New WTC plan unveiled

Great, you've read the Constitution and met Bill O'Rights. Need more bedtime reading? Try
The Patriot Act.

Savor the contridictions.

I'd prefer to addres the fact that none of these has surivied without substantial impingement since 9/11. All in the name of protecting freedom, of course.

Yeah, is there anything that can be done to stop it? Or to stop torching the constitution? It just seems like such an overwhelmingly huge task and uphill battle with demonizing rhetoric tossed in the face of everybody who wants to keep our freedoms.

Win the battle but lose our way is the end result. Hundreds of thousands of people have not died fighting for the US and preserving the constitution and our way of life for shit like this to happen. It's a spit in the face to all my american ancestor's sacrifices.

Why can't more people see it or more people stop it?

Not that they had neccesarily survived without impingement before 9/11 either...

To most people the constitution is basically meaningless... They have no real concept of the idea of a limited government, and what's more they don't have much interest in it either. The government is there to scratch their back and wipe their ass, and if what they want done is unconstitutional, who cares?
The constitution has only been getting lip service for such a long time that it's no longer a functional deterent to government impropriety, so why should it weigh heavily in peoples minds that it's being ignored?

What I find most interesting is the people who fully support stretching or ignoring the constitution to achieve ends that they support, but then start getting apoplectic when it's done for other reasons.

Rep, that was exactly my point. These are the freedoms we're losing under Bush and the "patriot" act. Sorry if it was unclear.

Not really... As it's written it's a fairly clear and explicit clause. The problem lies with a government that wants to expand it's powers, and a populace that doesn't care if if the means are legitimate, so long as the ends are desirous.

"To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes"

The interpretation (or justification) that got us into trouble was (I believe) that since the government has the authority to regulate commerce, they should also have the authority to regulate things that *affect* commerce.
This is basically like the local dog catcher deciding that he should have the power to regulate the local pet stores, but hey, nobody really cares how the government legitimizes most of it's actions anyway...

These are the CE boards, man, you cant be subtle unless you've got a victim. That we get.