Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:

Only by around 50% of the population.

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
There are those that believe it is still the law of the land contrary to
some who are sworn to uphold it abusing their power and violating it.
And I know that some in power now admit publicly that they don't
believe in the Constitution - yet they swore to uphold it. Maybe they
are nihilists. But if they were honest, they would not have taken their
oath.

....secede...

I was born, and presently live, 45 miles from Appomattox Court House
(drove thru it about 2 hours ago as a matter of fact), and I do know a
little about the thing that some call "the recent unpleasantless". Just
because the Constitution has been grossly violated at times does not
negate it. The fact is that it is the law of the land, whether it is
followed or not (and I would agree that it is not followed in many
areas) does not make it not the law of the land in principle. To
believe otherwise would be anarchy.

The "precedence" thing is a crock. I wonder if I can get out of a
speeding ticket by invoking precedence. Something tells me I wouldn't
get away with it. Yet it is used to get away with how the entire
country is run.

I also am aware that the intent of certain organizations and certain
figures respected by the left have as their founding principles and
advocate using the Constitution to systematically destroy and dismantle
the Constitution itself. Yet they offer nothing that is better, and
even if they did, their own contradictions would and could be used by
their opposition to declare whatever it is that they declared as being
the law of the land to also have no authority, and so they would likely
eventually resort to totalitarianism or themselves be overthrown (IOW -
continuing anarchy unless ruling with a dictatorial iron fist).

And therefore what...? You often sound like another disciple of Saul
Alinsky.

--
Bill Putney
(To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my
address with the letter 'x')