We the People
A weekly show of constitutional debate hosted by National Constitution Center President and CEO Jeffrey Rosen where listeners can hear the best arguments on all sides of the constitutional issues at the center of American life.
預告片
主持人與來賓
More people need to seriously consider the constitution
6月21日
Thank you for the discussions. I particularly enjoyed the discussion with Alison LaCroix and William B. Allen. As an immigrant I understood the constitution better than most, but still don’t know enough. In recent years, it seems to me there are forces seeking to destroy this country. Keep in mind that we have a Supreme Court justice who does not know what a Woman is. If you can redefine Woman, you can redefine freedom, patriotism, honesty, integrity, or any other word. With regard to succession, we had better hope that is an option. Do not look to the constitution or the civil war to decide this issue, but rather the Declaration of Independence. With the insanity of the authoritarian left, a total collapse of America is a very real possibility.
Guest Selectivity- Platforming Conservative Hacks
7月2日
Many non-partisan media shows suffer from this issue, but you can’t platform right wing hacks and pretend you are unbiased. Putting them on as if they speak in good faith is in itself a form of bias. Sarah Isgur is a right wing hack and has no credibility on the law or in any legitimate legal circle. On almost any issue Sarah debates and equivocates in bad faith. As per usual, her conservative method of analysis is to accept what the court says as fact, despite the obvious holes, and then say “look, it must be right, they wouldn’t spin or lie and they have no agenda.” People understand that it is very difficult to get a reasonably mature or “normal” conservative to speak outside their bubble, but that shouldn’t mean you lower the bar for them. Don’t platform people who are fail to critically assess legal opinions and instead only see them through their political bias. Sarah Isgur cannot remove her conservative colored glasses. Amplifying that viewpoint injured the show’s nonpartisan stance.
Will SCOTUS overturn CHEVRON EPISODE
3月2日
Hi, I am listening to Tim rebut Chris’s point about public accountability. He says that agencies do not allow for accountability to the voters and that is simply not true. Agencies have a very strict administrative rule making process that REQUIRES NOTICE AND COMMENT from the public and only that after that process can the agency begin to write the rules for the legislation. So what is he talking about? There is a process already built in for accountability to the voters. I took an Administrative Law class in grad school and the APA IS SUPER STRICT. Q: for Tim: Using your logic about the constitutionality of Chevron, do you think judicial review (Marbury v. Madison) should be overturned? This case gave SCOTUS their judicial review power, not the Constitution.
Unbiased?
5月10日
Another publicly funded (or created) outlet that try’s to put forth an “unbiased” show and yet is clearly left. I’ve not heard a single show that doesn’t take the Biden/Democrat side.
簡介
資訊
- 頻道
- 創作者National Constitution Center
- 活躍年代2005年 - 2024年
- 集數548
- 年齡分級兒少適宜
- 版權© 2024 National Constitution Center. All Rights Reserved.
- 節目網站
「National Constitution Ctr」的更多內容
- 新聞隔週更新