Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk > Americas


Thanks Tree99Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old July 27th, 2017, 03:08 PM   #71
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 26,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by caconservative View Post
Again, in your opinion, the Court is right, even if they're wrong? The question is simple, show us where and what, in the Constitution the Court based their decision on. I'll save you time. It can't be found! The only recourse the Court had was to make up a phrase, and then use that phrase to justify their decision.
But please, if you can find it, let us know.
Hmmmm, recognized constitutional experts vs a couple of RWNJs. I wonder who is more apt to be correctt?

Well, actually I don't wonder at all.
RNG is offline  
Old July 27th, 2017, 03:25 PM   #72
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: In the mind of commie hippies
Posts: 38,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
Hmmmm, recognized constitutional experts vs a couple of RWNJs. I wonder who is more apt to be correctt?

Well, actually I don't wonder at all.
How do "real experts" have split decisions with opposite opinions and reverse other experts when nothing has changed in the Constitution?

Me v a liberal in Canada regarding the Constitution.
Thanks from caconservative and Sabcat
Jimmyb is offline  
Old July 27th, 2017, 03:46 PM   #73
Senior Member
 
Hollywood's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Memphis, Tn.
Posts: 19,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
How do "real experts" have split decisions with opposite opinions and reverse other experts when nothing has changed in the Constitution?

Me v a liberal in Canada regarding the Constitution.
It doesn't fucking matter!
ANYONE who has EVER served on the SCOTUS in our entire history almost certainly is more qualified than you. YOU are an anonymous guy on the internet.

But, what the fuck, go ahead and list your qualifications and experience with Constitutional law. You can still mask your identity. If you were a U.S. Appeals Court judge for 29 years you don't need to tell us which district and which two decades.
If you taught Constitutional law for 30 years at a prestigious university you don't need to say which one.
Go ahead genius, list your qualifications for the SCOTUS.
You can start with where you earned your degree in law.
Please proceed.
Thanks from Clara007
Hollywood is offline  
Old July 27th, 2017, 04:36 PM   #74
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: massachusetts
Posts: 9,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
All you have to do is show everyone the constitutional basis for the three. You will not and we all know why. Now go back to reading your atheist and left wing websites.
No, people don't have to prove that the way things actually work is correct.
It's people who make extraordinary claims that have to produce the proof.

You make extraordinary claims all the time, and have not produced an iota of proof.

It's why no one takes you seriously.
Thanks from Clara007
goober is offline  
Old July 27th, 2017, 04:43 PM   #75
Senior Member
 
skews13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: nirvana
Posts: 8,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by tristanrobin View Post
Another excellent article about the direction Trump is taking our nation. As always, I don't expect it to make a blip on the brain cells of the Trump adoring worshipers. But, for the rest of us - the ones who haven't yet been hypnotized by the New Speak of the 21st century - it's quite articulate and well thought out.


The news is being reported on split screen as if the one big story in Washington is disconnected from the other. But President Trump’s lawless threats against Attorney General Jeff Sessions have a lot in common with the Senate’s reckless approach to the health coverage of tens of millions of Americans.

On both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, we are witnessing a collapse of the norms of governing, constant violations of our legitimate expectations of political leaders, and the mutation of the normal conflicts of democracy into a form of warfare that demands the opposition’s unconditional surrender.

Trump’s latest perverse miracle is that he has progressives — along with everyone else who cares about the rule of law — rooting for Sessions. The attorney general is as wrong as ever on voter suppression, civil rights enforcement and immigration. But Sessions did one very important thing: He obeyed the law.

When it was clear that he would have obvious conflicts of interest in the investigation of Russian meddling in our election and its possible links to the Trump campaign, Sessions recused himself, as he was required to do.

Trump’s attacks on Sessions for that recusal are thus a naked admission that he wants the nation’s top lawyer to act illegally if that’s what it takes to protect the president and his family. Equally inappropriate are Trump’s diktats from the Oval Office calling on Sessions to investigate Hillary Clinton and those terrible “leakers” who are more properly seen as whistleblowers against Trump’s abuses.

Our country is now as close to crossing the line from democracy to autocracy as it has been in our lifetimes. Trump’s ignorant, self-involved contempt for his duty under Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution to “take care that the laws be faithfully executed” ought to inspire patriots of every ideological disposition to a robust and fearless defiance.

But where are the leaders of the Republican Party in the face of the dangers Trump poses? They’re trying to sneak through a health-care bill by violating every reasonable standard citizens should impose on public servants dealing with legislation that affects more than one-sixth of our economy. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and House Speaker Paul D. Ryan have little time for worrying about the Constitution because they are busy doing Trump’s bidding on health care.

Let it be said that two Republican senators will forever deserve our gratitude for insisting that a complicated health-care law should be approached the way Obamacare — yes, Obamacare — was enacted: through lengthy hearings, robust debate and real input from the opposition party. In voting upfront to try to stop the process, Sens. Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski demonstrated a moral and political toughness that eluded other GOP colleagues who had expressed doubts about this charade but fell into line behind their leaders.

The most insidious aspect of McConnell’s strategy is that he is shooting to pass something, anything, that would continue to save Republicans from having a transparent give-and-take on measures that could ultimately strip health insurance from 20 million Americans or more. Passing even the most meager of health bills this week would move the covert coverage-demolition effort to a conference committee with the House.

The Senate’s unseemly marathon thus seems likely to end with a push for a “skinny repeal” bill that would eliminate the Affordable Care Act’s individual and employer mandates and its medical device tax. But no one should be deluded: A vote for skinny repeal is a vote for an emaciated democracy.

A wholesale defeat of what might be described as the Trump-McConnell-Ryan Unhealthy America Act of 2017 is essential for those being served by the ACA but also for our politics. It was disappointing that Sen. John McCain’s passionate plea on Tuesday for a “return to regular order” did not match his votes in this week’s early roll calls.

But McCain could yet advance the vision of the Senate he outlined in his floor speech and rebuke “the bombastic loudmouths” he condemned by casting a “no” vote at the crucial moment. Here’s hoping this war hero will ultimately choose to strike a blow against everything he said is wrong with Congress.

And when it comes to the ongoing indifference to the law in the White House, Republicans can no longer dodge their responsibility to speak out against what Trump is doing. They should also examine their own behavior. The decline of our small-r republican institutions can be stopped only if the party brandishing that adjective starts living up to the obligations its name honors.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...pinions&wpmm=1
The Republican party has turned our country from a nation of laws, to a nation of men, by their unbridled support of a crony capitalist system.

Everything the Founders warned would happen if the system of checks and balances was allowed to fail.
Thanks from Clara007
skews13 is offline  
Old July 27th, 2017, 05:24 PM   #76
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: massachusetts
Posts: 9,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by skews13 View Post
The Republican party has turned our country from a nation of laws, to a nation of men, by their unbridled support of a crony capitalist system.

Everything the Founders warned would happen if the system of checks and balances was allowed to fail.
It's all built in to the constitution, that's why it needs to change.
Because whatever gets set up, get's gamed.
Now the FFs put enough twists into the mix, so it was hard to game for a while.
But now, it's almost totally gamed, and doomed.
Things need to change.
goober is offline  
Old July 27th, 2017, 05:46 PM   #77
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: In the mind of commie hippies
Posts: 38,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
The intellectual level of your posts is improving.
You have never answered who you votes for. Was it Clinton or Trump?
Jimmyb is offline  
Old July 27th, 2017, 05:55 PM   #78
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Between everywhere
Posts: 26,848
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
You have never answered who you votes for. Was it Clinton or Trump?
You have never explained how you can ask such a stupid question. But being as stupid as you are, that shouldn't surprise anyone.
Thanks from Hollywood
RNG is offline  
Old July 27th, 2017, 06:16 PM   #79
Senior Member
 
BubbaJones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Middle Tennessee
Posts: 6,399
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmyb View Post
You have never answered who you votes for. Was it Clinton or Trump?

And you have repeatedly refused to tell us whether or not you actually went to law school, much less which one you graduated from. Like wise for all your bluster and blather about what is or isn't constitutional you've given no indication of your law experience. Just another key board commando that knows how to google.
Thanks from Hollywood and Clara007
BubbaJones is offline  
Old July 27th, 2017, 06:22 PM   #80
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: In the mind of commie hippies
Posts: 38,895
Quote:
Originally Posted by goober View Post
No, people don't have to prove that the way things actually work is correct.
It's people who make extraordinary claims that have to produce the proof.

You make extraordinary claims all the time, and have not produced an iota of proof.

It's why no one takes you seriously.
It is not a matter of proving the ward of the state claims, it is a matter of not being able to.

I have produced the proof. It is not my problem you wards of the state can only bleat "the Supreme Court ruled" and are unable to provide the constitutional basis of their rulings. That is what makes a good commie and sheep.
Thanks from caconservative
Jimmyb is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk > Americas

Tags
collapsing, eyes, government, norms



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Venezuela Is Collapsing and the Left Is Afraid to Admit Why Sabcat Socialism 7 May 19th, 2017 04:26 AM
Trump campaign may be collapsing.😎 GhostRider Americas 15 October 8th, 2016 06:09 PM
Republican Support Collapsing In Wisconsin Clinton Leads Walker 52-40 skews13 Current Events 43 April 20th, 2015 11:42 AM
Is YOUR (Local) Infrastructure COLLAPSING? Medicine Man Current Events 6 July 14th, 2014 07:01 AM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.