I disagree strongly with the concept of separation of church and state. It was not written into the Constitution.
A disturbing prospect looms before us as Americans consider the possibility of a second term for President Barack Obama. Millions of conservatives who revere the Constitution, with its guarantees of freedom and limited government, have watched with alarm as the campaign season has unfolded.
When I was sworn in the Marine Corps in 1964, when I was sworn into Congress, I swore to uphold the Constitution against enemies, both foreign and domestic. We have a lot of domestic enemies of - of the Constitution, those who want to pervert it, those who want to change it.
The last thing I saw Gabrielle Giffords do on the floor of the House of Representatives was to line up like the rest of us and read a part of the Constitution. And unbeknownst to her, when she got to the well, her part was the First Amendment.
We are living out the liberal dream of our founders. The Constitution, the very liberal document - we have gone beyond English common law, which was the basis of law in the West.
Nothing in the 14th Amendment or in any other constitutional provision suggests that the president may usurp legislative power to prevent a violation of the Constitution.
The modern presidency, as expressed in the policies of the administration of George W. Bush, provides the strongest piece of evidence that we are governed by a fundamentally different Constitution from that of the framers.
The United States Constitution has proved itself the most marvelously elastic compilation of rules of government ever written.
The Constitution sets out no standards for granting pardons. They require no consent from Congress, and courts can't second-guess them.
So too, in forming a constitution, or in enacting rules of procedure, or making canons, the people do not merely passively assent, but actively cooperate. They have, in all these matters, the same authority as the clergy.
We got touring with the Stones, and people were trying to keep up with Keith. He's like a human machine with a constitution of iron, and they all thought they could do the same.
None of us takes amending the Constitution lightly. The plain fact is this amendment has been exhaustively studied and it really is time to act.
And the president is all wrong when he maintains that a nominee should have an up-or-down vote. The Constitution doesn't say that. The Constitution doesn't say that that nominee shall have any vote at all. There doesn't have to even be a vote.