Comment: dude... you're just too

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Me: "The constitution on the (see in situ)

dude... you're just too

dude... you're just too wrong. It's not worth it anymore. Are you one of the presidents former students?

You:
"democratic constitutional republic" is redundant. Democracy tells us of the vote and so naturally of the public nature of the government, constitutional tells us there are limitations, and republic again tells us of the public nature of the government. "Constitutional democracy" is correct."

Me:
Everything you said in that above paragraph is wrong. While it's still not worth it, I'll still try to show you why at the least.

1. "democratic constitutional republic" is redundant.

No, it's descriptive.

2. Democracy tells us of the vote and so naturally of the public nature of the government,

Irrelevant. Your definition of Republic is only it's literal translation from Latin, not it's true meaning as a form of government. It's like you stopped reading wikipedia after the first sentence. (I just read the wiki on republic and so I know that's where you're getting this from... the very first sentence of it's article.)

3. constitutional tells us there are limitations

That's also irrelevant. We're debating what the constitution limits, a republic or a democracy. The fact that the constitution is limiting is not in question by either of us.

4. and republic again tells us of the public nature of the government.

That's not all it tells us. It also tells us that the rule of law is honored (yeah.. I know lol) and it tells us that we have a deliberative body (as in a body that deliberates).

5. "Constitutional democracy" is correct.

No, it's not. Where in your theory does the word 'republic' even enter? Oh, yeah... you think it's implied by using the word democracy. lol