply to comment the question is that the framers of the Constitution
originally intended the Republic not majoritarian democracy if we touch on
that already someone and in in comparison with what was going
on at the revolutions in the Middle East re having majoritarian -ism outright a you want us to come to compare that
discussed that right me takers American history it’d has not added instanceof mob rule so we didn’t skate
that former behavior other countries are going through it now
I don’t think we should think about us is so much you superior to them
because they’re having those experiences because we had them in the comment I just wanted it touch base and there’s in order to prevent a revolution the framers drafted the Constitution WYD this system in organizational
fashion objecting bounces to prevent the
revolution that’s what it is therefore its added
the Bill of Rights those are our rights their special their
unique a system bet it’s been fed up is there
to preserve those rights to us as American it that in place to prevent that type of revolutionary
conduct which would then be a market different
system X question please will be wrapping this
up in about two minutes my question is is the way the
Constitution sets at the structure government to
skewed in favor the two-party system whether or not those intense the
question very interesting one is the system what is now set up our
political system which is essentially a two-party
political system is that a threat to because she’s in
itself is that in is that is the Constitution a at risk because %uh that please my question was more does the
Constitution make it like inevitable that there’s a two-party
system the Constitution make it inevitable that
there’s a tea party says not explicitly but look at you you know I would say the
constitution doesn’t specifically say there has to be two parties in fact misty california has
more than a dozen political parties just because the majority of people jus to be one of the major parties
because those are the parties that tend to have more power doesn’t exclude additional parties as I
mention with interest groups and political parties are interest groups people can choose a different path if
they wish arm a two-party political system has
sorted bubbled up if you will in our system because it actually lend greater
stability in government more party you have the mornin unstable
the system of government becomes because I love additional parties and sort of the
struggle or split overpower amongst 45 entities and set up
to so arm I don’t think that the
constitution specifically created or exacerbates the two-party system and the two-party system again like
everything else it certainly has its flaws in that would take another hour
speech arm certainly has some benefits as well
one of those greater stability for our system acres I respond to I just want to say
that the founding fathers did didn’t like
political parties they didn’t assist in the design wasn’t
supposed to have political parties bad the idea was that by just reading the central government
you could expand to the United States and makes expansion you as you had more
states you would multiply interests and make it
more and more difficult for those inches to call up on us into a party you no one party to parties
or however many parties and this was all part about proctoring a
bit more but they sought but course this is another example where
they were totally wrong now they’ve bought that the country will
be run by people like them no educated wealthy leads with leisure
time but very quickly lost control bid and political parties developed to replace
them miss just another instances where the
work at the founding fathers leaves them in the dustbin of history in the comment well that takes us to one
30 both in that concludes our program
please join me and get a hand or pillows the college kid a this in this proceeding will be on YouTube at some
point in the future so you know somebody that might like to see
it tell about it any I’m sure you can find
the lake of the home page at the college thanks Dawg you for spending time with
us today have a great afternoon up picking up

One thought on “LBCC – A Panel Discussion on the United States Constitution

  • Mal Queen Post author

    Excellent Video clip! Forgive me for chiming in, I would appreciate your opinion. Have you heard about – Tanaison Wealth Bulldozer (should be on google have a look)? It is a great exclusive guide for learning how to be on the winning side of the next great transfer of wealth minus the headache. Ive heard some decent things about it and my best friend Jordan after many years got great results with it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *