# We must restore constitutional government



## P@triot (May 7, 2016)

The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....

Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.

Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (May 7, 2016)

“We must restore constitutional government”

Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.

The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.

The Federal government is functioning as intended by the Founding Generation: a Constitutional Republic whose citizens are subject solely to the rule of law, not men – as men are incapable of ruling justly.

A Federal government afforded by the Constitution powers both expressed and implied (_McCulloch v. Maryland_ (1819)).

A Federal government whose laws are supreme, where the Supreme Court determines what the Constitution means, as authorized by the doctrine of Judicial Review and Articles III and VI of the Constitution, and where rulings by the Supreme Court become the law of the land, binding on the states and local jurisdictions, who have no ‘right’ to ‘nullify’ or ‘ignore’ Federal law or the rulings of Federal courts (_Cooper v. Aaron_ (1958)).

That conservatives, libertarians, and members of the TPM disagree with Supreme Court decisions because those rulings might conflict with errant, wrongheaded conservative dogma is of no consequence and devoid of merit.


----------



## Laughing-gas (May 7, 2016)




----------



## Billy_Kinetta (May 7, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’



Arguably not since 1803, but certainly not since the 1860s.

All states need to reassert their authority under the 10th Amendment.


----------



## ScienceRocks (May 7, 2016)

Lol, nearly every constitutional professor in this country would disagree with you., You don't know shit about the constitution! The president has had executive power since washington as our government has three equal branches of government. What this means is the president also has some power.

You honestly think the president shouldn't have power? lol The federal government always had power and that is why we gave up on the original bs of everything being at the state level.

Your idea of constitutional government is one where the corporate sector runs everything without regulations or human rights. It is ugly and it is bs.


----------



## RandallFlagg (May 7, 2016)

Rottweiler said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide




Indeed - those that laud over us are generally the biggest law-breakers in the United States. Look no farther than the rotten, no-good Clintons.


----------



## ScienceRocks (May 7, 2016)

The liberterian idea of constitutional government is a government that is powerless to do the will of the people and does only shit that they want. Liberterians and far right conservatives are a bunch of fascist assholes. Simply meaning that they think by the people means that the government should be so limited that the people shouldn't be able to elect a government that does more then sit on its dick.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (May 7, 2016)

Matthew said:


> Lol, nearly every constitutional professor in this country would disagree with you., You don't know shit about the constitution! The president has had executive power such washington as our government has three equal branches of government. What this means is the president also has some power.
> 
> You honestly think the president shouldn't have power? lol The federal government always had power and that is why we gave up on the original bs of everything being at the state level.
> 
> Your idea of constitutional government is one where the corporate sector runs everything without regulations or human rights. It is ugly and it is bs.



Considering the poor quality of some "constitutional professors" - pffft.  Who cares?

Oh, BTW.  The branches are no longer equal.


----------



## P@triot (May 7, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...


So wiretapping without a warrant is "constitutional" in your mind? 

Proof that CCJ has no idea what the Constitution is and that he's obviously never read it.


----------



## S.J. (May 7, 2016)

Our government violates the Constitution routinely at every level.  Sure, a lot of what they do can be twisted into being "Constitutional" but they clearly DO violate the original intent that our founders laid out, and they do it often.  It's just that over the years, those who have sought to subvert it have found ways to chip away at it, change people's minds about what things mean, convince people that it's supposed to be "flexible" and applicable to "the times".  They create crises to exploit and then use fear to get the people to give up a little of their freedom voluntarily.
The founders gave us the tools we need to stop it but we loaned those tools out to the enemy and now the enemy is using them to enslave us all, little by little.  And we'll never get them back.


----------



## The Great Goose (May 7, 2016)

S.J. said:


> Our government violates the Constitution routinely at every level.  Sure, a lot of what they do can be twisted into being "Constitutional" but they clearly DO violate the original intent that our founders laid out, and they do it often.  It's just that over the years, those who have sought to subvert it have found ways to chip away at it, change people's minds about what things mean, convince people that it's supposed to be "flexible" and applicable to "the times".  They create crises to exploit and then use fear to get the people to give up a little of their freedom voluntarily.
> The founders gave us the tools we need to stop it but we loaned those tools out to the enemy and now the enemy is using them to enslave us all, little by little.  And we'll never get them back.


Pivotal positions. Not apex positions.

Go white rabbit!


----------



## Anathema (May 7, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> .......The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.



If that is so; and I dont believe it is; then this country has never and will never have any validity or morality and should be burned to the ground.


----------



## P@triot (May 10, 2016)

Matthew said:


> *The liberterian idea of constitutional government is a government that is powerless to do the will of the people and does only shit that they want. Liberterians and far right conservatives are a bunch of fascist assholes*. Simply meaning that they think by the people means that the government should be so limited that the people shouldn't be able to elect a government that does more then sit on its dick.



This rant by this vintage libtard is simply _priceless_. In his infinite ignorance (mixed with his infinite fear that the right will pull his government gravy train away from him and - gasp! - expect him to provide for himself like a big boy), he contradicts himself.

*Fascism | Definition of Fascism by Merriam-Webster*
Merriam-Webster › dictionary › fascism
Definition of fascism for Students. : *a political system headed by a dictator in which the government controls business and labor and opposition is not permitted*.

Well, if the right wants a "powerless" government that is the exact _opposite_ of "fascism" in which the government wields unlimited power to control everything. Yes folks...libtards really are this stupid.


----------



## BluesLegend (May 10, 2016)

S.J. said:


> Our government violates the Constitution routinely at every level.  Sure, a lot of what they do can be twisted into being "Constitutional" but they clearly DO violate the original intent that our founders laid out, and they do it often.  It's just that over the years, those who have sought to subvert it have found ways to chip away at it, change people's minds about what things mean, convince people that it's supposed to be "flexible" and applicable to "the times".  They create crises to exploit and then use fear to get the people to give up a little of their freedom voluntarily.
> The founders gave us the tools we need to stop it but we loaned those tools out to the enemy and now the enemy is using them to enslave us all, little by little.  And we'll never get them back.



Government is constrained by the Constitution, they hate that and are constantly looking for ways around it so they can be corrupt.


----------



## P@triot (May 10, 2016)

Matthew said:


> Lol, nearly every constitutional professor in this country would disagree with you., You don't know shit about the constitution! The president has had executive power since washington as our government has three equal branches of government. What this means is the president also has some power.
> 
> You honestly think the president shouldn't have power? lol The federal government always had power and that is why we gave up on the original bs of everything being at the state level.
> 
> Your idea of constitutional government is one where the corporate sector runs everything without regulations or human rights. It is ugly and it is bs.



Come on little Matty...use your words. What exactly is it that you are so afraid of? Having to hold a job? Awwwwww....._pooooooor_ baby.

First of all, there is nothing "equal" about the three current branches of government. But you would need to have read the U.S. Constitution and understand it to be aware of that (something which you clearly are not). For instance, the law states that it is illegal for someone to enter the country through any means other than prescribed by law (ie work visa, naturalization/citizenship, etc.). As leader of the executive branch - Barack Obama must enforce the law. Instead, he issues a "Presidential Memorandum" stating that illegal aliens will not be deported for the time being and holds a press conference specifically to let those illegal aliens know they are "safe" and don't have to worry. But hey.....you're a libtard! You don't have to worry about facts. You can just spout stupid shit like "libertarians want powerless, castrated government because they are stupid fascists" 

By the way junior - the fact that you think "equal three branches of government" constitutes "Constitutional governmet" is as hilarious as it is tragic. Our founders designed our entire system of governmet with a focus on the vertical separation of powers first and foremost, then a horizontals sepeststion of powers (ie then"three branches" you like to crow about so you can pretend like you know what you're talking about) second as an additional measure of ensuring limited powers by any person or governing body.

Here - don't be afraid to learn something for once: X-Patriot (Constitutional Writes) | X Amendment. I'll even make it _really_ easy for you. Fifth paragraph, second sentence.


----------



## OKTexas (May 10, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...




So the courts have designated themselves to be all powerful legislators, FUCK THE SOBs. All legislative powers rest in the Congress, not the courts.


----------



## OKTexas (May 10, 2016)

S.J. said:


> Our government violates the Constitution routinely at every level.  Sure, a lot of what they do can be twisted into being "Constitutional" but they clearly DO violate the original intent that our founders laid out, and they do it often.  It's just that over the years, those who have sought to subvert it have found ways to chip away at it, change people's minds about what things mean, convince people that it's supposed to be "flexible" and applicable to "the times".  They create crises to exploit and then use fear to get the people to give up a little of their freedom voluntarily.
> The founders gave us the tools we need to stop it but we loaned those tools out to the enemy and now the enemy is using them to enslave us all, little by little.  And we'll never get them back.



Article 5 is the only way, and that will require a lot of changes at the State level.


----------



## P@triot (May 10, 2016)

OKTexas said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > “We must restore constitutional government”
> ...



Isn't is sad that you have to explain that to CCJ? Even by normal liberal standards, he's one of the more uninformed about the Constitution and his own government.


----------



## 1stRambo (May 10, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...



Yo, none of that shit you copied, has anything to do with a Dictator Obama of today, what a real fool!!!

"GTP"


----------



## P@triot (May 13, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right. The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.



Come on stupid....tell us again how "the United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government". You _know_ that's a blatant *lie*. You know nearly _everything_ you say is a blatant *lie*. You _know_ you tell these blatant *lies* because you have an agenda - advancing a failed ideology.

Federal judge rules Obamacare is being funded unconstitutionally


----------



## P@triot (May 13, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right. The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.



Come on stupid....tell us again how "the United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government". You _know_ that's a blatant *lie*. You know nearly _everything_ you say is a blatant *lie*. You _know_ you tell these blatant *lies* because you have an agenda - advancing a failed ideology.

*"Republicans mounted the lawsuit two years ago and charged that President Obama was going outside the powers granted to him under the Constitution by spending money Congress hadn’t appropriated."*

November Election Could Impact House Obamacare Lawsuit


----------



## koshergrl (May 13, 2016)

S.J. said:


> Our government violates the Constitution routinely at every level.  Sure, a lot of what they do can be twisted into being "Constitutional" but they clearly DO violate the original intent that our founders laid out, and they do it often.  It's just that over the years, those who have sought to subvert it have found ways to chip away at it, change people's minds about what things mean, convince people that it's supposed to be "flexible" and applicable to "the times".  They create crises to exploit and then use fear to get the people to give up a little of their freedom voluntarily.
> The founders gave us the tools we need to stop it but we loaned those tools out to the enemy and now the enemy is using them to enslave us all, little by little.  And we'll never get them back.


Well, not.if.we.don't try, at.least.


----------



## Markle (May 13, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’
> ...



In my opinion, the states were stripped of their authority when the Seventeenth Amendment was adopted.  That amendment stripped the states of representation in Washington.  Instead of the state legislatures electing their Senators, the popular vote elects their Senators creating just another, but smaller, House of Representatives.


----------



## P@triot (May 13, 2016)

Markle said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...


I'm not sure how I feel about that one. Part of me understands that view. But part of me says, as a constituent, I want more voice/power over the people representing me in Washington.


----------



## P@triot (May 13, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right. The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.



Come on stupid....tell us again how "the United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government". You _know_ that's a blatant *lie*. You know nearly _everything_ you say is a blatant *lie*. You _know_ you tell these blatant *lies* because you have an agenda - advancing a failed ideology.

"The case centers on the Obama administration's payment of subsidies to insurance providers for providing cost-sharing reductions to certain policyholders. There’s just one problem: *Congress explicitly refused to appropriate funds for these subsidies*."

Aside from the painfully obvious (that Obamacare itself is indisputably 100% unconstitutional), Congress controls the purse strings by law. Old Barry is violating the Constitution with his Obamacare subsidies. Your asinine premise that we are "functioning under Constitutional government" is something that not even the most deranged of libtards believes. But you certainly enjoy spreading that false premise anyway, don't you?

Obama Administration Loses Key Obamacare Case


----------



## P@triot (May 14, 2016)

“[Virginians] know and value too highly the blessings of their Union … *to consider every infraction [of the Constitution] as to be met by actual resistance*. They respect too affectionately the opinions of those possessing the same rights under the same instrument to make every difference of construction a ground of immediate rupture. They would, indeed, consider such a rupture as among the greatest calamities which could befall them; but not the greatest. *There is yet one greater–submission to a government of unlimited powers*.” - Thomas Jefferson (December 26, 1825)


----------



## easyt65 (May 14, 2016)

Stopped when Obama was elected, won't happen if Hillary is elected.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 14, 2016)

A bunch of right wing loons want to roll back government more than 200 years?

They are as stupid as protectionist.


----------



## Old Rocks (May 14, 2016)

And that is why they have lost the last two elections for the GOP.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (May 15, 2016)

They lost because of weak candidates and media control over the opinions of educationally-disabled Americans.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> They lost because of weak candidates and media control over the opinions of educationally-disabled Americans.


No.  They lost because the educated Americans rejected the far right positions of the GOP.


----------



## easyt65 (May 15, 2016)

'We must restore constitutional government'

...and the Rule of Law.

Won't happen until Barry is out and Hillary is kept out.


----------



## Mac1958 (May 15, 2016)

Rottweiler said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....


Okay, so how do you go about doing this?

It can only be by electing people with whom you agree.  How do you plan on convincing enough of the electorate to vote with you?
.


----------



## easyt65 (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > They lost because of weak candidates and media control over the opinions of educationally-disabled Americans.
> ...


Your opinion is debunked based on the historic, record-setting ass kicking liberals received in the 2014 election. Liberal 'rule', non-representative govt, and Barry's policies and agenda - which HE declared was what that election was all about - were soundly REJECTED.

Liberal turnout was near record lows and so far during the primaries it is being reported the turnout has only decreased.


----------



## Centinel (May 15, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> A Federal government afforded by the Constitution powers both expressed and implied (_McCulloch v. Maryland_ (1819)).



Congress' legislative powers are listed in Art I, section 8 and in various amendments. Congress has no legislative powers beyond those enumerated.


----------



## Centinel (May 15, 2016)

Matthew said:


> The liberterian idea of constitutional government is a government that is powerless to do the will of the people and does only shit that they want. Liberterians and far right conservatives are a bunch of fascist assholes. Simply meaning that they think by the people means that the government should be so limited that the people shouldn't be able to elect a government that does more then sit on its dick.



The federal government should only make laws that are necessary and proper to carry into execution it's enumerated legislative powers. Otherwise, it is acting beyond it's constitutional powers.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > They lost because of weak candidates and media control over the opinions of educationally-disabled Americans.
> ...



And yet you claim to be Republican?

Any confusion as to sex assignment?


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

easyt65 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


Those are bi elections and are always dominated by the small core cadre, which fall away in importance in the large elections.

You can hope you are right, but you are not.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


You are confused that we have a mainstream GOP that despises the far right wacks?


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Centinel's nonsense is noted.  This is 2016 not 1789.


----------



## pwjohn (May 15, 2016)

Matthew said:


> Lol, nearly every constitutional professor in this country would disagree with you., You don't know shit about the constitution! The president has had executive power since washington as our government has three equal branches of government. What this means is the president also has some power.
> 
> You honestly think the president shouldn't have power? lol The federal government always had power and that is why we gave up on the original bs of everything being at the state level.
> 
> Your idea of constitutional government is one where the corporate sector runs everything without regulations or human rights. It is ugly and it is bs.



The military has in fact carved out a 4th branch of government for itself that is more equal than the other three branches combined. That my friend is where our constitution has been assraped since the beginning of WWII.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



What you have are Republicans who are for all philosophical purposes Democrats.

I have no dog in the hunt, being neither.  You are easy to spot.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (May 15, 2016)

pwjohn said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Lol, nearly every constitutional professor in this country would disagree with you., You don't know shit about the constitution! The president has had executive power since washington as our government has three equal branches of government. What this means is the president also has some power.
> ...



Eh?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Centinel's nonsense is noted.  This is 2016 not 1789.



Irrelevant.  The Constitution is the law of the land, and the agreement that binds the nation, and remains so until repealed by the mandated process.


----------



## pwjohn (May 15, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> pwjohn said:
> 
> 
> > Matthew said:
> ...



Turn up you hearing aid.


----------



## Seawytch (May 15, 2016)

Mac1958 said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> ...



Call women pigs, Mexicans rapists, Muslims terrorists, gays perverts and tell black people how stupid they are because they keep voting for Democrats. That ought to convince people to go on over to your side!


----------



## P@triot (May 15, 2016)

Seawytch said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > Rottweiler said:
> ...


Well, liberals rape women (Occupy Wall Street) and then demand that the women keep their mouths shut for the good of the (bowel) movement. And lets not forget how liberals _humiliate_ their wives with serial infidelity (John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton, etc.). Oh...and how about the promoting of promiscuity and the spreading of STD's?

Any woman with an _ounce_ of self-respect would denounce the disgusting cancer that is the liberal ideology.


----------



## Centinel (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Centinel's nonsense is noted.  This is 2016 not 1789.


Are you saying that a law written in the past doesn't apply in the present? Wouldn't that eliminate ALL laws?


----------



## P@triot (May 15, 2016)

Centinel said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Centinel's nonsense is noted.  This is 2016 not 1789.
> ...


That's exactly what they are saying Centinel. And why? Well, because their party has become so radicalized and unhinged that they want to move way beyond the U.S. Constitution and the law. But rather than make their radicalized views legal through the amendment process (because they can't get the votes), they want to just violate the law and pretend like it doesn't matter. It's too bad that conservatives have much more integrity than that and actually obey the law because we could have a _lot_ of fun doing it their way. Can you imagine Executive Orders mandating that everyone carry a firearm at all times, stop & frisk for insurance, and prison time for any libtard not in compliance? They would be having meltdowns the likes of which we've never seen. Would be fun to give them a taste of their own absurd medicine once in a while.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (May 15, 2016)

pwjohn said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > pwjohn said:
> ...



Try explaining the "military has in fact carved out a 4th branch of government for itself that is more equal than the other three branches combined" blurb.


----------



## P@triot (May 15, 2016)

pwjohn said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Lol, nearly every constitutional professor in this country would disagree with you., You don't know shit about the constitution! The president has had executive power since washington as our government has three equal branches of government. What this means is the president also has some power.
> ...


That is a special kind of insanity. Tell me...what laws has the U.S. military created and enforced on the American people? What executive orders has the U.S. military created and enforced on the American people? When has the U.S. military limited the free speech or right to practice religion?

With each passing day, liberals become more and more bizarre. It's getting to the point where they can't even form coherent sentences, much less coherent thoughts.


----------



## TexM3 (May 15, 2016)

Rottweiler said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right. The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.
> ...


He's either a dishonest asshole or an idiot...


----------



## P@triot (May 15, 2016)

TexM3 said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...


He's _both_. Been that way for years. But in his defense...show me a liberal who isn't. If one wasn't dishonest, an asshole, and an idiot, then they wouldn't be a liberal. They would be a conservative.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


As are you.  Your understanding of philosophy is silly.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Centinel's nonsense is noted.  This is 2016 not 1789.
> ...


You are never relevant.  Your understanding of the Constitution is nonsensical.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Centinel said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Centinel's nonsense is noted.  This is 2016 not 1789.
> ...


You do not how the understand is created, adapted, changed, etc., is the point here.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

The far right blow hards blow each other hard.



Guys, you don't understand the Constitution.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (May 15, 2016)

That the ignorance and stupidity exhibited by conservatives in the thread has not come to pass, nor will it ever come to pass, is proof that we currently have Constitutional governance.


----------



## TexM3 (May 15, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> That the ignorance and stupidity exhibited by conservatives in the thread has not come to pass, nor will it ever come to pass, is proof that we currently have Constitutional governance.


More BS, we have a corporate oligarchy masquerading as a Constitutional government.  Stop being dishonest...


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

TexM3 said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > That the ignorance and stupidity exhibited by conservatives in the thread has not come to pass, nor will it ever come to pass, is proof that we currently have Constitutional governance.
> ...


The money has always dominated our governments.

It always will.

But it can be limited at times by progressive populist revolutions, like now, that are going on in both parties.


----------



## jillian (May 15, 2016)

For the uniformed..... "constitutional" is whatever the supreme court says it is.

even when it's as stupid a decision as citizen's united or heller.

but i love when people who get their "constitutional" education from the rightwing blogosphere pretend they know what "constitutional" is.


----------



## TexM3 (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> TexM3 said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...


And that's why the fed gov is supposed to be limited to its enumerated powers.  Power corrupts...the founders knew that, modern day libs evidently don't.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Put down the nitrogen gas, TexM3


----------



## P@triot (May 15, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> That the ignorance and stupidity exhibited by conservatives in the thread has not come to pass, nor will it ever come to pass, is proof that we currently have Constitutional governance.


Which is why you've avoided every undeniable example like the plague...right junior?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (May 15, 2016)

"The money has always dominated our governments."

True – and it likely always will.

Having nothing whatsoever to do with the wrongheaded myth of ‘restoring’ Constitutional government.


----------



## Centinel (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> You do not how the understand is created, adapted, changed, etc., is the point here.


I understand how the states established the constitution, and I understand the amendment process. You seem to be saying that because a law is old that it is somehow invalid. Is that your stance? Why did you bring up the age of the constitution?


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (May 15, 2016)

Although in of itself it has no legal authority or bearing, it’s nonetheless a primary source illustrating the original intent of the Framers with regard to the courts, the supremacy of the rule of law, and that we in fact currently have Constitutional governance:

“The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between the two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the Constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents.


Nor does this conclusion by any means suppose a superiority of the judicial to the legislative power. It only supposes that the power of the people is superior to both; and that where the will of the legislature, declared in its statutes, stands in opposition to that of the people, declared in the Constitution, the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former.”


FEDERALIST No. 78

“*…the power of the people is superior to both*” the legislative and judicial branches of government, reflecting the original understanding and intent of the Founding Generation that they be subject solely to the rule of law, as codified by the people in the Constitution, with the understanding that the courts would determine what the Constitution means. 

*“…the judges ought to be governed by the latter rather than the former.”*

Meaning that it was the intent of the Framers that the courts determine what the Constitution means, as authorized by the doctrine of judicial review and Articles III and VI of the Constitution, where the Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law.

That these settled, accepted, and fundamental facts of our Constitutional Republic – facts that are beyond dispute – must be explained to far too many Americans is both sad and disturbing, and that they must be explained to conservatives comes as no surprise.


----------



## RandallFlagg (May 15, 2016)

CNN's Jake Tapper just did an in-depth report on Hillary (The murderer) Clintons Emails. Here is his report:

POLITICS
*CNN’s Jake Tapper Brutally Fact Checks Clinton’s Email Claims — See What He Found Out*
May. 14, 2016 8:07pm Tré Goins-Phillips
*3.9K*
SHARES
CNN anchor Jake Tapper teamed up with FactCheck.org to examine Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton’s claims about her private email server — and the results weren’t pretty.

Tapper first checked on the validity of Clinton’s claim that she was “absolutely permitted” to use a private email server during her tenure as secretary of state.




AP

“Was Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server for official business while she was secretary of state ‘absolutely permitted?’” Tapper asked. “No — that’s not true.”

According to Tapper, Clinton only says that because she permitted herself to use the personal server “and there was no one absolutely prohibiting her,” but no one actually signed off on her using it.

Federal regulations did allow Clinton to send and receive emails outside the government system, but, as the CNN host noted, it was mandatory that those emails were preserved when she left office.

“Clinton did not provide the State Department with the emails from her private server until 21 months after she left office,” Tapper said, adding that a federal judge said the former secretary of state “failed to follow government policy on preserving federal records.”

Another expert described the fact that Clinton used her private server to store sensitive information exclusively as “inconsistent with long-established policies and practices … governing all federal agencies.”

“In the end,” Tapper said, “Clinton’s exclusive use of her private email server for the people’s business was definitely unusual, it was definitely discouraged and she did not comply with government regulations when it came to preserving government records.”

Tapper concluded the report with a simple instruction “to all politicians out there,” saying, “You’re perfectly entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts.”





—





—

_*Follow the author of this story on Twitter:*_


Looks as though CNN is FINALLY wising up a bit.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Go talk to SCOTUS, please, Centinel.


----------



## RandallFlagg (May 15, 2016)

RandallFlagg said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> ...




Like I've said here a million times - I held a TS SC3 Clearance while in the Army. Had I treated classified information like the SOS did - I would be in Leavenworth, most likely with a life sentence. Now - you idiot liberals - tell me that out "leaders" don't get a pass when it comes to the "law".


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Sure thing, ranger rick.


----------



## Dale Smith (May 15, 2016)

We are not under the organic constitution that was passed in 1787 and anyone that says differently is a fucking moron. Act of 1871, anyone? The corporate charter that was passed that made us "U.S citizens" instead of sovereigns is what the original constitution was against. Do your fucking homework, leftards. The OP is "dead on" and 100 percent correct, I have posted about this before and loaded it with pertinent information and I am getting fucking tired of constantly repeating myself. Prove that I am wrong or STFU....seriously.


----------



## RandallFlagg (May 15, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> We are not under the organic constitution that was passed in 1787 and anyone that says differently is a fucking moron. Act of 1871, anyone? The corporate charter that was passed that made us "U.S citizens" instead of sovereigns is what the original constitution was against. Do your fucking homework, leftards. The OP is "dead on" and 100 percent correct, I have posted about this before and loaded it with pertinent information and I am getting fucking tired of constantly repeating myself. Prove that I am wrong or STFU....seriously.




Now, now....be easy on the left....to them the Constitution is a "living, breathing document".


----------



## Dale Smith (May 15, 2016)

RandallFlagg said:


> Dale Smith said:
> 
> 
> > We are not under the organic constitution that was passed in 1787 and anyone that says differently is a fucking moron. Act of 1871, anyone? The corporate charter that was passed that made us "U.S citizens" instead of sovereigns is what the original constitution was against. Do your fucking homework, leftards. The OP is "dead on" and 100 percent correct, I have posted about this before and loaded it with pertinent information and I am getting fucking tired of constantly repeating myself. Prove that I am wrong or STFU....seriously.
> ...



But these people are so fucking stupid, Randall....I mean utterly fucking STUPID and clueless. I should be charging these idiots for the stuff I have spent thousands of hours researching...it's a fucking gift I am trying to bestow....but they are like these robots that are programmed to repeat the same lame shit...un-fucking real.


----------



## RandallFlagg (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Sure thing, ranger rick.




I understand that you had extensive training in Squirt-Gun Commando tactics?


----------



## RandallFlagg (May 15, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> RandallFlagg said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...




I understand...but you have to realize that the vast majority of the pseudo-intellectual liberals on this board are little more than useful idiots for their party. History be damned - they are "PROGRESSIVES"!!!  Hell, I have a worthless degree in communications and I can debate their asses under the table. Or - as my Dear old Grandmother used to say about idiots - "Well, bless their little hearts" - which was code for - You Dumbass. Every time she saw a hippie - she would utter that phrase.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Same as you, randall.

The sovereign nonsense gets old.

We are not going backwards, ever.


----------



## RandallFlagg (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Same as you, randall.
> 
> The sovereign nonsense gets old.
> 
> We are not going backwards, ever.




So then tell me Jake - if we don't honor the past, and obey the laws of the Founders, do we count on the progressive liberals to lead us down that "primrose path"? If that be the case - we are finished as a country and are merely spinning our wheels - waiting on the tyrant to arrive. That person is so damned close right now, I can feel his/her breath on the back of my neck. 

The thing that keeps me awake at night is that I can't help but believe that liberals are looking forward to that day; just as the German people were conned into buying the Nazi dream - I see that same thing happening here. And I pray to the Almighty that I'm wrong - but we both know that I'm not.


----------



## TexM3 (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Same as you, randall.
> 
> The sovereign nonsense gets old.
> 
> We are not going backwards, ever.


Trying to put the restraints back on the fed gov and restore the Constitution is not going backwards duffus.


----------



## P@triot (May 15, 2016)

jillian said:


> For the uniformed..... "constitutional" is whatever the supreme court says it is.
> 
> even when it's as stupid a decision as citizen's united or heller.
> 
> but i love when people who get their "constitutional" education from the rightwing blogosphere pretend they know what "constitutional" is.


Oh my dear, dear Jillian. As usual, you could not be more wrong. I think we both know I've forgotten more about the U.S. Constitution than any 'blogosphere" and about 99.999% of the attorney's walking around out there. Though if it eases your psyche to pretend otherwise, I'll go with it dear friend.

The Constitution says what it says. Pretending that person A reads one thing while person B reads another and that requires governing body C (i.e. the Supreme Court) to decide is just typical liberal desperation. "The *right* of the *people* to keep and bear arms" is as straight forward, simple, and clear as it gets. Every single person on this earth knows exactly what it means. Sadly, the irrational liberals hatred of liberty and rights causes them to _pretend_ like there is some confusion around so that they can attempt to circumvent the Constitution. Liberals hate that they can't impose their will on others and since they can't get the votes to legally amend the Constitution, their approach is to feign misunderstanding, stack the Supreme Court with political activists posing as "justices" and hope that 9 unelected officials serve as an oligarchy to override the will of the people.

No where in the U.S. Constitution does it grant _any_ governing body the power to decide what the Constitution itself means. If there were some ambiguity around the Constitution which required as much, then rather than grant power over it, the framers would have simply rewritten it to clarify what ever was ambiguous. How long have you bee an attorney Jillian? Would you _ever_ - under _any_ circumstances - intentionally leave a section of a legal document ambiguous with the realization that the courts could later decide what it meant? Be honest for once. Of course not. And that alone proves what an asinine argument you're attempting to make.


----------



## P@triot (May 15, 2016)

Dale Smith said:


> RandallFlagg said:
> 
> 
> > Dale Smith said:
> ...


In all fairness D.S., liberals aren't so much stupid as they are evil. I mean, they _are_ stupid (clearly anyone who desires Nazi-like fascism is an idiot), but all of this nonsense is not because they don't understand. It's because they are lying animals with an agenda. They can't get the votes they need to amend the Constitution so they look for new and evil ways to get around it.


----------



## RandallFlagg (May 15, 2016)

Rottweiler said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > For the uniformed..... "constitutional" is whatever the supreme court says it is.
> ...




Indeed. The liberal mindset (sort of got going in the 60s) was to "work around" the American people. I distinctly recall my time in Political Science class the bearded, sit on his desk cross-legged "professor" that repeatedly told us that the "only way to affect change in the country was to stack the courts with liberal, like-minded judges". Congratulations! They have succeeded in doing just that. You see, they understand that patriotic Americans would NEVER sit still for a "re-do" of the Constitution or hell, even the Declaration of Independence - let alone the Bill of Rights. So, as Karl Marx said - "Go around the laws of the land and subvert from within". That's exactly what they have done both at the local and the Federal level. And, by doing so, have made the Congress, for the most part, irrelevant. I give you the SCOTUS and their ruling (unconstitutional) on gay marriage. 

The next step? The Second Amendment. I promise you, let Hillary OR Bernie win. You can kiss your Second Amendment rights goodbye, and confiscation will follow shortly thereafter. Welcome to Tyranny.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

You all can venerate the Founders.

We are not going back to 1789.


----------



## jillian (May 15, 2016)

TexM3 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > TexM3 said:
> ...



So they were kidding when. They said the congress should pass laws for the general welfare and commerce?

I understand that you want certain things. But the things you want aren't actually reflected in our laws. 

Thanks anyway


----------



## P@triot (May 15, 2016)

jillian said:


> So they were kidding when. They said the congress should pass laws for the general welfare and commerce?
> 
> I understand that you want certain things. But the things you want aren't actually reflected in our laws. Thanks anyway



I've explained this many times already Jillian. The founders were very clear that the power belonged to the states. For obvious reasons, the states delegated 18 specific powers to the federal government (18 items that made more sense for the federal government to control so the states would be unified in them - such as currency). Now within those 18 enumerated powers which they are explicitly restricted, the states used the language "general welfare" so that they wouldn't have to create a 4,000 page document outlining each and every item that would fall under those 18 enumerated powers.

Here is Thomas Jefferson himself on two separate occasions explaining as much:

“*Congress had not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but were restrained to those specifically enumerated; and that, as it was never meant they should provide for that welfare but by the exercise of the enumerated powers*, so it could not have been meant they should raise money for purposes which the enumeration did not place under their action” - Thomas Jefferson (June 6, 1817)

“[We] disavow, and declare to be most false and unfounded, the doctrine that the [Constitution], in authorizing its federal branch to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States, has given them thereby a power to do whatever they may think, or pretend, would promote the general welfare–which construction would make that of itself a complete government, without limitation of powers.… The plain sense and obvious meaning were that they might levy the taxes necessary to provide for the general welfare by the various acts of power therein specified and delegated to them, and by no others. – Thomas Jefferson (December 24, 1825)

This is _extremely_ clear Jillian. Even for a liberal. And you are an attorney - so don't pretend like you can't understand the language here. Game _over_.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

I am very clear that the Founders' vision has been adopted and changed by succeeding generations to meet their visions as needed.

That will continue, that will never change.


----------



## jillian (May 15, 2016)

TexM3 said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > TexM3 said:
> ...





Rottweiler said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > So they were kidding when. They said the congress should pass laws for the general welfare and commerce?
> ...



*you've* explained it?


My con law professors and 200 plus years of Supreme Court justices  who actually know what they're talking about explained it better.

The fact that the rabid right pretends that the constitution says what they want it to isn't my problem

And here's a hint.  Jefferson was one politician and his musings aren't law. And other politicians conflict with him 

But thanks for playing


----------



## Centinel (May 15, 2016)

jillian said:


> For the uniformed..... "constitutional" is whatever the supreme court says it is.



So when the convention delegates wrote the constitution, and they sent it to the states for ratification, the supreme court did not yet exist. How did the states know what they were ratifying?


----------



## Centinel (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> You all can venerate the Founders.
> 
> We are not going back to 1789.



Obeying a law does not initiate time travel to the time when that law was written.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Centinel said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > You all can venerate the Founders.
> ...


Now you are confusing yourself.


----------



## P@triot (May 15, 2016)

jillian said:


> My con law professors and 200 plus years of Supreme Court justices  who actually know what they're talking about explained it better.
> 
> The fact that the rabid right pretends that the constitution says what they want it to isn't my problem
> 
> And here's a hint.  Jefferson was one politician and his musings aren't law. And other politicians conflict with him



HaHa! So you're radical libtard "professors" with an agenda know better than Thomas Jefferson, who was the architect behind nearly our entire system of government and our entire system of law? _Riiiiiiight_. Keep trying to tell yourself that sweetie.

You are by far the most fascinating study on USMB. Unlike most of the high school dropout libtards on here, you can actually understand the language. And I've noticed how frustrated you get when hit with the facts. When you have to resort to "Thomas Jefferson doesn't matter - my professor at Libtard U. taught me something else" you know you've lost the debate. Your "professors" didn't found this country my dear. And they sure as hell didn't write the Declaration of Independence nor where their writings, concepts, and previous legislation used as the foundation of the U.S. Constitution. Sorry J - but your professors are irrelevant and clearly unqualified (either they are ignorant or they had an agenda - but either way that disqualifies them). The right accepts the U.S. Constitution accepts the document how the framers intended - exactly as it is written. Just as any rational human would.

By the way - why the refusal to answer the question? Because you realize it u equivocally proves you and your wing-tard profs wrong?


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Jillian, the professors, and SCOTUS know better than you, Rottweiler, yes, every time.


----------



## P@triot (May 15, 2016)

jillian said:


> My con law professors and 200 plus years of Supreme Court justices  who actually know what they're talking about explained it better.



Pssst..._Jillian_. If all of your "con-law" professors _combined_ were handed the answers in advance plus IBM's "Watson" AI machine, I would _still_ run circles around them on the U.S. Constitution (and it wouldn't even be close). It's so cut and dry that no amount of "well libtard agenda re-interpretation says X" would help them.


----------



## Centinel (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Centinel said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



You seem to be saying that obeying a law written in the past means one is going back in time. Is this your position?


----------



## P@triot (May 15, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> "The money has always dominated our governments."
> 
> True – and it likely always will.
> 
> Having nothing whatsoever to do with the wrongheaded myth of ‘restoring’ Constitutional government.


So I'll ask again (and I'm sure you'll ignore again I'm sure) - in your very limited mind, NSA warantless wire tapping is "Constitutional"?


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Centinel said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Centinel said:
> ...


Do you realize your question makes no sense?


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Rottweiler said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > "The money has always dominated our governments."
> ...


Your opinion is only your opinion.  Mine is that John Adams would have been thrilled with it if available in his day and age.


----------



## pwjohn (May 15, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



You couldn't possibly be more full of shit.


----------



## Centinel (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> We are not going back to 1789.


Absent time travel, how could we possibly go back to 1789?


----------



## Mac1958 (May 15, 2016)

Mac1958 said:


> Okay, so how do you go about doing this?  It can only be by electing people with whom you agree.  How do you plan on convincing enough of the electorate to vote with you?


Anyone?  

Bueller?
.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Centinel said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > We are not going back to 1789.
> ...


You continue to babble.  Do you have anything of worth to offer?


----------



## Centinel (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Centinel said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



What was the point of your statement: "We are not going back to 1789"?


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 15, 2016)

Centinel said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Centinel said:
> ...


You know exactly what is my point, you simply don't like it.  You have demonstrated repeatedly in the last few weeks you do not understand the Constitution, how American law develops, and the role of SCOTUS.  That is not my problem to fix for you.


----------



## Centinel (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> You know exactly what is my point, you simply don't like it.



I have no idea what your point is. What was the point of saying, "We're not going back to 1789"? How could we possibly go back to 1789?


----------



## RandallFlagg (May 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Jillian, the professors, and SCOTUS know better than you, Rottweiler, yes, every time.







I can only respond to that with one word: BULLSHIT!


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (May 15, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...



Implied powers...to excecute whatever is relevant to express powers.

End of discussion.


----------



## Sun Devil 92 (May 15, 2016)

Matthew said:


> The liberterian idea of constitutional government is a government that is powerless to do the will of the people and does only shit that they want. Liberterians and far right conservatives are a bunch of fascist assholes. Simply meaning that they think by the people means that the government should be so limited that the people shouldn't be able to elect a government that does more then sit on its dick.



Such a statement is beyond stupid.

The Constitution established a government that had all it needed to carry out express powers.

The Constitution was written because the Articles of Confederation failed.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 16, 2016)

Centinel said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > You know exactly what is my point, you simply don't like it.
> ...


Then you admit you are ignorant.  OK.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 16, 2016)

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Implied powers...to excecute whatever is relevant to express powers.
> 
> End of discussion.


False drivel.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 16, 2016)

Sun Devil 92 said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > The liberterian idea of constitutional government is a government that is powerless to do the will of the people and does only shit that they want. Liberterians and far right conservatives are a bunch of fascist assholes. Simply meaning that they think by the people means that the government should be so limited that the people shouldn't be able to elect a government that does more then sit on its dick.
> ...


Yes, the Constitution was written because the Articles were too weak, and the comment on express powers does not reflect the reality of interpreting the Constitution.


----------



## P@triot (May 16, 2016)

We can't get anywhere in today's world because the liberals refuse to have an honest conversation or obey the law. They know exactly what the U.S. Constitution says. But they don't like it. Fine. Then lets have that conversation, convince people you are correct, and then get the votes to amend the Constitution.

Like everything else, the left is too lazy to go through the process of amending the Constitution. So there tactic is to pretend like the can't read. Which doesn't make their case at all. If you're too dumb to understand what the U.S. Constitution says, it doesn't inspire me to follow you on policy.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 16, 2016)

You are wrong, Rottweiler.  Because we disagree is not ipso facto that you are right.  You are not.


----------



## P@triot (May 18, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> You are wrong, Rottweiler.  Because we disagree is not ipso facto that you are right.  You are not.


"You are wrong" - wow. What a post of deep value. No explanation for what is wrong. No attempt to deny the claims backed by fact after fact after fact.

I know I'm right when I can back up everything I've said with thorough documentation and the left comes back with generic, senseless stuff like "you are wrong". If you can't dispute it with something of substance, then it's obviously right.


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 18, 2016)

Rottweiler said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > You are wrong, Rottweiler.  Because we disagree is not ipso facto that you are right.  You are not.
> ...


You have not backed up anything with concrete, solid evidence.

Your arguments are just spoiled and rotten.

Do better.


----------



## P@triot (May 18, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


Really? So you deny that the NSA is performing illegal surveillance on all American's? _Really_? Because you were crying like a little bitch about the Patriot Act when Bush signed it. What were you crying about if that's not going on? _Oops_....


----------



## P@triot (May 18, 2016)

_This_ is how evil liberalism is... Hillary Clinton in a secret audio recording talking about how she plans to eliminate the 2nd Amendment:


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 19, 2016)

I gather your world view, Rott, makes you angry about government, etc.

However, you are not the authority; SCOTUS is.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (May 19, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> I gather your world view, Rott, makes you angry about government, etc.
> 
> However, you are not the authority; SCOTUS is.



Nope.  The American people are.

You really don't understand, do you?


----------



## JakeStarkey (May 19, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > I gather your world view, Rott, makes you angry about government, etc.
> ...


Are you as stupid as Edward Baiamonte?

Rework your statement for the truth, please.


----------



## P@triot (May 27, 2016)

Indisputable evidence that we are not even remotely functioning under constitutional government. The federal government has no business throwing tax dollars around to schools systems. *100% illegal*.

Texas Sues Obama Administration


----------



## Centinel (May 27, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> However, you are not the authority; SCOTUS is.



We are no longer a nation of laws. We are nation of SCOTUS opinions.

America, meet your nine emperors.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (May 27, 2016)

Centinel said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > However, you are not the authority; SCOTUS is.
> ...



In many ways, I must agree.


----------



## P@triot (May 27, 2016)

Centinel said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > However, you are not the authority; SCOTUS is.
> ...


That is tragic. And we must correct that immediately.


----------



## regent (May 27, 2016)

Jefferson tried to stop the whole thing but could not. It is now accepted as the law of the land.


----------



## P@triot (May 27, 2016)

regent said:


> Jefferson tried to stop the whole thing but could not. It is now accepted as the law of the land.


So was slavery at one time. We can restore constitutional government. Will we? I have no idea. But it can be done.


----------



## P@triot (May 29, 2016)

Ok you tool C_Clayton_Jones - tell us again how we're operating under constitutional government. Oh wait...that's right....you never read the document so how in the _hell_ would you know?!? Well here is a quick crash course - only the legislative branch (i.e. Congress) can create laws. _*Idiot*_. You're so ignorant of your own country's laws and structure of government that I'm literally embarrassed for you. But then again - you're so profoundly ignorant of it all that explains why you're not embarrassed by your stupid comments. Ignorance is bliss.


----------



## P@triot (May 29, 2016)

Ok you idiot C_Clayton_Jones - tell us again how we're operating under constitutional government. Oh wait...that's right....you never read the document so how in the _hell_ would you know?!? Well here is a quick crash course - it is illegal for the government to seize your assets without being found guilty in a court of law - _*idiot*_. The U.S. Constitution says so. Specifically, the 4th Amendment which states:
"the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."  You're so ignorant of your own country's laws and structure of government that I'm literally embarrassed for you. But then again - you're so profoundly ignorant of it all that explains why you're not embarrassed by your stupid comments. Ignorance is bliss.

The IRS has seized $43 million from more than 600 individuals by accusing them of violating “structuring” laws *even when there has been no evidence of criminal wrongdoing*, according to testimony heard at the House Ways and Means Committee today.

IRS Took $43 Million From Innocent Americans Under ‘Structuring’ Law


----------



## P@triot (May 30, 2016)

More indisputable evidence that we are not functioning under Constitutional government...

Obama Raided $500M for Zika to Finance UN’s Green Climate Fund


----------



## P@triot (Jun 3, 2016)

You have to laugh at the irony...left-wing New York Times, which has cheered on Obama shredding the U.S. Constitution for 8 years, is now freaking out over the thought of Donald Trump doing the same thing (and he _will_). Just remember libtards - you are the idiots that made the Constitution irrelevant. Like everything else throughout history, conservatives warned you. And like everything else throughout history, you ignored the wise warning in favor of your extreme ideology.

President George W. Bush “often went beyond what he should have done,” Professor Epstein said. “I think *Obama’s been much worse on that issue pretty consistently, and his underlings have been even more so*. But I think Trump doesn’t even think there’s an issue to worry about. He just simply says whatever I want to do I will do.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/04/us/politics/donald-trump-constitution-power.html


----------



## P@triot (Jun 4, 2016)

Come on CCJ....tell us again how we are operating under constitutional government. This thread is proving you to be the uninformed, ignorant tool that you are...

The IRS Warned Obama It Was Illegal To Pay ObamaCare Subsidies To Insurance Companie....*and Obama did not care.*
*
The IRS warned Obama it was illegal to pay ObamaCare subsidies to insurance companies*


----------



## P@triot (Jun 4, 2016)

We are so far removed from Constitutional government that we don't even know what it's supposed to look like anymore...

Obamacare, Executive Power and the Rule of Law


----------



## P@triot (Jun 9, 2016)

So we are nearly $20 *trillion* in debt, we have an estimated 20 *million* people who have illegally broken into our country, we have a record 94 *million* people who dropped out of the labor participation force, we have major national security threats from ISIS, Russia, Iran, and China, and our federal government spends time and money on....._salt_? Go Almighty do we need to not only restore constitutional government but also get our freaking priorities in line. I don't need our authoritarian liberal Nazi regime concerning themselves with my salt intake. I'll handle that myself - thank you.

The Government 'Nutrition Police' Are Going After Salt


----------



## Contumacious (Jun 9, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...



*
WE MUST RESTORE THE CONSTITUTION (1787) THEN ENFORCE IT.*


.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 9, 2016)

Remember when Obama lied over and over on the campaign trail promising "the most transparent administration ever"? Now we can't even get basic public records released by our federal government... 

DOJ Resists Court Order to Provide Ethics Training for Its Lawyers


----------



## P@triot (Jun 14, 2016)

It is imperative that we restore constitutional government. Here they are once again nefariously engaging in something egregiously beyond their constitutional responsibility. And libtards - don't even give us any nonsense about how this is for them to secure their government IT system. They do *not* need legislation to do that. They have _full_ authority over their own IT systems and can do anything they want with regards to policy for securing them. Legislation applies (in most cases - unconstitutionally) to people and organizations in the private sector.

Week ahead: Lawmakers revisit major cyber law


----------



## P@triot (Jun 15, 2016)

There are two things that are on display here. The first is the glaring ineptitude of the federal government despite their trillions of dollars, their advanced technology, and their surveillance state. The second is the indisputable truth that their unconstitutional and oppressive policies aren't helping any way. While the NSA engages in illegal surveillance of American's 24x7, Disney World (yes..._Disney World_) without any of the advantages that the federal government has - provided the FBI with the threat intel regarding Omar Mateen. And the government didn't prevent it. If the federal government can't stop one guy with a gun from killing 50 people even after Disney World put him on their radar - then what is the point of this oppressive nanny state anyway? It didn't stop 9/11, it's didn't stop Alton Nolan from beheading people in Oklahoma in 2014, and it didn't stop Omar Mateen from killing 50 people and wounding 50 more. It's safe to say that the federal government cannot protect us. So what is the point of the NSA's programs like TrailBlazer, ThinThread, and Stellar Wind?

Disney WARNED The FBI About Orlando Terrorist In April. So Why Did They Drop The Ball?


----------



## emilynghiem (Jun 15, 2016)

P@triot said:


> We are so far removed from Constitutional government that we don't even know what it's supposed to look like anymore...
> 
> Obamacare, Executive Power and the Rule of Law


P

Thanks P@triot for this link
I should add it as context to my spoof on Obama dissing the Constitution:
Obama Gangsta Style - Lyrics for Video Contest


----------



## P@triot (Jun 16, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right. The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.



Come on CCJ....tell us again how the United States is currently functioning under constitutional government. I _love_ laughing at your idiocy. Since you can't read (proven by the fact that I had to train you on the U.S. Constitution), I'll give you the Cliff's Notes on this article. Basically, the federal government engaged in egregious felonious wire tapping. You can spare all of the ridiculous, desperate, and immature arguments you'll attempt to use because you're incapable of admitting when you're wrong. "It happened under Bush - Obama restored Constitutional government", "the federal government usurping the courts and spying on citizens is legal", "blah, blah, blah, blah". I've posted volumes of indisputable proof in this thread that we are so far removed from Constitutional government, people such as yourself don't even know what Constitutional government looks like anymore...

NSA's Stellar Wind Program Was Almost Completely Useless, Hidden From FISA Court By NSA And FBI | Techdirt


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jun 16, 2016)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’
> ...



They don't have the authority you think they do.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jun 16, 2016)

Okay, so restore what you think is constitutional government.

Just do it constitutionally.  

What would that plan look like?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Jun 16, 2016)

NYcarbineer said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

They have all the authority not specifically granted the federal government under the Constitution.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 16, 2016)

NYcarbineer said:


> Okay, so restore what you think is constitutional government.
> 
> Just do it constitutionally.
> 
> What would that plan look like?


It's simple. The document is straight forward. The federal government is responsible for 18 things and 18 things only. Things like defense (the military), IP (the patent office), currency, etc.

Anything outside of those items disappear. So for instance - the Department of Education (unconstitutionally created by Jimmy Carter) is shut down. The EPA is shut down. The Department of Energy is shut down.

And if the American people believe they will die unless the federal government overseas those departments which were shut down, then they are welcome to legally and properly amend the U.S. Constitution to make those items the responsibility of the federal government.

So how easy that is?


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Jun 16, 2016)

Conservatives and liberals have no interest in Constitutional government.  You're only for the Constitution when it supports your views.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jun 16, 2016)

P@triot said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> > Okay, so restore what you think is constitutional government.
> ...



So how do you constitutionally shut down those departments?


----------



## P@triot (Jun 16, 2016)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> Conservatives and liberals have no interest in Constitutional government.  You're only for the Constitution when it supports your views.


How do you figure?


----------



## P@triot (Jun 16, 2016)

NYcarbineer said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > NYcarbineer said:
> ...


How do you shut down a laptop? How do you shut down a tv? You simply shut them down. Everyone's position is eliminated and they are sent home.


----------



## Dont Taz Me Bro (Jun 16, 2016)

P@triot said:


> Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> 
> 
> > Conservatives and liberals have no interest in Constitutional government.  You're only for the Constitution when it supports your views.
> ...



Electronic impulses constantly fire throughout a neural network in my brain.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 16, 2016)

Dont Taz Me Bro said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Dont Taz Me Bro said:
> ...


Well based on your last comment - I'm thinking the impulses aren't firing properly or the neural network is down.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 21, 2016)

Come on C_Clayton_Jones - tell us again how we're operating under Constitutional government you jack-ass. I mean, we haven't been for roughly 150 years now, but one needs to be educated to realize that. So _none_ of us expect you to understand.

*Operation CHAOS* or *Operation MHCHAOS* was the code name for an *American domestic espionage project* conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency. A department within the CIA was established in 1967 on orders from President of the United States Lyndon B. Johnson and later expanded under President Richard Nixon. The operation was launched under Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) Richard Helms, by chief of counter-intelligence, James Jesus Angleton, and headed by Richard Ober. The program's goal was to unmask possible foreign influences on the student antiwar movement.

Operation CHAOS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## P@triot (Jun 21, 2016)

Come on C_Clayton_Jones - tell us again how we're operating under Constitutional government, genius. 

Project* MINARET* was a sister project to Project SHAMROCK operated by the National Security Agency (NSA), which, after intercepting electronic communications that contained the names of predesignated US citizens, passed them to other government law enforcement and intelligence organizations.[1] Intercepted messages were disseminated to the FBI, CIA, Secret Service, Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD), and the Department of Defense.

The names were on "watch lists" of American citizens, generated by Executive Branch law enforcement and intelligence agencies, to detect communications involving the listed individuals. *There was no judicial oversight, and the project had no warrants for interception*.

Project MINARET - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jun 21, 2016)

P@triot said:


> Come on C_Clayton_Jones - tell us again how we're operating under Constitutional government you jack-ass. I mean, we haven't been for roughly 150 years now, but one needs to be educated to realize that. So _none_ of us expect you to understand.
> 
> *Operation CHAOS* or *Operation MHCHAOS* was the code name for an *American domestic espionage project* conducted by the Central Intelligence Agency. A department within the CIA was established in 1967 on orders from President of the United States Lyndon B. Johnson and later expanded under President Richard Nixon. The operation was launched under Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) Richard Helms, by chief of counter-intelligence, James Jesus Angleton, and headed by Richard Ober. The program's goal was to unmask possible foreign influences on the student antiwar movement.
> 
> Operation CHAOS - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



We are of course operating under a constitutional government.  You just don't like the outcome.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 21, 2016)

NYcarbineer said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Come on C_Clayton_Jones - tell us again how we're operating under Constitutional government you jack-ass. I mean, we haven't been for roughly 150 years now, but one needs to be educated to realize that. So _none_ of us expect you to understand.
> ...


So domestic spying - *without* a court order - is "constitutional" in your mind? Please. Not even you believe that. Nice try though. Thanks for playing.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jun 21, 2016)

P@triot said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



We have a process of determining constitutionality.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 21, 2016)

NYcarbineer said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > NYcarbineer said:
> ...


What a stupid and childish response. Your refusal to answer is confirmation of what we all already know. We are *not* operating under constitutional government nor have we been for roughly 150 years now. It is not constitutional for the federal government to engage in domestic espionage without court orders.


----------



## regent (Jun 21, 2016)

P@triot said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


And if the Court orders and no one obeys the orders, then what?


----------



## P@triot (Jun 22, 2016)

More indisputable proof that we are *not* operating under constitutional government. Only the Legislative branch can make laws. So how is it that 95% of our new laws were made by unelected bureaucrats in the Executive branch?


----------



## P@triot (Jun 26, 2016)

This is outstanding work by Paul Ryan and the Republican-controlled Congress. Huge steps here in restoring Constitutional government and reining in the uncontrolled, run away executive branch.

First, “A Better Way” proposes legislation that would expedite lawsuits brought by either or both chambers of Congress against the administration for failing to execute the law.

A second proposal is aimed at reining in the hybrid “fourth branch” of government: federal agencies that function as quasi-independent executive, legislative, and judicial bodies. Ryan’s proposal would require courts to independently review an agency’s action (when it is challenged in an appropriate case or controversy) rather than defer to the agency’s judgment, and this would provide much needed oversight. Hopefully this reform also would encourage members of Congress to write clearer statutes and refrain from delegating wide-ranging authority to agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency and Federal Communications Commission.

A third proposal found in “A Better Way” would strengthen the Anti-Deficiency Act, which makes it a crime for a federal employee to spend funds without congressional authorization. Currently, violations of the Anti-Deficiency Act are punishable by suspensions, fines, or imprisonment (although actual prosecutions are extremely rare).

3 Ways Paul Ryan Is Looking to Curb Executive Overreach


----------



## P@triot (Jun 28, 2016)

We *must* restore Constitutional government...

I have a little message for you, Mr. President, regarding your REFUSAL to answer Benghazi questions - Allen B. West - AllenBWest.com


----------



## P@triot (Jun 28, 2016)

Constitutional rights are not nuisances that the government must accommodate. Protecting these *rights* _is_ *the reason government exists*.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 30, 2016)

What a sad indictment on the current state of the U.S. The Constitution already protects and guarantees my religious freedoms. Why in the hell would I need additional laws for that? And if libtards won't obey the Constitution - what makes _anyone_ think they will obey this law?

Religious Freedom Bill Creeps Forward in Congress


----------



## P@triot (Jul 1, 2016)

jillian said:


> Rottweiler said:
> 
> 
> > Here is Thomas Jefferson himself on two separate occasions explaining as much:
> ...



"The authority of those who teach is often an obstacle to those who want to learn." - Marcus Tulles Cicero

(Flawlessly sums up you and your "con law professors" - eh Jillian?)


----------



## P@triot (Jul 1, 2016)

What a tragic indictment on the United States. Even Supreme Court Justices recognize just how extreme the abuse and usurpation of the Constitution has become in this country. We *must* restore Constitutional government.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 1, 2016)

This is _completely_ unacceptable. To be very clear here - yes, this girl is an awful human being. Awful. But even awful human beings have a 1st Amendment *right* to freedom of speech. She is not responsible for the death of this person. He didn't have to listen to her. Hell, he didn't even have to hear her. The technology exists today to block phone calls and/or texts from _any_ number. He could have blocked this horrible girl. He _chose_ not to. Just as he _chose_ to take his own life. It's vintage liberal idiocy to blame everyone else for the choices of the individual and it has to stop.

Court: Teen who texted boyfriend urging suicide to stand trial


----------



## P@triot (Jul 5, 2016)

Come on C_Clayton_Jones - tell us again how we are "operating under Constitutional government". It _always_ makes me laugh when you say stupid stuff. 

Hint: only the legislative branch can make laws, alter laws, or abolish laws. And Congress did not insert an "intent" statute into Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18). The F.B.I. and their director just inserted that statute into the law spontaneously and on their own. Since you are completely unaware of your own government or how it operates - the F.B.I. is a part of the executive branch (which has no authority to create, alter, or abolish law) while it is Congress that is the legislative branch. We are so far from actual constitutional government that you can't even comprehend what it looks like CCJ (it also doesn't help that you've refused to actually read the U.S. Constitution).

There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey (disclosure: a former colleague and longtime friend of mine), *Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation* of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed it from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless” and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services. Yet, Director Comey recommended against prosecution of the law violations he clearly found on the ground that there was no intent to harm the United States.

In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, *the FBI rewrote the statute*, *inserting an intent element that Congress did not require*. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes _gross negligence_ is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant. People never _intend_ the bad things that happen due to _gross negligence_.

FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook, by Andrew C. McCarthy, National Review


----------



## P@triot (Jul 16, 2016)

Come CCJ....tell us again how we are "operating under constitutional government".

How to Defend Your First Amendment Rights


----------



## regent (Jul 16, 2016)

So when did we lose Consrtitutional government and what was the cause?


----------



## P@triot (Jul 16, 2016)

regent said:


> So when did we lose Consrtitutional government and what was the cause?


Early 1900's. Liberalism.


----------



## regent (Jul 16, 2016)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > So when did we lose Consrtitutional government and what was the cause?
> ...


So what did liberals do in the early 1900's that caused the loss of Constitutional government?


----------



## P@triot (Jul 16, 2016)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


They ignored the U.S. Constitution. They assumed powers they did not have. They implemented policy that violated the Constitution. Here is a prime example:

Woodrow Wilson pushed for the *Federal Reserve Act of 1913*, which established twelve regional reserve banks controlled by the Federal Reserve Board, a new federal agency whose members were appointed by the President. This new federal system could adjust interest rates and the nation's money supply. Because it was authorized to issue currency based on government securities and "commercial paper" (the loans made to businesses by banks), the amount of money in circulation would expand or contract with the business cycle.

Here's the thing - if Woodrow Wilson wanted the power for the federal government to establish banks, adjust interest rates, and alter the nation's money supply, then what he should have pushed for is an amendment to the U.S. Constitution granting the federal government the power over those items. Instead, liberals just pushed ahead with their own bizarre agenda - law be damned.

How about another example?

Woodrow Wilson sponsored the Espionage and Sedition Acts, prohibiting interference with the draft and *outlawing criticism of the government, the armed forces, or the war effort. Violators were imprisoned or fined*.

Gee...that's not unconstitutional or anything. I mean, it's not like my 1st Amendment rights of Free Speech allows me to criticize the government, the armed forces, or a war effort. And the funny thing is - liberals sure as hell didn't abide by their own "Espionage and Sedition Act" when Bush was in office and we were embattled in conflict in Iraq.

Is that enough for you or do you require more?


----------



## regent (Jul 16, 2016)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


You might go back even earlier to the Alien and Sedition Act and the question of free speech. Sedition was saying bad things about the president.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jul 16, 2016)

The RWnuts love to make proclamations like 'we need to restore constitutional government!'

but with only a bit of closer scrutiny you realize that what they are really saying is,  'constitutional government' has to be 

1)  how we conservatives define it, and

2)  how we like it based on our partisan agenda.

In other words, the Right demands both that we play by the rules, and that the Right gets to make the rules.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 17, 2016)

None of this would be an issue if we were operating under constitutional government...

‘Zombie programs’ waste money with no Congress oversight


----------



## P@triot (Jul 17, 2016)

NYcarbineer said:


> The RWnuts love to make proclamations like 'we need to restore constitutional government!'
> 
> but with only a bit of closer scrutiny you realize that what they are really saying is,  'constitutional government' has to be
> 
> ...


Go ahead - dispute _one_ claim I've made about the U.S. currently not operating under constitutional government. I dare you. Tell us that the NSA is *not* spying on the American people without a warrant _or_ that it's ok for them to do so.


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jul 17, 2016)

P@triot said:


> NYcarbineer said:
> 
> 
> > The RWnuts love to make proclamations like 'we need to restore constitutional government!'
> ...



Laws are constitutional by default.  Only if they are challenged and struck down do they become unconstitutional.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 17, 2016)

NYcarbineer said:


> The RWnuts love to make proclamations like 'we need to restore constitutional government!' but with only a bit of closer scrutiny you realize that what they are really saying is,  'constitutional government' has to be
> 
> 1)  how we conservatives define it, and
> 
> ...


The problem with Dumbocrats like Carb here is that they are uneducated. They've never read the U.S. Constitution and they skipped civics in high school to smoke pot under the bleachers. As such, they believe two astoundingly ignorant things...

If Congress passes it, it _must _be "constitutional"
If the president does it, it _must_ be "constitutional"
Stupidity so special, it could _only_ come from an uneducated Dumbocrat.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 17, 2016)

NYcarbineer said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > NYcarbineer said:
> ...


Bwahahahahaha!!! So if Congress passed a law tomorrow saying it's ok to hang n*ggers - it is "constitutional"? Holy Jesus are you the _dumbest_ person in America.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 17, 2016)

NYcarbineer said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > NYcarbineer said:
> ...


So to be clear - it is "constitutional" for the NSA to intercept _every_ single phone call, text, email, and keystroke of _every_ single American? I just want to make sure your stupidity is very clear so everyone can have a good laugh.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 17, 2016)

NYcarbineer said:


> Laws are constitutional by default.  Only if they are challenged and struck down do they become unconstitutional.


NYcarbineer.....taking stupidity to _unprecedented_ levels since March 10, 2009.


----------



## regent (Jul 17, 2016)

Have the American people been required to obey laws in the past that were later found to be unconstitutional?


----------



## P@triot (Jul 17, 2016)

regent said:


> Have the American people been required to obey laws in the past that were later found to be unconstitutional?


In some cases - like the NSA surveillance programs - the American people can't obey or disobey. It's just an unconstitutional nightmare _forced_ on them against their will. And even if it is later shut down, the damage has been done.


----------



## regent (Jul 17, 2016)

mer


P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Have the American people been required to obey laws in the past that were later found to be unconstitutional?
> ...


How do we know a law passed by the Congress and signed by the president is against the people's will? Is that the criterion we should use for laws, if some believe it is against the people's will cancel the law?


----------



## P@triot (Jul 22, 2016)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


Did you _seriously_ just ask that question?!? 

By _law_, the "criterion" we use for creating law is called the U.S. Constitution. _That_ is what we are required by law to be using. If it's not a power of the federal government (such as healthcare) then the federal government *cannot* make laws around it.

If it _is_ a power of the federal government (such as defense) they still *cannot* create laws that violate the rights of the American people (such as violating the 4th Amendment with domestic spying).


----------



## regent (Jul 22, 2016)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


The answer is of course the American people have obeyed laws in the past that were later declared unconstitutional. That should then bring up the next question, are we obeying laws today that will in the future be declared unconstitutional?


----------



## P@triot (Jul 22, 2016)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


The answer, of course, is what I already stated and you ran from like a little girl with a disingenuous agenda. *Can the American people decide to comply with the NSA's domestic surveillance?* Yes or No?


----------



## P@triot (Jul 25, 2016)

regent said:


> How do we know a law passed by the Congress and signed by the president is *against the people's will*? Is that the criterion we should use for laws, if some believe it is *against the people's will* cancel the law?



"In questions of power, let no more be heard of confidence in *man*, but *bind him down* from mischief *by the chains of the constitution*." -Thomas Jefferson


----------



## P@triot (Aug 8, 2016)

No wonder we are $19 *trillion* in debt...

Government Agency Spent Millions on PR Campaign


----------



## regent (Aug 8, 2016)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > How do we know a law passed by the Congress and signed by the president is *against the people's will*? Is that the criterion we should use for laws, if some believe it is *against the people's will* cancel the law?
> ...


"No  society can make a perpetual constitution or even a perpetual law."
Jefferson


----------



## P@triot (Aug 12, 2016)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


Yeah? And? Why do you think Thomas Jefferson and his pals are considered among the brightest minds and greatest men of all time? Because they had the foresight to build an amendment process into the U.S. Constitution.

You want to pretend like the left's _insane_ policies (failed economic socialism, gay marriage, government mandated healthcare, etc.) have all been the result of amending the U.S. Constitution and they have *not* been.

If the American people want these policies - then so be it. They can and would vote for those items to become the responsibility of the federal government. But they have done no such thing.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 17, 2016)

The federal government is explicitly restricted to 18 enumerated powers and the environment *isn't* one of them. This is the result of unconstitutional government...

EPA Faces More Pressure Over Gold King Mine Spill


----------



## JakeStarkey (Aug 17, 2016)

Too bad patriot is not a constitutional scholar.


----------



## g5000 (Aug 17, 2016)

I'm going to have to side with Patriot on this one.

One of the reasons Donald Trump is succeeding is because the American people instinctively know they are being robbed.  They can feel someone's hands rifling through their pockets.

The problem is that the robbery is being done on such a sophisticated level, that most Americans don't have the time or the knowledge to understand how it is being done through our legislative process.

So when a demagogue comes along who simplifies it for them, and points a finger at a particular group ("it's those rapist Mexicans"), there are a certain number of people who will grasp that straw like a life preserver, even though it isn't Mexicans who are stealing from them.

The American people also feel the shadow of the government peeping into their personal lives.  Again, they don't know how it is being done, but they sense it.

The police state is regularly violating the Fourth Amendment, and we gave them permission to do so in the terrifying aftermath of 9/11.  We gave up our liberty for safety.  It became axiomatic. Bush:  "He kept us safe."

Yes, but HOW did Bush keep us safe?  He did it by spying on all of us.  And he passed the baton to Obama. 

This has been known for a long time, and no one really objects.

We should be objecting.  Very loudly.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 17, 2016)

g5000 said:


> I'm going to have to side with Patriot on this one.
> 
> One of the reasons Donald Trump is succeeding is because the American people instinctively know they are being robbed.  They can feel someone's hands rifling through their pockets.
> 
> ...


It's funny - both sides actually objected. But the only did so when the other guys party was in power. Under Bush, Democrats lost their mind over the Patriot Act. Republican's applauded. In steps Obama, and after promising on the campaign trail to end the Patriot Act, he actually expands it. Republican's (who made it possible in the first place) lose their minds. Democrats (who previous opposed it), suddenly see it as not threat at all and not an issue to deal with.

Stupid. Very stupid. By both sides.


----------



## regent (Aug 17, 2016)

P@triot said:


> The federal government is explicitly restricted to 18 enumerated powers and the environment *isn't* one of them. This is the result of unconstitutional government...
> 
> EPA Faces More Pressure Over Gold King Mine Spill





P@triot said:


> The federal government is explicitly restricted to 18 enumerated powers and the environment *isn't* one of them. This is the result of unconstitutional government...
> 
> EPA Faces More Pressure Over Gold King Mine Spill


The federal government is not restricted to 18 enumerated powers, the executive has powers as does the Court.


----------



## BlackAsCoal (Aug 17, 2016)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide



Like Thomas Jefferson, I believe the Constitution should be re-written every 19 years .. then the Constitution can deal more effectively with issues of government and technology that didn't even exist in the minds of the Founders.

*Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of nineteen years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right.* It may be said, that the succeeding generation exercising, in fact, the power of repeal, this leaves them as free as if the constitution or law had been expressly limited to nineteen years only. In the first place, this objection admits the right, in proposing an equivalent. But the power of repeal is not an equivalent. It might be, indeed, if every form of government were so perfectly contrived, that the will of the majority could always be obtained, fairly and without impediment. But this is true of no form. The people cannot assemble themselves; their representation is unequal and vicious. Various checks are opposed to every legislative proposition. Factions get possession of the public councils, bribery corrupts them, personal interests lead them astray from the general interests of their constituents; and other impediments arise, so as to prove to every practical man, that a law of limited duration is much more manageable than one which needs a repeal." 
     --Thomas Jefferson to James Madison, 1789. ME 7:459, Papers 15:396

No generation should be bound by the thoughts of the long dead.

Let us provide in our constitution for its revision at stated periods. What these periods should be nature herself indicates. By the European tables of mortality, of the adults living at any one moment of time, a majority will be dead in about nineteen years. At the end of that period, then, a new majority is come into place; or, in other words, a new generation. *Each generation is as independent as the one preceding, as that was of all which had gone before. It has then, like them, a right to choose for itself the form of government it believes most promotive of its own happiness; consequently, to accommodate to the circumstances in which it finds itself that received from its predecessors; and it is for the peace and good of mankind* that a solemn opportunity of doing this every nineteen or twenty years should be provided by the constitution, so that it may be handed on with periodical repairs from generation to generation to the end of time, if anything human can so long endure." 
    --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. ME 15:42


----------



## JakeStarkey (Aug 17, 2016)

Many on the far right and among the libertarians trap themselves with the fallacy of "idola tribus", the idols of the tribe.

They have so echoed the nonsense in the chamber they believe as easily as the old saw that the Chicago Cubs are going to the World Series this year: the cubbies just can't miss!


----------



## P@triot (Sep 14, 2016)

BlackAsCoal said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> ...


And that's fine. Simply amend the U.S. Constitution to require it to be rewritten every "X" amount of years.

The only thing I will say is that in a nation of 330,000,000 people which is infinitely more diverse than it was 235 years ago, getting people to agree on a new Constitution is going to be a _nightmare_. It was quite a challenge two centuries ago when just about everyone was a white, Angeo-Saxon, Protestant. Now we are a nation of Latinos, African-Americans, Asians, etc. who are Catholic, Jewish, muslim, etc.

In my humble opinion, it would be exponentially easier to simply amend the U.S. Constitution when and where it makes sense than trying to write a whole new one every 20 years. But that is a decision for the American people to make.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 15, 2016)

One of an endless array of dangers that are the result of abandoning the U.S. Constitution. Matt Bevin is spot-on with his assessment here. Violence should be the last resort of last resorts. But with the current level of corruption and the near total abandonment of the U.S. Constitution - it might very well become the reality that America is forced into.

I'll say this much - if it ever comes to a second Civil War, I pray that the ultimate outcome would include some kind of mechanism to prevent this from happening again. Maybe some sort of Constitution "gatekeepers" that have the authority to trump the Supreme Court and who are *not* appointed by someone in the government.

“*I want us to be able to fight ideologically, mentally, spiritually, economically, so that we don’t have to do it physically*,” Bevin said, according to the Washington Post. “But that may, in fact, be the case".

Kentucky Governor: Patriots May Need to ‘Shed Blood’ if Clinton Gets Elected


----------



## JakeStarkey (Sep 15, 2016)

The Constitution gate keeper already exist as written into the Constitution: SCOTUS.

If it comes to blood shed, the great majority of Americans will ensure that it is that of the Alt Right deplorables.


----------



## owebo (Sep 15, 2016)

JakeStarkey said:


> The Constitution gate keeper already exist as written into the Constitution: SCOTUS.
> 
> If it comes to blood shed, the great majority of Americans will ensure that it is that of the Alt Right deplorables.


You radical LWNJs will stack up like cord wood......


----------



## Windship (Sep 15, 2016)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...



Omg. What planet do you live on? Do you think your vote matters? Do you think all candidates have an equal chance at debates? Do you think if your vote doesnt matter we ave a Democracy? Do you think the government is afraid of the population?     Do you trust our government?
Look this up: oligarchic inverted totalitarianism. Thats what we have. Corporations have taken over the government and the courts, the legislative and executive branches are owned by the corporations as well. The liberals(neo liberals)speak what the working class want to hear then betrays them to corporate. Functioning properly? Lol, for who?


----------



## Votto (Sep 15, 2016)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide



Lawless?  It's not like the President of the United States can do things like go around imprisoning innocent civilians because they are of a different race without the checks and balances stopping him or her......oh wait.


----------



## hazlnut (Sep 15, 2016)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide





Another dope living in a bubble of hate.


----------



## regent (Sep 15, 2016)

Votto said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> ...


 In a war it seems things change somewhat. Security becomes more important and measures that are taken to protect the American people during a war are different than during peace time. And the Court seems to agree with that concept.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Sep 15, 2016)

Bush and his gang locked up a lot people on security charges.

So did FDR, WW, AL.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 16, 2016)

regent said:


> Votto said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


You know who else agrees with that "concept"? *Idiots*. I didn't ask the government for any additional "measures" to "protect" me during war. Did you? Where is it written in the U.S. Constitution that the government may employ any "measures" they desire during war?


----------



## P@triot (Sep 22, 2016)

This has happened for one reason and one reason _only_: the cancer known as progressivism created an unconstitutional monstrosity out of the federal government. Tax revenues are the highest they've ever been. We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. Had the federal government been restrained to the 18 enumerated powers legally required by the U.S. Constitution, we would have a national debt of $0.00 today.

*By 2023, spending on net interest payments will surpass spending on national defense*.

Taxpayers Are Paying Billions to Service the National Debt


----------



## P@triot (Sep 22, 2016)




----------



## regent (Sep 22, 2016)

P@triot said:


> This has happened for one reason and one reason _only_: the cancer known as progressivism created an unconstitutional monstrosity out of the federal government. Tax revenues are the highest they've ever been. We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. Had the federal government been restrained to the 18 enumerated powers legally required by the U.S. Constitution, we would have a national debt of $0.00 today.
> 
> *By 2023, spending on net interest payments will surpass spending on national defense*.
> 
> Taxpayers Are Paying Billions to Service the National Debt


It was that damn Revolution against Britain that caused the beginning of our national debt and the debt lasted until a
Democratic president paid it off, then lo and behold, it came back.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 23, 2016)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > This has happened for one reason and one reason _only_: the cancer known as progressivism created an unconstitutional monstrosity out of the federal government. Tax revenues are the highest they've ever been. We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. Had the federal government been restrained to the 18 enumerated powers legally required by the U.S. Constitution, we would have a national debt of $0.00 today.
> ...


As you said...that was paid off in full. We had $0.00 in national debt under under Andrew Jackson. Then FDR stepped in one day and everything went to shit. Republican's were stuck with the nightmare he created. Idiots like LBJ and Jimmy Carter only built on it.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Sep 23, 2016)

Trump is not a small government conservative, either fiscally or socially.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 23, 2016)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide



Poodle, no one cares about your phone calls and computer records...

You just aren't that important.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 23, 2016)

P@triot said:


> As you said...that was paid off in full. We had $0.00 in national debt under under Andrew Jackson. Then FDR stepped in one day and everything went to shit. Republican's were stuck with the nightmare he created. Idiots like LBJ and Jimmy Carter only built on it.



Oh, Poodle... you are too funny.   Point was between Geo. Washington and Jimmy Carter, we had less than a Trillion dollars of debt, despite two world wars, massive infrastructure building, and the creation of a social safety net.  

Then Ronnie Ray-gun decided it was just soooooo unfair that the rich had to pay their fair share.  and he put out some snake oil about how cutting taxes would create revenues. 

so instead, we got 3 Trillion dollars of additional debt by the Time George Bush got run out of office. 

Clinton finally got it under control and we were posting surpluses. Then we let Bush clincally retarded son steal the presidency, who doubled the debt again.


----------



## WinterBorn (Sep 23, 2016)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > As you said...that was paid off in full. We had $0.00 in national debt under under Andrew Jackson. Then FDR stepped in one day and everything went to shit. Republican's were stuck with the nightmare he created. Idiots like LBJ and Jimmy Carter only built on it.
> ...



Clinton did not post surpluses.   The only way surpuses were claimed is by shuffling money around to make it look good.  He "borrowed" from the Sicial Security coffers like it was free money.  There may have been less debt in one specific area, but there was never a surplus.

from: The Myth of the Clinton Surplus

_"Interestingly, this most likely was not even a conscious decision by Clinton. The Social Security Administration is legally required to take all its surpluses and buy U.S. Government securities, and the U.S. Government readily sells those securities--which automatically and immediately becomes intragovernmental holdings. The economy was doing well due to the dot-com bubble and people were earning a lot of money and paying a lot into Social Security. Since Social Security had more money coming in than it had to pay in benefits to retired persons, all that extra money was immediately used to buy U.S. Government securities. The government was still running deficits, but since there was so much money coming from excess Social Security contributions there was no need to borrow more money directly from the public. As such, the public debt went down while intragovernmental holdings continued to skyrocket. 

The net effect was that the national debt most definitely did not get paid down because we did not have a surplus. The government just covered its deficit by borrowing money from Social Security rather than the public."_


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 23, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> Clinton did not post surpluses. The only way surpuses were claimed is by shuffling money around to make it look good. He "borrowed" from the Sicial Security coffers like it was free money. There may have been less debt in one specific area, but there was never a surplus.



If you take in more money then you are paying out, that's a surplus... Sorry.  

Point was, Clinton had spending and taxing at the right levels. Then Bush put a war ona credit card while giving his rich buddies obscene tax breaks, and here we are.


----------



## WinterBorn (Sep 23, 2016)

JoeB131 said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Clinton did not post surpluses. The only way surpuses were claimed is by shuffling money around to make it look good. He "borrowed" from the Sicial Security coffers like it was free money. There may have been less debt in one specific area, but there was never a surplus.
> ...



At no time during Clinton's term was he taking in more than he spent.  He was BORROWING from Social Security rather than from the public.   So it looked good. He just changed who the gov't owed.


----------



## regent (Sep 23, 2016)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


America had 22 presidents between Jackson and FDR, and of the 22, 17 were Republicans or Whigs and the nation they handed FDR was vastly different than the one Jackson gave to Harrison.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 23, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> At no time during Clinton's term was he taking in more than he spent. He was BORROWING from Social Security rather than from the public. So it looked good. He just changed who the gov't owed.



Distinction without a difference.  Point was, the government took in more than it spent. This is a good thing.


----------



## WinterBorn (Sep 23, 2016)

JoeB131 said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > At no time during Clinton's term was he taking in more than he spent. He was BORROWING from Social Security rather than from the public. So it looked good. He just changed who the gov't owed.
> ...



No, it didn't.   Because the Social Security money has not been paid back.  So unless you repay that, there was still a deficit.    Perhaps you think robbing the SSI coffers is just more revenue for the gov't, but it is not.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 23, 2016)

So now the state is going to tell you that you must smile when they take your picture so that their unconstitutional facial recognition software can more easily identify you in public? Good grief do we desperately need to restore constitutional government...

NJ DMV says don't smile for the camera on driver's license


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 23, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> No, it didn't. Because the Social Security money has not been paid back. So unless you repay that, there was still a deficit. Perhaps you think robbing the SSI coffers is just more revenue for the gov't, but it is not.



Who says that it's going to get repaid? More than likely, it won't, anyway. But that shit started long before Clinton got there.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 23, 2016)

P@triot said:


> So now the state is going to tell you that you must smile when they take your picture so that their unconstitutional facial recognition software can more easily identify you in public? Good grief do we desperately need to restore constitutional government...



Naw, man, what we need are less sissies who think the Government is hiding under their beds. 

Here's the real tragedy of your life, Poodle. The government doesn't care what you do.


----------



## Grizz (Sep 23, 2016)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > So now the state is going to tell you that you must smile when they take your picture so that their unconstitutional facial recognition software can more easily identify you in public? Good grief do we desperately need to restore constitutional government...
> ...



They aren't hiding under anyone's bed. They are right out in the open taking American's by the balls and ripping their "Rights" away.


----------



## WinterBorn (Sep 23, 2016)

JoeB131 said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > No, it didn't. Because the Social Security money has not been paid back. So unless you repay that, there was still a deficit. Perhaps you think robbing the SSI coffers is just more revenue for the gov't, but it is not.
> ...



Of course it won't be repaid.    But by "borrowing" SS money, he was able to avoid borrowing public money.  

Look at the actual deficit numbers.   There was no surplus.


----------



## Bush92 (Sep 23, 2016)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide


The founders could not envision the savage culture that we now live in. They would be disgusted at what we have become.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 24, 2016)

Grizz said:


> They aren't hiding under anyone's bed. They are right out in the open taking American's by the balls and ripping their "Rights" away.



Right. Like your right to have a white male in the White House, correct?  

Get real. 



Bush92 said:


> The founders could not envision the savage culture that we now live in. They would be disgusted at what we have become.



These would be the same founders who raped their slaves and genocided the shit out of the Native Americans, and bled themselves when they got sick and occassionally put people on trial for witchcraft.... 

But we have the "Savage" culture?


----------



## P@triot (Oct 3, 2016)

This is a *great* first step towards restoring constitutional government...


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 3, 2016)

P@triot said:


> This is a *great* first step towards restoring constitutional government...



If we have a state convention, what would you like to see changed on our constitution?


----------



## P@triot (Oct 3, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > This is a *great* first step towards restoring constitutional government...
> ...


Everything that they proposed at the mock Article V convention a couple of weeks ago:

*The Convention delegates passed amendment proposals on the following six ideas: 

1. Requiring the states to approve any increase in the national debt

2. Term limits on Congress

3. Limiting federal overreach by returning the Commerce Clause to its original meaning

4. Limiting the power of federal regulations by giving an easy congressional override

5. Require a super majority for federal taxes and repeal the 16th Amendment

6. Give the states (by a 3/5ths vote) the power to abrogate any federal law, regulation or executive order*.

A Convention of the States is the Answer


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 3, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



And you don't think, given the propaganda machine we see, that there is a possibility that the 2nd Amendment would be removed?


----------



## P@triot (Oct 3, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


Nope. Not even a litte. Do people looking to curb the unconstitutional power of the federal government sound like the same people who would be looking to strip American's of their 2nd Amendment rights to you? I *guarantee* it won't happen.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 3, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



The people who want to curb the unconstitutional power of the federal gov't will not be the only people involved in a Convention of the States.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 3, 2016)

And as for #6 in your list.    Will this be any law or ruling?    For example, will the states be able to overrule the SCOTUS ruling concerning same sex marriage?


----------



## P@triot (Oct 3, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


But they will be the one's with all of the power. Currently 31 states are run by conservatives. Each state will get 1 vote (not matter how many delegates they send to represent their state).

Plus...come on...you know progressives. Do you think they are actually going to put in the work of an Article V convention when they believe in simply illegally and unconstitutionally banning guns are achieving their insanity through the Supreme Court? Of all of the things that should scare you regarding the loss of your 2nd Amendment rights, an Article V Convention is the *last* of them.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 3, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> And as for #6 in your list.    Will this be any law or ruling?    For example, will the states be able to overrule the SCOTUS ruling concerning same sex marriage?


Yep. It clearly states "*any* federal law, regulation, or executive order".


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 3, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Yes, I do believe progressives will turn out to help rewrite the constitution.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 3, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > And as for #6 in your list.    Will this be any law or ruling?    For example, will the states be able to overrule the SCOTUS ruling concerning same sex marriage?
> ...



Then any state that can come up with 3/5 of the votes can say we can bear arms only if we are members of a militia.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 3, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> Yes, I do believe progressives will turn out to help rewrite the constitution.


Well you happen to be really wrong on that. They will turn out to attempt to *stop* the Aritcle V convention. They love having a federal government with unfettered power. But they won't be taking the time to call their own when they find it easier to achieve their desires through unconstitutional means such as Supreme Court rulings, Executive Orders, and legislation in instances where those channels are not the legal authority for the subject in question.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 3, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


No they can't - because we have a Consitutional *right* to bear arms. You notice the Amendment does not say the power to override the Constitution. It says federal laws, regulations, and executive orders".


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 3, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



And the same sex marriage ruling was based on the US Constitution.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 3, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, I do believe progressives will turn out to help rewrite the constitution.
> ...



Their own?    You make it sound as though the convention you are talking about will not be open to all

The progressives got enough people out to elect a democrat president.   In fact, they have done that in 4 of the last 6 presidential elections.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> And as for #6 in your list.    Will this be any law or ruling?    For example, will the states be able to overrule the SCOTUS ruling concerning same sex marriage?


Yes. The states will be able to overrule the Supreme Court. That's the idea. The federal government simply doesn't have jurisdiction over marriage and have no authority to push that on the states. The states want their power back.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> And the same sex marriage ruling was based on the US Constitution.


No it wasn't. At all. Show me in the Constitution where it grants the federal government the power over marriage. The federal government was *delegated* 18 enumerated powers by the states and marriage was *not* one of them.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> The progressives got enough people out to elect a democrat president.   In fact, they have done that in 4 of the last 6 presidential elections.


Well that is quite a trick considering Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and George W. Bush were all Republicans. Three of the last five presidents were Republicans. So how does your math come up with four of the past six presidents were Democrats?


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> And you don't think, given the propaganda machine we see, that there is a possibility that the 2nd Amendment would be removed?


This addresses your concern about the 2nd Amendment:

PAT: So what do you say, Mark, to the people who say, “Well, what about a runaway convention? How do you safeguard against that?” Everybody is afraid they’re going to open up the Second Amendment and change that and take that away and all of that. How do you — how do you respond to that? 

MARK: Sure. Well, let me start at the backside, which is the ultimate safeguard the Founders put in. It takes 38 states, or three-quarters of states, to ratify anything that comes out of convention. That’s a super high bar. Right? Super, super majority. So when you put the math on its head, what it means is that it takes only 13 states to stop anything that those of us sitting here wouldn’t like. So I want you to think about that: One of the things I hear all the time from people who are against this — and it is a small minority, but a vocal minority of people against this.

PAT: They really are. 

MARK: They say, “We’re going to lose our Second Amendment. They’re going to take away our guns in this convention.” So I want you to imagine this: *Thirteen states can stop anything that comes out of convention*. That means, in our case, the 13 most conservative states. So here’s what you have to believe if you believe in this runaway with a stuff. You have to believe Texas, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, the Carolinas, Florida, Nebraska, the Dakotas, they’re going to vote to take away your guns. You have to believe that. I’ve been in 40 states in the last two years, most of them in the state legislatures — 

PAT: They’re not going to. 

MARK: — *those people are not going to vote for anything that would limit your liberty*. So the threshold is so high, it is impossible to pass anything that would limit — 

GLENN: So there’s two really high thresholds. Thirty-four states need to say, yes, we’ll go. And then — then they hash whatever it is out. Then it goes back, and 38 states have to say, “Yes, we’re going to do that.” 

MARK: That’s correct. 

GLENN: Holy cow. 

MARK: *Meaning it takes a mass majority of public opinion to get something out of convention and then to the states and then ratified*. And, remember, the way ratification works is important. I spent a lot of time in state legislatures. The things that they’re very best at is doing nothing. They’re experts at nothing.

In a nutshell WinterBorn, if that many people truly want to repeal the 2nd Amendment, it's going to happen no matter what. They will have voted so many anti-gun progressives to Washington and stacked the Supreme Court with so many progressive political activists that your guns will be long gone well before we get to this point. So they'll be gone _either_ way.

#NeverTrump #NeverHillary #NeverMind: A Convention of States Is the Answer


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)




----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)




----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)




----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)




----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)




----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 5, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > The progressives got enough people out to elect a democrat president.   In fact, they have done that in 4 of the last 6 presidential elections.
> ...



I didn't say 4 of the last 6 presidents were democrats.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 5, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > And as for #6 in your list.    Will this be any law or ruling?    For example, will the states be able to overrule the SCOTUS ruling concerning same sex marriage?
> ...



The SCOTUS did not rule on marriage, per se.   They ruled that excluding same sex couples was a violation of the 14th amendment.   In other words, a constitutional right to equal treatment.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


That's _exactly_ what you said...



WinterBorn said:


> The progressives got enough people out to elect a democrat president.   In fact, they have done that in 4 of the last 6 presidential elections.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 5, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Try again.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


But homosexuals were *never* denied any right. They could vote. They could carry a firearm. They could practice their religion. Hell, they were even allowed to marry. A homosexual man could marry any woman he wanted and a homosexual woman could marry any man she wanted.

That's not what the Supreme Court did at all. What they did was force all 50 states to accept homosexual marriage and they simply do not have that power.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


No need. It's there for everyone to see.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 5, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Ok, what I said was "In fact, they have done that in 4 of the last 6 presidential *ELECTIONS".   *That is certainly not say 4 of the last 6 presidents.    And my statement is accurate.   

Let me make it simpler.
The last 6 Presidential elections:
1) 1992 - Democrat elected
2) 1996 - Democrat elected
3) 2000 - Republican elected
4) 2004 - Republican elected
5) 2008 - Democrat elected
6) 2012 - Democrat elected


Next time read ALL the words before going off.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 5, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



They forced them to remove the bans on same sex marriage.   It is exactly what they are tasked with doing.  They rule on the constitutionality of laws.  Just like they struck down the anti-sodium laws.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


I didn't "go off". You're just cherry picking statistics. If you want to go that way, then conservatives have dominated the political landscape - winning 5 of the last 9 (Reagan 2x, Bush 1x, Bush 2x). You conveniently choose to stop at Clinton. How about 12 straight years of Reagan and H.W. Bush?


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


No it's not. They created *law* from the bench (which is 100% illegal). You know it. I know it. Progressives know it. There were no "bans" on gay marriage (and even if there had been, that is for the states decide - the federal government has no jurisdiction over that).


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 5, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Because my point was a rebuttal of your claim that liberals will not come out for the Convention.   Do I pointed out that they are capable of turning out to win elections, so dismissing them is ridiculous.   

But at least you finally read what I actually posted, instead of what you wanted to see.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 5, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



There is federal jurisdiction to insure equality under the law.   As I said, it was just like the sodomy laws being struck down.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


Your point doesn't hold up at all if you go back to Reagan. It only holds up when you conveniently stop where you need to stop to support your opinion.

And I'm not "dismissing" progressives. I simply recognize that they are far too lazy to achieve anything through constitutional means. They do it through illegal legislation and through the Supreme Court. So they are going to do what they are going to do anyway. The convention is not a threat to us at all from a progressive perspective. Hell, you should be far more worried about Hitlery and who she will appoint to the Supreme Court and thus backing this to limit their power.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 5, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


Yeah....and homosexuals had "equality". They were not denied anything. Including the right to marry. A homosexual man was allowed to marry any woman he wanted and vise versa. What the Supreme Court did was unconstitutionally create law from the bench and over step their authority. Marriage is not one of the federal governments 18 enumerated powers. Hell....show me where it even says that "equality under the law" is one of the 18 enumerated powers of the federal government. You can't. But you keep using that term. Apparently you've bought into the progressive propaganda hook, line, and sinker.

The Supreme Court's *only* responsibility is to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Not to create law from the bench or "interpret" what the Constitution says.


----------



## regent (Oct 5, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Would all states recognize a gay marriage licence issued by another state?


----------



## P@triot (Oct 6, 2016)

regent said:


> Would all states recognize a gay marriage licence issued by another state?


That would be up to each state to decide. Just like they do with conceal handgun licenses. I can't really imagine why they _wouldn't_ but it's their choice to make.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 6, 2016)

Now - more than _ever_ - it is critical that we restore constitutional government. It is also critical that we continue to develop the most secure encryption possible and deploy it across any and all forms of communications (emails, texts, faxes, phone calls, keystrokes, etc.).

Here’s the Company Who Fought for Our Privacy as Yahoo Sold Us Out to the NSA


----------



## regent (Oct 6, 2016)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Would all states recognize a gay marriage licence issued by another state?
> ...


So if a couple moved to state "a" they would be living in sin and in state "b" they would be regular folks.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 6, 2016)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


God forbid said couple actually takes the personal responsibility to inquire about the marriage license laws of state "a" before moving there - right? Nah...can't have that. Must have government think and act for you, uh?

Furthermore, God really doesn't care about man's law. If a couple was actually married then they would *not* be "living in sin" regardless of whether or not a state recognized their marriage.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 7, 2016)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Personal responsibility?    So the couple gets married, and then one of them gets transferred via work.  They are being responsible, hard working members of our society and nation.    They would have a choice of killing their career or giving up marital benefits and protections.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 7, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> Personal responsibility?    So the couple gets married, and then one of them gets transferred via work.  They are being responsible, hard working members of our society and nation.    They would have a *choice* of killing their career or giving up marital benefits and protections.


Yep. That's what America is all about - *choice*. You nailed it. They have the _choice_. They also had the _choice_ in their "career" to get it in writing before accepting a job that they could not be transferred unless they agreed to it (just like the *no trade clauses* that professional athletes will sometimes demand in their contracts).

Choice is a _beautiful_ thing WinterBorn.


----------



## Kosh (Oct 8, 2016)

If you want constitutional government then you need to remove government from a lot of things, like marriage, healthcare, welfare, food stamps, abortion, etc.

The defense of the US is constitutional, paying for the post office is constitutional, etc.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 8, 2016)

Kosh said:


> If you want constitutional government then you need to remove government from a lot of things, like marriage, healthcare, welfare, food stamps, abortion, etc.
> 
> The defense of the US is constitutional, paying for the post office is constitutional, etc.


Bingo!


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 8, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Personal responsibility?    So the couple gets married, and then one of them gets transferred via work.  They are being responsible, hard working members of our society and nation.    They would have a *choice* of killing their career or giving up marital benefits and protections.
> ...



Choice is a wonderful thing.   But then, you do not face giving up your marriage if you are transferred.   

And getting it in writing does not change anything.  If the company needs you somewhere, you go or you suffer the consequences.  

And to lose your marital benefits because people who are not effected by your marriage don't like your marriage, is simply ignorant.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 8, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> And getting it in writing does not change anything.  If the company needs you somewhere, you go or you suffer the consequences.


Oh bullshit...now you're just asking like a desperate progressive. A legal contract is legally _binding_. Having it in writing changes _everything_. They would be legally bound by it and their hands would be tied.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 8, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > And getting it in writing does not change anything.  If the company needs you somewhere, you go or you suffer the consequences.
> ...



I did not say they would not be legally bound.   But if the company needs you to transfer, and you don't, your career could be shot.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 8, 2016)

There should be no need gor


Kosh said:


> If you want constitutional government then you need to remove government from a lot of things, like marriage, healthcare, welfare, food stamps, abortion, etc.
> 
> The defense of the US is constitutional, paying for the post office is constitutional, etc.


 
There is no need for govt involvement in marriage.  Or in many other areas.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 8, 2016)

WinterBorn said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


Why? If they force you, they owe you financial reparations. If they don't force you, your career is just fine.

Furthermore - who cares? If your career is sooooooo important - then make the *choice* to go. If your family is more important to you - then make the *choice* to stay. What is the problem?


----------



## regent (Oct 8, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > Personal responsibility?    So the couple gets married, and then one of them gets transferred via work.  They are being responsible, hard working members of our society and nation.    They would have a *choice* of killing their career or giving up marital benefits and protections.
> ...


Is that what gays were asking for: choice to marry ?


----------



## P@triot (Oct 8, 2016)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > WinterBorn said:
> ...


They were *never* denied that "choice". Ever. What they were denied was government *acknowledging* their idea of a new form of marriage.


----------



## regent (Oct 8, 2016)

P@triot said:


> Kosh said:
> 
> 
> > If you want constitutional government then you need to remove government from a lot of things, like marriage, healthcare, welfare, food stamps, abortion, etc.
> ...


How about post roads? Veteran's benefits?


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 8, 2016)

P@triot said:


> WinterBorn said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



A company wants employees that do what is best for the company.   They will promote someone over you for the good of the company

How about straight marriages run the risk of being worthless with a job transfer?


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 8, 2016)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



They want to marry the person they love.   That is the key.   All the noise and bullshit about "destroying marriage" was craziness by nutcases.  It does no one any harm if 2 heterosexual marry or if 2 gays marry.


----------



## hazlnut (Oct 8, 2016)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide




If you believe this, you need professional help.


----------



## WinterBorn (Oct 8, 2016)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Kosh said:
> ...



I would say they must be funded.   Especially the veteran's benefits.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 8, 2016)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Kosh said:
> ...


The military _is_ the constitutional responsibility of the federal government. As far as "postal roads" - there is no such thing. There are only roads. None are dedicated to the U.S. Post Office. In addition, the U.S. Post Office existed and flourished for centuries before the first roads were ever built. Vehicles operate just fine on dirt and gravel. Trust me - I've done it.


----------



## regent (Oct 8, 2016)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Might read the Constitution and check on the roads built as "post roads."


----------



## bripat9643 (Oct 8, 2016)

Matthew said:


> Lol, nearly every constitutional professor in this country would disagree with you., You don't know shit about the constitution! The president has had executive power since washington as our government has three equal branches of government. What this means is the president also has some power.
> 
> You honestly think the president shouldn't have power? lol The federal government always had power and that is why we gave up on the original bs of everything being at the state level.
> 
> Your idea of constitutional government is one where the corporate sector runs everything without regulations or human rights. It is ugly and it is bs.


Wrong.  We "gave up" on state sovereignty because Lincoln invaded and destroyed the states that refused to give up that principle


----------



## P@triot (Oct 8, 2016)

bripat9643 said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Lol, nearly every constitutional professor in this country would disagree with you., You don't know shit about the constitution! The president has had executive power since washington as our government has three equal branches of government. What this means is the president also has some power.
> ...


Yes Bripat....little Matthew there really is that stupid. He has no idea what Executive Orders are or what they are actually for. The ultimate irony of course is that the state run education failed him so bad, he's not even educated enough to know how badly the state run education failed him. Thus, he continues to advocate for more government.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 8, 2016)

regent said:


> Might read the Constitution and check on the roads built as "post roads."


Then it _is_ the constitutional responsibility of the federal government. What's the problem?


----------



## regent (Oct 8, 2016)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Might read the Constitution and check on the roads built as "post roads."
> ...


It is sort of important that we get the comments on the Constitution correct, there might be children reading this.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 11, 2016)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


You still haven't mentioned why you brought it up. Can the children reading this assume at this point that you're just trying to be argumentative? That you have no point behind it?


----------



## P@triot (Oct 17, 2016)

Come on C_Clayton_Jones, tell us all again how we are currently operating under "constitutional government", you _tool_. Which part of the constitution permits the federal government to issue mass warrants without even knowing who is the target of the warrant? How could one have probable cause if they can't even provide the issuing judge names, devices, etc.?!? 

In the court document filed earlier this year, federal prosecutors in California argued that a warrant for a mass finger-unlocking was constitutionally sound even though “the government does not know ahead of time the identity of every digital device or every fingerprint (or indeed, every other piece of evidence) that it will find in the search” because “it has demonstrated probable cause that evidence may exist at the search location.”

“They want the ability to get a warrant on the assumption that they will learn more after they have a warrant,” Medvin told Forbes. “This would be an unbelievably audacious abuse of power if it were permitted.”

Feds Claim They Can Enter a House and Demand Fingerprints to Unlock Everyone's Phones


----------



## Londoner (Oct 17, 2016)

P@triot said:


> Come on C_Clayton_Jones, tell us all again how we are currently operating under "constitutional government", you _tool_. Which part of the constitution permits the federal government to issue mass warrants without even knowing who is the target of the warrant? How could one have probable cause if they can't even provide the issuing judge names, devices, etc.?!?
> 
> In the court document filed earlier this year, federal prosecutors in California argued that a warrant for a mass finger-unlocking was constitutionally sound even though “the government does not know ahead of time the identity of every digital device or every fingerprint (or indeed, every other piece of evidence) that it will find in the search” because “it has demonstrated probable cause that evidence may exist at the search location.”
> 
> ...



Why don't you ever complain about restoring Constitutional Government when your side controls the White House?

Where were you when Reagan sold weapons to Iran so he could launder money and fund an illegal war in Latin America?

Where were you during Bush's first foray into Wire Tapping, which was deemed unconstitutional.

If you NEVER hold your side accountable, than people will see you are pimping the Constitution as a partisan weapon. 

Have enough respect for the Constitution to hold your side accountable, and then we will trust that you know what you're talking about. Otherwise you seem like a pure partisan who cares more about your political party than the Constitution. 

Have the courage to respect the Constitution over dear leader.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 21, 2016)

Londoner said:


> Why don't you ever complain about restoring Constitutional Government when your side controls the White House?


I do.


Londoner said:


> Where were you during Bush's first foray into Wire Tapping, which was deemed unconstitutional.


I vehemently opposed it then and I vehemently oppose it now.


Londoner said:


> If you NEVER hold your side accountable, than people will see you are pimping the Constitution as a partisan weapon.


Agreed.


Londoner said:


> Have enough respect for the Constitution to hold your side accountable, and then we will trust that you know what you're talking about. Otherwise you seem like a pure partisan who cares more about your political party than the Constitution. Have the courage to respect the Constitution over dear leader.


Agreed _again_. Clearly you have no idea who you're talking to.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 21, 2016)




----------



## P@triot (Oct 24, 2016)




----------



## P@triot (Jan 5, 2017)

We must restore constitutional government...

The NSA might be spying on you from this creepy NYC skyscraper


----------



## P@triot (Jan 22, 2017)

This is a good start if President Trump follows through...

Boom: Trump eyes 10% spending cuts, 20% slash of federal workers


----------



## P@triot (Feb 2, 2017)

Even Joe “all I am saying is give Trump a chance” Manchin doesn’t want a school voucher activist who has never attended — nor sent her children to — a public school *overseeing American education*.

Democrats Need to Flip One More Republican to Block Betsy DeVos

Wait...._what_?!? Why is the federal government "overseeing American education" when no such power exists for them to do so? Yet another example of unconstitutional government.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 2, 2017)

Londoner said:


> Why don't you ever complain about restoring Constitutional Government when your side controls the White House?


For the record - I'm doing it right now Londoner. Post #299. Republicans own the White House, the House, and the Senate. And I'm complaining about unconstitutional government. Just as I have in the past. Just as I will again in the future.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 5, 2017)

We must restore constitutional government...

Cops May Get Location Data Without Warrants. That Has to End


----------



## P@triot (Feb 6, 2017)

Here is a "radical" idea - how about we restore constitutional government and simply stop funding for all cities - whether they comply with federal law or not?

Sanctuary Cities Receive Billions in Federal Funds


----------



## P@triot (Feb 9, 2017)

What a *great* step in restoring constitutional government!

Bill introduced to terminate the Department of Education, bringing funding back to the states


----------



## kaz (Feb 9, 2017)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...



The Founders would be shocked and appauled at what the Federal government does today.  They wouldn't recognize the country as one supposedly run by their principles.  Imagine the Federal government sending checks of other people's money to people, they couldn't conceve that is their document


----------



## P@triot (Feb 23, 2017)

Me must restore constitutional government...

Feds Paid $1 Billion in Social Security Benefits to Individuals Without a SSN


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Feb 23, 2017)

kaz said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > “We must restore constitutional government”
> ...



They would line up half our leadership and have them shot.  The Democrat half, mostly.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 8, 2017)

We must restore constitutional government. This is an outrageous statement by an F.B.I. Director. We have a constitutional *right* to absolute privacy in America.

"There is no such thing as absolute privacy in America; there is no place outside of judicial reach,"

James Comey: 'There is no such thing as absolute privacy in America' - CNNPolitics.com


----------



## P@triot (Mar 17, 2017)

I love how left-wing legislators believe that as long as they convince people to vote on something, that magically makes it "legal" and ok.


> But in his first inaugural address, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt called for constitutional change. He claimed the Great Depression should be treated as an “emergency of war,” requiring a “temporary departure from the normal balance of public procedure.”


Typcial of the left-wing facists (especially _this_ one). Everything is an "emergency" requires "more power". But it gets worse...


> But it wasn’t until Roosevelt died and President Harry Truman came to power that the government adopted a more systematic and codified framework that set the ground rules for America’s burgeoning administrative state. The cornerstone of this framework was the Administrative Procedures Act.
> 
> Under the Administrative Procedures Act, Congress could delegate broad lawmaking powers to executive branch agencies.



That is an _outrageous_ violation of the U.S. Constitution. Legislation is completely and totally irrelevant in this case. The only way to change the structure of power outlined in the U.S. Constitution is to legally *amend* the U.S. Constitution. This is as idiotic as passing legislation eliminating the Supreme Court. Congress *cannot* do that. It doesn't work that way.

Thankfully the Republicans are in charge of everything now. Let's hope they do the right thing and start restoring constitutional government.

Trump’s Historic Chance to Dismantle the Administrative State


----------



## regent (Mar 17, 2017)

People have been complaining about Constitutional government since the second president of the United States made it illegal to criticize presidents and other government officials. One thing is certain, however, we will continue the complaining.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 18, 2017)

regent said:


> People have been complaining about Constitutional government since the second president of the United States made it illegal to criticize presidents and other government officials. One thing is certain, however, we will continue the complaining.


If we would just obey the it - there wouldn't be _any_ complaining.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Mar 18, 2017)

Asshole, we already have constitutional government. 


The federal government can and must invest and govern the lands of this country! Unlike Trumps war on the media and the first amendment it is completely constitutional.

Goddamn you idiots are stupid...Please do me a favor and play in high way...Please.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Mar 18, 2017)

regent said:


> People have been complaining about Constitutional government since the second president of the United States made it illegal to criticize presidents and other government officials. One thing is certain, however, we will continue the complaining.




Our constitution is extremely broad...That is the main part of it as it can move with the times.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 18, 2017)

Matthew said:


> Asshole, we already have constitutional government.


Asshole....*no*....we don't. The examples are endless. One of hundreds of thousands is Obamacare mandating that citizens purchase health insurance. There is *no* constitutional power to force citizens to purchase a good or service.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 18, 2017)

Matthew said:


> The federal government can and must invest and govern the lands of this country!


The federal government has absolutely no authority to "invest" in _anything_ you nitwit. No governing is constitutionally left to the states (outside of the 18 enumerated powers *delegated* to them by the states). Which is why states have *Governors*, you nitwit, and the federal government doesn't.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 18, 2017)

Matthew said:


> Goddamn you idiots are stupid...Please do me a favor and play in high way...Please.


Says the nitwit who has *never* read the U.S. Constitution (or probably anything else for that matter).

By the way my friend - you need to get help for your alcoholism. At night time, your posts get more belligerent and less lucid. Those are sure signs of alcoholism.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 18, 2017)

Matthew said:


> Our constitution is extremely broad...


It's three pages you nitwit. There is nothing "broad" about it. 


Matthew said:


> That is the main part of it as it can move with the times.


No, really, it can't. It can't move at all. Any more than a speed limit can move or a law about rape can move. In all cases with law - only a legal act of legislation can alter an existing law. In the case of the U.S. Constitution, that would be an amendment.

Ask an adult to explain it to you.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 28, 2017)

A big step towards restoring the U.S. Constitution...


> President Trump on Wednesday ordered U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos to study how the federal government has supported "top-down mandates" that rob autonomy from state and local education authorities, taking aim at Obama-era regulations that Republicans have long sought to eliminate.
> 
> In an executive order, Trump granted DeVos authority to get rid of K-12 education regulations that don't comport with federal law. A top U.S. Education Department official admitted, however, that DeVos already has this authority.


Trump orders DeVos to get rid of 'overreaching mandates' in schools


----------



## koshergrl (Apr 28, 2017)

P@triot said:


> A big step towards restoring the U.S. Constitution...
> 
> 
> > President Trump on Wednesday ordered U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos to study how the federal government has supported "top-down mandates" that rob autonomy from state and local education authorities, taking aim at Obama-era regulations that Republicans have long sought to eliminate.
> ...


I kept my daughter home today because of the retarded civil war model that they TAKE THE KIDS OUT OF THEIR OTHER CLASSES to participate in. 

They sneaked the Immigration Day one by on me..I didn't find out until after the fact. It was a *model* on election day that taught the kids how evil it is to vet immigrants. It's RACIST! And in case you didn't fully understand that, they *assigned* biases to the kids, so the could internalize what it's like to be a racist. 

Today it's the CIVIL WAR day thing. They take the kids out of their classes to impress upon them that it's RACIST! to maintain that the feds have no constitutional authority over the states except as pertains to national security and safety. 

While totally ignoring the fact that for a hundred years CHRISTIANS had been lobbying for the end of slavery and the feds didn't give a shit. 

The feds didn't give a shit until COTTON and TOBACCO and SUGAR became huge. 

Anyway, I am sure the series is part of a federal grant that our school has latched onto and which has been inserted in the slots where history and geography used to be.


----------



## emilynghiem (Apr 28, 2017)

Matthew said:


> Asshole, we already have constitutional government.
> 
> 
> The federal government can and must invest and govern the lands of this country! Unlike Trumps war on the media and the first amendment it is completely constitutional.
> ...



Great Matthew! I'm confident if we can agree on THIS we can SUCCEED!
Wonderful, if we can get BOTH major parties and media to police and correct themselves as much as they preach and protest the violations and abuses of opponents, we d have it made!!

How do we help all parties to check balance and correct the grievances being put forth left and right? Lots of yelling back and forth, lots of pots and kettles calling each other out. But where is the work to Correct these abuses? And pay back Taxpayers who've been accruing the costs and debts while these wrongs get dumped on us to pay for???

Did you get my other post, about how Democrats are equally guilty of pushing Beliefs through govt and punishing people for not complying where said policies Violate citizens beliefs . that's not Constitutional either, to abuse govt to discriminate and regulate by CREED. But Democrats have done this including Obama and Pelosi, enforcing laws that violate Constitutional beliefs and rights of citizens our laws are supposed to include protect and respect Equally.

We can fix this. I'm with you, Matthew, as a progressive Green Democrat who believes in Constitutional equal inclusion of beliefs and consensus on policies that respects consent of the governed in all areas of law - by organizing people and resources by party to either collaborate by free choice or agree to separate funding and programs instead of imposing on each other. Www.ethics-commission.net


----------



## Moonglow (Apr 28, 2017)

P@triot said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > Asshole, we already have constitutional government.
> ...


The cops have no problem invalidating the 4th amendment with their greed..


----------



## P@triot (Apr 29, 2017)

Matthew said:


> That is the main part of it as it can move with the times.


No..._really_....it *can't*. If it could "move with the times" then there would have been no need for the founders to place an amendment process in it.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 29, 2017)

Matthew said:


> Asshole, we already have constitutional government.


Really? We do? So it is "constitutional" in your mind for the NSA to spy on the American people - intercepting every single email, text, web search, phone call, etc.?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Apr 29, 2017)

P@triot said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > That is the main part of it as it can move with the times.
> ...


Yes . . . really . . . it can and does.  We have Art III and SCOTUS and the amendment process.


----------



## regent (Apr 29, 2017)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Post roads were one of the first arguments  that involved the Constitutional powers of the new government.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 29, 2017)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


Ok. And? Is there _anyone_ complaining about the federal government funding roads strictly utilized by the Post Office?


----------



## regent (Apr 29, 2017)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


No, we have moved on to new subjects, but always continue the old post-road arguments with the  new subjects.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 28, 2017)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


People who can actually read and understand the U.S. Constitution disagree with you, son:

US surveillance has 'expanded' under Obama, says Bush's NSA director


----------



## P@triot (Jul 28, 2017)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


People who can actually read and understand the U.S. Constitution vehemently disagree with you, son:

Newly declassified memos detail extent of improper Obama-era NSA spying


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 28, 2017)

P@triot said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.
> ...


 
Dear P@triot 
cc: C_Clayton_Jones 

What's interfering with understanding the spirit of the Constitution is a BIAS IN BELIEF.

liberals who believe that govt exists to establish the collective will of the people are not going to see the Constitution the same way, as people who believe rights/freedoms exist INHERENTLY by human nature (as created by God) and our Constitutional laws are DIFFERENT in that they are used to LIMIT and CHECK the trend of collective govt toward taking rights, power and control over decisions involving our liberty and labor AWAY from the people.

These are two separated schools of thought. As different as Atheists and secularists think compared with Christians and Theists.

it's not a matter of intelligence, but a matter of willingness to recognize the equal and opposite beliefs of the other school of thought as VALID.

When both sides seek to INVALIDATE overrule DENY and DISMISS the other school, that blockage and bias overrides all intelligent discussion and interaction.

It's a deep rooted religious and political belief that biases how we all look at and interpret laws and means of justice.  We approach it two different ways, similar to how secularists use science to establish knowledge and theists understand truth as faith based and Christians rely on agreement in spirit to establish truth and justice, since we know human perception is relative.

liberal secularists want to use Govt to establish secular truth and laws collectively. That's fine, but we have to AGREE, not impose our beliefs on others then attack and negate their beliefs which are supposed to be treated equally  under law.

Govt should be NEUTRAL.

And right now, instead of NEUTRALIZING conflicts, the left is overcompensating for past right-wing swings by swinging too far left, thinking that's a just correction. But instead, it's more like two wrongs cancelling each other, and not making things right, but both being equally wrong for the same reason: both are unconstitutionally imposing their own beliefs on and against the other side.  So that's not fixing things, but causing equal and opposite backlash of right against left.

We need to get back to NEUTRAL.
Well both sides think they are the neutral default. If they don't agree, that shows they aren't being fully neutral and universal.  The right way would equally include all sides' beliefs, not favor one over the other.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 28, 2017)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


People who can actually read and understand the U.S. Constitution vehemently disagree with you, son:

NSA Prism program taps in to user data of Apple, Google and others


----------



## P@triot (Jul 31, 2017)

*Attorney General Jeff Sessions: Insurer Payments Unconstitutional*

Gee...I've only been saying this for the past two decades. Social Security, Weflare, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, etc. is all 100% unconstitutional. It's an indisputable reality. Not only are none of those things one of the federal government's 18 enumerated powers, but taking the fruits of my labor against my will and handing them over to someone else is slavery - an act outlawed by the 13th Amendment.

Attorney General Jeff Sessions: Insurer payments unconstitutional


----------



## NYcarbineer (Jul 31, 2017)

You know what constitutional government is?

It's government that hasn't been ruled unconstitutional.


----------



## regent (Jul 31, 2017)

P@triot said:


> *Attorney General Jeff Sessions: Insurer Payments Unconstitutional*
> 
> Gee...I've only been saying this for the past two decades. Social Security, Weflare, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, etc. is all 100% unconstitutional. It's an indisputable reality. Not only are none of those things one of the federal government's 18 enumerated powers, but taking the fruits of my labor against my will and handing them over to someone else is slavery - an act outlawed by the 13th Amendment.
> 
> Attorney General Jeff Sessions: Insurer payments unconstitutional


Take it to Court


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

regent said:


> Take it to Court


That's what ultimately will happen. Unfortunately, you seem to think that what 9 unelected people say dictates what the U.S. Constitution says.

I don't need the Supreme Court to tell me that all of this and a whole lot more is unconstitutional. I can read.


----------



## jillian (Aug 1, 2017)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide



you a)n don't know what a constitutional government is, little boy; and
b) you hate the parts of the constitution you do know; ond c)n anyone who believed in the constitution would be appealed by the orange sociopath.

oh...and idiota.... all of those things have been upheld by the Supreme Court which makes them per se constitutional. but I guess we should listen to a moron on a message board like you instead.

*pats the wing nut on the head and sends him on his way*


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

jillian said:


> *you a)n* don't know what a constitutional government is, little boy; and
> b) you hate the parts of the constitution *you do know; ond c)n* anyone who believed in the constitution would be appealed by the orange sociopath.
> 
> oh...and idiota.... all of those things have been upheld by the Supreme Court which makes them per se constitutional*. b*ut I guess we should listen to a moron on a message board like you instead.
> ...


I hope you file motions with more clarity and better grammar than you post on message boards... 

Sweetie - I have literally forgotten more about the U.S. Constitution than you and every single one of your left-wing, constitution-hating pals have _ever_ known. I would be happy to teach it to you, if you'd like. Let me know.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

jillian said:


> all of those things have been upheld by the Supreme Court which makes them per se constitutional. but I guess we should listen to a moron on a message board like you instead.


If "all of those things" were constitutional, why did the government attempt to hide them? Oops...

By the way sweetie, just because radical wing-nuts like Ruth Bader Ginsburg made their way onto the Supreme Court and pushed their political agenda instead of upholding the U.S. Constitution per their oath, doesn't make something "constitutional". It just means that at least 5 unelected individuals with a political agenda rubber-stamped the agenda of those that appointed them.

What makes something constitutional is if it is permitted by the U.S. Constitution. Which is only like 3 pages. You should try reading it sometime (or call me - I'll read it to you).


----------



## BULLDOG (Aug 1, 2017)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Take it to Court
> ...



Too bad that the people who wrote the constitution didn't think like you do. They set up the Supreme Court to do exactly that. It's their job to determine what the constitution says. What other parts of the constitution do you hate?


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

BULLDOG said:


> They set up the Supreme Court to do exactly that. It's their job to determine what the constitution says.


Really BULLDOG? *Please cite the article and section of the U.S. Constitution* that tasks the Supreme Court with (and I quote) "determining what the constitution says". Where in the hell did they put in the U.S. Constitution that the Supreme Court was "set up to do exactly that"?

Don't worry _stupid_ - I'll wait.


----------



## BULLDOG (Aug 1, 2017)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > They set up the Supreme Court to do exactly that. It's their job to determine what the constitution says.
> ...



I'm not going to play that silly game with you. If you don't agree that the Supreme Court is the ultimate interpreter of the law under the constitution, you are simply wrong, and I have no desire to try to convince a RWNJ of facts that you have already chosen to ignore.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

BULLDOG said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Ahahahahhahaha! You just got bent over, you dumb tool. You made an outrageous accusation which was *100% false*, BULLDOG. And when called out on it, you couldn't deliver and you didn't have the humility to admit you *lied*.

The Supreme Court was *not* set up to decide what the U.S. Constitution said.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

BULLDOG said:


> I'm not going to play that silly game with you.


The slogan of lying losers everywhere. He made an outrageous claim and he can't back it up. BULLDOG is more bullshit than anything. He doesn't have a clue about the U.S. Constitution and that was just proven.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

BULLDOG said:


> If you don't agree that the Supreme Court is the ultimate interpreter of the law under the constitution


I don't agree, _stupid_. And the U.S. Constitution proves I'm 100% correct. You're a typical uneducated left-wing slob who believes the bullshit version of America spoonfed to him by idiot progressives of past generations.


----------



## BULLDOG (Aug 1, 2017)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



What does interpret mean? OK. I'll play a minute or two. Why do we have a Supreme Court?


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

NYcarbineer said:


> You know what constitutional government is?
> 
> It's government that hasn't been ruled unconstitutional.


You know what pure, unadulterated, idiocy is? It's your post right there.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

BULLDOG said:


> What does interpret mean? OK. I'll play a minute or two. Why do we have a Supreme Court?


I'll _gladly_ answer that - as soon as you admit that there is no article and section of the U.S. Constitution which establishes the U.S. Supreme Court as the body to decide what the U.S. Constitution says.

Do you even understand how idiotic that is? Why would the founders create a legal document and in it, establish a body to determine what the legal document they were creating said?!? If there was any ambiguity in the document - they would have edited it during the creation! Not left it ambiguous and then use it to create a body to decide later what it meant.

God Almighty, do progressives ever hear themselves speak?


----------



## BULLDOG (Aug 1, 2017)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > What does interpret mean? OK. I'll play a minute or two. Why do we have a Supreme Court?
> ...



It might not be worded exactly as you are demanding, but the obligation and right to interpret our laws has been given to the Supreme Court since the constitution was signed. As I said before, if you choose to not believe that, then stay in your ignorance. Not my job to try to convince a RWNJ of anything.


----------



## regent (Aug 1, 2017)

It's true there is nothing in the Constitution about the Court deciding Constitutional issues so the Court simply declared it indeed had that power in Marbury, America has accepted that Court decision and the Court now decides. It was assumed, however, by most, to be what the framers had in mind and today it is rarely questioned. .


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

BULLDOG said:


> Not my job to try to convince a RWNJ of anything.


Spoken like a true LWNJ caught in a *lie*...


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

regent said:


> *It's true there is nothing in the Constitution about the Court deciding Constitutional issues* so the Court simply declared it indeed had that power in Marbury, America has accepted that Court decision and the Court now decides. It was assumed, however, by most, to be what the framers had in mind and today it is rarely questioned. .


At least you said one thing accurate. Maybe you could be a mentor for BULLDOG? Maybe ease him into reality? You know - since 90% of what you say is inaccurate - maybe that 10% is a good start for BD?


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

regent said:


> It's true there is nothing in the Constitution about the Court deciding Constitutional issues so the Court simply declared it indeed had that power in Marbury...


That's not exactly what Marbury vs. Madison did. That's the LWNJ revised history version.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

BULLDOG said:


> the obligation and right to interpret our laws has been given to the Supreme Court since the constitution was signed.


Ok...so just tell the class what article and section gave the U.S. Supreme Court that "obligation", BULLDOG.


Like I said...I'll wait...


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2017)

regent said:


> It's true there is nothing in the Constitution about the Court deciding Constitutional issues so the Court simply declared it indeed had that power in Marbury, America has accepted that Court decision and the Court now decides.


"The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse." - James Madison


----------



## regent (Aug 2, 2017)

S.J. said:


> Our government violates the Constitution routinely at every level.  Sure, a lot of what they do can be twisted into being "Constitutional" but they clearly DO violate the original intent that our founders laid out, and they do it often.  It's just that over the years, those who have sought to subvert it have found ways to chip away at it, change people's minds about what things mean, convince people that it's supposed to be "flexible" and applicable to "the times".  They create crises to exploit and then use fear to get the people to give up a little of their freedom voluntarily.
> The founders gave us the tools we need to stop it but we loaned those tools out to the enemy and now the enemy is using them to enslave us all, little by little.  And we'll never get them back.


Or as Justice Marshall said in 1819, "But the question respecting the extent of the powers actually granted is perpetually arising, and will continue to arise as long as our system shall exist."


----------



## P@triot (Aug 2, 2017)

regent said:


> Or as Justice Marshall said in 1819, "But the question respecting the extent of the powers actually granted is perpetually arising, and will continue to arise as long as our system shall exist."


Only by anti-Americans left-wing facists who refuse to accept the constraints placed on power by the U.S. Constitution.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (Aug 2, 2017)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide


How? It didn't work for more than five minutes the first time so why would it work now?


----------



## regent (Aug 2, 2017)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Or as Justice Marshall said in 1819, "But the question respecting the extent of the powers actually granted is perpetually arising, and will continue to arise as long as our system shall exist."
> ...


Can you name the biggie constraint that is not acceptable?


----------



## P@triot (Aug 12, 2017)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


What constraint isn't to the left? They loathe the _entire_ document. Day in and day out, American's have to fight for their basic rights already guaranteed to them by the U.S. Constitution because you fascist progressives can't accept liberty.

Every day you attempt to restrict our 1st Amendment rights (speech, press, _and_ religion). You've stripped us of 75% of our 2nd Amendment rights. You've stripped us of 100% of our 4th Amendment rights (thanks to Barack Insane Obama drastically expanding the Patriot Act after promising to shut it down). And nothing pisses you people off like the limitations of power on the Oval Office when when of your own is sitting in it.


----------



## regent (Aug 12, 2017)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


It was the conservative Federalist party that took away our first amendment rights with  president Adams, and it meant the end of that conservative party. On the death of that party the period following with no conservative party  has gone down in history as the Era of Good Feelings.


P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Or as Justice Marshall said in 1819, "But the question respecting the extent of the powers actually granted is perpetually arising, and will continue to arise as long as our system shall exist."
> ...


----------



## regent (Aug 12, 2017)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > It's true there is nothing in the Constitution about the Court deciding Constitutional issues so the Court simply declared it indeed had that power in Marbury, America has accepted that Court decision and the Court now decides.
> ...


Yep liberals were against the Marbury decision, but it was Jefferson that fought it tooth and nail.  Many of the judges were appointed by Adams after Jefferson had been elected but had not taken office.


P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > People have been complaining about Constitutional government since the second president of the United States made it illegal to criticize presidents and other government officials. One thing is certain, however, we will continue the complaining.
> ...


Why do  you think the Articles were dropped? It wasn't because people disobeyed them, they didn't work.


----------



## hazlnut (Aug 12, 2017)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide




So when the Senate GOPs rewrote the Constitution on the fly last year, refusing to hold hearings and vote when the President named a justice to fill Scalia's seat -- you must have been really upset.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 12, 2017)

regent said:


> Why do  you think the Articles were dropped? It wasn't because people disobeyed them, they didn't work.


What does that have to do with the price of rice in China? You're right about one thing tough - they didn't just disobey them. They legally created the U.S. Constitution.


----------



## Kevin_Kennedy (Aug 14, 2017)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Why do  you think the Articles were dropped? It wasn't because people disobeyed them, they didn't work.
> ...


Actually they didn't. They had no mandate to scrap the Articles of Confederation and compose a new constitution.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 2, 2017)

*President Trump* continues to implement policy which saves the American tax payer a fortune, reduces the size and scope of unconstitutional federal government, and eliminates idiotic and failed left-wing policy.

Former Trump immigration advisor tells harsh truth about DACA


----------



## P@triot (Sep 3, 2017)

We *must* restore constitutional government. This is unacceptable...

Utah officer who brutally arrested nurse for complying with law just got a huge reality check


----------



## P@triot (Sep 3, 2017)

Absolutely outrageous...


> The Times notes that the 50’s-era law was passed after Harry Truman struggled for income after leaving the White House.


I'm sorry Harry - if you "struggled for income" after leaving the White House then your stupid ass should have gotten a job like every other American. Working the gas pump was not beneath you. Typical lazy, greedy Democrat.

Obama’s 2018 budget requests will make him most expensive ex-president on taxpayer dime — Here’s why


----------



## regent (Sep 3, 2017)

P@triot said:


> We *must* restore constitutional government. This is unacceptable...
> 
> Utah officer who brutally arrested nurse for complying with law just got a huge reality check


I wonder how conservatives feel about the incident?


----------



## P@triot (Sep 3, 2017)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > We *must* restore constitutional government. This is unacceptable...
> ...


They feel that we *must* restore constitutional government.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 16, 2017)

Absolutely unacceptable...


> The Constitution—the one taught to students in civics classes—doesn't really exist anymore. Nowadays, American government follows a process that barely resembles the basic principles established in our fundamental law.


Breaking the law is a criminal act. Every single representative who has violated the U.S. Constitution should be prosecuted.

The Mythical Constitution


----------



## P@triot (Sep 17, 2017)

A grim reminder on this Constitution Day that the United States federal government has completely eliminated the 4th Amendment without the permission of the American people...


----------



## P@triot (Oct 14, 2017)

This is a good start to restoring constitutional government...


> This bill would not only protect taxpayers, but would also *prohibit government intervention* that enables industry dependence on subsidies and empowers Washington to direct the flow of investments.


The U.S. Constitution already prohibits federal government intervention. What a shame that we need a law because progressives are violating the U.S. Constitution.

New Bill Would Stop Energy Department From Risking Taxpayer Money


----------



## dblack (Oct 14, 2017)

P@triot said:


> This is a good start to restoring constitutional government...
> 
> 
> > This bill would not only protect taxpayers, but would also *prohibit government intervention* that enables industry dependence on subsidies and empowers Washington to direct the flow of investments.
> ...



We need an amendment that explicitly protects free trade, and prevents government, at any level, from using its taxation power to manipulate the economy.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 14, 2017)

This is how we address educational needs - through the private sector. The federal government has no damn business being involved. If tech companies can't find the skillsets they need, then the onus is on _them_ to train _their_ workforce. It is not the job of the federal government to incur the cost for them. Ironic that progressive demand the federal government incur that cost while whining 24x7 about "corporate welfare". Just more indisputable proof that the left can't figure out which way is up, what they want, or how to avoid contradicting their own positions.

Google commits $1 billion in grants to train U.S. workers for high-tech jobs


----------



## initforme (Oct 14, 2017)

So we are going to take some redneck from a trailer court south of the mason Dixon line and make him a high tech worker?  Surely you best.  You are correct though...helping companies is not something the govt should do.   If the company folds up...good...no loss.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 17, 2017)

President Trump continues to do an astounding job restoring constitutional government...


> President Trump has kicked the immigration ball back to Congress where the constitution says it belongs
> 
> He has also scrapped the Obamacare birth control mandate that penalized Christians and others.
> 
> Last, but certainly not least, President Trump ended the Obamacare subsidies for insurance companies.


President Trump Has Done Some Real Good Lately | The Resurgent


----------



## P@triot (Oct 17, 2017)

initforme said:


> So we are going to take some redneck from a trailer court south of the mason Dixon line and make him a high tech worker?  Surely you best.  You are correct though...helping companies is not something the govt should do.   If the company folds up...good...no loss.


Wow...but you’re not an ignorant bigot or anything.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 14, 2017)

"Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." -Thomas Jefferson


----------



## regent (Dec 14, 2017)

P@triot said:


> "Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." -Thomas Jefferson


That is why Jefferson fought the conservative Sedition Act and apparently that was the end of America's first conservative party, the Federalists.  With the failure of that conservative party,  America entered into "The Era of Good Feelings."


----------



## ScienceRocks (Dec 14, 2017)

restore the stone age.

This is fucking dumb. Sorry, but only savages would want to live in the 18th century and give up all of our workers and consumer protections.

FUCK YOU OP!  Dumb idiot


----------



## Bush92 (Dec 14, 2017)

P@triot said:


> "Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." -Thomas Jefferson


What does your post have to do with net neutrality? CNN, MSNBC, _NY Times, Washington Post_ and feast of MSM are just propaganda wing of Democrat Party.


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 14, 2017)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > "Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter." -Thomas Jefferson
> ...



What was "conservative" about them?  It appears they were the party of big government.  They were the liberal party, in other words.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 15, 2017)

Bush92's statement makes no sense and has no evidence.


----------



## regent (Dec 15, 2017)

bripat9643 said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


I would suggest some reading, either history or some political ideology. Ever wonder why Hamilton was considered a conservative?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 15, 2017)

Hamilton was a big government conservative.


----------



## ScienceRocks (Dec 15, 2017)

JakeStarkey said:


> Hamilton was a big government conservative.




Many of our founders wanted big government  Look at Adams that played a very large part in our nations history.

Washington also appointed Hamilton as the first treasure sectary. 

Funny how this idea of no government doesn't even stand the test of our founders! In fact our founders "created" the current constitution because the articles didn't work because the federal government didn't have enough power. Conservatives are fucking idiots.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Dec 15, 2017)

ScienceRocks said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Hamilton was a big government conservative.
> ...



It's Bill of Rights Day!  The Bill of Rights keeps the government SMALL.  What we currently have is an aberration.


----------



## sealybobo (Dec 15, 2017)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide


Then let the mueller investigation continue


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 15, 2017)

The Mueller investigation secures American civil liberties.


----------



## ErikViking (Dec 15, 2017)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide



The government wrote the constitution. You decide who is to govern. It’s called election.

It’s your responsibility to put the right people to govern, and then - the magic - they work for you. Grow the fuck up.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 15, 2017)

sealybobo said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> ...


I'm sorry - are you somehow under the impression that I am halting the "Mueller Investigation"? Are you under the impression I even have the power to do that if I wanted to?

By the way - where was your "let the investigation continue" spirit while Barack Insane Obama was in office?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 15, 2017)

*P@triot, there will no pardon for Flynn or anyone else by Trump.*

*Ryan told him that impeachment would be the outcome if the President did anything of the sort.*


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Dec 15, 2017)

JakeStarkey said:


> *P@triot, there will no pardon for Flynn or anyone else by Trump.*
> 
> *Ryan told him that impeachment would be the outcome if the President did anything of the sort.*



Doubtful that Ryan told him that.  If Trump acts within his constitutional authority, there will be no impeachment.

Don't be goofy.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 15, 2017)

Doubt all you want, which changes nothing.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 15, 2017)

Mueller had Flynn and others waive their rights as part of the deal.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Dec 15, 2017)

JakeStarkey said:


> Doubt all you want, which changes nothing.



Neither will your supercilious hallucinations.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 15, 2017)

Trump cannot escape from Mueller.  Poor Billy, the end is coming.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Dec 15, 2017)

JakeStarkey said:


> Trump cannot escape from Mueller.



Au contraire, it appears the hunter may soon become the hunted.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 15, 2017)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Trump cannot escape from Mueller.
> ...


That is Billy deulsions time.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Dec 15, 2017)

JakeStarkey said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



As always, time will tell, eh?


----------



## regent (Dec 16, 2017)

One of these days the Republican party might have to realize that if they do not impeach Trump, it may very difficult for their party to recover from Trump. A war might be Trump's  best bet. Not only would America be great again but it would be, in Trump's words,  mannish.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 24, 2017)

regent said:


> One of these days the Republican party might have to realize that if they do not impeach Trump, it may very difficult for their party to recover from Trump.


Not an issue...as you Dumbocrats still have to figure out how to recover from Barack Insane Obama


----------



## P@triot (Feb 14, 2018)

We continue to move towards constitutional government. We still have a long way to go, but this is a respectable start.


> Originally, it included $59.9 billion for the Department of Education, which would have reduced spending at the agency by $7.1 billion—a 10.5% decrease from the 2017 enacted level. It would have done so by, among other reforms, eliminating billions of dollars for duplicative and ineffective programs and those that are “more appropriately supported through state, local, or private funds.”


We won’t be constitutional again with regards to education until the Department of Education is eliminated, but this is a good start. If *President Trump* followed this pattern every year and was elected to a second term, there would be more than an 80% reduction to the DoE by the time he left office.

What Trump’s Education Budget Gets Right, and Where It Can Improve


----------



## P@triot (Mar 9, 2018)

This is absolutely unacceptable and the type of completely bullshit, disingenuous twist that we came to expect from Barack Insane Obama:


> The president acted because steel and aluminum imports have helped erode the domestic industry to the point that it threatens national security.


To claim that your powers of “national security” allows you to bypass Congress and implement your own tariffs is totally disingenuous and an _egregious_ abuse of power. This is literally as idiotic as claiming that the President has the power to shut down the internet because they view it as a “threat” to “national security”.

It was this kind of unacceptable crap that I feared from Donald Trump when I was a “NEVER Trump” advocate. His first year in office, he was _incredible_. If he starts to resort to this type of unconstitutional, power-hungry nonsense going forward - I will *not* be showing up at the polls to cast a vote for him in bid for re-election.

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross: “Why We Imposed the Metal Tariffs”


----------



## emilynghiem (Mar 10, 2018)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > One of these days the Republican party might have to realize that if they do not impeach Trump, it may very difficult for their party to recover from Trump.
> ...


I thought it was Hillary Clinton who was the last straw, which broke the camel's back, and outted the split between fake elitist corporate liberals who buy their way into office vs. real grassroots workers and progressives who can't get their agenda done through govt Constitutionally so they end up getting bought and sold by elitists on false promises they can't ever deliver.

Clinton and Sanders outted this split that finally leaked into public media. And Democrats can't recover from this growing split because govt and party are not the solution to the social problems they want to solve. It's the economy stupids, you have to invest your money time labor resources and knowledge directly into social programs and change or you waste it going through party or govt as the middle man obstructing it all with politics and bureaucracy where nothing gets done!


----------



## TheParser (Mar 10, 2018)

RE: The OP's thread title

It is *too late* to restore constitutional government, for:

1. Many states are now allowing undocumented immigrants to vote, thus destroying the integrity of elections.

2. The so-called imperial presidency seems destined to stay regardless of who is in the White House.

a. As I understand it, the Founding Fathers intended the Congress, not the President, to be the most powerful branch of the federal government.

3. For constitutional government to succeed,  a nation needs an unbiased media, which we obviously lack.

*****

All great nations throughout history (Spain, France, England, etc.) have risen and then eventually fallen.

Why should we Americans think that we are exempt?


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Mar 10, 2018)

TheParser said:


> RE: The OP's thread title
> 
> It is *too late* to restore constitutional government, for:
> 
> 1. Many states are now allowing undocumented immigrants to vote, thus destroying the integrity of elections.



Votes from those states should be discarded outright.



TheParser said:


> 2. The so-called imperial presidency seems destined to stay regardless of who is in the White House.



The nature of the beast.  People flock to leaders.  Go figure.



TheParser said:


> a. As I understand it, the Founding Fathers intended the Congress, not the President, to be the most powerful branch of the federal government.



Nope.  The Founders intended three co-equal branches of government.  Of course, that model was cracked in 1803 with Marbury v. Madison, and has been diddled ever since.



TheParser said:


> 3. For constitutional government to succeed,  a nation needs an unbiased media, which we obviously lack.



We have never in our history had unbiased media.  Such creatures do not exist.

What we need is an educated citizenry.



TheParser said:


> All great nations throughout history (Spain, France, England, etc.) have risen and then eventually fallen.
> 
> Why should we Americans think that we are exempt?



Because we "could be" better than that.  Our problems arise from enemies within gaining political power through the tried-and-true bread and circuses MO, allowing them to nearly arbitrarily modify the foundational mandates of the nation.

Steal from Peter to pay Paul, and you will always have Paul's vote.  The problem is that Paul is nearly invariably the least educated, and the most easily led.

The Democratic Party has essentially become the foreign interloper in America.  Philosophically, they have no more in common with American foundational thought than does Kim Jung Un.  However, their ambitions are quite similar.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 10, 2018)

We must restore constitutional government...

Our constitutional rights are under attack, ‘there’s going to be nothing left’


----------



## dblack (Mar 10, 2018)

The irony of those trying to subvert the Constitution, is that they're usually doing so in the name of democracy. What they don't realize is that the limits placed on democracy, by the Constitution, are what make democracy viable. Without those limits, democracy is mob rule - nothing a sane person would ever wish for.


----------



## emilynghiem (Mar 10, 2018)

TheParser said:


> RE: The OP's thread title
> 
> It is *too late* to restore constitutional government, for:
> 
> ...



Dear TheParser
To legalize all 12-20 million Mexican nationals currently residing in the US without agreed status, we need to negotiate with Mexico to set up 4-5 cities the size of Houston on the Mexican side of the border for their citizens to claim.

Then have everyone register, similar to enrolling in university campus programs.
Work study students interns and residents can earn their credits toward education and equal status under plans proportional to any violations they would be required to report in order to qualify. (Violators, even criminal traffickers, can qualify to pay restitution by investing labor and resources into development so they can be included as well. Veterans and military can have jobs in security, and law abiding taxpayers with no violations can choose freely whether to invest in these plans or not, similar to donating to universities and nonprofits in the US or abroad that help stabilize populations. see www.paceuniversal.com or Doctors without Borders)

This is not impossible, but may be inevitable in order to resolve these issues
and create enough viable housing jobs education and access to services
that this population needs. By setting up campus towns along the border, and allowing the people to own their own programs similar to how Texas and CA were colonized by granting people tracks of land to work, we give incentive to people to govern themselves under the law by giving a place where they don't have to break any laws to get stable.

See www.earnedamnesty.org
based on APV campus plans for sustainable community development
www.campusplan.org
Also
www.rightsfortheworkers.org
www.freedmenstown.com
about setting up Veteran housing and jobs to rebuild distressed communities
on a sustainable basis with training in property and business mgmt


----------



## P@triot (Apr 6, 2018)

And to think that progressives want the federal government to have unlimited money and unlimited power.



 

If this is what they were doing in the 1960’s, just imagine what they are doing now.

FBI tracked King's every move - CNN.com


----------



## P@triot (Apr 7, 2018)




----------



## Contumacious (Apr 7, 2018)

P@triot said:


> View attachment 186737




The MAJORITY 

1- the deep state (swamp dwellers)
2- the parasites
3- the narcotized

love the gargantuan bankrupt welfare/warfare police state


.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 7, 2018)

This is absolutely chilling. *Nothing* good can come from this. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing.

Department of Homeland Security to establish monitoring system that tracks journalists in live time


----------



## P@triot (Apr 8, 2018)

We must restore constitutional government...


> Leftist billionaire George Soros tapped into at least $9 million worth of taxpayer dollars when the Obama administration in 2016 allegedly funneled money into a Soros organization called the East West Management Institute, according to Judicial Watch.


The corruption under the Obama Administration exceeded that of third-world nations.

Billionaire George Soros received millions in US taxpayer dollars to fund his progressive agendas


----------



## P@triot (Apr 8, 2018)

Boom! Knockout blow to idiot progressivism delivered...


----------



## P@triot (Jun 30, 2018)




----------



## P@triot (Jun 30, 2018)




----------



## P@triot (Jul 1, 2018)

We must restore constitutional government...


> We can survive fake news, but we cannot survive the shredding of the First Amendment.


The left will never be content until they have George Orwell’s 1984.

There's nothing to worry about with California's proposed 'Fake News' advisory group — right?


----------



## Sahba (Jul 2, 2018)

P@triot said:


> _This_ is how evil liberalism is... Hillary Clinton in a secret audio recording talking about how she plans to eliminate the 2nd Amendment:




This is one of the tricks she had up her sleeve in making that come to pass.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 15, 2018)

We must restore constitutional government - and hold those accountable who violate the U.S. Constitution.

Veteran says police tried to confiscate his guns without a warrant, due process. He said no.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 29, 2018)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


Come on, _stupid_. Tell us again how we are "currently functioning under constitutional government".


> Federal air marshals are surveilling thousands of ordinary U.S. citizens through a Transportation Security Administration program called Quiet Skies, the Boston Globe reported. Typically, the people being monitored are travelers who *are not under investigation by any agency, nor are they in the Terrorist Screening Database*, according to TSA documents obtained by the news outlet.


Idiot. You wouldn't known constitutional government if it slapped you upside your stupid head while introducing itself.

Undercover air marshals monitoring thousands of US travelers under Orwellian ‘Quiet Skies’ program


----------



## P@triot (Aug 15, 2018)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


Hey _stupid_, care to declare to everyone again that the U.S. is “currently functioning under constitutional government”?


> We’ve known for roughly two years the US government has programs devoted to intercepting computer hardware mid-shipment.


That’s remarkable. I had no idea that it was constitutional for the NSA to intercept equipment (computers, routers, switches, etc.) and imbed hardware and software that gives them surveillance capabilities. *Idiot*.

Apple may design its own servers to avoid government snooping - ExtremeTech

The NSA regularly intercepts laptop shipments to implant malware, report says - ExtremeTech


----------



## P@triot (Sep 3, 2018)

No evidence. No indictment. No charges. No prosecution. We *must* restore constitutional government.


----------



## JWBooth (Sep 3, 2018)

"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."  Lysander Spooner


----------



## P@triot (Sep 3, 2018)

JWBooth said:


> "But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist."  Lysander Spooner


That’s a great quote - but there is one problem. A constitution is merely a piece of paper. If men refuse to abide by it, that piece of paper is helpless to do anything about it.

At the end of the day - it requires men of honor and integrity. Those are qualities absent in the left. Hence, the problem we face.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 5, 2018)

Only the shit-hole state of California would pass laws like this...


> A California law that aims to limit the number of people who can refuse vaccines


I’m an American. I’ll refuse a vaccine _any_ fucking time I want. And I don’t need a “reason”. This isn’t the Soviet Union.

What's happened since California let fewer families reject vaccines


----------



## P@triot (Sep 25, 2018)

As a constitutional conservative, I don’t have the slightest problem with this. Is it a LOT of money? Yes. But it wasn’t paid for by the federal government. It was handled locally. If that’s how the people of Miami choose to spend their tax dollars, so be it. Personally, I think it’s a great idea (and not just for the homeless). I think we need a lot more public restrooms in society and it will certainly keep these left-wing shit-hole cities cleaner.

Here’s how much Miami’s new restroom for the homeless cost — complete with needle exchange


----------



## P@triot (Oct 19, 2018)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


Hey CCJ...tell us all again how the U.S. is “currently functioning under constitutional government”.


> Obaid was arrested and charged with a misdemeanor count of disorderly conduct for posting a photo of the toy gun to SnapChat.


It’s not “disorderly conduct” to post photos of actual firearms on social media accounts, much less toy guns.

Chicago teen posts image of toy gun on social media – you already know what happens next


----------



## P@triot (Nov 1, 2018)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


Come on, _stupid_. Tell us again how we are "currently functioning under constitutional government".

DARPA Seeks FAA Approval For Military Drones Over American Cities


----------



## P@triot (Dec 28, 2018)




----------



## emilynghiem (Dec 28, 2018)

Dear C_Clayton_Jones and P@triot


P@triot said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > “We must restore constitutional government”
> ...



It's not just a matter of "not reading" but NOT INTERPRETING Constitutional laws and limits the same way. That's like expecting an ATHEIST and a CHRISTIAN to interpret and follow the Bible the same way!

*These left and right approaches to Govt are like TWO DIFFERENT POLITICAL RELIGIONS.

The major PROBLEM going on is that it Contradicts the Constitution
for Govt to COMPEL people to follow beliefs they don't choose freely.
And Constitutionalism, Conservatism and Liberalism have become their own political religions.

We have NEVER had a Court ruling or Constitutional Convention
that ADDRESSES POLITICAL BELIEFS as RELIGIONS.*

So in the meantime C_Clayton_Jones and P@triot
BOTH parties, their leaders and members, continue to fight for
their OWN Political Religious beliefs which the Govt under
the Constitution is not supposed to Prohibit or Establish.

Both parties are too busy trying to Establish their own Beliefs
while Prohibiting the other groups by voting out or overruling their voices, votes and representation in Govt.

So to answer both of you, this bullying by RELIGION is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Until we address that, we have govt and corporate abuses.
We are caught in the game where the bigger bully with the bigger pocket books
is who pays to get their way by trying to get their candidates or their legislation passed
by cutting out the others opposed. That is "taxation without representation" or TYRANNY.

Because we haven't agreed how to handle Political Religions, Beliefs and Parties
that have hijacked and abused the democratic system playing politics for money and power.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 28, 2018)

emilynghiem said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...


Sorry...there is *nothing* to “interpret”. Words have meaning. The U.S. Constitution is written in black & white. The left cries that “interpretation” crap because they can’t accept the limitation of power created by the constitution.


----------



## danielpalos (Dec 28, 2018)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide


We should be better at Capitalism than socialism on a national basis.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 4, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> We should be better at Capitalism than socialism on a national basis.


We should also be exponentially better at educating our citizens so that we don’t continue to pump out ignorant buffoons such as yourself. You know, people who constantly respond with the same sentence that economics terms are the solution to legal or political issues.


----------



## H B Lowrie (Jan 5, 2019)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide



And the people will do what about all this, vote?


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 5, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > We should be better at Capitalism than socialism on a national basis.
> ...


only the right wing makes excuses.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 12, 2019)

H B Lowrie said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> ...


That’s the beauty of America. We saw how well it works when we prevented Hitlary Clinton from assuming power.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 12, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


And only the left attempts to make the ultra-ignorant case that economic systems are the solution to political and/or legal issues. That is a special kind of stupid.


----------



## Third Party (Jan 12, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...


Post was good, but you sunk its level by "ridiculous right". All right thinkers are ridiculous? Being in the center, I don't care, but I think you are better than that.


----------



## dblack (Jan 12, 2019)

Third Party said:


> Post was good, but you sunk its level by "ridiculous right". All right thinkers are ridiculous? Being in the center, I don't care, but I think you are better than that.



You should read more of his posts.


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Tax cut economics; only the right wing praises its virtues in the public domain.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 12, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> Tax cut economics; *only the right wing praises it*s virtues in the public domain.


Exactly! Because only the right understands economics. Revenues to the federal government went *up* after the "Trump tax cuts". As did wealth, employment, goods and services, etc. Literally everything that every single person with an ounce of sense would desire.


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Tax cut economics; *only the right wing praises it*s virtues in the public domain.
> ...


so what.  that Only means something in a vacuum of special pleading if tax cut economics doesn't cover spending.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 12, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


It went up. It covered spending *more* than higher taxes did.


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 12, 2019)

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time


----------



## Pilot1 (Jan 12, 2019)

States and cities blatantly pass laws that violate the Second Amendment of the Constitution, yet corrupt courts uphold them.  The Supreme Court rarely hears these cases.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 19, 2019)

What a sad indictment on how the left has shredded the U.S. Constitution when a representative is "turning heads" for merely exercising a basic constitutional *right*.

A Virginia senator is turning heads by openly carrying her gun to work: 'It is a deterrent'


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 19, 2019)

P@triot said:


> What a sad indictment on how the left has shredded the U.S. Constitution when a representative is "turning heads" for merely exercising a basic constitutional *right*.
> 
> A Virginia senator is turning heads by openly carrying her gun to work: 'It is a deterrent'


There is no immigration clause in our federal Constitution.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 19, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> There is no immigration clause in our federal Constitution.


Could you possibly be any dumber?


> Article I   Section 8
> To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization


Why don't you just read the document already???


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 19, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > There is no immigration clause in our federal Constitution.
> ...


naturalization is not immigration; only the right wing, never gets it.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jan 19, 2019)

ScienceRocks said:


> The liberterian idea of constitutional government is a government that is powerless to do the will of the people and does only shit that they want. Liberterians and far right conservatives are a bunch of fascist assholes. Simply meaning that they think by the people means that the government should be so limited that the people shouldn't be able to elect a government that does more then sit on its dick.


Libertarians are more like _Anarchists Light_...


----------



## P@triot (Jan 26, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> naturalization is not immigration; only the right wing, never gets it.


Good God...you are hands down the dumbest living human being alive today.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 26, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> Libertarians are more like _Anarchists Light_...



That’s *exactly* what they are. A salute to Kondor3 for being the first leftist to actuallly make an accurate statement about the political spectrum and political ideologies. Libertarianism _is_ anarchist lite.


----------



## Rambunctious (Jan 26, 2019)

The left is hard at work making conservatism and patriotism illegal and the media is cheering them on and the GOP is hard at work being death dumb and blind.....


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 26, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > naturalization is not immigration; only the right wing, never gets it.
> ...


why do we have an illegal problem?  

naturalization clauses don't cause illegal problems only immigration laws do.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 26, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


Because like you - and all Dumbocrats - foreigners don’t give a shit about our laws. Moron.


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 27, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


We have no immigration clause.  A naturalization does not cause illegal problems.  Why waste our tax money with immigration laws when we have an express naturalization clause.


----------



## sparky (Jan 27, 2019)

Ask Trump.....>>>>




*Donald J. Trump*‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump
H1-B holders in the United States can rest assured that changes are soon coming which will bring both simplicity and certainty to your stay, including a potential path to citizenship. We want to encourage talented and highly skilled people to pursue career options in the U.S.

4:40 AM - 11 Jan 2019


----------



## P@triot (Jan 28, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> We have no immigration clause.  A naturalization does not cause illegal problems.  Why waste our tax money with immigration laws when we have an express naturalization clause.


We do have an immigration clause, PRT.


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > We have no immigration clause.  A naturalization does not cause illegal problems.  Why waste our tax money with immigration laws when we have an express naturalization clause.
> ...


not in our Constitution.  express powers have precedence over any implied powers.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 30, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


And we _expressly_ have an immigration clause...


----------



## P@triot (Jan 30, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> not in our Constitution.  express powers have precedence over any implied powers.


Incidentally, you continue to move the goalposts, Paid Russian Troll. First you claimed the government had unlimited implied powers. When I used that against you, you claimed express powers existed which didn't exist. When I used that against you, you now claim that both exist but that express trumps implied.

Holy fucking shit...what a mess. How could anyone follow the U.S. Constitution if it actually said what the Paid Russian Troll claims it says?!?


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 30, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


no, we don't.   the right wing really is that clueless and that Causeless.


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 30, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > not in our Constitution.  express powers have precedence over any implied powers.
> ...


nothing but right wing propaganda.  Our Constitution is Express not Implied.


----------



## Votto (Jan 30, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...



Right, everyone knows that FDR was Constitutionally correct to imprison those Japanese Americans with virtually no opposition and God knows that Obama and Holder were Constitutionally correct running guns across the border to drug lords while trying to take guns away from law abiding American citizens.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 30, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> nothing but right wing propaganda.  Our Constitution is Express not Implied.


Exactly, dumb ass. And as such, there are no powers to provide Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, etc. *None* of those items are "expressly" outlined in the U.S. Constitution. Once again, you defeated your own argument.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 30, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > And we _expressly_ have an immigration clause...
> ...


Man, Paid Russian Troll, you are failing miserably today.


----------



## danielpalos (Jan 31, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > nothing but right wing propaganda.  Our Constitution is Express not Implied.
> ...


those programs provide for the general welfare not the general warfare.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 31, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


And the general welfare is *not* “express”. You’ve defeated your own position again, Paid Russian Troll.


----------



## danielpalos (Feb 1, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


yes, it is.  the right wing is simply clueless and Causeless.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 2, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> *y*es, it is.  *t*he right wing is simply clueless and *C*auseless.


Still struggling with basic grammar. And you wonder why nobody takes you seriously about _anything_.


----------



## P@triot (May 13, 2019)

Thank you, *President Trump*, for working hard to restore constitutional government in the United States.

Trump wants to defund the arts. Will Republicans defy him for a third time?


----------



## busybee01 (May 13, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Thank you, *President Trump*, for working hard to restore constitutional government in the United States.
> 
> Trump wants to defund the arts. Will Republicans defy him for a third time?



There is nothing in the Constitution to prohibit this. Trump will go down for a third time.


----------



## P@triot (May 13, 2019)

busybee01 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Thank you, *President Trump*, for working hard to restore constitutional government in the United States.
> ...


I marvel at your stupidity. The U.S. Constitution clearly and unquestionably prohibits federal funding of the arts.

Seriously....please read the damn document before commenting again. You’re embarrassing yourself. You’re also embarrassing this country with your profound stupidity.


----------



## Votto (May 14, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Thank you, *President Trump*, for working hard to restore constitutional government in the United States.
> 
> Trump wants to defund the arts. Will Republicans defy him for a third time?



The GOP Senate is too busy trying to subpoena his son.

Apparently, the Mueller report after years and $30 million of taxpayer money was not enough.


----------



## P@triot (May 14, 2019)

Kudos to San Fransisco for taking this step.


> "The propensity for facial recognition technology to endanger civil rights and civil liberties substantially outweighs its purported benefits, and the technology will exacerbate racial injustice and threaten our ability to live free of continuous government monitoring," the ordinance says, according to the Times.


Sadly, I suspect they will be the first to reverse that as soon as a queer has a drink thrown on them or an insult hurled towards them.

San Francisco could become first to ban facial recognition technology


----------



## BULLDOG (May 14, 2019)

Votto said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Thank you, *President Trump*, for working hard to restore constitutional government in the United States.
> ...



The Mueller report might be enough when it is finally released, but Barr's little note is no where near enough.


----------



## danielpalos (May 15, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > *y*es, it is.  *t*he right wing is simply clueless and *C*auseless.
> ...


lol.  only right wingers make excuses instead of ask questions.


----------



## P@triot (May 18, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> The Mueller report *might* be enough when it is finally released, but Barr's little note is no where near enough.


And there you have it folks...it will never be "enough" unless it indicts *President Trump*. If it exonerates him, it will *never* be "enough".


----------



## BULLDOG (May 18, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > The Mueller report *might* be enough when it is finally released, but Barr's little note is no where near enough.
> ...



What a childish remark.


----------



## P@triot (May 23, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Hey...it was _your_ remark. I agree with you. Claiming that the Mueller findings are “no where near enough” is fuck’n childish. But...that’s what we’ve come to expect from you.


----------



## BULLDOG (May 23, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Dumb ass. Read it again. I said Barr's little note was not enough.


----------



## P@triot (May 23, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> Dumb ass. Read it again. I said Barr's little note was not enough.


Barr’s “little note” was the direct results of the investigation, subsequent report, and Mueller’s recommendation. Idiot.


----------



## BULLDOG (May 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Dumb ass. Read it again. I said Barr's little note was not enough.
> ...




No. Barr's little note was an attempt to spin things to help Trump. It had little to do with what the report actually said.


----------



## basquebromance (May 24, 2019)

brothers & sisters: we should pause all Russia investigations, get infrastructure done, then resume the investigations. Trump will still be corrupt by that time, my friends!


----------



## basquebromance (May 24, 2019)

Trump's become an erratic helter skelter do nothing president. the tax law is highly unpopular. these radical judges are unpopular.


----------



## P@triot (May 24, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


You’re inability to accept *reality* is a direct result of your severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome.

The Mueller report completely and totally exonerated *President Trump*. Mueller found absolutely nothing and recommended no charges.


----------



## P@triot (May 24, 2019)

basquebromance said:


> Trump's become an erratic helter skelter do nothing president. the tax law is highly unpopular. these radical judges are unpopular.


If you’re going to troll, at least do it with something that could be even slightly plausible. *President Trump* has had the most successful and productive two years of any president _ever_. You know it. I know it. The American people know it.


----------



## P@triot (May 24, 2019)

basquebromance said:


> brothers & sisters: we should pause all Russia investigations, get infrastructure done, then resume the investigations. Trump will still be corrupt by that time, my friends!


The federal government isn’t responsible for “infrastructure”, my extremely ignorant friend. And thanks to MaObama pandering to parasites such as yourself, were $21 trillion in debt. That means we can’t afford “infrastructure” even if it were the responsibility of the federal government.


----------



## iceberg (May 24, 2019)

if you wish to properly alter our government, you do it via the processes in place to do so and in accordance with the will of the people. if you can't do that then the will of the people overall must not want that.

if you go around this, it's an attack on our government.

personally, i'm a fan of the constitution and anyone making efforts to go around the design to get what they want today are the problem to the core.


----------



## regent (May 24, 2019)

Might want to check out The American System that took place after the War of 1812. 





iceberg said:


> if you wish to properly alter our government, you do it via the processes in place to do so and in accordance with the will of the people. if you can't do that then the will of the people overall must not want that.
> 
> if you go around this, it's an attack on our government.
> 
> personally, i'm a fan of the constitution and anyone making efforts to go around the design to get what they want today are the problem to the core.


----------



## BULLDOG (May 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



You still haven't read it, have you?


----------



## P@triot (May 24, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> You still haven't read it, have you?


Have you read the Warren Report? No? 

I *guarantee* you that you will never read the Mueller Report even if 100% of it is released to the public. Fuck man, you're lazy ass won't even read the U.S. Constitution for crying out loud.


----------



## BULLDOG (May 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > You still haven't read it, have you?
> ...



You just spout crap like that  all the time, don't you?  Barr's little note wasn't anything more than spin. Read the report to see what it really says.


----------



## P@triot (May 24, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Yes...I spout the *truth* all of the time. Sadly, you leftists hate truth and refer to it as "crap".

Again, asshat, you never read the Warren Report. You never read the U.S. Constitution. And your dumb ass will *never* read the Mueller Report. Never.

So all of your tantrums here are nothing more than Trump Derangement Syndrome in overdrive because you had your hopes set on Mueller indicting Trump instead of exonerating him.


----------



## BULLDOG (May 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Without crazy unfounded accusations, you wouldn't have anything to post, would you?


----------



## P@triot (May 29, 2019)

The left continues to piss all over the U.S. Constitution. Those radicals simply cannot accept liberty and a limitation of power.

NYC employs manipulative tactics over gun control law ahead of major SCOTUS case


----------



## P@triot (May 29, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> Without crazy unfounded accusations, you wouldn't have anything to post, would you?


Without egregious *lies* that you make up as you go, you wouldn’t have anything to post.


----------



## BULLDOG (May 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> The left continues to piss all over the U.S. Constitution. Those radicals simply cannot accept liberty and a limitation of power.
> 
> NYC employs manipulative tactics over gun control law ahead of major SCOTUS case



You don't consider using all the tools in their toolbox to be smart?


----------



## BULLDOG (May 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Without crazy unfounded accusations, you wouldn't have anything to post, would you?
> ...



Please explain what the Warren report has to do with the current political environment.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (May 29, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The left continues to piss all over the U.S. Constitution. Those radicals simply cannot accept liberty and a limitation of power.
> ...



I do, so don't complain when your opposition does the same.


----------



## P@triot (May 29, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The left continues to piss all over the U.S. Constitution. Those radicals simply cannot accept liberty and a limitation of power.
> ...


Egregiously violating the U.S. Constitution is not a “tool”. And it’s not “smart”. It is _extremely_ unethical and it is flat-out criminal. Not the least bit surprised by your lack of understanding about ethics.


----------



## P@triot (May 29, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


It’s self-explanatory. Both were government-issued reports resulting from government-run investigations. One revolved the assassination of a sitting U.S. president (nothing is more important). You didn’t care enough to read that...but you _pretend_ like you’ll read the Mueller Report in its entirety. It’s ridiculous. And it’s juvenile.

The fact is, *President Trump* has been completely and totally exonerated by the Mueller investigation. Beyond a shadow of a doubt.


----------



## BULLDOG (May 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Then you should file charges.  Your understanding of the constitution is less than adequate.


----------



## BULLDOG (May 29, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



No matter how much you want that to be true, it just isn't.


----------



## P@triot (May 31, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> Then you should file charges.  Your understanding of the constitution is less than adequate.


That’s comical coming from the snowflake demanding to read the Mueller Report but who can’t take 5 minutes to read the U.S. Constitution.


----------



## P@triot (May 31, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The fact is, *President Trump* has been completely and totally exonerated by the Mueller investigation. Beyond a shadow of a doubt.
> ...


Sorry snowflake...that is *100% true*. In the U.S., if sufficient evidence doesn’t exist to even prosecute, one has been _completely_ exonerated.

You just can’t accept that your fellow Americans reject you, your candidate Hitlery, and your fucked up ideology.


----------



## regent (May 31, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Then you should file charges.  Your understanding of the constitution is less than adequate.
> ...


Are you suggesting that you can read the Constitution in five minutes? Can't be done.


----------



## P@triot (May 31, 2019)

regent said:


> Are you suggesting that you can read the Constitution in five minutes? Can't be done.


It’s a pretty small document, sweetie.


----------



## danielpalos (Jun 1, 2019)

P@triot said:


> The left continues to piss all over the U.S. Constitution. Those radicals simply cannot accept liberty and a limitation of power.
> 
> NYC employs manipulative tactics over gun control law ahead of major SCOTUS case


Be legal to the law, right wingers.



> The defense and protection of the state and of the United States is an obligation of all persons within the state. The legislature shall provide for the discharge of this obligation and for the maintenance and regulation of an organized militia.



We have a Second Amendment and should have no security problems in our free States.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Jun 1, 2019)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide




"Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use."


most police are conservatives.......

blues lives matter was a counter movement to black lives matter.....

Consequently.....

you seem to have a problem with the unconstitutional behavior of your own buddies....

Do you REALLY want to stop conservative policemen from using unconstitutional practices against gays? blacks? liberals?  democrats?


I think not......


----------



## danielpalos (Jun 1, 2019)

Only the unorganized militia whines about gun control.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 4, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The left continues to piss all over the U.S. Constitution. Those radicals simply cannot accept liberty and a limitation of power.
> ...


Ah yes...this old trolling cut & paste answer. Posted thousands of times. As I've pointed out to you before slick - we've been stripped of our 2nd Amendment thanks to you anti-constitutional progressives.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 4, 2019)

anynameyouwish said:


> Do you REALLY want to stop conservative policemen from using unconstitutional practices against gays? blacks? liberals?  democrats?


They don't, sparky. But if they did - I would absolutely want them to *stop* using "unconstitutional practices" against gays, blacks, liberals, etc.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 29, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”. Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right. The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


And C_Clayton_Jones wants you to believe the United States is currently operating under constitutional government. 

Watch as Cops Detain Entire Bar, Seal Off All Exits, Force EVERYONE to Submit to Record Check


----------



## BULLDOG (Jun 29, 2019)

That is the kind of storm trooper behavior that Trump wants.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 30, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> That is the kind of storm trooper behavior that Trump wants.


That is the kind of ignorant, uninformed, uneducated response that the Dumbocrats want. Congrats...the people who have destroyed the U.S. Constitution have made you their mindless minion.


----------



## BULLDOG (Jul 1, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > That is the kind of storm trooper behavior that Trump wants.
> ...



Can you name all the recent presidents that urged cops to bang prisoners around as they were put in the car?


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 1, 2019)

S.J. said:


> Our government violates the Constitution routinely at every level.  Sure, a lot of what they do can be twisted into being "Constitutional" but they clearly DO violate the original intent that our founders laid out, and they do it often.  It's just that over the years, those who have sought to subvert it have found ways to chip away at it, change people's minds about what things mean, convince people that it's supposed to be "flexible" and applicable to "the times".  They create crises to exploit and then use fear to get the people to give up a little of their freedom voluntarily.
> The founders gave us the tools we need to stop it but we loaned those tools out to the enemy and now the enemy is using them to enslave us all, little by little.  And we'll never get them back.



I disagree, we will handle that shortly.


----------



## BULLDOG (Jul 1, 2019)

S.J. said:


> Our government violates the Constitution routinely at every level.  Sure, a lot of what they do can be twisted into being "Constitutional" but they clearly DO violate the original intent that our founders laid out, and they do it often.  It's just that over the years, those who have sought to subvert it have found ways to chip away at it, change people's minds about what things mean, convince people that it's supposed to be "flexible" and applicable to "the times".  They create crises to exploit and then use fear to get the people to give up a little of their freedom voluntarily.
> The founders gave us the tools we need to stop it but we loaned those tools out to the enemy and now the enemy is using them to enslave us all, little by little.  And we'll never get them back.



Damn, that sounds bad. If it's really all that bad, you should go live in a cave, and eat nuts and berries. Sounds like that would be more suited for someone with your mentality and outlook.


----------



## Marion Morrison (Jul 1, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > Our government violates the Constitution routinely at every level.  Sure, a lot of what they do can be twisted into being "Constitutional" but they clearly DO violate the original intent that our founders laid out, and they do it often.  It's just that over the years, those who have sought to subvert it have found ways to chip away at it, change people's minds about what things mean, convince people that it's supposed to be "flexible" and applicable to "the times".  They create crises to exploit and then use fear to get the people to give up a little of their freedom voluntarily.
> ...


Look at your avatar and then ask yourself if I should take you seriously. No.


----------



## BULLDOG (Jul 1, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...



What have you got against the first daughter?


----------



## emilynghiem (Jul 1, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > Our government violates the Constitution routinely at every level.  Sure, a lot of what they do can be twisted into being "Constitutional" but they clearly DO violate the original intent that our founders laid out, and they do it often.  It's just that over the years, those who have sought to subvert it have found ways to chip away at it, change people's minds about what things mean, convince people that it's supposed to be "flexible" and applicable to "the times".  They create crises to exploit and then use fear to get the people to give up a little of their freedom voluntarily.
> ...



Dear BULLDOG 
Actually I know someone personally with the Constitution Party
who was getting so discouraged at how out of hand and control the Federal Govt is getting,
he did express how he just wants to give up, move to Montana, live in seclusion,
and watch America implode on ourselves where this is going since it's so UNSUSTAINABLE.

This is as bad as when Cortez and others raise concern about the Environmental damage
to the planet escalating beyond repair.

It's not anything to take lightly. It is serious, on all sides, no matter what angle makes more sense to you.

We DO need to stop abuse and waste that is spiraling out of control.
We cannot afford the messes being made at taxpayers' expense.

All sides know this can't go on.
We just have different ways of expressing how impossible the situation is at hand.


----------



## BULLDOG (Jul 1, 2019)

emilynghiem said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...



Yes, we have lots of problems that need fixing. We always have, and probably always will. I just don't have the fatalistic view as some of the idiots who think the country is crumbling. They are certainly free to spout their "sky is falling" outlook all they want, but I have just as much right to tell them they are nuts and ridicule their goofy remarks. If your friend really is that concerned, perhaps he would be happier in seclusion somewhere in Montana.


----------



## S.J. (Jul 1, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> Yes, we have lots of problems that need fixing. We always have, and probably always will. I just don't have the fatalistic view as some of the idiots who think the country is crumbling.


So the world isn't going to end when Trump is reelected?


----------



## P@triot (Jul 30, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> Can you name all the recent presidents that urged cops to bang prisoners around as they were put in the car?


Your concern for _prisoners_ (and contempt for Americans) is duly noted.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 30, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> I just don't have the fatalistic view as some of the idiots who think the country is crumbling.


Thanks to *President Trump*, not only is the U.S. not “crumbling”, it is actually flourishing! Makes people why you hate Trump so much. Almost like you’re rooting against the U.S.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 30, 2019)

The federal government is completely out of control. We desperately need to restore constitutional government.

The Sneaky Way the Government Is Growing the Number of Bureaucrats


----------



## BULLDOG (Jul 30, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Can you name all the recent presidents that urged cops to bang prisoners around as they were put in the car?
> ...



The question was "Can you name all the recent presidents that urged cops to bang prisoners around as they were put in the car?"  Try to keep up.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


And the response was: your concern for _prisoners_ (and contempt for Americans) is duly noted.

I don’t blame you for being ashamed. I would be too if I were you.


----------



## BULLDOG (Aug 1, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Your goofy is showing.


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Aug 1, 2019)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...



Until the opposition gets power......then Clayton's colors change quicker than a fading rainbow after a storm


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Aug 1, 2019)

BULLDOG said:


> Yes, we have lots of problems that need fixing. We always have, and probably always will. *I just don't have the fatalistic view as some of the idiots who think the country is crumbling.* They are certainly free to spout their "sky is falling" outlook all they want, but I have just as much right to tell them they are nuts and ridicule their goofy remarks. If your friend really is that concerned, perhaps he would be happier in seclusion somewhere in Montana.



WTF??

Jesus Christ!
Watch the Fn Democrat PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES and get off the crack

What the hell is wrong with you??
Dumbest thing said on the boards this week.   DAMN!


----------



## Marion Morrison (Aug 1, 2019)

BasicHumanUnit said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, we have lots of problems that need fixing. We always have, and probably always will. *I just don't have the fatalistic view as some of the idiots who think the country is crumbling.* They are certainly free to spout their "sky is falling" outlook all they want, but I have just as much right to tell them they are nuts and ridicule their goofy remarks. If your friend really is that concerned, perhaps he would be happier in seclusion somewhere in Montana.
> ...



They're all literally running around yelling "The sky is falling!"


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Aug 1, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> They're all literally running around yelling "The sky is falling!"



They've got the media and corruption not to mention Hollywood all backing their side.
It's not surprising they see things all wonderful and Utopian.
Homelessness out of control.   Chicago a war zone.   But NOOOOOooooooo...nothing's wrong, business as usual to those blind idiots.
Chaos violence and destruction makes their day. 
It's not surprising they see things all wonderful and Utopian. 

Can you imagine for ONE SECOND their dirty diapers and snowflake meltdowns if the media etc was against them?


----------



## P@triot (Aug 1, 2019)

BasicHumanUnit said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > They're all literally running around yelling "The sky is falling!"
> ...


You didn’t even scratch the surface! 

Baltimore: a third-world shit-hole overflowing with filth, disease, and rats.

Detroit: a third-world shit-hole that had to file bankruptcy.

San Francisco: literally a shit-hole...the streets are overflowing with human feces and heroin syringes

The U.S. has been invaded by 20 million foreigners with millions more at the gate trying to break it down. ANTIFA is assaulting people in the streets and preventing basic 1st Amendment rights. Dumbocrats are ignoring science and claiming that gender is a state of mind.

And what does *all* of that have in common? It’s 100% the result of left-wing policy. Thank God for *President Trump*.


----------



## BULLDOG (Aug 1, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BasicHumanUnit said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...



According to Orkin, New York has lots more rats than Baltimore.  You think Trump Tower doesn't have rats?


----------



## Osiris-ODS (Aug 2, 2019)

ScienceRocks said:


> The liberterian idea of constitutional government is a government that is powerless to do the will of the people and does only shit that they want. Liberterians and far right conservatives are a bunch of *fascist* assholes. Simply meaning that they think by the people means that the *government should be so limited* that the people *shouldn't be able to elect a government that does more then sit on its dick*.



This guy believes fascism means an impotent central government that can do nothing more than sit on its dick. Seriously, you can't make this stuff up.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 2, 2019)

Enforce express Constitutional law!


----------



## P@triot (Aug 24, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> Enforce express Constitutional law!


I love how you think adding the word “express” to _every_ fucking post you do makes you sound “smart”.

Hint: it doesn’t...you continue to misuse it and sound like a nitwit


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Enforce express Constitutional law!
> ...


only illegals don't care about express Constitutional law.


----------



## regent (Aug 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> BasicHumanUnit said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


So what programs has Trump created to help clean up these areas of American sloth?


----------



## Marion Morrison (Aug 24, 2019)

regent said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > BasicHumanUnit said:
> ...



Who says we need government to create programs to fix pieces of shit?

Parents are responsible for their offspring. Also, people are responsible for themselves. Look at you, looking to government to fix your personal problems..It does not work like that, no sir!

Ask me how I know you're a leftist dork. 

I am so sorry you did not grow up free like I did and they have ruined your mind. There ought to be a law against that. 

I guarantee you have no clue as to what Constitutional even is. You may have an idea as to what Institutional is.


----------



## regent (Aug 24, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Can you name one president that has helped clean up slums and make America a better place to live? Could you name ten? Has Trump done anything? Has any Republican president?


----------



## Marion Morrison (Aug 24, 2019)

regent said:


> Marion Morrison said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...



Aren't slums state/city responsibilities?

Trump has done much for the good of the country, but I seriously doubt your TDS will let you ever recognize that

I think we'll have to open Mental Hospitals for the TDS-afflicted come 2020.
Really 3/4 of the other Mental patients should be cared for 1st, but then there's teh TDS-afflicted.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 25, 2019)

Marion Morrison said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Marion Morrison said:
> ...


equal protection of the law is also a State responsibility.


----------



## regent (Aug 25, 2019)

One of our recent Democrat presidents did this for America: 
He had the Grand Coulee Dam built
Built the Tribourough Bridge
Built the LaGuardia airport
Built 41,300 schools
Built 124,000 bridges
Built 8000 parks
Built TVA
built 18,000 playgrounds
Built125,000 public buildings
Had 69,000 highway light poles installed
10,000 miles of runways


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 26, 2019)

we should have underground maglev in a vacuum environment like our federal freeway system.


----------



## iceberg (Aug 26, 2019)

regent said:


> One of our recent Democrat presidents did this for America:
> He had the Grand Coulee Dam built
> Built the Tribourough Bridge
> Built the LaGuardia airport
> ...


if 30's is considered recent, sure.

but what would said president think of giving everything away today when at that time he made people work for their $?


----------



## regent (Aug 26, 2019)

iceberg said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > One of our recent Democrat presidents did this for America:
> ...


FDR believed having a job and working was one of the most one of the most parts in combatting the Great Depression.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 31, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> only illegals don't care about *express* Constitutional law.


Well clearly you're an express illegal because you don't give an express shit about the U.S. Constitution. You're even too express lazy to even express read it.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 31, 2019)

regent said:


> FDR believed having a job and working was one of the most one of the most parts in combatting the Great Depression.


FDR also believed in abusing power, violating the U.S. Constitution, lying to the American people, and that there was absolutely no place in government for unions.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 31, 2019)

danielpalos said:


> we should have underground maglev in a vacuum environment like our federal freeway system.


We should? Says who? Where is that written?

What we actually should have is a constitutional government in which the federal government expressly restricts themselves to their express 18 enumerated powers - of which, transportation is expressly *not* one of them.

You're an express fuck'n moron who should read the express damn document before commenting. Express idiot.


----------



## dudmuck (Aug 31, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > we should have underground maglev in a vacuum environment like our federal freeway system.
> ...


Article I, Section 8, which states that _“Congress shall have Power to…establish Post Offices and Post Roads.”
_
However, this has been corrupted by the influence of our automobile industry, resulting in our interstate highway system.  Should have been funded at state level, so we could have better public transport instead.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 31, 2019)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > only illegals don't care about *express* Constitutional law.
> ...


You are more "illegal than me, Mr. Caucasian."  We know where the mountains of the True caucasians are.  And, they are not on the continent of the True Americans.


----------



## danielpalos (Aug 31, 2019)

Americans love it that "the Sierra Madre has the mother lode."


----------



## P@triot (Sep 2, 2019)

dudmuck said:


> Article I, Section 8, which states that _“Congress shall have Power to…establish Post Offices and Post Roads.”_


Oh snowflake....a subway doesn't even remotely resemble a "post road". Would you like to try again?


----------



## P@triot (Sep 2, 2019)

There is a reason the fascists _desperately_ want to abolish everything in the U.S. Constitution - including the Electoral College...

WATCH: Dan Crenshaw obliterates electoral college malarkey pushed by DNC, MSNBC, AOC


----------



## P@triot (Sep 2, 2019)

This former Marine - who served his nation honorably to defend the U.S. Constitution - has had his constitutional rights trampled. I would say the people of Oregon need to forcefully remove their state legislatures and governor and restore constitutional government in that state.

Former Marine had firearms seized under Oregon's 'red flag' law over anti-Antifa comments


----------



## Kondor3 (Sep 2, 2019)

P@triot said:


> This former Marine - who served his nation honorably to defend the U.S. Constitution - has had his constitutional rights trampled. I would say the people of Oregon need to forcefully remove their state legislatures and governor and restore constitutional government in that state.
> 
> Former Marine had firearms seized under Oregon's 'red flag' law over anti-Antifa comments


Dumbass screamed "Fire" (on fellow citizens) in a crowded theater. MEH. *That* was about as bright as PIckett's Charge... 

------

Oh, and, BTW, the Federal government probably looks unfavorably upon citizens calling for the forcible overthrow of State governments.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Sep 2, 2019)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide


Comey walks. Welcome to America 2.0


----------



## dudmuck (Sep 2, 2019)

P@triot said:


> dudmuck said:
> 
> 
> > Article I, Section 8, which states that _“Congress shall have Power to…establish Post Offices and Post Roads.”_
> ...


There was a 1907 supreme court case _Wilson v. Shaw_ with roots from the commerce clause.  This then allowed the 1916 federal road aid act.   Then in 1956 was amended for highways.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 4, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> Oh, and, BTW, the Federal government probably looks unfavorably upon citizens calling for the forcible overthrow of State governments.


Oh...and BTW...that's only the case for federal employees who are *ignorant* of history and the Declaration of Independence. You know...people like _you_!


> But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, *it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government*, and to provide new Guards for their future security.


Think of the irony of an "American" (which you can't really call a leftist an American any more) complaining about American citizens doing exactly what was done to build America and what was called for by American founders.

There could be nothing more American than the American people forcefully removing the governor and state legislature of Oregon considering both parties have egregiously violated the U.S. Constitution and in doing so, "reduced" Oregonians "under absolute despotism".


----------



## regent (Sep 4, 2019)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > FDR believed having a job and working was one of the most one of the most parts in combatting the Great Depression.
> ...


Yep, that's why the American people elected him four times in a row, and historians have named FDR America's greatest president. Unions took hold during the New Deal.


----------



## Kondor3 (Sep 4, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, and, BTW, the Federal government probably looks unfavorably upon citizens calling for the forcible overthrow of State governments.
> ...


References to 'throwing off' such Government refers to the national government, not an individual State government within an otherwise functioning Federal system.

But you go right ahead and keep clamoring for the violent overthrow of a State government and its elected officials and see where that gets you, lightweight.


----------



## whitehall (Sep 4, 2019)

Who the hell is Kim Zetter? First we have to tackle the easy stuff like the attempted political coup of a President by high ranking FBI agents (and possibly the CIA) and then we can address Ms (or MR.) Zetter's breathless concern about the "Stingray Spy Tool".


----------



## P@triot (Sep 4, 2019)

dudmuck said:


> There was a 1907 supreme court case _Wilson v. Shaw_ with roots from the commerce clause.


That's great. Doesn't change a thing. The U.S. Supreme Court has absolutely no power to alter the U.S. Constitution and "Wilson vs. Shaw" isn't a clause in the U.S. Constitution.

Next?


----------



## P@triot (Sep 4, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> References to 'throwing off' such Government refers to the national government, not an individual State government within an otherwise functioning Federal system


It does no such thing, snowflake. Please don't pretend to know about the Declaration of Independence (or any of the founding documents). You clearly don't. It says plain as day "government". It does *not* say "national government". You lose. As always.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 4, 2019)

regent said:


> Yep, that's why the American people elected him four times in a row...


Wow...what an "achievement". George Washington would have been re-elected 40 times in a row. Here, allow us to enlighten you yet again:


> “Reason and experience tell us that the first magistrate will always be reelected if he may be reelected. He is then an officer for life". –Thomas Jefferson in a letter to James Madison in 1787


But Washington wasn't a power-hungry asshole. That's what Democrats are. Washington stepped down on his own - despite the nation _begging_ him to stay - stating "I didn't not fight to replace one king with another".


----------



## P@triot (Sep 4, 2019)




----------



## Kondor3 (Sep 4, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > References to 'throwing off' such Government refers to the national government, not an individual State government within an otherwise functioning Federal system
> ...


It's implicit, given that the various States are part of a single, indissoluable union, lightweight. The trouble with you binary-choice types is that you can't make-out the fine print.


----------



## dudmuck (Sep 4, 2019)

P@triot said:


> dudmuck said:
> 
> 
> > There was a 1907 supreme court case _Wilson v. Shaw_ with roots from the commerce clause.
> ...


The supreme court interprets the constitution, and they said that the commerce clause allows congress to construct federal highways.

The result was the 1916 Federal Road Aid Act.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 5, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> It's implicit, given that the various States are part of a single, indissoluable union, lightweight. The trouble with you binary-choice types is that you can't make-out the fine print.


Man alive, where do I even being with this one? 

"Indissoluable"? Seriously? That's not even a word, genius. 

Furthermore, each state is an *independent* state, united in 18 specific issues _only_. You would know that if you hadn't chosen to be willfully ignorant (as is the way with the left). Trying studying some original documents some time. Try reading about the founders. Good grief. It's painful having to educate you a dozen times per day.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 5, 2019)

dudmuck said:


> The supreme court interprets the constitution, and they said that the commerce clause allows congress to construct federal highways.


Really? Please cite the article and section of the U.S. Constitution that grants the U.S. Supreme Court the power to *interpret* the U.S. Constitution itself.

Don't worry. I'll wait.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 5, 2019)

Another *huge* win for the U.S. Constitution and personal liberty!!!

Ruling in Minnesota Wedding Videographers’ Case Favors First Amendment


----------



## Kondor3 (Sep 5, 2019)

P@triot said:


> ...Furthermore, each state is an *independent* state, united in 18 specific issues _only_. You would know that if you hadn't chosen to be willfully ignorant (as is the way with the left). Trying studying some original documents some time. Try reading about the founders. Good grief. It's painful having to educate you a dozen times per day.


You tell 'em, Sparky.

If you really and truly believe that each state is independent in actual practice, I've got this bridge in Brooklyn that you need to take look at...

The relationship between the Union and its constituent States was settled in 1865...

Consequently, a forcible attack upon on State is an attack upon all fifty States...

But we can forgive impractical, blinkered Binary Choices types such as yourself for not understanding the subtleties and practicalities at work here... that's above your pay-grade.

Having trouble selling your _Confederation of States_ preliminaries to folks outside your own political sphere, are ya? 

The Federal model is extant and will remain so, at the pleasure and will of The People.

Mess with that, forcibly, and the rest of us are gonna buy tickets and popcorn while the _Federales_ burn your ass down to the ground.

-------------

Time to let this thread die-out...


----------



## danielpalos (Sep 6, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Another *huge* win for the U.S. Constitution and personal liberty!!!
> 
> Ruling in Minnesota Wedding Videographers’ Case Favors First Amendment


it would mean so much more, if right wingers were more Tolerant.


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 6, 2019)

dudmuck said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > dudmuck said:
> ...



But the commerce clause should never be interpreted as allowing federal jurisdiction to supersede state jurisdiction on matters clearly to be up to state control.
For example, while you can build federal interstate highways, the regulations and enforcement of them must always remain with the states.
Which is why the 55 mph speed limit was only a suggestion, and could not be universal.  So states like Nevada ignored the 55 mph standard on the interstates, and allow 75 mph.


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 6, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > ...Furthermore, each state is an *independent* state, united in 18 specific issues _only_. You would know that if you hadn't chosen to be willfully ignorant (as is the way with the left). Trying studying some original documents some time. Try reading about the founders. Good grief. It's painful having to educate you a dozen times per day.
> ...



Whether or not states can legally secede is not that important.
But what is important is that the federal government has exceeded its mandate.
Things like the War on Drugs, 3 Strikes, gun control, etc., are simply illegal abuses by the federal government.
It is strictly against the 9th and 10th amendments, which give states, municipalities, and individuals jurisdiction whenever the federal government is not specifically authorized to have jurisdiction.


----------



## dudmuck (Sep 6, 2019)

Rigby5 said:


> dudmuck said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


The commerce clause says regulation of commerce among the several states.


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 6, 2019)

dudmuck said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > dudmuck said:
> ...



The meaning of "regulation" means to keep regular, or in other words, to prevent one state from blocking or interfering with commerce from other states.
That does not mean to supersede jurisdiction, but to prevent one state from abusing the rights of those from other states.
So it is not giving the federal government authority, but allowing the federal government to help facilitate the inherent rights of individuals.
As the inherent rights of individuals is actually the ONLY legal source of any government authority at all in a democratic republic.

This federal intrusion came about through things like when states started enacting prohibition laws.
They failed because alcohol simple was brought in from other states, so the claim was made that it had to be done federally.
But the claim was totally false, and the reality is that NO state should have made any prohibition laws at all, because all nanny laws like that are inherently illegal.
Making them federal did not help, but just made them all even worse.

Very few things should ever be federal, and only things states can not do.
The feds are always going to be more distant, detached, unresponsive, unsympathetic, expensive, corrupt, abusive, hard to appeal, etc.


----------



## Kondor3 (Sep 6, 2019)

Rigby5 said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...


Fine. Now all you have to do is to convince the rest of modern-day America, most of whose citizens are content with the Federal-State relationship, and Federal dominance.


----------



## Kondor3 (Sep 6, 2019)

Rigby5 said:


> dudmuck said:
> 
> 
> > Rigby5 said:
> ...


You were born about 250 years too late for that Minimalist approach...


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 6, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



Not really.
In a democratic republic, all you need to convince is the judiciary.
Nor is everybody content with federal buses of the Constitution.
Blacks for example, are pissed off that almost 30% of Blacks are not allowed to vote due to drug convictions.
About 100 million gun owners are pissed off about out of control gun control.
About half the states are in a show down with the federal government over the states legalizing pot.
Face the facts, almost any time you end up in federal court when it could have been state or local, it is wrong.
It is very hard, expensive, and distant to deal with defending yourself from federal charges.
And if sentences, most states do not have federal prisons, so then visitation rights are also violated.


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 6, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > dudmuck said:
> ...



Wrong.
These federal abuses did not occur until about only 100 years ago.
And it was not so apparent why it so wrong at first.
They quickly repealed prohibition as a huge mistake.
But no one has yet repealed the federal war on drugs, so it is time to ratchet it up a notch, and start doing something about it.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Sep 6, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



It seems California is not, just as an example.


----------



## Kondor3 (Sep 6, 2019)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> ...It seems California is not, just as an example.


Well, yeah, the _People's Socialist Democratic Republic of Kalipornia_ *is* rather 'special', isn't it? The Land of Fruits and Nuts.


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 6, 2019)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Rigby5 said:
> ...



Good point.
California wants stricter control on emissions and guns, but more laxity on drugs.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Sep 6, 2019)

Rigby5 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > Kondor3 said:
> ...



California is a Sanctuary state, clearly interfering with federal immigration law.


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 6, 2019)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



Sanctuary states interfere with nothing.
No state can legally enforce federal law.
It is illegal for any state to try to enforce federal law.
The rights of individuals require states to treat all people as if citizens.


----------



## danielpalos (Sep 6, 2019)

Rigby5 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > Rigby5 said:
> ...


the right wing only alleges to believe in natural rights in abortion threads.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Sep 6, 2019)

Rigby5 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > Rigby5 said:
> ...



Wow, are you fucked in the head.

Stares can enforce federal law, or not.    Their choice.  What they cannot do is interfere with the enforcement of federal law.


----------



## danielpalos (Sep 7, 2019)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


They enforce State laws from unitary State governments which cover most everything but specific federal powers.


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 7, 2019)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...




No, states can not legally enforce federal law, any more than one state can enforce the law of another state.
They have no standing.
Governments are NOT a source of any legal authority.
They derive their authority only by borrowing from the individuals they are protecting.
The Constitution divided jurisdiction between federal and all other.
While it does give the federal government jurisdiction over the borders, that precludes states jurisdiction, and it would be like the federal government demanding that all commercial businesses enforce federal immigration laws.  They can't do it.  Only federal agents are authorized to enforce federal law.  No one else would even necessarily know what federal law actually states.  Local and state police have very limited jurisdiction, and that definitely does NOT include immigration law.
I agree they can not interfere with federal law enforcement, but I have never heard of a case where they did that.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 8, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Whether or not states can legally secede is not that important. But what is important is that the federal government has exceeded its mandate. Things like the War on Drugs, 3 Strikes, gun control, etc., are simply illegal abuses by the federal government. It is strictly against the 9th and 10th amendments, which give states, municipalities, and individuals jurisdiction whenever the federal government is not specifically authorized to have jurisdiction.
> ...


Actually, snowflake, no such thing is required. What Rigby5 stated is *law* (constitutional law). So the onus is on ignorant people like _you_ to “convince the rest of modern-day America” that federal power should be expanded. Otherwise, your engaging in unconstitutional government (which is illegal).


----------



## P@triot (Sep 8, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> You were born about 250 years too late for that Minimalist approach...


Unfortunately for you, you were born in the wrong country for your communist approach...


----------



## P@triot (Oct 2, 2019)




----------



## P@triot (Oct 2, 2019)




----------



## Rigby5 (Oct 2, 2019)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



No, states can only enforce laws they have jurisdiction over and create.
Federal law requires interpretation, regulations, guidelines, legal advice, etc. that states do not have and are forbidden to try to have.
It is illegal for any state or local cop to even ask for ID or citizenship, because that is prejudicial.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 8, 2019)

The NRA is just a group of U.S. citizens working to ensure the U.S. Constitution is properly upheld. So ask yourself why the left is so committed to the destruction of the NRA.

(Hint: fascists hate the U.S. Constitution)

Democratic congresswoman screams 'the NRA has got to go!' during town hall — at a gun range. It probably wasn't the best place to say that.


----------



## Kondor3 (Oct 8, 2019)

P@triot said:


> The NRA is just a group of U.S. citizens working to ensure the U.S. Constitution is properly upheld. So ask yourself why the left is so committed to the destruction of the NRA.
> 
> (Hint: fascists hate the U.S. Constitution)
> 
> Democratic congresswoman screams 'the NRA has got to go!' during town hall — at a gun range. It probably wasn't the best place to say that.


Biggest pile of hor$e$hit I've seen around here all week long...

Nationwide ownership, storage, transaction, licensing and registration standards do not equate to 'hating the U.S. Constitution"...

It's time to dismantle the Gun Lobby in Washington D.C...

We'll see far fewer little children with their brains splattered on classroom floors, once those lowlifes are out of the way...


----------



## P@triot (Oct 8, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> We'll see far fewer little children with their brains splattered on classroom floors, once those lowlifes are out of the way...


Actually, every time we’ve listened to the ignorant left (such as yourself), we’ve seen far more children with their brains splattered on classroom floors. But that’s not the issue here, snowflake.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 8, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> Nationwide ownership, storage, transaction, licensing and registration standards do not equate to 'hating the U.S. Constitution"...


Trying to eliminate some firearms, trying to eliminate all firearms, trying to eliminate freedom of religion, trying to eliminate freedom of speech, does equate to hating the U.S. Constitution.

The U.S. Constitution limits control. That’s why you little leftists hate it.


----------



## Kondor3 (Oct 8, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Nationwide ownership, storage, transaction, licensing and registration standards do not equate to 'hating the U.S. Constitution"...
> ...


Bumper-sticker simple-simon Kool-Aid that has no bearing on reality...


----------



## P@triot (Oct 8, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> Bumper-sticker simple-simon Kool-Aid that has no bearing on reality...


Then stop posting that nonsense...


----------



## regent (Oct 8, 2019)

P@triot said:


> Kondor3 said:
> 
> 
> > Nationwide ownership, storage, transaction, licensing and registration standards do not equate to 'hating the U.S. Constitution"...
> ...


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Oct 8, 2019)

Kondor3 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The NRA is just a group of U.S. citizens working to ensure the U.S. Constitution is properly upheld. So ask yourself why the left is so committed to the destruction of the NRA.
> ...



I agree.  Democrats are horseshit.



Kondor3 said:


> Nationwide ownership, storage, transaction, licensing and registration standards do not equate to 'hating the U.S. Constitution"...



Maybe not, but those things would be in violation of it.



Kondor3 said:


> It's time to dismantle the Gun Lobby in Washington D.C...



Why?  Are they not citizens exercising their right to petition the government?



Kondor3 said:


> We'll see far fewer little children with their brains splattered on classroom floors, once those lowlifes are out of the way...



Kill the bad guys, lock up the crazies.  Leave real people alone.

And stop shouting.  It's annoying.


----------



## regent (Oct 9, 2019)

P@triot said:


> View attachment 282567


And the first conservative president elected had conservatives pass
a law that violated the  Bill of Rights.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 9, 2019)

regent said:


> And the first conservative president elected had conservatives pass a law that violated the  Bill of Rights.


George Washington did no such thing, sweetie.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 9, 2019)

And yet C_Clayton_Jones would have you believe that the federal government isn't violating the U.S. Constitution 37x's per _second_. 

FBI’s Use of Surveillance Database Violated Americans’ Privacy Rights, Court Found


----------



## regent (Oct 9, 2019)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > And the first conservative president elected had conservatives pass a law that violated the  Bill of Rights.
> ...


----------



## P@triot (Oct 10, 2019)

regent said:


> But if you like we can name  Washington a conservative.


All of the founders were conservatives. They tolerated nothing less than small, limited government.


----------



## regent (Oct 10, 2019)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > But if you like we can name  Washington a conservative.
> ...


That seemed to be the plan but they quickly changed to a larger  government with considerably more power.  Maybe your problem is simple high school history? Might try reading some because you made Jefferson and Madison turn over in their graves.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 11, 2019)

regent said:


> That seemed to be the plan but they quickly changed to a larger  government with considerably more power.


Wait...so 18 specific powers only is "considerably more power" in _your_ mind?


----------



## regent (Oct 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > That seemed to be the plan but they quickly changed to a larger  government with considerably more power.
> ...


I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ME, BUT IT DOES APPLY TO THE FOUNDERS AS THEY WROTE THE NEW CONSTITUTION.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 12, 2019)

regent said:


> I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ME, BUT IT DOES APPLY TO THE FOUNDERS *AS THEY WROTE THE NEW CONSTITUTION*A.


Yes the did. And they hammered the point over and over and over that government was dangerous and that the federal government must be limited to 18 enumerated powers.

Your dumb ass continues to defeat your own position.


----------



## basquebromance (Oct 12, 2019)

Our entire country is about to be over if we don't stop immigration. Absolute stop, deport illegals, build the wall, go after refugee frauds. Otherwise all of your Congressmen are going to be Ilhan Omar

This is the last Christian country on earth and it is being swept away by morons who will not face what the truth is.


----------



## regent (Oct 12, 2019)

P@triot said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ME, BUT IT DOES APPLY TO THE FOUNDERS *AS THEY WROTE THE NEW CONSTITUTION*A.
> ...


YOUR LACK OF SCHOLARSHIP, PARTICULARY IN HISTORY IS ALWAYS YOUR  PROBLEM.  A NIGHT-CLASS  IN A HIGH SCHOOL HISTORY CLASS MIGHT HELP.  THANK ME LATER.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 12, 2019)

This is 1,000% unconstitutional...

California enacts most radical gun seizure, gun control law yet — even the ACLU is speaking out


----------



## P@triot (Dec 24, 2019)

We must restore constitutional government...

Gun-rights advocates sue Pennsylvania over 'ghost gun' rule, say state is classifying 'a hunk of metal' as a firearm


----------



## P@triot (Dec 24, 2019)

We must restore constitutional government...

The Inspector General’s Report on 2016 FBI Spying Reveals a Scandal of Historic Magnitude: Not Only for the FBI but Also the U.S. Media


----------



## Rigby5 (Dec 24, 2019)

P@triot said:


> We must restore constitutional government...
> 
> Gun-rights advocates sue Pennsylvania over 'ghost gun' rule, say state is classifying 'a hunk of metal' as a firearm



While I agree individuals must have firearm rights the state should not be infringing upon, when it comes to state legislation like this, it is the state constitution that has to be used, not the federal constitution.
The federal Bill of Rights really just restricts the federal government, not state or local government.
After the Civil War, and the 14th amendment, there has been a trend towards more supreme court defense of individual rights, but the 4th and 5th amendments create more of a gun rights penumbra than the 2nd does.


----------



## bripat9643 (Dec 24, 2019)

Rigby5 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > We must restore constitutional government...
> ...


That was true until the incorporation doctrine.  States must now comply with every amendment to the Constitution.  If they have to comply with the 1st Amendment, then they have to comply with the 2nd Amendment.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 24, 2019)

Rigby5 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > We must restore constitutional government...
> ...


Wrong. The Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution establishes the constitution as the highest law in the land. That means any state or local law cannot conflict with the constitution nor can they override constitutional rights.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 31, 2019)

Really tired of the lawless thugs of the left. *President Trump‬⁩* and ⁦‪the Justice Department need to bring the hammer down. The left has morphed us into a lawless banana republic.

House Democrats Show Their Contempt for Constitution, Rule of Law


----------



## P@triot (Feb 4, 2020)

We must restore constitutional government. This is an absolute abomination. All laws must be applied equally to all citizens. Having special laws for _some_ citizens which include harsher sentences is the polar opposite of everything the U.S. justice systems was designed for.

Compelled Speech Is Hitting Close to Home


----------



## P@triot (Feb 9, 2020)

We must restore constitutional government. The left has‬⁩ never did recognized the U.S. Constitution and that cannot continue. We must hold them accountable to the law.

Constitutional law expert flips the script on Democrats, explains their impeachment sins


----------



## LeftofLeft (Feb 9, 2020)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide



The Constitution was written by all white men... many of which owned slaves. When Liberals asail the Founders for being all white, owned slaves, yet Liberals hail constitution, whose or which constitution are liberals referring?


----------



## Markle (Feb 9, 2020)

LeftofLeft said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> ...


----------



## P@triot (Feb 9, 2020)

LeftofLeft said:


> The Constitution was written by all white men...


Doesn’t take more than one skin color to write a constitution.


----------



## LeftofLeft (Feb 9, 2020)

P@triot said:


> LeftofLeft said:
> 
> 
> > The Constitution was written by all white men...
> ...



Agreed but when the Left does not agree with the Constitution, they say it was written by white male slaveowners.


----------



## Pilot1 (Feb 10, 2020)

LeftofLeft said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > LeftofLeft said:
> ...



So what?  That was common and legal at the time.  In other words "normal".  Also, we haven't had slavery in the U.S. since 1865, and we've "fixed" that part of our country as the times and people's attitudes changed.  That doesn't make the Constitution invalid.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 17, 2020)

A great day for liberty and the U.S. Constitution!

Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam suffers embarrassing loss as assault weapons ban is rejected in Virginia


----------



## Dragonlady (Feb 17, 2020)

Pilot1 said:


> LeftofLeft said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



You haven't "fixed" the damage caused by slavery.  It's still ongoing.  Every time someone posts that blacks are inferior to whites.  That's the legacy of slavery. 

Bloomberg's discussion of "redlining", which is really legalized discrimination in mortgage lending, and blaming the 2008 housing market crash on the end of the practice, shows that not much has changed over the past two hundred plus years.  Blacks from poor neighbourhoods should not be allowed to buy property.  This is why, after 300 years in this country blacks hold so little of American wealth.  

Poor white people can still get a mortgage.  Americans are a nation of home owners.  White home owners.  In 1968, 50% of blacks owned their homes.  That number is unchanged 50 years later.  Home ownership is the key to creating personal wealth for the working class.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 17, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> In 1968, 50% of blacks owned their homes.  That number is unchanged 50 years later.


And what happened in 1967? Lyndon B. Johnson’s massive interference in healthcare (Medicare and Medicaid) and his “War on Poverty”.

Thank you for proving that government interference sets minorities back generations.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 19, 2020)

The left is terrified that we might actually restore constitutional government...


> On Monday, Justice Brett Kavanaugh sent the clearest signal yet that the Supreme Court’s conservative majority is ready to take a wrecking ball to federal regulations. By doing so, the court could jeopardize a vast swath of laws that govern pollution, Wall Street, wage and hour rules, campaign finance limits, and more.


If those “federal regulations” were actually important, then Congress would pass them as law instead of the Executive branch forcing them on the American people via unconstitutional executive fiat.

Brett Kavanaugh Is Ready to Join the Supreme Court’s Conservatives to Tear Down Key Federal Regulations


----------



## P@triot (Mar 6, 2020)

Remind me again where in the U.S. Constitution the federal government was placed in charge of healthcare and thus authorized to spend tax payer dollars on it.


> The Senate on Thursday easily passed more than $8 billion in funding to fight the coronavirus, sending the measure to President Trump, who is expected to sign it.


$8 fucking billion on a stupid ass flu bug. We must restore constitutional government.

Senate passes $8.3 billion coronavirus bill, sending it to Trump


----------



## P@triot (Mar 14, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


This is a violation of the 2nd Amendment and an egregious violation of H.R.5013 (the “Disaster Recovery Personal Protection Act of 2006”). And yet, CCJ wants you to believe that we are currently operating under constitutional government. 

Illinois mayor issues coronavirus emergency that gives her the power to ban the sale of guns, ammo, alcohol, and more


----------



## P@triot (Mar 30, 2020)

We must restore constitutional government.


> It authorizes, among other things, federal contract prioritization, material allocation, loan guarantees, and direct federal investments in industries. *But it does not supersede the Constitution and the limited powers conferred upon Congress and the President*.


The left wants to convince everyone that every piece of legislation grants the federal government unlimited power.









						Memo to Gov. Cuomo: 1950 Act Not a License for Takeovers
					

President Trump’s prudent discretion to forgo illegal federal mandates and instead rely on the private sector’s patriotism to produce ventilators, medical masks, and treatments has saved him from Harry Truman’s judicial fate




					www.newsmax.com


----------



## Rigby5 (Mar 30, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...



No the US government is not at all constitutional.
The current interpretations and procedures make the federal government not only supreme over the states, but in control of almost all laws, such as drugs, firearms, travel, censorship, taxation, etc., and all of that is not only completely wrong, but explicitly against the constitution.

First of all, we have to remember that the Bill of Rights are absolute restrictions on the federal government, that were contingent on any states even being willing to join the Union.  So violation of the Bill of Rights essentially nullifies the whole country.  And things like the 2nd amendment are not just a statement of rights, but an absolute prohibition on any and all federal jurisdiction over weapons at all.  So ANY and ALL federal weapons laws are completely and extremely illegal.

That is not just the BATF that is illegal then, but also the DEA, FDA, and all federal agencies that are not just advisory, except the few that are actually authorized by the constitution, such as the coast guard, ambassadors, the post office, federal reserve, and a few others.

Clearly the founders wrote the Constitution to make states supreme, not the federal government.  There are very few areas where the federal government is at all authorized, and even fewer where the federal government is supposed to be able to over ride a state.


----------



## Rigby5 (Mar 30, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



I am not really going to disagree with that, but it is not quite that explicit.
If states had not violated the rights of individuals in a wholesale matter after the Civil War, then the whole 14th amendment and incorporation would never have happened or been needed.  And the whole process of looking for individual rights that were the inspiration for the Bill of Rights is a vague and tenuous task.  
For example, while the 2nd amendment essentially bans all federal firearms laws, it was not intended to ban all local or state firearms laws.  For example, there is no reason to believe the 2nd amendment should prevent states from imposing a 18 year old age limit on those buying or owning firearms.  So sure, I agree there is an individual right that was the inspiration for the 2nd amendment, but the ban on federal firearm jurisdiction is far more explicit and complete as compared to how states and municipalities should be restricted.


----------



## Rigby5 (Mar 30, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> > In 1968, 50% of blacks owned their homes.  That number is unchanged 50 years later.
> ...



That implies Blacks had better home ownership before, and that is not true.
It was even worse before Johnson signed the 1964 Civil Rights Bill.
The problem is a lack of regulation of the banks, who routinely still discriminate.


----------



## Rigby5 (Mar 30, 2020)

P@triot said:


> The left is terrified that we might actually restore constitutional government...
> 
> 
> > On Monday, Justice Brett Kavanaugh sent the clearest signal yet that the Supreme Court’s conservative majority is ready to take a wrecking ball to federal regulations. By doing so, the court could jeopardize a vast swath of laws that govern pollution, Wall Street, wage and hour rules, campaign finance limits, and more.
> ...



From your link:
{...
Since most federal agencies are located within the executive branch, the doctrine would bar lawmakers from authorizing these agencies to make “policy decisions.” Instead, as Kavanaugh put it, agencies could only “decide less-major or fill-up-the-details decisions.”

What, you might ask, distinguished “major” and “less-major” policy decisions? No one really knows. That’s a key reason why the Supreme Court has only invoked the nondelegation doctrine to strike down a law twice in history—both times in 1935, at the height of the judicial revolt against the New Deal. Ever since, SCOTUS has only asked whether Congress gave agencies an “intelligible principle” to follow. If so, it upheld the law.
...}

So most federal regulations are just details necessary for the implementation and enforcement of the congressional legislation.  Very rarely do federal regulation go beyond that and create policy that would be controversial.


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 30, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > “We must restore constitutional government”
> ...




Have you always been a conspiracy theory nutbag, or is that a recent development?


----------



## P@triot (Mar 30, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Dragonlady said:
> ...


No...that implies *exactly* what it says. That left without interference, homeownership would be exponentially higher today for the African-American community because that's simply the nature of evolving. The fact that it has stayed the same (when _nothing_ stays the same) is all the evidence one needs.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 30, 2020)

BULLDOG said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...


It's not a "conspiracy theory" you imbecile. You don't even know how to use that term right. Good grief. It's a simple fact that the states delegated 18 enumerated powers to the federal government, and law enforcement isn't one of them. Therefore, the F.B.I., the ATF, etc. are all unconstitutional.


----------



## BULLDOG (Mar 30, 2020)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Rigby5 said:
> ...



You'll have to forgive me. I don't have the benefit of a stylish tinfoil hat to boost my knowledge of such things like you do. Did you get your information from the voices in your head, or did it come directly from that implant the aliens put in you?


----------



## P@triot (Apr 5, 2020)

BULLDOG said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > It's not a "conspiracy theory" you imbecile. You don't even know how to use that term right. Good grief. It's a simple fact that the states delegated 18 enumerated powers to the federal government, and law enforcement isn't one of them. Therefore, the F.B.I., the ATF, etc. are all unconstitutional.
> ...


Tragically, you also don’t have the benefit of literacy, and thus having actually read the U.S. Constitution. Oh well. It is what it is.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 5, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


So this is “constitutional” in your mind, uh C_Clayton_Jones? 









						Judges order ankle monitors for people exposed to coronavirus who refuse to stay home — even if they have not tested positive
					

Where do we draw the line?




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 5, 2020)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Odd that someone with a permanent  seat at the children's table like you would try to discuss literacy.


----------



## lennypartiv (Apr 5, 2020)

P@triot said:


> We must restore constitutional government...
> The Inspector General’s Report on 2016 FBI Spying Reveals a Scandal of Historic Magnitude: Not Only for the FBI but Also the U.S. Media


The Deep State will protect their own.  On top of that, they'll protect Hillary.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 5, 2020)

BULLDOG said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...




What conspiracy?
We are discussing the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and federal jurisdiction.
If you read history, the intent of the founders is very clear.
They wanted an extremely weak federal government, which is why they first tried the Articles of Confederation, which gave the federal government no real power at all.
The Constitution was a second try, to make a slightly stronger federal government, but for example, there still was not even supposed to be a standing army of any significance.  The only permanent troops were supposed to be the coast guards and training facilities only.

Almost all of what the federal government is doing now, like regulating firearms and drugs, is not explicitly authorized, and instead claimed to be implied under regulating interstate commerce clause or the domestic tranquility preamble.  And the 9th and 10th amendments clearly prevent such interpretations.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 5, 2020)

BULLDOG said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...




Go look at the Bill of Rights, specifically the 9th and 10th amendments.

{...

*Amendment IX*
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

*Amendment X*
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

...}

These amendments are clearly dividing jurisdiction, and are saying that the federal government can ONLY do exactly what it is specifically authorized to do, and no more.
They are saying everything else that is not explicitly authorized to the federal government, are under the jurisdiction of someone else and can not be acted upon by the federal government.


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 6, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Rigby5 said:
> ...



You seem to only know parts of the constitution.  You completely ignore the parts that allow for modifications, and the the right of the SC to interpret what the constitution says. You should study what it says instead of whining because it doesn't say what you want it to say.


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 6, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



I'm thoroughly impressed with how you know so much more than the SC justices. You should catch the first bus and go tell them how much they screwed up. I'm sure they will appreciate your superior knowledge.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 6, 2020)

BULLDOG said:


> I'm thoroughly impressed with how you know so much more than the SC justices. You should catch the first bus and go tell them how much they screwed up. I'm sure they will appreciate your superior knowledge.


I, on the other hand, am thoroughly unimpressed by your astounding ignorance to believe that _every_ Supreme Court Justice in U.S. history has forgone their own selfish views and party bias, and ruled strictly and solely on the exact text of the U.S. Constitution.

I mean, Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ginsburgh never rubber-stamped the Obama agenda. Nope! Never.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 6, 2020)

BULLDOG said:


> Odd that someone with a permanent  seat at the children's table like you would try to discuss literacy.


Says the illiterate imbecile who is completely and totally baffled by the U.S. Constitution.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 6, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones would have you believe that this is wholly “constitutional”. You know, since the U.S. is (and I quote) “currently functioning under constitutional government”.  









						Police issue citation, fine woman who was just 'going on a drive' amid coronavirus stay-at-home order
					

'...failed to abide by the order of the governor'




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 6, 2020)

BULLDOG said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Of course the constitution can be amended, and new things are bound to come up, like the need for the FAA.
But the amendment process is supposed to require a careful convention or state supermajority that is not being done.  And the SCOTUS is NOT supposed to reinterpret a new meaning as to what the founders had in mind.  The supreme court is only supposed to maintain the original intent.  (And the supreme court has made some huge mistakes, like the Dred Scott decision, where they allowed the slavery laws of one state to be imposed on people in another state.)
And there simply is no way for the federal government to ever get jurisdiction over things like guns or drugs.  That has already been explicitly denied to the federal government, so would require essentially scrapping the whole constitution, starting over, and allowing states to decide once again if they even wanted to join at all.

I know exactly what all of the constitution says, have read it all very carefully many times, and I know most of what the federal government is doing is illegal.  For example, the only legal war the US has been in was the War of 1812, and all the US soldiers who died in battle since then are actually crimes by the US government.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 6, 2020)

BULLDOG said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



You know as well as I do that the Supreme Court justices are aware of the fact the federal government is almost entirely out of compliance with the constitution.  In their defense, one can consider the Constitution to be a work in progress, since originally it allowed slavery.  Another excuse we can give them is the need and use for precedence, where you want stability, tradition, and for things to not change too quickly.  But when you look at the overall change, it is far too drastic, with states going from having almost complete sovereign status, to now being pawns under federal budget control.  Examples where the federal government are way out of control are the War on Drugs and the invasion of Iraq.  Those are both areas where clearly it is the states that are supposed to make the decisions, whether through state representatives at state or federal levels.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 6, 2020)

P@triot said:


> C_Clayton_Jones would have you believe that this is wholly “constitutional”. You know, since the U.S. is (and I quote) “currently functioning under constitutional government”.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




That is a very good example.
The authority for government to exist or do anything at all comes from the authority we delegate to them to protect our rights for us.  And clearly a person in a glassed in car is not endangering anyone else at all.
In fact, it was the police who endangered by stopping her and causing a social interaction.
Do we have the right to just sightsee and drive around?  Of course we do.  Otherwise it would be like imprisonment, where boredom is deliberately used as a punishment.  We do need to get out of the house and we do have the right to sightsee, as long as in a safely confined car.
So the police were not only wrong, but totally and completely criminal.


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 6, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Rigby5 said:
> ...



Sorry buddy, but I'll have to go with the supreme court over the opinion of some anonymous poster on the internet.  Perhaps you should get a sign and megaphone  and go stand on a street corner.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 6, 2020)

BULLDOG said:


> Sorry buddy, but I'll have to go with the supreme court over the opinion of some anonymous poster on the internet.


In your particular case (ie illiteracy), that’s wise. For those of us who can actually read (and comprehend) a 3 page document however, we go with our own eyes over justices drunk with power and appointed with an agenda.


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 6, 2020)

P@triot said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Sorry buddy, but I'll have to go with the supreme court over the opinion of some anonymous poster on the internet.
> ...



I acknowledge that supreme court justices know more about the constitution than I ever will.  If you want to call that illiterate, then OK. but it's not as stupid as thinking some nut bag on the internet is right while all the people with actual responsibility  are wrong.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 7, 2020)

BULLDOG said:


> I acknowledge that supreme court justices know more about the constitution than I ever will.


Well duh. My 3-year old knows more about the U.S. Constitution than you _ever_ will. 


BULLDOG said:


> If you want to call that illiterate, then OK. but it's not as stupid as thinking some nut bag on the internet is right *while all the people with actual responsibility  are wrong*.


That is an idiotic, immature, and irrational "reason". NFL, NBA, and MLB coaches are given "the actual responsibility" of running a team - along with millions and millions of dollars. How many of them are fired for winning less than half of their games? How about CEO's who are fired for running corporations into the ground? Just because someone was "given responsibility" doesn't mean they were qualified _or_ capable.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 26, 2020)

So idiot ⁦‪Bill de Blasio‬⁩ is letting criminals go free under the guise of “COVID” while Texas arresting suburban house wives under the guise of “COVID”. 

We need some common sense leadership in this country and we need it NOW.








						Texas cops use undercover sting operation to arrest women offering salon services at their homes
					

Is this really the best use of police resources right now?




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> So idiot ⁦‪Bill de Blasio‬⁩ is letting criminals go free under the guise of “COVID” while Texas arresting suburban house wives under the guise of “COVID”.
> 
> We need some common sense leadership in this country and we need it NOW.
> 
> ...



Like always, when it comes to stupid, oppressive cops,   In Texas. WE'RE NUMBER ONE!!!


----------



## P@triot (Apr 27, 2020)

New York’s laws are _egregiously_ unconstitutional. Would love to see the American people converge on NY armed to teeth and fully prepared to defend their constitutional rights. Millions of us.








						Supreme Court dodges N.Y. firearms case in defeat for gun rights advocates
					

The ordinance at issue said residents with the proper permits could take handguns outside their homes to city shooting ranges under certain conditions.




					www.nbcnews.com


----------



## The Original Tree (Apr 27, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...


Your bat soup is getting cold!


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2020)

The left-wing ideology of one massive federal government controlling _everything_, is extremely ignorant.


> Can anyone be surprised that when the government dispenses a few trillion dollars in the course of a few weeks, targeting these funds efficiently—the aid being structured properly and funds getting where they need to go—*is impossible*?
> 
> Funds from the aid bills winding up in the hands of big corporations, professional sports teams, and rich Ivy League universities while many small businesses that can’t meet payroll are being shut out should come as no surprise.


It’s why everything the left does ends in catastrophic failure.








						Lessons to Learn From COVID-19
					

COVID-19 has shined light on a crisis in American government and the mistakes we have made in undermining traditional values.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## HenryBHough (May 3, 2020)

This year July 4th will have a new name.  "Independence Day" a mere memory......



No fireworks.

Just burn copies of The (former) U.S. Constitution.
If you can find any liberals haven't already burned.
Or shredded and smoked.


----------



## Regent23 (May 3, 2020)

HenryBHough said:


> This year July 4th will have a new name.  "Independence Day" a mere memory......
> View attachment 331604
> No fireworks.
> 
> ...


  America declared it's independence on July 2.  
The American Constitution is a liberal document, written primarily by liberals and based on the Age of Enlightenment. The Age of  
Enlightenment was a  liberal age, and not our last liberal period.


----------



## HenryBHough (May 4, 2020)

"Liberal" in 1775 pretty much equates to militant conservative in 2020.


----------



## Regent23 (May 4, 2020)

HenryBHough said:


> "Liberal" in 1775 pretty much equates to militant conservative in 2020.


Liberalism doesn't change. The way it is implemented does change. Read Jefferson's Declaration of Independence for liberalism, or go back and read  the philosophy  of the ancient liberals.


----------



## P@triot (May 4, 2020)

Those that refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it...








						City permits religious gatherings, with one exception — church must maintain 'records of all attendees': 'The Germans did this very thing to Jews’
					

Not a good look




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (May 4, 2020)

Regent23 said:


> The American Constitution is a liberal document


Then why do "liberals" *hate* it so much? 


Regent23 said:


> written primarily by liberals and based on the Age of Enlightenment


Oh, you mean the racist slave owners? Now _that_ does sound like modern day liberals.


Regent23 said:


> The Age of Enlightenment was a  liberal age, and not our last liberal period


Makes the current age of pure liberal ignorance that much more tragic.


----------



## Regent23 (May 5, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Regent23 said:
> 
> 
> > The American Constitution is a liberal document
> ...


So has America become more or less liberal since the Constitution?


----------



## P@triot (May 6, 2020)

Regent23 said:


> So has America become more or less liberal since the Constitution?


Sadly way more. And why? Because liberals *hate* the U.S. Constitution and are trying to get as far away from it as possible. The left loves centralized totalitarianism.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 17, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”. Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


Once again we see the ignorance of CCJ - the U.S. is *not* functioning under constitutional government as the Supreme Court just altered law. For those that are ignorant like CCJ: the Supreme Court is part of the Judicial branch and cannot create or alter law. Only the Legislative branch can do that.








						Gorsuch Helps Transform Supreme Court Into Supreme Legislature
					

A majority of the court led by Gorsuch has rewritten Title VII of the Civil Rights Act to include sexual orientation and gender identity in the definition of “sex.”




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## Moonglow (Jun 17, 2020)

P@triot said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > “We must restore constitutional government”. Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> ...


Hardly does complying with the Constitution on the basis of equality, liberty and fraternity allow the discrimination of a demographic group of humans you don't like.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jun 17, 2020)

Moonglow said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...


It actually does, moron.


----------



## JWBooth (Jun 17, 2020)

Moonglow said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...


The jacobins are passe’


----------



## P@triot (Jun 28, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”. Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


Once again we see the ignorance of CCJ - the U.S. is *not* functioning under constitutional government. Hint: the 1st Amendment does not say "except for times of pandemic". The ignorance of CCJ and his ilk is a genuine threat to the United States.








						2 Federal Courts, 1 Constitutional Right
					

Americans simply want their freedom to attend houses of worship treated equally with the freedom to attend peaceful protests or to go to a casino.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## P@triot (Nov 13, 2020)

The "America Experiment" was lost decades and decades ago. Along with the US Constitution. The only question that remains at this point is, can it be restored? I would almost guarantee that it cannot be, but I hold out hope anyway.








						Justice Alito: COVID-19 Pandemic Has Been a 'Constitutional Stress Test'
					

Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito on Thursday said the COVID-19 pandemic has served "as a sort of constitutional ...




					www.theepochtimes.com


----------



## The2ndAmendment (Nov 13, 2020)

Just to answer the OP title from 2016.

It's gone as of Nov 3rd.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 13, 2020)

P@triot said:


> The "America Experiment" was lost decades and decades ago. Along with the US Constitution. The only question that remains at this point is, can it be restored? I would almost guarantee that it cannot be, but I hold out hope anyway.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think the country lost all constitutional balance around the turn of the century, when bankers, war mongers, imperialists, and colonialists took over.
The military was supposed to rely on state maintained militia, and the federal government went to a mercenary standing army instead.  The National Guard is not what the founders wanted either.  And the creation of a federal income tax essentially destroyed the states.  With control over all the money, the federal government  became all powerful.  With a powerful mercenary force, and all the money to pay them, you ensure feudalism.


----------



## BULLDOG (Nov 13, 2020)

The2ndAmendment said:


> Just to answer the OP title from 2016.
> 
> It's gone as of Nov 3rd.


Was that start the rotors song the one they played at your wedding?


----------



## P@triot (Nov 15, 2020)

We *must* restore constitutional government...








						Judge hits Gavin Newsom with massive legal loss, rules he overstepped authority on mail-in ballots
					

But the judge's ruling had broader implications




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## Zorro! (Nov 15, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...


Sure.  Illegal FISA warrants on political opponents, transition team and even an ADMINISTRATION, yet, no criminal charges of significance.  That's not rule BY THE PEOPLE, that's rule by an out of control unaccountable central government.  

But, at least Trump can slam the Corrupt Lawless Slaver China, one more time.

GOOD: Scoop: Trump plans last-minute China crackdown. 





President Trump will enact a series of hardline policies during his final 10 weeks to cement his legacy on China, senior administration officials with direct knowledge of the plans tells Axios.

*Why it matters:* He'll try to make it politically untenable for the Biden administration to change course as China acts aggressively from India to Hong Kong to Taiwan, and the pandemic triggers a second global wave of shutdowns.

Watch for National Intelligence Director John Ratcliffe to publicly describe in granular detail intelligence about China's nefarious actions inside the U.S.
*Details:* Trump officials plan to sanction or restrict trade with more Chinese companies, government entities and officials for alleged complicity in human rights violations in Xinjiang and Hong Kong, or threatening U.S. national security.

The administration also will crack down on China for its labor practices beyond Xinjiang forced labor camps.
But don't expect big new moves on Taiwan or more closures of Chinese consulates in the U.S., officials say.
*National Security Council spokesperson John Ullyot told Axios,* "Unless Beijing reverses course and becomes a responsible player on the global stage, future U.S. presidents will find it politically suicidal to reverse President Trump’s historic actions."

*Behind the scenes: *Senior administration officials are discussing expanding a Defense Department list of Chinese companies deemed to have ties to the Chinese military.

An executive order issued last week barred U.S. investment in 31 such companies, and any additions would likely face a similar restriction.
Officials plan to target China's growing use of forced labor in the highly competitive fishing industry. Coerced and unpaid labor isn't just a human rights concern — it can also give Chinese fisheries an advantage over rivals in an industry with geopolitical significance.
Trump officials have been looking to move more hawkish China experts into senior roles across the government, another senior official added.
*What they're saying:* "Director Ratcliffe will continue playing a leading role, in coordination with other national security principals, in delivering a necessary mindset shift from the Cold War and post-9/11 counterterrorism eras to a focus on great power competition with an adversarial China," DNI senior adviser Cliff Sims tells Axios.


----------



## Kondor3 (Nov 15, 2020)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> ...Arguably not since 1803, but certainly *not since the 1860s*. All *states need to reassert their authority* under the 10th Amendment.


"_Hang onto your Confederate money, boys... the South's gonna rise again!_"


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 16, 2020)

Kondor3 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > ...Arguably not since 1803, but certainly *not since the 1860s*. All *states need to reassert their authority* under the 10th Amendment.
> ...



States being more sovereign, as it used to be, is likely much better.
For example, imagine if the federal government enforced uniform gun laws, health care, traffic laws, etc.?
Not only would it be inappropriate for Alaska and NYC to have the same laws and regulations, but those charged would have to try to fight federal prosecutors in federal courts.  An expensive and totally inappropriate infringement on rights.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 26, 2020)

Each and ever item listed is 100% unconstitutional...








						5 'Terrifying' Policies to Brace for Under a Biden Presidency
					

The Biden agenda isn't just a collection of radical policies some think he'll push. These are things he's said he'll do.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## P@triot (Nov 26, 2020)

We must restore constitutional government...








						Alito Points to Warning Signs That Threaten a Free and Civil Society
					

"The pandemic has resulted in previously unimaginable restrictions on individual liberty," Justice Samuel Alito remarks.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Each and ever item listed is 100% unconstitutional...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



While I am an extreme leftist, I agree the federal government does not have legal jurisdiction over anything like health care.

However, that is why the Hyde Amendment is illegal.
States are who should be administering all health care funding regardless if it is coming from the federal government or not, so then the federal government should get no say in if the funding is used for abortions or not.  It has to be totally up to each state.
However, it is still not clear states can dictate individual rights and withhold abortion funding to individuals.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> We must restore constitutional government...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sure, we should limit federal involvement in local affairs.
But that does not mean we should let states dictate personal affairs, like abortion.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 26, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> While I am an extreme leftist, I agree the federal government does not have legal jurisdiction over anything like health care.


Agreed


Rigby5 said:


> However, that is why the Hyde Amendment is illegal...the federal government should get no say in if the funding is used for abortions or not.


Agreed...with one caveat. If the federal government is going to unconstitutionally pass out my tax payer dollars, then they should unconstitutionally control how it is spent at the state level.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 26, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Sure, we should limit federal involvement in local affairs.


Agree completely.


Rigby5 said:


> But that does not mean we should let states dictate personal affairs, like abortion.


While I agree that the state has no business in personal affairs, abortion does not qualify for that status. Taking a human life is *not* a “personal affair”. If you can’t take a 40 year olds life, you sure as shit shouldn’t be able to take a baby’s life.


----------



## Turtlesoup (Nov 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide


HOW? is the question......

our dammed ruling class is corrupt and out of control.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > While I am an extreme leftist, I agree the federal government does not have legal jurisdiction over anything like health care.
> ...



Why?  You have more influence over your own state government than you do over the federal government?


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Sure, we should limit federal involvement in local affairs.
> ...



A fetus or a baby is a subjective distinction, and the women gets to make that choice because she is the one who has to risk her life if she wants to deliver it.
And clearly a 40 years old can have its life taken without it being a crime, if the person is brain dead or otherwise hopeless.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 26, 2020)

Turtlesoup said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> ...



The way communications work, like cellphones, is that tower side is repeatedly broadcasting in a fairly frequent manner, and a then a cellphone responds to let the tower know it is in the vicinity and wants a time slot.  Then the tower can get the cellphone to do whatever it wants.  And if the tower is not a real public tower, but instead is a fake government plant, then the tower can not only get it to reveal it's GPS coordinates, but even listen in on conversations and turn on the video.  Perfect for bugging suspects without having to actually put anything there.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 27, 2020)

Turtlesoup said:


> HOW? is the question......
> 
> our dammed ruling class is corrupt and out of control.


You're 100% correct on both accounts. I would say three things (though I'm open to suggestions):

*1. Take back control of education in America*
The Dumbocrats need an ignorant electorate to win elections and they know it. That is why they took control of education in America and destroyed it. We need to take it back and teach real history.

*2. Fight back through the FREE MARKET*
It's ridiculous that so-called "conservatives" call tech corporations into Congress to wine. Build alternatives in the free market. Parler. Rumble. USMB. We have plenty of options for conservative voices and we can build more.

*3. Enforce the law*
ANTIFA and BLM are domestic terrorist organizations. Treat them as such. Secure the border. Deport all 20 million illegal aliens at all costs. Stop voter fraud. Most of what the left engages in, is illegal. They can't do any harm if they are sitting in prison, where they belong.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 27, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Why?  You have more influence over your own state government than you do over the federal government?


Exactly. My own state government. When the federal government sends my money to California, that's *not* my state government. Therefore, I have 0 control over it. None. Zip. Zero. Not a single say or vote. Even way less than I have with the federal government.

Stop sending my money to other states, I'll stop demanding federal control.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 27, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> A fetus or a baby is a subjective distinction


Wrong. It's a human life whether you want to play a juvenile game of calling it a baby, a "fetus", an "embryo" or anything else. Science has unequivocally *proven* as much.


Rigby5 said:


> and the women gets to make that choice because she is the one who has to risk her life if she wants to deliver it.


Stop the immature hyperbole. Lets have an adult conversation here. No woman's life is in "danger" under normal circumstances. In those rare instances where a physician can absolutely attest to the fact that the woman's life is legitimately in danger, I 100% support her right to an abortion. Her life is not worth less than the baby.


Rigby5 said:


> And clearly a 40 years old can have its life taken without it being a crime, if the person is brain dead or otherwise hopeless.


Again, stop with the juvenile game. The brain dead person is not in the natural state of a person at that age. A health baby in the womb is in the natural state of a "fetus" at that stage.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 27, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Turtlesoup said:
> 
> 
> > HOW? is the question......
> ...



1. The wealthy elite who back republicans don't want an educated population either, because then they would have to pay them more.

2. A free market is one dictated by monopolies.  The people demand a fair market, and only socialism can provide fair access to everyone on thing that may not be profitable, like good health care, utilities, etc.

3. We need terrorist organizations when government is consistently committing atrocities like Vietnam, the invasion of Iraq over WMD lies, etc.  Police that shoot unarmed people should be in jail, and since the government is not doing it, we need to jail the whole government if we have to.  As far as illegal aliens, we need them to keep manufacturing and agriculture prices down, and pay for our Social Security.  What voter fraud?  Point it out?


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 27, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Why?  You have more influence over your own state government than you do over the federal government?
> ...



Sorry, but I think you have this backwards.
In general the most populated states pay the most in federal taxes and get disproportionately less back, like CA.
It is the less populated poor states that pay in the least and get the most back proportionately.


----------



## anynameyouwish (Nov 27, 2020)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide




follow the constitution?

do you want police to stop killing people in the streets?


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 27, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > A fetus or a baby is a subjective distinction
> ...



But is an unborn sentient?
I don't think so, so I don't think it cares whether it lives of dies.
And clearly we are WAY over populated already, and the world can only sustainably support about a forth of the population we already have.
We have been cheating with fossil fuels for over 100 years now, but those fossil fuels are running out, and food production is going to be cut by at least 3/4s soon.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 27, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> 1. The wealthy elite who back republicans don't want an educated population either, because then they would have to pay them more.


That makes 0 sense. Wealthy people excitedly shell out massive money to land free agents. George Steinbrenner shelled out a quarter of a *billion* dollars to land Alex Rodriguez. If the left understood basic economics, they would understand how absurd their comments are.


Rigby5 said:


> 2. A free market is one dictated by monopolies.  The people demand a fair market, and only socialism can provide fair access to everyone on thing that may not be profitable, like good health care, utilities, etc.


Really? You don't like monopolies, uh? _Really_? So tell me, who is the federal governments competition? Don't say "state governments" because they have 0 authority over coining money, defense, or any of the other federal powers.

Sorry, but you are wrong yet again. Free markets ensure competition. The moment a monopoly exists, someone offers an alternative cheaper. That's just a simple fact. The left loves their faux terms like "fair". It's just propaganda for "government-CONTROLLED".


Rigby5 said:


> 3. Police that shoot unarmed people should be in jail, and since the government is not doing it, we need to jail the whole government if we have to.


In #2 you claim we need government to make things "fair". In #3, you claim that government is a bunch of murderous thugs. 

Folks...you can't make this stuff up! This is the left for you. They can't spit out a single sentence without contradicting themselves.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 27, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Sorry, but I think you have this backwards.


I don't have it backwards. I don't have it backwards at all. You wrongly claimed that I had more control over how federal funds were spent at the state level. The fact is, I don't have an ounce of control over 49 states. Not an ounce. You were wrong.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 27, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> As far as illegal aliens, we need them to keep manufacturing and agriculture prices down, and pay for our Social Security.



Illegal aliens do *not* pay for our social security  
You cannot justify illegal actions under the guise of "but it keeps prices down"
We're either a lawful nation or we're not. You leftist thugs want a lawless nation because you hate the US and because you're too lazy to compete in the free market.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 27, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> In general the most populated states pay the most in federal taxes and get disproportionately less back, like CA.


In general, you buy into left-wing propaganda. Which is really a shame.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 27, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > 1. The wealthy elite who back republicans don't want an educated population either, because then they would have to pay them more.
> ...




I don't get that at all because athletes who make millions are also part of the wealthy elite.  Steinbrenner and Rodriguez are both the wealthy elite.  Neither are the average joe.
The point is that education allows for more equal opportunity for anyone who wants to work for it.
Most people can never be highly paid athletes.
That takes rare genes.

The federal government is not a monopoly because we are the owners and board members, who can tell the federal government to do whatever we say.  The problem seems to be we are letting the federal government get away with lying to us, like lying about Iraqi WMD, lying about needing gun control, etc.

Free markets can never enure fair competition.  For example, what Microsoft did was to make computer wholesalers buy a copy of Windows for every computer they sold, even if the customer wanted Linux or something else.  Otherwise Microsoft would not let them buy any Microsoft product.
Another thing Microsoft did was to buy up all the shelf space at places that sold computer software, and would not allow competition to be sold.

But you do have a good point about how it is contradictory for me to complain about government abuses but then still support socialism.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 27, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > As far as illegal aliens, we need them to keep manufacturing and agriculture prices down, and pay for our Social Security.
> ...



Illegal aliens do pay Social Security, but just do so under a borrowed social security number.
All immigration used to be legal, and it is not clear we have legal right to deny immigration by natives have more right to be here than we do.
Their ancestors used to live here, while our ancestors came from Europe.

I compete fine in the free market, I just have compassion for those who do not.
And I am worried about who is going to keep Social Security afloat.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 27, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > In general the most populated states pay the most in federal taxes and get disproportionately less back, like CA.
> ...



I don't want to argue enough to try to look anything up myself, but even your figures do not indicate much difference.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 27, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> I don't get that at all because athletes who make millions are also part of the wealthy elite.  Steinbrenner and Rodriguez are both the wealthy elite.  Neither are the average joe.


And that's the point. Like 100% on the left (and at least 50% on the right), you don't get it. You actually think that Alex Rodriguez was paid to "hit a baseball" or "win games". And that's *not* why he was paid.

He was paid a quarter of a billion dollars because he will generate half a billion in revenue. In ticket sales. In concessions. In parking. In jersey sales. In tv revenue. He made Steinbrenner far more than he cost Steinbrenner.

And that's how it works. If you can't generate massive amounts of money for your organization, then you can't demand a massive salary. A checkout clerk doesn't generate revenue for an organization - they are a cost. So they can only demand a minimal salary. #BasicEconomics


----------



## P@triot (Nov 27, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> The point is that education allows for more equal opportunity for anyone who wants to work for it.


And? Education in the US through high school is not only free, it's mandatory. Beyond that, there is 0 excuse for not continuing your education if that's something you desire.

Even a minimal wage, entry level job at McDonald's comes with tuition reimbursement. College completely covered.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 27, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't get that at all because athletes who make millions are also part of the wealthy elite.  Steinbrenner and Rodriguez are both the wealthy elite.  Neither are the average joe.
> ...



No, you don't get it, Rodriguez produced nothing, and was not worth those millions.
Steinbrenner actually did not earn anything either, and simply made money because he had the investment money to start with.
All people should have the same opportunity, and then their results would be due to effort and ambition, not inheritance or luck.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 27, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > The point is that education allows for more equal opportunity for anyone who wants to work for it.
> ...



No, McDonald's tuition reimbursement is only $2500/year.
Tuition now is more like $12000/ year, and that does not count food and rent, which doubles that.
So McDonalds is paying only about a tenth the actual costs.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> No, you don't get it, Rodriguez produced nothing, and was not worth those millions.


No, you don’t get it. Rodriguez was worth every penny because he generated far more than he was paid. Millions paid large ticket prices night after night just to watch him play. Millions more bought his jersey and other items with his number on it.


Rigby5 said:


> Steinbrenner actually did not earn anything _either_, and simply made money because he had the investment money to start with.


Many people had millions and ended up bankrupt. Steinbrenner didn’t - which makes him exponentially better than most.


Rigby5 said:


> All people should have the same opportunity, and then their results would be due to effort and ambition, not inheritance or luck.


All people do have the same opportunity. Bill Gates wasn’t born a billionaire. Hell, he wasn’t even born a millionaire. He came from an average, middle-class family.

Steve Jobs was given up for adoption by his mother. He was adopted by a middle class family. He died a billionaire (without a college education).

The cream rises to the top. Anyone who doesn’t succeed, failed because they had nothing to offer. It really is that simple.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> No, McDonald's tuition reimbursement is only $2500/year.
> Tuition now is more like $12000/ year, and that does not count food and rent, which doubles that.
> So McDonalds is paying only about a tenth the actual costs.


Tuition is $12,000 per year if you’re an asshole socialist lying on websites.

You can earn your associates degree for far less than $2,500 per year and then you can finish your 4-year degree for that much at a multitude of colleges. That’s just a fact.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > No, you don't get it, Rodriguez produced nothing, and was not worth those millions.
> ...



I disagree.
I think Steinbrenner and Rodriguez both both simply accomplices in what essentially is a fraud that manipulates people into paying for something that is worthless.

Anyone who starts with millions and loses it has to either be a total moron, or the victim of a swindle.
Even mutual funds give you a safe 5% return, and real estate has given me a safe 30% return.
All I have to do is come up with the assurances to get the mortgage, and then the renters buy houses for me, without me spending a cent.

And Bill Gates was a terrible example.  He never produced anything good or useful in his entire life, and committed more wholesale crimes than anyone I know.  His start was selling DOS to IBM, but he did not write DOS.  He bought it from a Seattle fireman who wrote it as a hobby, an is really just a version of the public domain OS, CP/M.  The smart thing Gates did was retain rights to DOS when he sold it to IBM, but that was really just IBM being stupid.  And the rise of Microsoft was mostly by illegal trust crimes, like buying out shelf space or dumping, so that better operating system went under.  If there is anyone in the world who should be in jail, it is Bill Gates.  Nothing he can do now can make up for what he did in the past.  And I would be he is not actually helping anyone now either, but just using charities to cover illegal medical experimentation on poor populations in the world.

I happen to like Steve Jobs somewhat, but he also actually did nothing.  He did not really know how to program.  All he did was to coordinate resources of others.  And he almost ruined Apple when he pushed the Lisa for $15k and tried to ban work on the Mac, that would later see millions at a tenth the price of the Lisa.

Look at all the millionaires/billionaires, and most of them are pretty stupid.  Ford almost went under because he thought cars should not change or vary, and they should all be black.  

I am successful but will never be a millionaire because you have to be  jerk in order to do that.
Never found anyone who is worth millions who earned it and was not a jerk, if not an actual criminal.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > No, McDonald's tuition reimbursement is only $2500/year.
> ...



Well actually that is what I did, the first 2 years at a community college, to save money.
But that is difficult and disorienting to most people, because it means going it alone constantly.
You can't have any social life at a community college, or by switching schools later.
And I still had to sleep in a VW van in the cold WI winter, to be able to afford it.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> I think Steinbrenner and Rodriguez both both simply accomplices in what essentially is a fraud that manipulates people into paying for something that is worthless.


That's exactly what all welfare socialists say. It doesn't matter what you _think_. The fact is, people paid for what they wanted.


Rigby5 said:


> Anyone who starts with millions and loses it has to either be a total moron, or the victim of a swindle. Even mutual funds give you a safe 5% return, and real estate has given me a safe 30% return.


Do you think at all before you post? Business owners have costs. They have overhead. They can't sit on their money in "mutual funds" trying not to go broke.

Please stop talking about economics. You're just embarrassing yourself at this point.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> And Bill Gates was a terrible example.


Of course he was. Because he proved everything you've cried about in this thread is pure nonsense. He was a middle class child who became a billionaire.


Rigby5 said:


> He never produced anything good or useful in his entire life


Yeah, just Microsoft Windows. The platform that literally changed the world. Which allowed businesses to operate. Which allowed other businesses (like Facebook) to even be created.

For the love of God, just stop talking. Nobody is taking you seriously at this point. Nobody.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Rigby5 said:
> ...


What if, you could have applied for unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States?  

Equal protection of our at-will employment laws could make that a reality for our posterity.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> His start was selling DOS to IBM, but he did not write DOS.  He bought it from a Seattle fireman who wrote it as a hobby, an is really just a version of the public domain OS, CP/M.  The smart thing Gates did was retain rights to DOS when he sold it to IBM, but that was really just IBM being stupid.


No son, the smart thing Bill Gates did was create Microsoft Windows. DOS didn't make billions. It was a command-based OS. It was Windows - a GUI OS that changed the world. Everything you've said to this point has been 100% wrong. You haven't made a single statement that was accurate. Which is the hallmark of socialists.


Rigby5 said:


> And the rise of Microsoft was mostly by illegal trust crimes, like buying out shelf space or dumping, so that better operating system went under.


If it was a "better" operating system, it would have beaten Windows. That's just a simple fact. Others failed to topple Windows because they were inferior.


Rigby5 said:


> I happen to like Steve Jobs somewhat, but he also actually did nothing.


Yeah, he only created Apple - the company with the highest valuation in _history_. That's all. Other than that though, he did "nothing".  


Rigby5 said:


> He did not really know how to program.


So what? Neither does your messiah Fidel Castro. Neither does Warren Buffet. Coding is not the ultimate metric of success. Jobs was a visionary. He understood what people wanted/needed and he knew how to run a company. He wasn't chief coder. He was Chief Executive Officer of Apple.


Rigby5 said:


> Look at all the millionaires/billionaires, and most of them are pretty stupid.


Yeah...it's all of you welfare queen socialists who are really the geniuses 


Rigby5 said:


> Ford almost went under because he thought cars should not change or vary, and they should all be black.


And my aunt was almost born with testicles, making her almost my uncle. But you know what? She wasn't. And Ford didn't go under. Instead, he created an empire that resulted in generational wealth for his family. Something you will *never* do.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> I am successful


No you're not. Not at all.


Rigby5 said:


> but will never be a millionaire


The first accurate thing you've said in this thread.


Rigby5 said:


> Never found anyone who is worth millions who earned it and was not a jerk, if not an actual criminal.


Yeah, they aren't first-class, caring, murderous thugs like socialists such as Fidel Castro, Joseph Stalin, and the rest of your boys.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > I am successful
> ...


What a difference a Constitution makes.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> But that is difficult and disorienting to most people, because it means going it alone constantly.


That makes 0 sense. It's not even coherent.


Rigby5 said:


> You can't have any social life at a community college, or by switching schools later.


Nor should you. You're not there for a "social life". You're there for an education. You're showing everything that is wrong with the left. They think the government should take money from everyone else and give it to socialists so they can spend $25,000 a year to have a "social life" and party at a college.


Rigby5 said:


> And I still had to sleep in a VW van in the cold WI winter, to be able to afford it.


Good. It's called _sacrifice_. Anything worth doing is hard.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

danielpalos said:


> What a difference a Constitution makes.



You wouldn't know the US Constitution if it slapped you in the face
Left-wing thugs don't care about constitutions. They ignore them, then destroy them


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > What a difference a Constitution makes.
> ...


You must love Right Wing fantasy where you only have the "gospel Truth" in whatever you claim.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > I think Steinbrenner and Rodriguez both both simply accomplices in what essentially is a fraud that manipulates people into paying for something that is worthless.
> ...



You have a point in that my socialism would give me a disposition against what I consider wastes, like professional sports, and people should be free to choose, since I could be wrong, at least for them.

But you are wrong about someone inheriting millions and just putting it into mutual funds.
There are no costs to mutual funds, so they will will make plenty of profit without risk.
If they decide to invest in a risky business instead, that is greed and their own fault if they fail.

I know about all there is to know about economics.
And the proof is I am successful, just not a millionaire.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > And Bill Gates was a terrible example.
> ...



Gates has essentially nothing to do with Windows, and it is about the worst operating system ever invented.
It could not even do multi tasking, a long industry standard for decades before Windows, until 1995.
There were dozens of better OSs before Windows that were far better, and Gates hired most of the programmers who made them, after he caused them to become unemployed.
Window is the worst throwback, and held back computers over a decade behind where they should be.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > His start was selling DOS to IBM, but he did not write DOS.  He bought it from a Seattle fireman who wrote it as a hobby, an is really just a version of the public domain OS, CP/M.  The smart thing Gates did was retain rights to DOS when he sold it to IBM, but that was really just IBM being stupid.
> ...



Wrong.
Windows originally was just a graphical image manipulation on top of DOS as first.
Windows was not a new operating system at all, and it was DOS where Gates made most of his money.
Gates resisted changing Windows to be a real operating system, and all other operating systems were always at least 10 times better.
For example, no real operating system should ever be susceptible to virus attacks like Windows always has been.
You don't need constant patches to Linux like you do for Windows.
That is because Windows uses COM as its basic organizational structure, for example DirectX is COM based, and COM is based on the non-Microsoft RPC, which is never supposed to be or going to be safe.
All Microsoft products are the worst that have ever been made, and all the competition was destroyed either illegally or by unethical trust abuses.  
Digital Research and Borland made products hundreds of times better.

Castro was a state capitalist, and the opposite of a socialist.

I do not mind what Jobs did, but he was not making a great product.  He just knew how to market.
For example of a huge mistake he kept making was the 1 button mouse.  Everyone likes more mouse buttons.

As for Ford, it was only relatives and the board of directors that saved the company, not Ford himself.
He had as many blind spots as he had good visions.

And I am likely more financially more successful than you.
You don't seem to understand the realities of life or business.
The whole point of capitalism is to leverage unfair advantages.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > I am successful
> ...



I already am successful, and have close to a million in assets.
It is just that I am now retired and not wanting to expand any more.

And again, Castro, Stalin, Mao, etc. were/are state capitalists, and not at all remotely socialist.
They were/are the exact opposite of socialist.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > But that is difficult and disorienting to most people, because it means going it alone constantly.
> ...



The phrase "going it alone" is a coloquialism, meaning that you give up your social life.
It is like the lyrics about "you want to travel with her, and you want to travel blind".

Humans NEED a social life, and the transition from high school to college can be devastating for most people.
They likely are greatly harmed by it.
You need to understand why Dickens wrote about Scrooge.
He was pointing out things wrong with material society that lacks social values.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > What a difference a Constitution makes.
> ...



The constitution is mostly left wing.
It is restricting government and protecting individual rights.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...


This is our "mission statement" for our form of Constitutional Government.  

_We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America._


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

danielpalos said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



Correct.
All that we want government for, is socialism, like to protect us from capitalist dictators, monarchs, and feudal barons.
All the bad comes from when a few want to abuse others for unearned profits.
And government is designed and intended to protect us from that.

The fact government can also become a corrupt danger, usually is from capitalists infiltrating and manipulating government away from its original purposes.


----------



## Prof.Lunaphile (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....


Nobody is going to restore the Constitutional government.
The Constitution sucks. The state constitutions suck.
The three-part separation theory is improperly deployed, and the inadequacies in the separation of powers provide the opportunity for corruption. It should not be that difficult to figure out that the Justice Department needs to be separated from the presidency in order to satisfy the citizens sense of favored cronyism. It is absurd to expect the person that was nominated by the president to then investigate the president - it absurd, yet I am the only person smart enough to figure that out. 

It is also absurd to believe that the judiciary is separated from the other branches, when they are expected to graduate their hierarchy of offices.

The 17th Amendment eliminated a check on the reliability of the state governments to demonstrate that they can agree on issues - indicating that the state constitutions are faulty. 

Gerrymandering representative districts and limiting the number of representatives fails to properly represent the diversity that the nation has evolved to.

The system sucks, and I am the only one who figured it out.





						A Better Subdivisioning of the Three-part Model will Provide Better Checks & Balances
					

http://www.us4cc.info



					www.usmessageboard.com


----------



## Prof.Lunaphile (Nov 28, 2020)

danielpalos said:


> This is our "mission statement" for our form of Constitutional Government.
> 
> _We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America._


Right, and the fact is the operations of the government cannot fulfill the mission. It is not that the mission is not a noble mission, or unreasonable; it is that the operations are erroneously organized.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

Prof.Lunaphiles said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> ...



Had to look that one up.
{...
The *Seventeenth* *Amendment* (*Amendment* *XVII*) to the United States Constitution established the direct election of United States senators in each state.
...}

Not sure I agree with all of what you wrote, but good food for thought.
Presidents are and always were too powerful.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > Rigby5 said:
> ...


Yet, all it should require is social morals for free not the Expense of Government. 

_We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America._


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 28, 2020)

Prof.Lunaphiles said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > This is our "mission statement" for our form of Constitutional Government.
> ...


We have a First Amendment.  What would be better?


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

danielpalos said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



I do not believe socialism requires the redistribution of wealth.
But we do need minimal social safety net because while primitive societies allow people to survive by simple foraging, not only make property private so that is no longer possible, but we also have greatly over populated by eliminating most natural threats, while not taking birth control seriously enough.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

danielpalos said:


> Prof.Lunaphiles said:
> 
> 
> > danielpalos said:
> ...



We had a first amendment, but between monopolistic controls, censorship, federal overstep, etc., it is not clear we do any more.
Look at the last election.
I can't believe the 2 choices forced upon us were the best possible.
And none of the media makes any sense any more.
For example, the media knew there were no significant WMD in Iraq, and yet we invaded because the media had 69% of the people believing Saddam was behind the 9/11 attacks.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

danielpalos said:


> You must love Right Wing fantasy where you only have the "gospel Truth" in whatever you claim.


The evidence is undeniable. We haven't seen a leftist in over 100 years show the slightest respect for the US Constitution. After all, you can't build large, unlimited government if you're restricted.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> I know about all there is to know about economics.


You literally don't even know the most fundamental basics about economics. I know this, because you embrace socialism. A failed ideology that has resulted in mass poverty everywhere it has ever been instituted. People educated on even basic economics do not embrace socialism.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> But you are wrong about someone inheriting millions and just putting it into mutual funds.


Again, you sound like buffoon discussing economics. Very few people "inherit" millions. Most people inherit a _business_. And rather than cash in and live life like a lazy socialist, they realize that they have a responsibility to continue (and grow) that business for all of the employees who rely on it.

You're a socialist. Stick to idiotic theories dreamed up in academia where results aren't required. When you attempt to talk real world, you just sound insane.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> danielpalos said:
> 
> 
> > You must love Right Wing fantasy where you only have the "gospel Truth" in whatever you claim.
> ...



You don't know what progressive liberalism is.
It is not about big government, but individual liberties.
And in fact, the most leftest people are the Anarchist, who want no coercive government at all.
They are very similar to the right wing Libertarians.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Gates has essentially nothing to do with Windows


Bill Gates _literally_ wrote the code for Microsoft Windows. You know you're on the wrong side when you have to resort to blatantly lying over and over.


Rigby5 said:


> and it is about the worst operating system ever invented.


Well that's a matter of personal opinion. But at the end of the day, it was adopted by over 95% of the pc's in the _world_. So clearly they were doing something right (namely it wasn't a closed system like alternatives).


Rigby5 said:


> There were dozens of better OSs before Windows that were far better, and Gates hired most of the programmers who made them, after he caused them to become unemployed.


You just defeated your own argument for me 

Those other programmers wouldn't have been unemployed if they had created a superior product. There's a reason Windows ended up on over 95% of all pc's across the entire world at one point.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > I know about all there is to know about economics.
> ...



You not only do not know economics, but you don't know anything about socialism.
Socialism has only been tried on small levels, like Wisconsin and New Hampshire.
There is nothing any government does that is not socialist in a democratic republic, because good government is always and only for socialist ends, like police, fire protection, transportation, schools, etc.,


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Windows originally was just a graphical image manipulation on top of DOS as first.


No shit. That's *exactly* what I said. A GUI (Graphical User Interface).

Now you're just taking the accurate information I'm spoon-feeding you and attempting to make it your own.


----------



## justinacolmena (Nov 28, 2020)

Prof.Lunaphiles said:


> Nobody is going to restore the Constitutional government.
> The Constitution sucks. The state constitutions suck.


Donald Trump.


Prof.Lunaphiles said:


> The three-part separation theory is improperly deployed, and the inadequacies in the separation of powers provide the opportunity for corruption. It should not be that difficult to figure out that the Justice Department needs to be separated from the presidency in order to satisfy the citizens sense of favored cronyism. It is absurd to expect the person that was nominated by the president to then investigate the president - it absurd, yet I am the only person smart enough to figure that out.


You've got too many ideas of what we should be forced to do against our will, and how to prohibit us from doing things that we might like to do.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> For example, no real operating system should ever be susceptible to virus attacks like Windows always has been.


You spend your life steeped in welfare, away from the real world. For example, there has *never* been an OS that isn't susceptible to malware and there never will be. Not MAC OS. Not iOS. Not Android (which actually had over 55,000 security flaws). Not Blackberry OS. Not Linux. Not Unix. Nothing. It has never happened.

The rest just achieved "security through obscurity". Since nobody owned them, hackers didn't care about them. Since Windows ran on 95% of the world's computers, hackers made it their _only_ target.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> The whole point of capitalism is to leverage unfair advantages.


There are no "unfair advantages" in the free market. That only occurs when government gets involved and starts picking winners and losers. You'll understand this more once you graduate.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> And I am likely more financially more successful than you.


No you're not and you know it. Successful people don't spend their life pissed off at millionaires and billionaires. Welfare queens who feel sorry for themselves do that. Successful people are too busy being successful to care how someone else is doing.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Gates has essentially nothing to do with Windows
> ...



Wrong.
Windows is written in C++ and Gates can't write a single line of C++.
I have worked on Windows, and have seen the masses of green card armies from India, China, Vietnam, the Philippines, etc. that Gates used to write Windows.

Windows also never was adopted by more than about half the computers in the world, with Unix, Linux, Chrome, Android, AppleOS, BSD Unix, and other systems

And no, I did not defeat my own argument.  Gates destroyed these other better operating systems of those times by cheating, not making a better operating system.  He did it by doing things like temporarily giving Windows away, until the competition was dead.  That is called dumping, and is illegal.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > The whole point of capitalism is to leverage unfair advantages.
> ...



There are lots of unfair advantages.
For example, someone with enough money can prevent the competition from accessing a rare resource.  
You can temporarily sell for a loss until the competition goes broke, and then you can jack prices way up and recoup your loses.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > And I am likely more financially more successful than you.
> ...



Wrong.
I happen to like computers and the way they were back when Commodore, Apple, and Atari were making some good machines, until Microsoft and IBM screwed everything all up.
I should also add Intel to the list screwup companies.
Can you imagine any computer company being so bad as to do the things Intel calls segmentation?


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Windows originally was just a graphical image manipulation on top of DOS as first.
> ...



Wrong.
Normal graphical user interfaces are inherently multitasking, with each window getting is own process.  
Windows was not like that, and was not a real operating system until only around XP, after NT got integrated with the graphics of Windows95.
In the 1980s and most of 1990s, it was actually still just DOS with graphics and could not even multi task preemptively.
A real graphical user interface has to have an operating system with underlaying independence between windows, an Windows did not, it was NOT a GUI actually, but a very poor simulation of one, with what was still a command line interface system, with one user only.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 28, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Humans NEED a social life, and the transition from high school to college can be devastating for most people.


"Devastating" 

Dude...your desperation is causing you to resort to hyperbole now. Anyone transitioning from high school to college still has their parents, still has their siblings, still has their friends, still has their co-workers.

You're just unable to admit you were completely wrong. Anyone can attend college for "free". What you want is for government to unconstitutionally steal from some people to let others party and live it up in college. Fuck that.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 28, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Humans NEED a social life, and the transition from high school to college can be devastating for most people.
> ...



No, that was my whole point in that going off to college is separation from their parents, siblings, friends, and co-workers except on a few holidays they get off and can travel back home.
No one can attend college for free.
Some states used to have free tuition, but not for decades.
I have already quoted sources saying average college costs have increased up to $25,000 a year.
Very few party or live it up in college.
When I went to college, there were 5 bloodbanks nearby, and selling blood was a main source of food money.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 29, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Gates destroyed these other better operating systems of those times by cheating, not making a better operating system.


By "cheating". Like business is a game of tag or something. 


Rigby5 said:


> He did it by doing things like temporarily giving Windows away, until the competition was dead.  That is called dumping, and is illegal.


Psst...dumb ass...that's *not* "illegal". Google gives Android away. 

Please stop talking. I'm embarrassed for you.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 29, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Wrong. Windows is written in C++ and Gates can't write a single line of C++.


Not "wrong". Bill Gates personally wrote Windows. No amount of your socialist propaganda bullshit will change that.


Rigby5 said:


> I have worked on Windows, and have seen the masses of green card armies from India, China, Vietnam, the Philippines, etc. that Gates used to write Windows.


I'm a Microsoft Certified Professional, chief. I'll run circles around you all day on this. Of course once Microsoft became a global corporation and he was CEO, he was no longer writing Windows. Stop being obtuse. He wrote the original Windows codes that launched the product and thus the company.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 29, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> There are lots of unfair advantages. For example, someone with enough money can prevent the competition from accessing a rare resource.


An innovator in the free market would create an alternative without that "rare resource". It's been done millions of times. It's the difference between innovation (capitalist) and copying (socialist).


Rigby5 said:


> You can temporarily sell for a loss until the competition goes broke, and then you can jack prices way up and recoup your loses.


Completely fair and proper. If your competition cannot figure out how to compete at a lower price, they deserve to be out of business.


----------



## Contumacious (Nov 29, 2020)

Prof.Lunaphiles said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> ...




Indeed

As long as there is a CIA - a Deep Administrative State - forget about constitutional government.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 29, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> No one can attend college for free.


Every single person in American can attend college for free. Scholarships, tuition reimbursement, etc. Lots of options for anyone who isn't a whiny socialist.


Rigby5 said:


> When I went to college, there were 5 bloodbanks nearby, and selling blood was a main source of food money.


That's the exact same with me. You know what students would do with that money? Buy beer. They loved that they could get drunk with less beer because they had given blood. Less blood meant a lower tolerance.

So we've come back full circle to - it was all about partying. Which is the reason for your position. People who are serious about getting an education have absolutely no problems achieving/affording one. None.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 29, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> No, that was my whole point in that going off to college is separation from their parents, siblings, friends, and co-workers except on a few holidays they get off and can travel back home.


Why...are they attending college in Siberia? And if so, do they not have a telephone in their dorm, a laptop for email, a cell phone for FaceTime, and all of the other communications that keeps people in a _constant_ state of connection?

Most people go to college within an hour of their home. And those that don't have all of the modern technologies to stay in touch.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 29, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Gates destroyed these other better operating systems of those times by cheating, not making a better operating system.
> ...



Don't be silly.
Dumping is illegal and is cheating.
No one is giving Android away totally for free, there are just free portions based on open source Linux, and parts that have to be purchased.
The cell phone companies that use it pay for it.
You just buy it already bundled when you buy a cellphone.
And there is nothing wrong with giving something away for free as long as you do not use that to illegally destroy the competition, and they jack the prices way up when they are gone.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 29, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong. Windows is written in C++ and Gates can't write a single line of C++.
> ...



Wrong.
Gates never programmed anything.
First of all, no one single person could, and second is that Windows did NOT launch the company Microsoft, DOS did.

{... Microsoft is a multinational computer technology corporation. Microsoft was founded on April 4, 1975, by Bill Gates and Paul Allen in Albuquerque, New Mexico. ... In 1980, Microsoft formed a partnership with IBM to bundle Microsoft's operating system with IBM computers; with that deal, IBM paid Microsoft a royalty for every sale. In 1985, IBM requested Microsoft to develop a new operating system for their computers called OS/2. Microsoft produced that operating system, but also continued to sell their own alternative, which proved to be in direct competition with OS/2. ...The first operating system publicly released by the company was a variant of Unix announced on August 25, 1980. Acquired from AT&T through a distribution license, Microsoft dubbed it Xenix, and hired Santa Cruz Operation in order to port/adapt the operating system to several platforms. ...
IBM first approached Microsoft about its upcoming IBM Personal Computer (IBM PC) in July 1980.[27] On August 12, 1981, after negotiations with Digital Research failed, IBM awarded a contract to Microsoft to provide a version of the CP/M operating system, which was set to be used in the IBM PC. For this deal, Microsoft purchased a CP/M clone called 86-DOS from Tim Paterson of Seattle Computer Products for less than US$100,000, which IBM renamed to IBM PC DOS.  The original CP/M was made by Gary Kildall of Digital Research, Inc. Due to potential copyright infringement problems with CP/M, IBM marketed both CP/M and PC DOS for US$240 and US$40, respectively, with PC DOS eventually becoming the standard because of its lower price.[28][29] Thirty-five of the company's 100 employees worked on the IBM project for more than a year. When the IBM PC debuted, Microsoft was the only company that offered operating system, programming language, and application software for the new computer.[27] The IBM PC DOS is also known as MS-DOS.
_InfoWorld_ stated in 1984 that Microsoft, with $55 million in 1983 sales
... Ireland became home to one of Microsoft's international production facilities in 1985, and on November 20 Microsoft released its first retail version of Microsoft Windows (Windows 1.0), originally a graphical extension for its MS-DOS operating system. ...}




__





						History of Microsoft - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




The company was 10 years old by the time they came up with Windows 1.0, and Windows was pretty much worthless trash no one wanted or would buy until 3.0.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 29, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > There are lots of unfair advantages. For example, someone with enough money can prevent the competition from accessing a rare resource.
> ...



That is just lies.
The rare resource Microsoft monopolized was shelf space.
That is illegal but no one was willing to take him to jail over it like they should have.
Dumping is not at all legal, and violates all sorts of anti trust laws.

{...
*Predatory or Below-Cost Pricing* 

Can prices ever be "too low?" The short answer is yes, but not very often. Generally, low prices benefit consumers. Consumers are harmed only if below-cost pricing allows a dominant competitor to knock its rivals out of the market and then raise prices to above-market levels for a substantial time. A firm's independent decision to reduce prices to a level below its own costs does not necessarily injure competition, and, in fact, may simply reflect particularly vigorous competition. Instances of a large firm using low prices to drive smaller competitors out of the market in hopes of raising prices after they leave are rare. This strategy can only be successful if the short-run losses from pricing below cost will be made up for by much higher prices over a longer period of time after competitors leave the market. Although the FTC examines claims of predatory pricing carefully, courts, including the Supreme Court, have been skeptical of such claims.
Q: The gas station down the street offers a discount program that gives members cents off every gallon purchased. I can't match those prices because they are below my costs. If I try to compete at those prices, I will go out of business. Isn't this illegal?
A: Pricing below a _competitor's_ costs occurs in many competitive markets and generally does not violate the antitrust laws. Sometimes the low-pricing firm is simply more efficient. Pricing below your own costs is also not a violation of the law unless it is part of a strategy to eliminate competitors, and when that strategy has a dangerous probability of creating a monopoly for the discounting firm so that it can raise prices far into the future and recoup its losses. In markets with a large number of sellers, such as gasoline retailing, it is unlikely that one company could price below cost long enough to drive out a significant number of rivals and attain a dominant position.
...}








						Predatory or Below-Cost Pricing
					

Can prices ever be "too low?" The short answer is yes, but not very often. Generally, low prices benefit consumers.




					www.ftc.gov


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 29, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > No one can attend college for free.
> ...



That is ridiculous.
Almost no one has time for partying at college these days.
They need all their spare time to make rent/food money.
{...
Student loan debt in 2020 is now about $1.56 trillion.
The latest student loan debt statistics for 2020 show how serious the student loan debt crisis has become for borrowers across all demographics and age groups. There are 45 million borrowers who collectively owe nearly $1.6 trillion in student loan debt in the U.S. Student loan debt is now the second highest consumer debt category - behind only mortgage debt - and higher than both credit cards and auto loans. The average student loan debt for members of the Class of 2018 is $29,200, a 2% increase from the prior year, according to the Institute for College Access and Success.
...}


----------



## Zorro! (Nov 29, 2020)

P@triot said:


> ...*We must restore constitutional government*...


Amy's On It!

For Thanksgiving, the Supreme Court upholds religious liberty




For Thanksgiving, the Supreme Court upholds religious liberty

New York could not show that church attendance has spread COVID-19 — not in comparison to business activities and political demonstrations.
thehill.com

Amy is the Cherry On Top Of The Ice Cream Sunday of Constitutional Judicial Reform, Trump's Crowning Achievement on  Job Very Well Done.  A Grateful Nation Applauds.

What a difference a one-justice swing in the Supreme Court makes. Late Wednesday, the high court, in a 5-4 ruling, granted two religious organizations an injunction, relieving them from the suffocating restrictions that New York’s Democrat governor, Andrew Cuomo, had imposed on community worship.

In June the justices split 5-4 in favor of upholding restrictions that California and Illinois had similarly rationalized as necessary to deal with COVID-19. What’s different now?

Trump Judge Amy Coney Barrett.  The trajectory is shifting away from deference to autocratic executive power and toward the Constitution’s protections of core liberties — the separation of powers and the Bill of Rights.

In Wednesday’s ruling, Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo, even Chief Justice John Roberts conceded that Gov. Cuomo’s limitations on worship “do seem unduly restrictive.” Based on his assessments of the severity of COVID-19 outbreaks, Cuomo classifies various state areas as red, orange or yellow zones. In the red zones, of greatest outbreak concern, no more than 10 people can attend a religious service, even though some of the churches seat over 1,000, and all of them at least a few hundred. In orange zones, attendance is capped at 25.

By contrast, businesses that the governor deems “essential” have no limitations on the size of meetings or other activity. As noted in the court majority’s per curiam opinion the governor denominates as “essential” such businesses as “acupuncture facilities, campgrounds, garages,” and many businesses “whose services are not limited to those that can be regarded as essential, such as all plants manufacturing chemicals and microelectronics and all transportation facilities.”

In orange zones, the court found that “the disparate treatment is even more striking.” Though religious services are limited to 25 persons, even businesses Cuomo deems “nonessential”  are free to “decide for themselves how many persons to admit.”

The majority concluded that the restrictions are not “neutral” or of “general applicability.” This finding is key in the court’s religious-liberty jurisprudence. Restrictions that apply to everyone and do not target religion but incidentally affect religious observance (e.g., a general ban on peyote use that happens to burden the rites of some religious groups) are presumptively valid. By contrast, restrictions that single out religion — i.e., that are not neutral or generally applicable — are subject to the “strict scrutiny” analysis that the court applies to burdens on fundamental freedoms. That means the state, to justify its restrictions, must show that they are narrowly tailored to serve a compelling governmental interest.

The court observed that “it is hard to see how the challenged regulations can be regarded as narrowly tailored.”

The majority had little trouble concluding that the organizations are likely to win their lawsuit. The restrictions are draconian, and they appear capricious in comparison to the solicitude the governor shows to activities he subjectively considers essential.

In addition, the organizations demonstrated irreparable harm. The restrictions are so stifling that many faithful observers would be shut out of community worship — and here, the court significantly acknowledged that “remote viewing [on television] is not the same as personal attendance,” further noting that, for example, “Catholics who watch a Mass at home cannot receive communion.”

Finally, the court concluded that the state is unable to show that church attendance has spread COVID-19 more than the many business activities and social/political demonstrations the state has indulged. It is easy to conjure less restrictive alternatives that would achieve the state’s interest in combating spread of the disease. After all, many American states and cities are employing such alternatives.

Here, “the very heart of the First Amendment’s guarantee of religious liberty” is at stake. As the majority concluded, “Even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten.”

And that makes all the difference. As the court’s liberals recognize only too well when a case involves some “right” they’ve managed to derive from “penumbras” mystically drifting from the Constitution’s “emanations,” it is not be our burden to defend our entitlement to core liberties. It is the government’s burden to prove that they must be denied, and courts eye such claims with skepticism.

Trump has done a commendable job turning this part of the system right side up.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 29, 2020)

Zorro! said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > ...*We must restore constitutional government*...
> ...




I am ambivolent.  While I do not like religion to over rule law, I do think that "flattening the curve" simply kills more and is a very bad idea.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 30, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> No one is giving Android away totally for free...The cell phone companies that use it pay for it.


Like all socialists, you’re completely and totally devoid of facts...


----------



## P@triot (Nov 30, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> And there is nothing wrong with giving something away for free as long as you do not use that to illegally destroy the competition, and they jack the prices way up when they are gone.


And there is nothing wrong with giving something away for free to destroy your competition. The consumer wins huge when that happens. If a company then “jacks up their prices”, someone will inevitably step in with a cheaper alternative because that is a golden opportunity. The beauty of the free market.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 30, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Wrong. Gates never programmed anything.


Like all socialists, you can’t bring yourself to accept that people actually earned what they have. Hang in there little buddy.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 30, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> The company was 10 years old by the time they came up with Windows 1.0, and Windows was pretty much worthless trash no one wanted or would buy until 3.0.


I said Windows launched Microsoft. I didn’t say it founded it.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 30, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > No one is giving Android away totally for free...The cell phone companies that use it pay for it.
> ...



First of all, your quoted section does not say they give it away for free but instead for the additional profit of advertising income, and second is that I already posted they have to give part of it away because they did not write it and it is open source, but they sell the additional optional parts they did write and make available if people want to buy them.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 30, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > And there is nothing wrong with giving something away for free as long as you do not use that to illegally destroy the competition, and they jack the prices way up when they are gone.
> ...



Wrong it is illegal and makes those with the most capital reserve win instead of the best or most popular products.
And it eliminates competition, so you always result with the worst and most expensive products.
Competition is good, but destroying competition with methods not dependent upon consumer input is always bad.  Your claim that just open an opportunity for another new competitor is wrong because new companies always will have less capital reserve, so will be illegally destroyed again, just like the previous competition.  What you are suggesting is as criminal as just murdering the competition, like Israel and the US are doing to Iranian.  That is against all legal principles.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 30, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong. Gates never programmed anything.
> ...


Wrong.  Gates does not know how to program in modern programming languages.  He only did a little primitive programming back in the beginning of DOS, in machine language.  
Spearheading development means coordinating, not writing code.
You clearly never talked to Gates.
It is not at all computer literate.
He only knows marketing.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 30, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > The company was 10 years old by the time they came up with Windows 1.0, and Windows was pretty much worthless trash no one wanted or would buy until 3.0.
> ...



But the point is that launched mean initially floating it, and that was DOS.
They made hundreds of millions off DOS because IBM made it the standard, and everyone had to pay for it.
Even now, all computers when they first boot up have to make calls to DOS in BIOS, so they have to pay Gates for the royalties.  The only exception are from an attempt by Intel to make UEFI as a replacement for DOS, and that is not very successful.
Microsoft's fortune is based on DOS and not Windows, with Windows 1.0 to 2.5 being extremely unpopular.
It is only Windows 3.0 that could start to make any profit at all, and it was still considered clunky, large, slow, and ungainly.  It could not play games until 1995, and most games were still launched from DOS even if you were running Windows.  It was not till DirectX that Windows could support gaming itself.


----------



## danielpalos (Nov 30, 2020)

This is what we are supposed to be doing with our form of Constitutional government:

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 30, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Wrong.  Gates does not know how to program in modern programming languages.


You've be proven wrong over and over. Gates wrote Windows. You can't create an alternate reality.


----------



## P@triot (Nov 30, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> It could not play games until 1995, and most games were still launched from DOS even if you were running Windows.


Psst...corporations don't care if a platform can play games.  

If you wanted to play games in 1985, you bought an Atari. If you want to play games in 2020, you buy an Xbox. In between, it was 100% Nintendo, Sega, and Playstation.

Only assholes have ever "gamed" on computers.


----------



## The Original Tree (Nov 30, 2020)

*I'm surprised to find out that I am only 7/10ths of a person, according to Democrat Fraud Machines used in The 6 states that cheated.

Dr Shiva from MIT just proved Vote Swapping Live on TV at The Arizona Hearing.

130% of Democrats voted for Biden vs. -30% voted for Trump.

If you are a Republican, you are only 7/10ths of a person.

Based on the revelation from MIT Scientist Dr. Shiva, that Dominion Machines swapped votes counting Trump votes at 7/10ths of a vote, and Biden votes as 1.3 votes, here are the actual legal vote totals for the 2020 Election

President Trump 98,028,452 votes
Joe Biden 56,161,000*


----------



## P@triot (Nov 30, 2020)




----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 30, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong.  Gates does not know how to program in modern programming languages.
> ...



Gates managed the project to create Windows from a very high level.
He never wrote a single line of Windows code.
And the original 5 versions of Windows were so bad, that all the people who really did write the code, should have been fired and never wrote any code again.  Even now, Windows is awful, and is only used because there really is not any other viable choices left, since Gates ruined all the other better companies.


----------



## Rigby5 (Nov 30, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > It could not play games until 1995, and most games were still launched from DOS even if you were running Windows.
> ...



Wrong.
Advertising, videos, html, or anything people want from the internet are essentially identical to games.
Buying an XBox to play games is stupid because you already need a computer for the internet, so you might as well just use that, since any computer can easily play games better than an XBox can.  No one should ever buy an XBox.  I got a deal on one last year, played it for a couple days, and dumped it.  My computer was at least twice as good at games.
Almost all games are over the internet these days, like Candy Crush, and are much better on a computer than a game machine.
Anything real, like crash simulations, mathematical analysis, circuit simulations, CAD, drafting, art work, video editing, image manipulation, etc., requires gaming graphics.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 2, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Even now, Windows is awful, and is only used because there really is not any other viable choices left, since Gates ruined all the other better companies.


MacOS is more than "viable". But Apple is expensive. Microsoft is much more affordable. Welcome to the free market, son!


----------



## P@triot (Dec 2, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Wrong. Advertising...are essentially identical to games.


We need a show called "welfare queen says the damndest things" 

Listening to socialist make the most absurd claims because they cannot defend their ideology on its merits, is as comical as it is painful.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 2, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> Wrong. Buying an XBox to play games is stupid because you already *need a computer for the internet*...


You sound _highly_ knowledgeable when it comes to technology


----------



## Rigby5 (Dec 2, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Even now, Windows is awful, and is only used because there really is not any other viable choices left, since Gates ruined all the other better companies.
> ...



MacOS is public domain version of BSD UNIX.
Apple did not write it or pay for it.


----------



## Rigby5 (Dec 2, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong. Advertising...are essentially identical to games.
> ...



To use a computer to do internet surfing, go to websites, show videos, look at art or images, etc., then you need the exact same graphics capability that games need.  Which is not the command line text of DOS.
Before NT could do graphics well, it really was a fairly useless command line program.


----------



## Rigby5 (Dec 2, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > Wrong. Buying an XBox to play games is stupid because you already *need a computer for the internet*...
> ...



I am, I have worked for Intel, IBM, HP, Sequent, and many other computer companies, including game companies .


----------



## P@triot (Dec 21, 2020)

Rigby5 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Rigby5 said:
> ...


And yet you just claimed you “need” a computer for the internet (when one can access it via a game console, iPad, and many other devices).

If you worked for any of those companies, you did so as a janitor


----------



## P@triot (Dec 21, 2020)

For those of you that are profoundly ignorant of the US Constitution (danielpalos, JoeB131, C_Clayton_Jones, etc.) it is time to educate yourselves. There is no excuse for your profound ignorance with all of the free content available to you.








						Ben Shapiro: The Federalist Papers by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay | PragerU
					

Do you understand the Constitution? What makes America different? Ben Shapiro joins Michael Knowles to discuss The Federalist Papers, a collection of essays…




					www.prageru.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 21, 2020)

P@triot said:


> For those of you that are profoundly ignorant of the US Constitution (@danielpalos, @JoeB131, @C_Clayton_Jones, etc.) it is time to educate yourselves. There is no excuse for your profound ignorance with all of the free content available to you.



I wouldn't believe Weasel Shapiro if he told me the sky was blue. 

Here's the thing.  The constitution is fine as a guideline, but it's not a suicide pact.  If the majority votes for something, that should be it, the constitution be damned.


----------



## Rigby5 (Dec 21, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Rigby5 said:
> 
> 
> > P@triot said:
> ...



That is silly because game consoles, iPads, smartphones, etc., all have cpu processors and are computers, except have limitations in terms of accessories like keyboard and mouse, which operating systems you can install, etc.
A general purpose computer is vastly superior, easier to maintain, more adaptable, and easier to use.
There is hardly and savings by going with a special purpose and limited game console, tablet, smartphone, etc.
The larger the desktop computer, the easier it is to use and update as necessary.
I do not even like laptops, because they are so hard to open, and you have to replace the heatsink heat conducting paste every couple of years.  They also can't easily have their video processor upgraded.  
Face it, large desktop console computers are the best way to do for all computer uses, including gaming.


----------



## miketx (Dec 21, 2020)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...


Lying foreign spy.


----------



## Rigby5 (Dec 21, 2020)

P@triot said:


> For those of you that are profoundly ignorant of the US Constitution (danielpalos, JoeB131, C_Clayton_Jones, etc.) it is time to educate yourselves. There is no excuse for your profound ignorance with all of the free content available to you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I would not read the Federalist Papers to get the full story of the Constitution because Hamilton and Madison who wrote them, were for a strong central government.  From the point of view of people like Jefferson, the federal government was to be severely restricted.  For example, most founders would have said a standing army, the War on Drugs, 3 Strikes, FDA, DEA, and AMA were not legal.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 21, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> The constitution is fine as a guideline,


No it’s not, snowflake. It’s the *law*. Literally the law. It is not a “guideline”. 





JoeB131 said:


> If the majority votes for something, that should be it, the constitution be damned.


*1.* The US Constitution literally says the polar opposite

*2.* So if the majority says all liberals should be executed because it is in the best interest of the US, “thats should be it, constitution be damned”?

If you’re not the most ignorant person on the planet, I don’t know who is


----------



## miketx (Dec 21, 2020)

P@triot said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > The constitution is fine as a guideline,
> ...


joeb is the apotheosis of a lying cheating shill.


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 21, 2020)

P@triot said:


> *1.* The US Constitution literally says the polar opposite



Nope, it really doesn't 



P@triot said:


> *2.* So if the majority says all liberals should be executed because it is in the best interest of the US, “thats should be it, constitution be damned”?



Why do you always go for the most absurd example you can find?  Probably because you know your argument is weak.  

Most people are fine with the big programs you don't like, and they don't really care that some Dead Slave Rapists didn't think of them.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 21, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > *2.* So if the majority says all liberals should be executed because it is in the best interest of the US, “that should be it, constitution be damned”?
> ...


Because your position is outrageously absurd. Stooping to your level and throwing it back at you, not only dumbs it down enough for you to understand it, but it allows you to paint yourself into a corner leaving you absolutely nowhere to go.

Which is why you had no response to that question. You lack the humility to admit you were *wrong* (or lied) but anything else would expose you were wrong (or lied) via the hypocrisy required to disagree.

That simple sentence proves that everything you said is 100% wrong. The US Constitution was designed to put the rights of the individual above the needs of the collective and to protect the minority from the majority. You would know had your dumb ass taken a few minutes out of your life to watch the video.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 21, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > *1.* The US Constitution literally says the polar opposite
> ...


It _really _does, high school dropout. Nowhere in the US Constitution does it state "constitution be damned". Nowhere. In fact, the Supremacy Clause of the US Constitution establishes it as the *supreme* *law* of the land. As in - nothing supersedes it. Nothing.

You're out of your league here son. Take your bullshit pipe dreams somewhere else. We only deal in facts here.


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Dec 21, 2020)

The bad news is......

The time for wasting your breath arguing with Communists and anti-Americans is past

The Good news is.....

It's time to stop negotiating and compromising with them as they will destroy your Constitution and your nation without a doubt....and defend your freedom

Take the personal oath now.....that you will defend your God given rights at all costs......then stick to it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 21, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Because your position is outrageously absurd. Stooping to your level and throwing it back at you, not only dumbs it down enough for you to understand it, but it allows you to paint yourself into a corner leaving you absolutely nowhere to go.



Oh, okay. I thought it was because you are a crazy person who can't rationally discuss policy. 



P@triot said:


> That simple sentence proves that everything you said is 100% wrong. The US Constitution was designed to put the rights of the individual above the needs of the collective and to protect the minority from the majority. You would know had your dumb ass taken a few minutes out of your life to watch the video.



Okay, that and $5.00 will get you a coffee at Starbucks.   

The reality is, ALL human society has always been a balance between the collective good vs. the individual want, from the time the tribe threw the first guy they didn't like to the Saber Tooth Tiger so the rest of the tribe could get away.  

Which is why I don't waste my time on silly stuff by people who think that human development should have ended when a bunch of slave rapists didn't want to pay their taxes.


----------



## danielpalos (Dec 22, 2020)

...the left is on it.  Biden got elected over the right wing's reality tv guy who had more fantasy than reality.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 22, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Which is why I don't waste my time on silly stuff by people who think that human development should have ended when a bunch of slave rapists didn't want to pay their taxes.


Actually, the reality is the US Constitution is the law. So it really doesn’t matter whether you like it or not.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 22, 2020)

Folks, this comment right here sums up the left and why they are so disgusting.


JoeB131 said:


> The reality is, ALL human society has always been a balance between the collective good vs. the individual want, from the time the tribe threw the first guy they didn't like to the Saber Tooth Tiger so the rest of the tribe could get away.


Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot, Adolf Hitler, Fidel Castro - they all believe that the mass-murder of citizens is justified. Even good.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 22, 2020)

danielpalos said:


> Biden got elected over the right wing's reality tv guy who had more fantasy than reality.


You mean *President Trump*? The man who restored constitutional government? Who eliminated all of the unconstitutional Executive Orders of Obama?

Meanwhile, Biden violated the Emoluments Clause. 47 years in office and he’s a millionaire while your dumb ass scrapes by on welfare.


----------



## justinacolmena (Dec 22, 2020)

P@triot said:


> You spend your life steeped in welfare, away from the real world. For example, there has *never* been an OS that isn't susceptible to malware and there never will be. Not MAC OS. Not iOS. Not Android (which actually had over 55,000 security flaws). Not Blackberry OS. Not Linux. Not Unix. Nothing. It has never happened.


Don't be such a Bolshevik. We've got a hacked judicial system running on 100% Microsoft® all the way to the Supreme Court.


P@triot said:


> The rest just achieved "security through obscurity". Since nobody owned them, hackers didn't care about them. Since Windows ran on 95% of the world's computers, hackers made it their _only_ target.


And why do you think your dirty Windoze® tricks don't work on other operating systems such as Linux?
GNU/Linux is Free and Open Source Software with full disclosure of vulnerabilities.
Fast fixes are available via software updates. No need to wait for Patch Tuesday.


----------



## justinacolmena (Dec 22, 2020)

P@triot said:


> “Naturalization” is a _synonym_ for “immigration” you fucking high school dropout.


There are few finer points of law here before you grab our papers at the border and fuck our lives over like that, you hacked 9/11 patriot.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 22, 2020)

justinacolmena said:


> And why do you think your dirty Windoze® tricks don't work *on other operating systems* such as Linux?


You answered your own question... 

That’s like asking why a Ford F-150 engine block doesn’t fit in a Kia


----------



## Dragonlady (Dec 23, 2020)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide



All of the discusions the American right has about the American Constitution has about as much validity as religious arguments about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

The document was written nearly 250 years ago, by a colonial white males living in an agrarian world before the Industrial Revolution, for a small nation spread out along the East Coast of the United States.  It has been amended and added to, but not nearly enough to keep up with a changing world.

And always Conservatives will say "What did the Founders intend".  It doesn't matter what the Founders intended if it is no longer applicable to today's world, and the way the human race lives in the 21st Century.  The problems the Constitution was written to solve and/or prevent, are not the problems you have to deal with today.  And then they try to project conservative views on a group of men who were the flaming revolutionary leftists of their time.  

Many of the constitutional problems faced today weren't even considered in the establishment of the nation.  Instead of trying to paste this 250 year old national blueprint for a mainly coastal agrarian nation of 3 million people, on this massive industrialized nation of 330 million people, is not working well for you.  

Time to look ahead and forge a new idea of who America is now, rather than look back and try to project 21st Century politics and thinking on 18th Century men.


----------



## Dragonlady (Dec 23, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> > *The liberterian idea of constitutional government is a government that is powerless to do the will of the people and does only shit that they want. Liberterians and far right conservatives are a bunch of fascist assholes*. Simply meaning that they think by the people means that the government should be so limited that the people shouldn't be able to elect a government that does more then sit on its dick.
> ...



The right doesn't want a powerless government.  Far from it.  They want a police state.  No opposition permitted.  Trump wanted to send troops in to restore order.  Barr had federal forces pulling protestors off the street in unmarked vans, to terrorize and suppress protest.


----------



## Dragonlady (Dec 23, 2020)

P@triot said:


> justinacolmena said:
> 
> 
> > And why do you think your dirty Windoze® tricks don't work *on other operating systems* such as Linux?
> ...



You have no reading comprehension at all.  She asked why the hackers can't get into other operating systems, not why the malware they write for one system doesn't work other systems.  Only Microsoft systems get hacked.  Apple doesn't get hacked either.

They have all these tricks and no Microsoft system is safe from them, but they can't get into other operating systems.


----------



## justinacolmena (Dec 23, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> Apple doesn't get hacked either.


That is because Apple (since OSX) is based on the BSD (Berkeley Software Distribution) variants of Unix (not Linux) -- mostly The NetBSD Project, I believe, which is actually Free and Open Source Software, but Apple has it customized and locked down somewhat. The FreeBSD Project and OpenBSD are also popular.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 23, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> The document was written nearly 250 years ago...


It doesn’t matter, high school dropout. It’s the *law*. It is _literally_ the law. I realize you don’t know that, but 


Dragonlady said:


> by a colonial white males


Ever notice that the racist left cannot get past skin color?


Dragonlady said:


> It has been amended and added to, but not nearly enough to keep up with a changing world.


That’s your uneducated opinion. We the People have amended exactly as needed to keep up with a changing world.


Dragonlady said:


> And always Conservatives will say "What did the Founders intend".  It doesn't matter what the Founders intended if it is no longer applicable to today's world


It does matter, high school dropout as it is the *law*.  


Dragonlady said:


> Time to look ahead and forge a new idea of who America is now...


*We the People* have already decided that the principles that America was built on are timeless and we will not be changing them. You, the uneducated Canadian, can fuck off.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 23, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> The document was written nearly 250 years ago...


Preserving liberty and protecting against tyranny is more important now than it was 250 years ago. Our founders were so amazing, they had that foresight two and half centuries ago, when you don’t even have it today!


Dragonlady said:


> It has been amended and added to, but not nearly enough to keep up with a changing world.


Preserving liberty and protecting against tyranny is more important now than it was 250 years ago. That’s a timeless principle that never changes.


Dragonlady said:


> And always Conservatives will say "What did the Founders intend".  It doesn't matter what the Founders intended if it is no longer applicable to today's world...


Preserving liberty and protecting against tyranny is as “applicable to today's world” as it was 250 years ago. That’s a timeless principle that never changes.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 23, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> No opposition permitted.


That’s the *left* in America. Perfect example as to why you shouldn’t comment on American politics (you’re too uninformed about all of it).


Dragonlady said:


> Trump wanted to send troops in *to restore order*.


You get that, folks? She fucked up. She accidentally admitted the truth.

You’re right, President Trump did want to restore order. Because that’s what normal people do. There is no right to be a lawless thug. The constitution doesn’t permit assaulting people or burning cities to the ground.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 23, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> She asked why the hackers can't get into other operating systems


Hackers can and do get into other systems, you dumb shit


----------



## P@triot (Dec 23, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> She asked why the hackers can't get into other operating systems, not why the malware they write for one system doesn't work other systems.


That’s *exactly* what she said, you high school dropout 


Dragonlady said:


> Only Microsoft systems get hacked.  Apple doesn't get hacked either.


Seriously, every time I think you’ve reached the pinnacle of ignorance, you scream “hold my beer”. 


			https://www.blackhat.com/presentations/bh-jp-08/bh-jp-08-Miller/BlackHat-Japan-08-Miller-Hacking-OSX.pdf
		



Dragonlady said:


> They have all these tricks and no Microsoft system is safe from them, but they can't get into other operating systems.


How are you not too embarrassed to open your mouth after years of being proven 100% wrong on USMB? _How_?








						Hacking the iOS/macOS webcam – Apple pays out $75,000 to bug hunter
					

A vulnerability researcher has received a bug bounty after discovering security holes in Apple’s software that could allow malicious parties to hijack an iPhone or Mac user’s camera and spy upon them. Bug hunter Ryan Pickren is richer to the tune of $75,000 after responsibly disclosing seven...




					securityboulevard.com


----------



## P@triot (Dec 23, 2020)

justinacolmena said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> > *Apple doesn't get hacked* either.
> ...


Please stop talking. Please. You are far too stupid to speak about technology.









						Hacking the iOS/macOS webcam – Apple pays out $75,000 to bug hunter
					

A vulnerability researcher has received a bug bounty after discovering security holes in Apple’s software that could allow malicious parties to hijack an iPhone or Mac user’s camera and spy upon them. Bug hunter Ryan Pickren is richer to the tune of $75,000 after responsibly disclosing seven...




					securityboulevard.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 23, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot, Adolf Hitler, Fidel Castro - they all believe that the mass-murder of citizens is justified. Even good.



So did a shitload of 19th Century American Presidents who authorized the genocide of Native Americans, so what is your point?  We could also talk about mass murder committed by Americans in the Philippines (1899-1910), Vietnam (1965-1973) or Iraq (2003- Present)... but that's probably too adult a conversation for you. 

There was the old story of how the proper southern ladies could tell you who fathered the mullatos on the neighboring plantations, but never their own.  Mass murder is like that.  We whine about other countries but get pretty indignant when people talk about our history.


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 23, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Preserving liberty and protecting against tyranny is more important now than it was 250 years ago. Our founders were so amazing, they had that foresight two and half centuries ago, when you don’t even have it today!



Our founders talked about "liberty" and "freedom" and then went home and raped their slaves.  That's how into "liberty" they were. 

"All Men are Created Equal!" 

"Um, how about us, Massa!"

"Get back to picking that tobacco before I whip you!!!"  

Let's be straight.  When the Founding Slave Rapists talked about "liberty", they didn't mean people of color, they didn't mean women and they didn't mean people who didn't own property.  

And mechanism like the Electoral College are there because they didn't trust the people.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 25, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> So did a shitload of 19th Century American Presidents who authorized the *genocide* of Native Americans


"Genocide" is left-wing dog-whistle for "I hate the United States". What the left calls "genocide", normal people call "self-defense".

Also, the horrific dictators you love were all 20th Century dictators. Don't point to the 1800's when your idols of the 1900's were a bigger problem.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 25, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Our founders talked about "liberty" and "freedom" and then went home and raped their slaves.  That's how into "liberty" they were.


Except that they *didn't*. Because you're simple-minded, it was very easy for the left to dupe you with propaganda. You now regurgitate that propaganda.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 25, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> And mechanism like the Electoral College are there because they didn't trust the people.


Those tools are there to protect the people (from the low IQ like yourself)


----------



## P@triot (Dec 25, 2020)

Every time the Democrats lose, they want to change the rules.

We are not - and have never been - a Democracy. We are a Republic. A republic designed to protect the minority. That is why the Electoral College is so important.








						Do You Understand the Electoral College? | PragerU
					

Do you understand what the Electoral College is? Or how it works? Or why America uses it to elect its presidents instead of just using a straight popular…




					www.prageru.com


----------



## P@triot (Dec 25, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Our founders talked about "liberty" and "freedom" and then went home and raped their slaves.  That's how into "liberty" they were.
> 
> Let's be straight.  When the Founding Slave Rapists talked about "liberty", they didn't mean people of color...


You cannot control being low IQ. But you can control being _willfully_ ignorant. Here is your change to educate yourself:








						What's Wrong With The 1619 Project? | PragerU
					

In August of 2019, the New York Times published The 1619 Project. Its goal is to redefine the American experiment as rooted not in liberty but in slavery. In…




					www.prageru.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> "Genocide" is left-wing dog-whistle for "I hate the United States". What the left calls "genocide", normal people call "self-defense".



Uh, guy, the United States wasn't "Defending" itself from Native Americans, it was deliberately exterminating them for the purpose of taking their land.  THAT'S GENOCIDE, buddy.   And we killed far more of them than the Nazis killed Jews.  The only reason we don't hear about it constantly is that the Native Americans don't control Hollywood. 



P@triot said:


> Also, the horrific dictators you love were all 20th Century dictators. Don't point to the 1800's when your idols of the 1900's were a bigger problem.



A bigger problem for who?  Hitler only got as far as he did because the West allowed him to.  



P@triot said:


> Except that they *didn't*. Because you're simple-minded, it was very easy for the left to dupe you with propaganda. You now regurgitate that propaganda.



Thomas Jefferson raped Sally Hemmings on a regular basis... this is historic, proven fact.  It's the real underlying problem of America... we were founded on all this flowerly language about equality and liberty, but our society is based on racism and slavery.  



P@triot said:


> Those tools are there to protect the people (from the low IQ like yourself)



Sorry, guy, let's review. 

A majority thought that Trump wasn't fit to be President, but the Electoral Anachronism put him in office anyway. 
He proceeded to wreck the economy, get impeached, cause hundreds of thousands of deaths due to his sheer incompetence, and the people finally voted him out because even though the constitution has a lot of mechanisms to supposedly protect us from an unfit president, (the 25th Amendment, Impeachment), they couldn't remove him from office.  

I'm not feeling "protected" by the fact that an incompetent idiot got into office after the majority of us voted against him, TWICE.  



P@triot said:


> Every time the Democrats lose, they want to change the rules.
> 
> We are not - and have never been - a Democracy. We are a Republic. A republic designed to protect the minority. That is why the Electoral College is so important.



No, guy, the electoral college is an awful system for a bunch of reasons....  





__





						The Electoral College Needs to Go
					

By JoeB131  The 2020 Election has proven one thing, that it is past time for America go get rid of the 18th century anachronism of the Electoral College.  The reasons that the electoral college is detrimental can be identified pretty easily.   The presidents it chooses over the will of the...



					www.usmessageboard.com
				







P@triot said:


> You cannot control being low IQ. But you can control being _willfully_ ignorant. Here is your change to educate yourself:



Yawn, Prager lamenting his lost white privilege...  Can't get worked up about that.  

Slavery was a stain on our history, it's America's original sin.  The only way we solve the problem is by 1) Owning up to it and 2) then trying to correct the injustices.   

We broke away from a relatively benevolent parliamentary democracy because some rich people didn't want to pay their fair share in taxes and they wanted to keep owning slaves.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 26, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, the United States wasn't "Defending" itself from Native Americans,


Uh...in most cases...we were.


JoeB131 said:


> it was deliberately exterminating them for the purpose of taking their land.  THAT'S GENOCIDE, buddy.


That's left-wing dog-whistle for "I hate capitalism because it requires me to support myself".


JoeB131 said:


> And we killed far more of them than the Nazis killed Jews.  The only reason we don't hear about it constantly is that the Native Americans don't control Hollywood.


That's left-wing dog-whistle for "I'm a fascist antisemite like the Nazis".


----------



## P@triot (Dec 26, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Also, the horrific dictators you love were all 20th Century dictators. Don't point to the 1800's when your idols of the 1900's were a bigger problem.
> ...


Mankind  


JoeB131 said:


> Hitler only got as far as he did because the West allowed him to.


Because of people like _you_. How many times have you posted "Saddam Hussein was none of our business"? Yeah, that's the same mantra of idiots during Hitler's reign of terror.


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Uh...in most cases...we were.



Uh, no they weren't.  

Here, let's use an example you can understand. 

"Hey, you just shot Poodle". 

"It was self-defense, he came after me." 

"Uh, you broke into his house and you were stealing his stuff!" 

"Exactly.  Self Defense." 

We invaded their country, they didn't invade ours.  Morally, we were no better than the Nazis in Poland.  



P@triot said:


> That's left-wing dog-whistle for "I hate capitalism because it requires me to support myself".



Uh, what does complaining about the GENOCIDE of Native Americans have to do with capitalism? Are you admitting Capitalism is a genocidal philosophy?  



P@triot said:


> That's left-wing dog-whistle for "I'm a fascist antisemite like the Nazis".



Naw, just a reality.  Why do we have all these movies about the holocaust, but almost none about Native American Genocide. 

I think the only movie about the slaughter of Cambodia was mostly about how a White Guy was inconvenienced. 

I don't think an American film has ever been made about the Philippine war... or that most Americans even know there was a Philippine War.


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> Because of people like _you_. How many times have you posted "Saddam Hussein was none of our business"? Yeah, that's the same mantra of idiots during Hitler's reign of terror.



Actually, most of the west was fine with Hitler until he started threatening them.  They were hoping they'd take out Stalin for them, which is why they ignore him when he annexed Austria, Czechoslovakia and, yes, Even Poland.  It wasn't until he invaded France they took him "seriously". 

Kind of the same thing with Saddam.  We were fine when he invaded Iran, but then he invaded Kuwait and threatened Exxon's profits, and we couldn't have_ that_!  

But it's not like you guys were signing up to fight him.


----------



## justinacolmena (Dec 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> You, the uneducated Canadian, can fuck off.


That’s not even Canadian. Chinese Communist Party.


JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy,





JoeB131 said:


> Sorry, guy,





JoeB131 said:


> No, guy,


Did somebody said there was a high school dropout on this thread?


----------



## P@triot (Dec 26, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, no they weren't. Here, let's use an example you can understand. "Hey, you just shot Poodle". "It was self-defense, he came after me." "Uh, you broke into his house and you were stealing his stuff!" "Exactly.  Self Defense."


It's a cute story, but like _everything_ you post, it's ignorant and propaganda.

The Native Americans didn't establish a nation. They were hundreds of individual tribes with "territories". 95% of the US was unclaimed land, and the areas that Native Americans did inhabit didn't have "deeds" or anything else because there was no established government or legal system.

Thanks for playing, Joseph (Stalin). Class dismissed.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 26, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > That's left-wing dog-whistle for "I hate capitalism because it requires me to support myself".
> ...


Not much, really. But you leftists never were much for logic or reason.

Essentially the left-wing "plan" goes like this: "we can't denounce capitalism unless we convince people it was devised by evil people with evil intent. We can't do that unless we can convince people that the US is evil. And we can't do that unless we can convince everyone that the founders were Satan".

So then you people make *false* claims about slavery, rape, and genocide.


----------



## justinacolmena (Dec 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> 95% of the US was unclaimed land,


Free range for bison or buffalo which were rounded up on a hunt from time to time by Native Americans -- whereas European people seemed to prefer European breeds of cattle on the round-up. The availability of beef was not the limiting factor to livelihood in either case.


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> It's a cute story, but like _everything_ you post, it's ignorant and propaganda.
> 
> The Native Americans didn't establish a nation. They were hundreds of individual tribes with "territories". 95% of the US was unclaimed land, and the areas that Native Americans did inhabit didn't have "deeds" or anything else because there was no established government or legal system.



Wow, so it was okay to murder them en masse because they didn't establish the same kinds of laws we did?  This is your argument.  

Well, besides the fact that is wrong... The Cherokee were considered a "Civilized Tribe" that lived in houses and followed the law.   They had won an injunction from the Supreme Court to protect their rights, but were still driven off their land on the "Trail of Tears".   

Again, Genocide is one of those things we think everyone else is guilty of. 



P@triot said:


> Essentially the left-wing "plan" goes like this: "we can't denounce capitalism unless we convince people it was devised by evil people with evil intent. We can't do that unless we can convince people that the US is evil. And we can't do that unless we can convince everyone that the founders were Satan".



Well, it's actually kind of easy to do that... you just look at the history.  

The 19th Century had three major features. 

1) The Genocide of Native Americans
2) The Enslavement of black people
3) The exploitation of immigrant labor

These things were evil. they were wrong. They did happen.  

Fortunately, in the 20th century, we had a lot of progressives who tried to right the wrongs of the past.  But there is still much more to be done.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 26, 2020)

JoeB131 said:


> Wow, so it was okay to murder them en masse because they didn't establish the same kinds of laws we did?


No, propaganda princess. It's ok to *defend* yourself against attacking tribes. I made that abundantly clear, but of course, you always have to resort to lying because you're on the wrong side of the facts.

Then you attempted to claim that it wasn't self-defense because we were "stealing" their land. I pointed out how 95% of the land wasn't even inhabited, and the land that was had absolutely no legal outline/guideline for who owned what.

Thanks for playing, Joseph (Stalin). You are dismissed.


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 26, 2020)

P@triot said:


> No, propaganda princess. It's ok to *defend* yourself against attacking tribes. I made that abundantly clear, but of course, you always have to resort to lying because you're on the wrong side of the facts.



Those tribes weren't "attacking".  They weren't getting in their canoes and crossing the Atlantic to attack Europe.  They were on their land, minding their own business when Europeans showed up and started messing things up. 



P@triot said:


> Then you attempted to claim that it wasn't self-defense because we were "stealing" their land. I pointed out how 95% of the land wasn't even inhabited, and the land that was had absolutely no legal outline/guideline for who owned what.



Except there was a legal outline, and that was the treaties that the United States government negotiated with native nations, and then proceeded to break every last one of them.  

But as Stalin said, "Treaties are like pie crusts... they are meant to be broken."  









						Treaties Brokered—And Broken—With Native American Tribes
					

See a timeline of treaties signed and then broken by the U.S. government with various Indigenous peoples across the North American continent.




					www.history.com


----------



## P@triot (Jan 23, 2021)

What a sad indictment on the left in America today - that we have to actually create "Super PACs" devoted to protecting the US Constitution. That _should_ be every American's #1 priority from birth. Tells you everything you need to know about the left.








						Sidney Powell Launches Super PAC to 'Fight Vigorously for Our Constitutional Rights'
					

Lawyer Sidney Powell has launched a Super PAC dedicated to a range of aims, including freedom of speech and "the sacred right of free and fair elections."




					www.theepochtimes.com


----------



## P@triot (Feb 17, 2021)

The federal government has become an oppressive, unconstitutional monstrosity. We must restore constitutional government.








						Daniel Horowitz: State Legislatures Must 'Take Back' Power from Executive Branches
					

The U.S. is living through a time in which the normal rigor of the legislative process has been put aside amid the pandemic, according to Daniel Horowitz.




					www.theepochtimes.com


----------



## P@triot (Apr 2, 2021)

We must restore constitutional government...








						Restoring the Founders’ Original Vision for Our Constitutional Republic
					

The growth of the administrative state through extraneous departments and independent agencies has overtaken the Founders’ original intent.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 2, 2021)

P@triot said:


> We must restore constitutional government...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, we MUST restore the constitution to it's original form. You know, like back when a hard working man could own a few slaves if he wanted to, and before wimmin got so uppity and insisted they should be able to vote. The original constitution only dealt with 13 states, and that would make it a lot easier to count votes after elections.   Great idea you got there Bubba.  I wonder why nobody ever thought of that before.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 3, 2021)

P@triot said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Uh, no they weren't. Here, let's use an example you can understand. "Hey, you just shot Poodle". "It was self-defense, he came after me." "Uh, you broke into his house and you were stealing his stuff!" "Exactly.  Self Defense."
> ...



Wrong.
There was no "unclaimed land" in north American, and the colonists knew that.
That is why they brought soldiers and hundred of rifles.
The native tribes each established a nation.
The borders of all native nations were recorded and marked.
There was established government and legal systems.
In particular in NY area., there was the Iroquois Federation of 7 Nations

{... *Iroquois Confederacy*, self-name *Haudenosaunee (“People of the Longhouse”)*, also called *Iroquois League*, *Five Nations*, or (from 1722) *Six Nations*, confederation of five (later six) Indian tribes across upper New York state that during the 17th and 18th centuries played a strategic role in the struggle between the French and British for mastery of North America. The five original Iroquois nations were the Mohawk (self-name: Kanien’kehá:ka [“People of the Flint”]), Oneida (self-name: Onᐱyoteʔa∙ká [“People of the Standing Stone”]), Onondaga (self-name: Onoñda’gega’ [“People of the Hills”]), Cayuga (self-name: Gayogo̱hó:nǫ’ [“People of the Great Swamp”]), and Seneca (self-name: Onödowa’ga:’ [“People of the Great Hill”]). After the Tuscarora (self-name: Skarù∙ręʔ [“People of the Shirt”]) joined in 1722, the confederacy became known to the English as the Six Nations and was recognized as such at Albany, New York (1722). Often characterized as one of the world’s oldest participatory democracies, the confederacy has persisted into the 21st century.  ...}

The fact little land was cleared for farming does not mean it was not used.
Hunters need more untouched land than farmers do.
All the land was used and was essential.
The natives already had to fight each other due to over population for hunter, already, even before the European colonists arrived.


----------



## justinacolmena (Apr 3, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> Yes, we MUST restore the constitution to it's original form.


The gun rights need to be restored, and Karl Marx's manifesto has got to go.


BULLDOG said:


> You know, like back when a hard working man could own a few slaves if he wanted to, and before wimmin got so uppity and insisted they should be able to vote.


No man ever owned more slaves than he was doing well enough in business to make payroll and share the wealth with his employees anyways. And I don't know that anyone objected in theory that women should vote, but those women have to be stopped from murdering and torturing unborn babies and infants, and ceased and desisted from collecting so much child support and alimony from strange men.


BULLDOG said:


> The original constitution only dealt with 13 states, and that would make it a lot easier to count votes after elections. Great idea you got there Bubba. I wonder why nobody ever thought of that before.


The Constitution provided for the admission of more states than that. The Democrats have got an "urbanization" agenda in Puerto Rico, and they're demanding a totally Marxist city hall in every locality and community before admitting it as a state. And then they've got a statehood agenda for the District of Columbia, denying the constitutional principle that the District of the seat of government is already too powerful and ought not to be a state, notwithstanding the Civil War retrocession of the original portion of the District of Columbia south and west of the Potomac river to Virginia.


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 3, 2021)

justinacolmena said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, we MUST restore the constitution to it's original form.
> ...


The constitution provided for more than just adding more states. It provided for us to adapt to a world that has drastically different problems and needs than they did when the country was funded. I'm sorry if you are too childish to adapt to a changing world, but you will just have to get over it


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Apr 3, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> justinacolmena said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



So ... You're deeply involved in the amendment process, eh?


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 3, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> justinacolmena said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


That's supposed to be done through the amendment process, douchebag.  Nothing about making DC a state is designed to provide for us to adapt to a world that has drastically different problems and needs. It's a blatant power grab, and nothing more.

You failed to fool anyone.


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 3, 2021)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > justinacolmena said:
> ...



No more than any 7th grader who wanted to pass their 4th period history class. Seems you could use a refresher course.


----------



## jc456 (Apr 3, 2021)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy


Our government was hi jacked on January 20, 2021, by demofks


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 3, 2021)

bripat9643 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > justinacolmena said:
> ...



Of course it is. The founders never intended for that many people to go without representation. Divide off those areas that are specifically government areas,( white house, senate, etc.) and form a state for the rest. Problem solved. Nobody is trying to fool anyone.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Apr 3, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



As I suspected.

Refresher course?  In what?


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 3, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Then file an Amendment, asshole.


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 3, 2021)

jc456 said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy
> ...


Was that before or after your latest abduction and anal probe?


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 3, 2021)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...


Basic American history.


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 3, 2021)

bripat9643 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Not  my job to file an amendment.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Apr 3, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Glad you feel that way.  You will never get what you want.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Apr 3, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Be specific.


----------



## justinacolmena (Apr 3, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> The constitution provided for more than just adding more states. It provided for us to adapt to a world that has drastically different problems and needs than they did when the country was funded. I'm sorry if you are too childish to adapt to a changing world, but you will just have to get over it



The Second Amendment was duly proposed by Congress and ratified by the legislatures of the severals states, and has never yet been repealed.
I'm of age and have the *absolute right* to possess and carry firearms, to wit, a right that *"shall not be infringed."*
The world changes and all that, true, but basic needs of self-defense, and defense of family, territory, homeland, etc. do not change and never will, for as long as the world stands.









						Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 9 - King James Version
					

And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth. And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea...




					www.biblegateway.com
				



Man must have the weapons to hunt and fish, according to the Bible, liable to be killed if he kills other humans. There is a everlasting covenant with God that the deluge no more will destroy the whole earth. and a rainbow in the sky as a token of that covenant, which requires guns to be valid.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 3, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Then you obviously don't view it as a problem.  The last thing this country needs is welfare parasites in DC having a voice in our government.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 3, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


_*"The founders never intended for that many people to go without representation."*_

Actually, yes they did.  The Founding Fathers were not fans of democracy.  They wanted voting strictly limited to those who were responsible and qualified.


----------



## justinacolmena (Apr 3, 2021)

bripat9643 said:


> _*"The founders never intended for that many people to go without representation."*_
> 
> Actually, yes they did. The Founding Fathers were not fans of democracy. They wanted voting strictly limited to those who were responsible and qualified.


There are certain absolute or unalienable rights -- and as far as voting goes, each person making decisions for his or her own life, versus making decisions to force other people to do or perform certain deeds against their will and restrain them from doing things that they like to do.


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 3, 2021)

justinacolmena said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > The constitution provided for more than just adding more states. It provided for us to adapt to a world that has drastically different problems and needs than they did when the country was funded. I'm sorry if you are too childish to adapt to a changing world, but you will just have to get over it
> ...


The Bible, a rainbow, and a covenant with God requires that everyone has guns? You've gotta show me the Bible verse that says that. How did that actually work when there were no guns in biblical times?


----------



## BULLDOG (Apr 3, 2021)

bripat9643 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


They certainly didn't want you to vote if you were a slave or a woman, but they wanted all free men to be able to vote.


----------



## justinacolmena (Apr 6, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> They certainly didn't want you to vote if you were a slave or a woman, but they wanted all free men to be able to vote.


The Holy Bible uses a strange allegory for voting in public elections: getting a haircut, being a man, making your own decisions, etc. and with respect to public elections counting the opinions that each man makes with his own head as the hairs on one man's head.

A "poll" is seen as "polling" or "pulling hair" etc. not about the actual length of the hair, or being a man versus a woman, but don't be such a whore or a sell-out if you're going to vote. Don't expect girly-girly "fluff" opinions to be taken seriously by men, or older or more serious women for that matter.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 6, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> justinacolmena said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



The point is to have weapons equal to those the bad guys have, whether the bad guys are thieves or agents of a dictator.
The founders were clear they did not trust mercenary soldiers and wanted only citizen soldiers instead.
We are not following the founders words.
And it is foolish.
Mercenary police is why do many Blacks are being killed by police, and mercenary soldiers is why we were lied to about Iraqi WMD.


----------



## Rigby5 (Apr 6, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...



Actually at first they had land ownership requirements before you were allowed to vote.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 7, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> BULLDOG said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Of course, since land was free for the taking, virtually every able-bodied adult male had property.  However, why would we want people who aren't responsible enough to own a piece of property to vote?


----------



## justinacolmena (Apr 8, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> Actually at first they had land ownership requirements before you were allowed to vote.





bripat9643 said:


> Of course, since land was free for the taking, virtually every able-bodied adult male had property. However, why would we want people who aren't responsible enough to own a piece of property to vote?


Gee whiz. It was never that hard. You owned or rented or somehow had the legal right to reside somewhere, get your mail, etc. -- even if you were "homeless" there were (and still are) places to stay without trespassing on other people's property. People owned any land they planted their two feet on in those days, and they voted.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 8, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> Yes, we MUST restore the constitution to it's original form.


No snowflake, I completely support the US Constitution in its current form (amendments and all).

Would you like to try again? #AskingForAFriend


----------



## P@triot (Apr 8, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> The founders never intended for that many people to go without representation.



Stop pretending like you have a clue about the founders  
Those people *choose* to live there. If they want “representation” they can move 8 minutes up the street to Maryland or 14 minutes up the street to Virginia
It’s a _choice_. You know, that thing you fascists leftists hate?


----------



## P@triot (Apr 8, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> Not  my job to file an amendment.


Spoken like a true lazy leftist. But, actually, it _is_ your job to file an amendment. You’re the one bitching and crying like a small toddler having a tantrum cause he needs a nap. If you don’t like it, the founders made it so you can change it.

Don’t blame them because you’re too damn lazy.


----------



## JWBooth (Apr 9, 2021)

*We must restore constitutional government*
How’s that working out so far?
Spooner was right.


----------



## JWBooth (Apr 9, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> They certainly didn't want you to vote if you were a slave or a woman, but they wanted all free men to be able to vote.


Good thinking on their part.
Repeal the 19th.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 9, 2021)

BULLDOG said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > BULLDOG said:
> ...


Not true.  They limited voting to property owners and in other ways.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 9, 2021)

JWBooth said:


> *We must restore constitutional government*
> How’s that working out so far?
> Spooner was right.


Not sure what that even means. We haven't restored it, so how can I comment on how that worked out? Come back when we're operating under constitutional government again.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 9, 2021)

The left is absolutely disgusting. We have to restore constitutional government and we better do it damn soon...








						School Districts Are Hiding Information About Children From Their Parents
					

American law has long recognized the rights of parents. But some school districts are acting like these rights are no longer valid.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 10, 2021)

P@triot said:


> The left is absolutely disgusting. We have to restore constitutional government and we better do it damn soon...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If a kid feels the need to hide their gender identity from the transphobic parents, you really think it's a good idea for schools to out them?


----------



## P@triot (Apr 10, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> If a kid feels the need to hide their gender identity from the transphobic parents, you really think it's a good idea for schools to out them?


If government employees - with no relation to a child whatsoever - feel it’s a good idea to make life-altering decisions for that child, we have entered North Korea / Nazi, Germany / communist China territory.

Now I get, we all know you looooove that shit. You’ve raved about all 3 many times. But normal people don’t. The _only_ people who should ever make decisions regarding a child is the biological parent (or legal guardian in the event that the biological parents are no longer around). Period. End of story.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 10, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The left is absolutely disgusting. We have to restore constitutional government and we better do it damn soon...
> ...


Chemical castration is a good alternative?

You're an imbecile.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 10, 2021)

bripat9643 said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > If a kid feels the need to hide their gender identity from the transphobic parents, you really think it's a good idea for schools to out them?
> ...


Oh he's an imbecile alright. He loves the idea of government raising everyone's children. That is, until Donald Trump and the Republicans are in control. Then he spends every waking moment losing his shit. 

I never cease to marvel at the ignorance of the left. Since Republicans cause them to come unglued, and it is absolutely inevitable that Republicans will control government, you'd think they would deeply desire the smallest, most limited government imaginable.

But nope! They just aren't bright enough to figure that out.


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 11, 2021)

P@triot said:


> If government employees - with no relation to a child whatsoever - feel it’s a good idea to make life-altering decisions for that child, we have entered North Korea / Nazi, Germany / communist China territory.



Wow. So by your logic, if a teacher suspects child abuse, and reports it to the police, that's "Nazi Germany" territory, because what goes on in the home should be the parents business?  Really, Poodle?  



P@triot said:


> Now I get, we all know you looooove that shit. You’ve raved about all 3 many times. But normal people don’t. The _only_ people who should ever make decisions regarding a child is the biological parent (or legal guardian in the event that the biological parents are no longer around). Period. End of story.



So what you are saying is child abuse is okay, and none of the government's business?  Wow, good to know, Poodle. 



P@triot said:


> Oh he's an imbecile alright. He loves the idea of government raising everyone's children. That is, until Donald Trump and the Republicans are in control. Then he spends every waking moment losing his shit.
> 
> I never cease to marvel at the ignorance of the left. Since Republicans cause them to come unglued, and it is absolutely inevitable that Republicans will control government, you'd think they would deeply desire the smallest, most limited government imaginable.



Actually, no.  Republicans shouldn't be in charge because they are fucking incompetent...  They never make the government any smaller... in fact, they grow government at about the same rate as Democrats do.  

The problem wasn't that Trump was in charge, it was that Trump handled everything BADLY.  resulting in 500,000 dead, 65 million jobs lost, riots in the streets, a wrecked economy. 

If you guys were really for "small government", you wouldn't be trying to ban abortion, roll back voting rights or dismantle unions.   

When a crisis hit, Trump went full Keynesian, pumping the economy full of money, because that's what you do.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Wow. So by your logic, if a teacher suspects child abuse, and *reports it to the police*, that's "Nazi Germany" territory, because what goes on in the home should be the parents business?  Really, Poodle?


Bwahahaha! You just tried to compare hiding stuff from parents while making life-altering decisions to reporting a crime to law enforcement (who will in fact immediately involve the parents). #EpicFail #YouTriedAndFailed #WouldYouLikeToTryAgain?

I love when Joe's love of oppressive dictatorships backs him into a corner and forces him to say whack-job shit


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, no.  Republicans shouldn't be in charge because they are fucking incompetent...


I rest my case, folks. Joe isn't bright enough to figure out that Republicans will always gain control again at some point (as will Dumbocrats) so voting for a government with unlimited power is a special kind of ignorant. 

Not for nothing, but his "fucking incompetent" comment is left-wing dog-whistle for "*they won't give me free shit and handouts so I hate them*".


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> The problem wasn't that Trump was in charge, it was that Trump handled everything BADLY.


It was only "bad" for the anti-American, pro-oppressive-dictatroship tools. Everyone else was _loving_ the *record low unemployment*, *record market highs*, *lower taxes,* higher incomes, and world peace.

The people you masturbate over 24x7 (the CCP who tortures and oppresses people) are the one's who gave the world COVID, dill-hole


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> If you guys were really for "small government", you wouldn't be trying to ban abortion, roll back voting rights or dismantle unions


Uh..."right to work laws" = *LESS* control over people (which is why you hate is so much) 

Georgia expanded voter rights  (even left-wing propaganda machine CBS had to admit that much)

Allowing murder isn't an indication of "small government". It's a sign of ignorant large, left-wing governments engaging in genocide.

#YouTriedAndFailedYetAGAIN


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

Father,

  This is the day that God has made. Let us rejoice, and be glad in it. We pray for Joe today, Lord. He is lost, confused, hurt, and separated from you. We pray that You will leave the 99 to bring him home. He's not bad, he's just had bad things happen to him and he didn't know how to cope with that. Use all of that and more to help him find You.

In Jesus Name, Amen


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 11, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Bwahahaha! You just tried to compare hiding stuff from parents while making life-altering decisions to reporting a crime to law enforcement (who will in fact immediately involve the parents).
> 
> I love when Joe's love of oppressive dictatorships backs him into a corner and forces him to say whack-job shit



Uh, guy... you are the one who has backed yourself into a corner.  

So let's review your bit of crazy. A teacher suspects a child might be trans.. The teacher didn't make the kid trans, the kid came to that conclusion all on his own...  

So, um, yeah, being someone a kid can trust when they can't trust their parents... um, that would be a good thing. 



P@triot said:


> Uh..."right to work laws" = *LESS* control over people (which is why you hate is so much)
> 
> Georgia expanded voter rights  (even left-wing propaganda machine CBS had to admit that much)



Wow, man, that's fucking Orwellian.  How is keeping people from voting expanding voting rights. 

The problem with you guys on the LIbertarian Right is you think "Freedom" is the ability of the rich to fuck the rest of us.  

You certainly don't want the anarchy of where we can kill our bosses if we don't like their decisions.  That would be anarchy.  



P@triot said:


> Father,
> 
> This is the day that God has made. Let us rejoice, and be glad in it. We pray for Joe today, Lord. He is lost, confused, hurt, and separated from you. We pray that You will leave the 99 to bring him home. He's not bad, he's just had bad things happen to him and he didn't know how to cope with that. Use all of that and more to help him find You.
> 
> In Jesus Name, Amen



Mighty C'Thulhu, 

this is the day your Tentacles have made.  Let us rejoice, and be glad in it.  We pray for Poodle today, Lord.  He is stupid, mean, and really the kind of amoral asshole you would love.  He read Ayn Rand as a teen and really thinks selfishness is a life strategy.  Let us hope one day, he learns to be a decent human being. 

In C'Thulhu's Name, Amen.


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 11, 2021)

P@triot said:


> It was only "bad" for the anti-American, pro-oppressive-dictatroship tools. Everyone else was _loving_ the *record low unemployment*, *record market highs*, *lower taxes,* higher incomes, and world peace.
> 
> The people you masturbate over 24x7 (the CCP who tortures and oppresses people) are the one's who gave the world COVID, dill-hole



Uh, guy, Trump fails the basic Reagan test.  

Are you better off than you were four years ago. For most people, the answer to that is NO!  

China didn't give us Covid.  Trump's incompetence in handling it gave us Covid. The recession and riots are on him.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Bwahahaha! You just tried to compare hiding stuff from parents while making life-altering decisions to reporting a crime to law enforcement (who will in fact immediately involve the parents).
> ...



No kid would come to that conclusion on their own.  It must first be suggested to them, and reinforced.


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 11, 2021)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> No kid would come to that conclusion on their own. It must first be suggested to them, and reinforced.



Really?  

You really think that no kid decides to be trans or gay until someone suggests it to them?


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > If government employees - with no relation to a child whatsoever - feel it’s a good idea to make life-altering decisions for that child, we have entered North Korea / Nazi, Germany / communist China territory.
> ...


Chemical castration is child abuse, moron.


JoeB131 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > No kid would come to that conclusion on their own. It must first be suggested to them, and reinforced.
> ...


Why do you believe otherwise?  How would it come into a kid's head that he should have an operation to change his sex if it wasn't for leftwing propaganda?


----------



## Markle (Apr 11, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> Mercenary police is why do many Blacks are being killed by police, and mercenary soldiers is why we were lied to about Iraqi WMD.








"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
*- President Clinton in 1998* “

[…], when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world", and when I say to him, "You have used weapons of mass destruction before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again.”* 
- President Clinton , Jan. 27, 1998 – State of the Union 
*
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
*- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 *.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- *President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.*

“Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraqis *nuclear,* chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.”

“Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.”

“Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.”
*- President Bill Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998*

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- *Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 Clinton Secretary of State
*
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed."
*- Madeline Albright, 1998 Clinton Secretary of State
*
"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
*- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 " 

Update: September 8, 2005* *- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser* was sentenced to community service and probation and fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives and intentionally destroying some of them..

[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton.
*- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 *.

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- *Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 *.

Former Vice President Joe Biden urged the U.S. government in 1998 to pursue a strategy to ‘dethrone’ Saddam Hussein over allegations the Iraqi strongman was hiding weapons of mass destruction.

Biden, the-then ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was one of President Bill Clinton’s most vocal allies in the battle to pressure Hussein to abide by terms established after the Gulf War requiring Iraq to destroy its stockpile of chemical weapons. * - Former Vice President Joe Biden 1998 *1998: Joe Biden Urged U.S. to 'Dethrone' Saddam Hussein Over WMDs

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- *Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 *.


"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- *Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002*

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- *Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 *.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- *Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002*.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- *Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002* .

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons but has not yet achieved nuclear capability."
- *Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002*.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- *Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 *.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- *Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002*.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- *Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002*.

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."
*- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002 
*
"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."
*- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002*

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
*- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 .*

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War."
*- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003*" (Currently President Barack Hussein Obama’s Secretary of State)

I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out."
*- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003 *

"Saddam is gone and good riddance," former President Bill Clinton said yesterday, but he urged President Bush to resist trying to get even with nations that opposed the war.

"There are German and French soldiers in Afghanistan today. Does the President want them to come home?" Clinton said at a Manhattan forum on corporate integrity.

Democrats on Iraq + WMD's (Weapons of Mass Destruction)


He [President Clinton] praised Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for their handling of the war, but said Bush should have waited longer before attacking for the "chance that either [Saddam Hussein] would have disarmed or . . . we would have had far more members of the Security Council with us."

*Clinton also said Bush should not be faulted if banned weapons of mass destruction aren't found.

"I don't think you can criticize the President for trying to act on the belief that they have a substantial amount of chemical and biological stock. . . . That is what I was always told," Clinton said.

- Former President Clinton *Wednesday, April 16, 2003*

"Could Be One of the Great Achievements of This Administration" The vice president said he’d been to Iraq 17 times and visits the country every three months or so. "I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society" he said. "It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."*
*- Vice President Joe Biden (D) Feb. 10, 2010 
*


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > No kid would come to that conclusion on their own. It must first be suggested to them, and reinforced.
> ...



You did not mention gay, and neither did I.  Touch not the goalposts.


----------



## Dragonlady (Apr 11, 2021)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide



Which is it - we must put the anti-democratic authoritarians, a.k.a. Republicans, into office, or your must restore Constitutional government, because you can't do both.  Republicans sent unmarked military units to Portland to pick up protestors off the street, and take them to an undisclosed location, so a Party which would do that, is not working under the Constitution, and that's before Trump tried a coup.

You cannot start a thread about preserving the Constitution without mentioned the unConstitutional behaviour of Donald Trump and Republican Party around the 2020 election.


----------



## Markle (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, no. Republicans shouldn't be in charge because they are fucking incompetent... They never make the government any smaller... in fact, they grow government at about the same rate as Democrats do.
> 
> The problem wasn't that Trump was in charge, it was that Trump handled everything BADLY. resulting in 500,000 dead, 65 million jobs lost, riots in the streets, a wrecked economy.
> 
> ...









Are you acting ignorant, or are you really that ignorant about this issue?

As you know, as a result of Communist China unleashing a deadly virus on the world.  As a result, tens of millions of people were thrown out of work and millions of businesses had to close through no fault of their own.

President Trump acted quickly and decisively by closing flights to and from the area where the virus originated.  He put in place a plan to do the impossible, create a vaccine in far less than the typical 2-10 years typically required.  He did that by cutting red tape, not shortcutting safety procedures.  Another reason it was available so quickly is that companies with a solid vaccine were able to begin manufacturing the vaccine for distribution.  When the vaccines were proven effective, safe, and approved by the FDA, they had millions of doses ready to ship that day.

You may hate President Trump but you cannot deny his effectiveness.  If you do, you're lying to yourself and intentionally being a fool.  But hey, whatever floats your boat!  Right?


----------



## Dragonlady (Apr 11, 2021)

Markle said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, no. Republicans shouldn't be in charge because they are fucking incompetent... They never make the government any smaller... in fact, they grow government at about the same rate as Democrats do.
> ...



Given that you have the highest rate of death and disease in the world, I certainly can deny that Trump has been effective in dealing with the virus. 

In fact, I think that Donald Trump should be charged with negligent homicide with regard to the rate of deaths in the United States of America.  He could not have done a worse job if he had been trying to kill the most number of people in the world.

The constant scapegoating of the Chinese for the failure of Trump’s virus response is beyond ridiculous. You’re still blaming the Chinese for the deaths when no other first world country in the world has anything approaching the level of disease and death that you do?

Denial is not just a river in Egypt.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> So let's review your bit of crazy. A teacher suspects a child might be trans.. The teacher didn't make the kid trans, the kid came to that conclusion all on his own...
> 
> So, um, yeah, being someone a kid can trust when they can't trust their parents... um, that would be a good thing.


Who decides what equals "trust"? You keep creating a false narrative. The argument is if a fucking government employee has the right to help a child make a life-altering decision while *hiding* that decision from the parents (the answer of course is _hell_ *no*, no matter how much children transitioning turns you on).

You backed yourself into a corner and now you sound like a lunatic.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Georgia expanded voter rights  (even left-wing propaganda machine CBS had to admit that much)
> ...


*1. *You love Orwellian. You live for Orwellian. You can't stop raving about China, the CCP, and how the torture people who don't fall in line.

*2.* You should really start asking a trusted adult to read the article to you before commenting. How embarrassing for you:


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> He read Ayn Rand as a teen and really thinks *selfishness is a life strategy*.


Says the guy who literally will *not* help _anyone_. "Selfishness is a life strategy" is literally the slogan of the left. Demand that government take from others and give to them.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, Trump fails the basic Reagan test.
> 
> Are you better off than you were four years ago. For most people, the answer to that is NO!


We were _infinitely_ better off (until China Joe was sworn in):

*Record low unemployment*
*Record market highs*
Lower taxes
Higher incomes
4 historic peace agreements
Not a single war on his watch


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> China didn't give us Covid.  Trump's incompetence in handling it gave us Covid


WTF? Was President Trump in charge in Italy? Canada? Japan? France?

Snowflake, I get that China is paying you to spread propaganda on the internet, but you have to make your nonsense at least _slightly_ plausible. COVID came from the sick, oppressive, communist nation you masturbate over 24x7. Period. End of story.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

Dragonlady said:


> Which is it - we must put the anti-democratic authoritarians, a.k.a. Republicans, into office


The Republicans get us infinitely closer to constitutional government than the oppressive Dumbocrats.

Especially Republicans like Donald Trump, who restored constitutional government for the United States. He pulled us out of the repulsive W.H.O., he reversed Obama's unconstitutional block of the Keystone Pipeline, he reversed Obama's unconstitutional block of the Dakota pipeline, he pulled us out of the repulsive (unconstitutional) Paris Accord, etc. The list goes on and on and on.


----------



## Leviticus (Apr 11, 2021)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’
> ...


There is a very deep misunderstanding of exactly what the 10th amendment does.  For some odd reason for writers have it in their heads that if a law is not specifically written word for word in the Constitution that it's unconstitutional.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> He read Ayn Rand as a teen and really thinks selfishness is a life strategy


God always delivers the perfect news story directly to me whenever Joey spreads propaganda (never even have to search for this stuff  ).

Sure pays to be a selfish left-wing marxist, doesn't it Joey???








						Report: Marxist Black Lives Matter Co-founder Bought Four Homes since 2016
					

Patrisse Khan-Cullors, a co-founder of the Black Lives Matter movement and a "trained Marxist," is reported to have bought four homes.




					www.breitbart.com


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Apr 11, 2021)

Leviticus said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



*"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."*

English.  Means what it says, no more no less.


----------



## Leviticus (Apr 11, 2021)

P@triot said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > China didn't give us Covid.  Trump's incompetence in handling it gave us Covid
> ...




Trump downplayed the pandemic for most of 2020,  claiming that the virus didn't actually exist and that any deaths were caused by the flu, and that the high death count wasn't real and was a hoax created by the Democrats and China.

When he was forced to actually admit that covid-29 was a real threat, he continued downplaying it, claiming that social distancing and masks were not necessary.  He also spread dangerous false information, such as injecting bleach into the body to kill the virus.


----------



## Leviticus (Apr 11, 2021)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Leviticus said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...




The authority to pass law is a singular power.  Every single law does not need specific language written in the constitution to authorize it.


----------



## Dragonlady (Apr 11, 2021)

P@triot said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > So let's review your bit of crazy. A teacher suspects a child might be trans.. The teacher didn't make the kid trans, the kid came to that conclusion all on his own...
> ...



Well you’re working yourself into a right sense of outrage over something that seldom ever happens. Gin up the outrage machine!

How many trans people do you know? How often does this come up? Why aren’t you talking about real issues instead of cultural bullshit being pushed by right wing media outlets?

How long are you going to continue to be a gullible fool for the republican right wing outrage machine?


----------



## MadChemist (Apr 11, 2021)

Dragonlady said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> ...



Please tell us which states that republican governors fit what you describe.  

Can we compare them to the wicked witch of the west who rules Michigan ?


----------



## MadChemist (Apr 11, 2021)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide



I realize this thread is years in the making.

It seems your title is overarching but your OP is pretty focused.

Just saying.

Anyway, here is an article from CATO that is pretty good....



			https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/catos-letters-9.pdf


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Apr 11, 2021)

Leviticus said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > Leviticus said:
> ...



Indeed, but the legislation passed may not surpass the authority assigned to the federal government by the Constitution.  The federal government may not legally grant itself additional authority short of a constitutional amendment.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

Dragonlady said:


> Well you’re working yourself into a right sense of outrage over something that seldom ever happens.


You missed the entire discussion (as usual). Government employees should not attempt to make major life choices for children (while simultaneously hiding those major life choices from the child’s parent). Only a left-wing lunatic would think that that kind of Nazi, Germany bullshit is a good idea.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 11, 2021)

Dragonlady said:


> How many trans people do you know?


As usual, you can’t even follow the discussion. This *isn’t* about “trans people”, you sick sex-obsessed freak. 

It’s about government attempting to take over parental rights and parental decisions, devoid of any reasonable legal grounds to do so.


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 12, 2021)

bripat9643 said:


> Chemical castration is child abuse, moron.



which isn't what anyone is doing....  but never mind. 



bripat9643 said:


> Why do you believe otherwise? How would it come into a kid's head that he should have an operation to change his sex if it wasn't for leftwing propaganda?



I'll ask you again- when did you decide to be straight?  

If you want to claim that sexual orientation or identity is a "choice", then there had to be a point where you made that decision.


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 12, 2021)

P@triot said:


> You missed the entire discussion (as usual). Government employees should not attempt to make major life choices for children (while simultaneously hiding those major life choices from the child’s parent). Only a left-wing lunatic would think that that kind of Nazi, Germany bullshit is a good idea.



Except, of course, no one is doing that.  

Again, you guys live under the impression that sexual orientation is a choice.  It really isn't.  

When did you decide you liked girls?  



P@triot said:


> As usual, you can’t even follow the discussion. This *isn’t* about “trans people”, you sick sex-obsessed freak.
> 
> It’s about government attempting to take over parental rights and parental decisions, devoid of any reasonable legal grounds to do so.



Except we ask teachers to do these things all the time...  to report child abuse, to develop educational programs for special needs students, etc.


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 12, 2021)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> You did not mention gay, and neither did I. Touch not the goalposts.



It's the same thing.  Sexual orientation and identity aren't "choices".  They are what they are.  

When did you decide to become a cisgender straight male?   Oh, wait, you didn't. You just were.  



P@triot said:


> God always delivers the perfect news story directly to me whenever Joey spreads propaganda (never even have to search for this stuff  ).
> 
> Sure pays to be a selfish left-wing marxist, doesn't it Joey???



Uh, guy, you can worry about that sort of thing, I don't.  



P@triot said:


> Who decides what equals "trust"? You keep creating a false narrative. The argument is if a fucking government employee has the right to help a child make a life-altering decision while *hiding* that decision from the parents (the answer of course is _hell_ *no*, no matter how much children transitioning turns you on).
> 
> You backed yourself into a corner and now you sound like a lunatic.



Again, your whole premise is that this is a 'decision".   Which begs the question again, when did you decide to be straight, assuming you are and not a closeted homosexual like Rush Limbaugh.  

Children aren't the property of their parents...


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 12, 2021)

Markle said:


> Are you acting ignorant, or are you really that ignorant about this issue?
> 
> As you know, as a result of Communist China unleashing a deadly virus on the world. As a result, tens of millions of people were thrown out of work and millions of businesses had to close through no fault of their own.



China did nothing of the sort.  Trump had months of warning that this Covid thing was a problem and he ignored it. 



P@triot said:


> WTF? Was President Trump in charge in Italy? Canada? Japan? France?



Actually, Japan handled Covid pretty well.  Even though they were much closer to China, they did all the things Trump refused to do, cancelled the Olympics, imposed social distancing nation-wide. 

So while the US has had over half a million Covid deaths, Japan's total covid deaths are less than 10,000.  Even more impressive when you remember Japan has more old people than we have.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Apr 12, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > You did not mention gay, and neither did I. Touch not the goalposts.
> ...



It's absolutely not.  Pretending you are what you can never be is a mental disorder, the same as someone claiming to be Napoleon or Jesus.



JoeB131 said:


> Children aren't the property of their parents...



Like hell.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 12, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > You missed the entire discussion (as usual). Government employees should not attempt to make major life choices for children (while simultaneously hiding those major life choices from the child’s parent). Only a left-wing lunatic would think that that kind of Nazi, Germany bullshit is a good idea.
> ...


Uhhh...that’s _exactly_ what is happening. That’s what the entire article was about. Stopping that nonsense. Man you need to learn how to read.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 12, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Again, you guys live under the impression that sexual orientation is a choice.


WTF are you even talking about? None of this is about “sexual orientation”. It’s about the transgender mental illness and schools assisting children in transitioning while hiding it from parents. You’re not even following the discussion here.


JoeB131 said:


> It really isn't.


But since you brought up the left’s favorite topic (sexual deviance), I have *never* said that sexual orientation is a “choice”. Never.

But that has nothing to do with the mental illness of gender dysphoria or the topic of schools making “gender transition” decisions for students while hiding it from parents.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 12, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Children aren't the property of their parents...


Want to bet? The sure as fuck are. But they are *not* the property of the state, despite your deep desire for them to be.


----------



## Leviticus (Apr 13, 2021)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Leviticus said:
> 
> 
> > Billy_Kinetta said:
> ...



Yes but there has always been debate over exactly what the constitution gives authority over.

Elections are a prime example.  The constitution gives states control over elections, but it also allows Congress to regulate elections in cases where state laws violate voters rights or other cases.  
This is something many on the right ignore.


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 13, 2021)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> It's absolutely not. Pretending you are what you can never be is a mental disorder, the same as someone claiming to be Napoleon or Jesus.



Uh, guy, we have people who have breast augmentations, liposuctions, gastric bypasses, hair transplants all the time trying to change their physical characteristics.  

Are all those people mentally ill as well?


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 13, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Want to bet? The sure as fuck are. But they are *not* the property of the state, despite your deep desire for them to be.



No, they really aren't the property of their parents.  They are the responsibility of their parents and their teachers. 

If a teacher sees something going on, they have a responsiblity to take action.  Usually that should involve the parents, but sometimes it doesn't. 

So what are we talking about here.  We are talking about teachers getting kids help dealing with their gender identity when their parents are religious nuts.  Just can't see that as a bad thing. 

Now, if we can get parents to stop inflicting religion on their kids, that would be awesome.  I would have LOVED to have avoided 12 years of Catholic Stupidity.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Apr 13, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > It's absolutely not. Pretending you are what you can never be is a mental disorder, the same as someone claiming to be Napoleon or Jesus.
> ...



Nope.  Just vain.  They are trying to improve what they have, not change what they are and demand everyone accept their delusion.

You can hack off a penis and have plastic tits installed, but it's no more than a permanent Halloween costume.


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 13, 2021)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> Nope. Just vain. They are trying to improve what they have, not change what they are and demand everyone accept their delusion.
> 
> You can hack off a penis and have plastic tits installed, but it's no more than a permanent Halloween costume.



Again, how is that any different than any other cosmetic surgery?  I mean other than your horror at the thought of picking up a he-she at the bar.


----------



## Billy_Kinetta (Apr 13, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Billy_Kinetta said:
> 
> 
> > Nope. Just vain. They are trying to improve what they have, not change what they are and demand everyone accept their delusion.
> ...



That you do not understand why is indicative of your level of intelligence.


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 14, 2021)

Billy_Kinetta said:


> That you do not understand why is indicative of your level of intelligence.



Naw, guy, the only reason why this upsets you is our own bigotry.   It's a lot easier to get a tummy tuck than sex-reassignment surgery.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 26, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Again, how is that any different than any other cosmetic surgery?  I mean other than your horror at the thought of picking up a he-she at the bar.


Your enthusiasm for the idea that you might pick up a he-she at a bar is rather disturbing. You get far too turned on by this shit. FFS man.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 26, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> It's a lot easier to get a tummy tuck than sex-reassignment surgery.


I would hope so. A tummy-tuck *isn't* genital _mutilation_. Fuck, it's not even permanent.


----------



## JimH52 (Apr 26, 2021)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...


When I first read  “We must restore constitutional government”...I thought we were going have another January 6th....


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 27, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Your enthusiasm for the idea that you might pick up a he-she at a bar is rather disturbing. You get far too turned on by this shit. FFS man.



Naw, I don't give it much thought at all, other than all you wingnuts who are obsessed by it... you think that Caitlin Jenner is going to march on your churches and piss on your bibles.  



P@triot said:


> I would hope so. A tummy-tuck *isn't* genital _mutilation_. Fuck, it's not even permanent.



It's body mutilation...  so are boob jobs, hair plugs, etc.


----------



## my2¢ (Apr 27, 2021)

If we're to restore a Consitutional government then it must not be done on any cafeteria plan where we pick-and-choose  our personal preferences for things we'd like restored.  It seems to me for a true restoration our choice would be either (1) be ruled by the limits of thought back in 1776 or (2) kick things off with a Constitutional Convention to bring the document up to date.    One example, the nation's founders saw fit to gave ultimate command of our land and sea forces to the President but we only reasonably imply that now includes our air and the brand new space force.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Your enthusiasm for the idea that you might pick up a he-she at a bar is rather disturbing. You get far too turned on by this shit. FFS man.
> ...


Is that why you’ve mentioned that over 71 times just here on USMB alone? Because you “don’t give it much thought at all”? 

I keep telling you, the Nazi propaganda techniques you are so deeply in love with do not work in the 21st century. It’s all captured on the internet and indexed.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > I would hope so. A tummy-tuck *isn't* genital _mutilation_. Fuck, it's not even permanent.
> ...


No dill-hole, it’s *not*. It’s genital-mutilation. And “boob-jobs” or “hair plugs” don’t even remotely meet the standard of “body mutilation”. Watching you work so hard to deny reality and create an alternate reality is comic gold.


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 28, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Is that why you’ve mentioned that over 71 times just here on USMB alone? Because you “don’t give it much thought at all”?
> 
> I keep telling you, the Nazi propaganda techniques you are so deeply in love with do not work in the 21st century. It’s all captured on the internet and indexed.



I only bring it up when one of you nuts think this is that new social issue that is going to get you back into power. 

I mean, it's hysterical to watch you guys go nuts over this non-issue.  



P@triot said:


> No dill-hole, it’s *not*. It’s genital-mutilation. And “boob-jobs” or “hair plugs” don’t even remotely meet the standard of “body mutilation”. Watching you work so hard to deny reality and create an alternate reality is comic gold.



Boob jobs aren't body mutilation? 









						Girl, 19, dies a year after boob job gone wrong left her in vegetative state
					

Emmalyn Nguyen died earlier this month, 14 months after booking a confidence-boosting breast enlargement that went horribly wrong




					metro.co.uk
				








__





						13 Examples of Plastic Surgery Gone Wrong (NSFW)
					

From breast implants in the butt to a literal missing nose




					www.womenshealthmag.com


----------



## P@triot (Apr 28, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> I only bring it up when one of you nuts think this is that new social issue that is going to get you back into power.


We *never* left “power”, snowflake. 








						Even Though Biden Won, Republicans Enjoyed The Largest Electoral College Edge In 70 Years. Will That Last?
					

Going into the presidential election, we expected President Trump to have an advantage in the Electoral College because the key battleground states were more Re…




					fivethirtyeight.com
				












						The 2020 Election Was A Good One For Republicans Not Named Trump
					

Democrat Joe Biden is president-elect, but Republicans made gains down the ballot in the House and outperformed the polls in Senate races.




					www.npr.org
				












						Why the future looks bright for the Republican Party | CNN
					

Richard N. Bond writes that while the Electoral College vote this week confirms Joe Biden's win, Republicans have a lot to be proud of given their surprise wins at the federal, state and local level.




					www.cnn.com
				





JoeB131 said:


> I mean, it's hysterical to watch you guys go nuts over this non-issue.


It’s _creepy_ watching how turned on and frothy you get talking about it 24x7. You mention meeting one in a bar at least 3x’s per week.


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 29, 2021)

P@triot said:


> We *never* left “power”, snowflake.



Uh, yeah, guy, you did.... you lost the last election.   I know you curdle up in the fetal position whenever you hear the words "President Biden".


----------



## P@triot (Apr 29, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, yeah, guy, you did.... you lost the last election.


Um…we won the election. Gained more seats across the nation than the Dumbocrats. Which has been a trend ever since the failure known as Barack Obama terrorized this nation. It’s hilarious reading your posts. You literally cannot figure out which way is up.








						The 2020 Election Was A Good One For Republicans Not Named Trump
					

Democrat Joe Biden is president-elect, but Republicans made gains down the ballot in the House and outperformed the polls in Senate races.




					www.npr.org


----------



## JoeB131 (Apr 30, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Um…we won the election.



No, guy, you lost the election by 7 million votes, and lost governorships and senate seats as well as the presidency. 

That you picked up a few Gerrymandered seats isn't much to be impressed with.


----------



## P@triot (Apr 30, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> No, guy, you lost the election by 7 million votes, and lost governorships and senate seats as well as the presidency.


We dominated governorships, mayorships, etc. coast-to-coast. Even hard core leftists admitted it. You cannot lie your way into an alternate reality, son.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 1, 2021)

P@triot said:


> We dominated governorships, mayorships, etc. coast-to-coast. Even hard core leftists admitted it. You cannot lie your way into an alternate reality, son.



Okay, guy.. Most of the major governorships weren't up this time...   I mean, I guess you should be happy you dominate the areas very few people live in.... but the places where people actually live, you got your asses handed to you.


----------



## P@triot (May 18, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> .... but the places where people actually live, you got your asses handed to you


So NY and LA? Yeah, nobody gives a shit about those third-world, hell-holes. People are fleeing both in record numbers because…well…Dumbocrats are doing what they do best (destroying jobs, destroying wealth, destroying liberty, etc.).

But hey…keep celebrating those “big” wins while the American people reject your bat-shit crazy ideology.


----------



## Rigby5 (May 18, 2021)

The point of the Constitution is to divide jurisdiction to be as close to the people who can control it as possible, and to only allocate distant jurisdiction when absolutely necessary.
Which is why the federal government is only supposed to do what states can't do, like a post office, protect interstate commerce, negotiate treaties, deal with defense, etc.

The problem was when they added a federal income tax, the federal government took control away from the states, and now states are subordinate and dependent upon federal hand outs.
That has to be changed.
States have to be the only means of taxation, and they then should give federal administration only the money the federal government needs and is due.


----------



## P@triot (May 18, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> The point of the Constitution is to divide jurisdiction to be as close to the people who can control it as possible, and to only allocate distant jurisdiction when absolutely necessary.
> Which is why the federal government is only supposed to do what states can't do, like a post office, protect interstate commerce, negotiate treaties, deal with defense, etc.
> 
> The problem was when they added a federal income tax, the federal government took control away from the states, and now states are subordinate and dependent upon federal hand outs.
> ...


I have to salute Rigby5 on this one. That is in the running for USMB post of the year for 2021.


----------



## P@triot (May 18, 2021)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> *The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government*, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


So to be clear, the CIA embedding a fuck’n army of intelligence operatives inside private corporations is “constitutional government” in your mind? 








						Pentagon reportedly running secret army of 60,000 around the world
					

The force is 10 times the size of the covert elements of the CIA, comes with a cost of more than $900 million, and engages about 130 private companies in operations in locales like the Middle East …




					nypost.com


----------



## lennypartiv (May 19, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, yeah, guy, you did.... you lost the last election.   I know you curdle up in the fetal position whenever you hear the words "President Biden".


Yes, we remember how the election was stolen.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 19, 2021)

P@triot said:


> So NY and LA? Yeah, nobody gives a shit about those third-world, hell-holes. People are fleeing both in record numbers because…well…Dumbocrats are doing what they do best (destroying jobs, destroying wealth, destroying liberty, etc.).
> 
> But hey…keep celebrating those “big” wins while the American people reject your bat-shit crazy ideology.



I don't give a shit about the inbred bible thumpers in Jesusland, but we have to count their votes, too. 

Of course, the reason they vote for Trump is their lives are already miserable.. no opportunities, the small factories have shut down and moved somewhere else.  Oops, did Trump ever reopen those coal mines like he promised?  










						US coal jobs down 24% from the start of Trump administration to latest quarter
					

After a few months of holding roughly flat, U.S. coal employment began falling in 2019 on weakening export prospects and an ongoing secular decline in domestic thermal demand, but the trend accelerated further when the COVID-19 pandemic hit.




					www.spglobal.com
				




I guess not.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 19, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> he point of the Constitution is to divide jurisdiction to be as close to the people who can control it as possible, and to only allocate distant jurisdiction when absolutely necessary.
> Which is why the federal government is only supposed to do what states can't do, like a post office, protect interstate commerce, negotiate treaties, deal with defense, etc.
> 
> The problem was when they added a federal income tax, the federal government took control away from the states, and now states are subordinate and dependent upon federal hand outs.
> ...



Dude, have you met state government?  As bad as the clowns in Washington are, they are a lot better than the clowns in any state capitol.  

The reality- the power of the Federal Government has grown because the needs of a modern industrial society has grown.  This is the big problem I have with Founding Father Fetishists like Poodle.  They wouldn't want to live with 18th century technology or sanitation or food safety... but they think that 18th century government is just fine.


----------



## P@triot (May 19, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Oops, did Trump ever reopen those coal mines like he promised?


You know what, *President Trump* was so successful, it’s hard to keep up! Record-low unemployment. Manufacturing jobs brought back home from overseas. Wealth up across all classes.

It was literally unprecedented prosperity. He achieved more in 4 years than any President in US history did in 8 years. And he did it with the anti-American Dumbocrats trying to undermine everything he was doing.


----------



## P@triot (May 19, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Of course, the reason they vote for Trump is their lives are already miserable…


Right? They saw that Dumbocrats made their lives miserable so they voted for *President Trump*. The so-called “Blue Wall” of West Virginia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania all voted for Trump after the Dumbocrats destroyed all of their jobs and insulted the hell of of them for being hard-working, self-supporting Americans.


JoeB131 said:


> no opportunities, the small factories have shut down and moved somewhere else.


Thanks to the Dumbocrats! Hence the reason they voted for Trump. High taxes, Union labors, and crushing government-regulations forces jobs overseas.


----------



## P@triot (May 19, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Dude, have you met state government?  As bad as the clowns in Washington are, they are a lot better than the clowns in any state capitol.


Dude…have you met federal government? Of course you haven’t. Because there isn’t a single “normal” constituent in the nation that can get a meeting with the President of the United States. But even a low-IQ nitwit such as yourself has unfettered access to his state Governor.

And…well…that’s exactly what frightens fascists like you. You want an insulated dictator who cannot be accessed or influenced.


----------



## P@triot (May 19, 2021)

P@triot said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Dude, have you met state government?  As bad as the clowns in Washington are, they are a lot better than the clowns in any state capitol.


Also…in all fairness…your dumb ass decided to settle in Illinois. An ignorant/failed left-wing state run by complete and total imbeciles (ie the Dumbocrat Party)


----------



## JoeB131 (May 20, 2021)

P@triot said:


> You know what, *President Trump* was so successful, it’s hard to keep up! Record-low unemployment. Manufacturing jobs brought back home from overseas. Wealth up across all classes.
> 
> It was literally unprecedented prosperity. He achieved more in 4 years than any President in US history did in 8 years. And he did it with the anti-American Dumbocrats trying to undermine everything he was doing.



Uh, guy, they weren't brought home...  Unemployment has been shrinking since 2010, and that's largely because the workforce has been shrinking as the Baby Boomers retire.  



P@triot said:


> Dude…have you met federal government? Of course you haven’t. Because there isn’t a single “normal” constituent in the nation that can get a meeting with the President of the United States. But even a low-IQ nitwit such as yourself has unfettered access to his state Governor.



Actually, I worked for the Federal Government when I was in the Army.  Frankly, I've never been in anything since that was as well organized or well run.  

The governor of my state is pretty well guarded... and this last year, his fat ass has needed it.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 20, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Right? They saw that Dumbocrats made their lives miserable so they voted for *President Trump*. The so-called “Blue Wall” of West Virginia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania all voted for Trump after the Dumbocrats destroyed all of their jobs and insulted the hell of of them for being hard-working, self-supporting Americans.



Uh, guy, West Virginia hasn't gone to the Democrat since 1996.  Why do you get so many facts... wrong?

As for the Rust Belt three, Yeah, Trump promised them jobs... and then became the first presidents since Hoover to post a NET JOB LOSS.  Which is why they flipped back as well as GA and AZ.  



P@triot said:


> Thanks to the Dumbocrats! Hence the reason they voted for Trump. High taxes, Union labors, and crushing government-regulations forces jobs overseas.



Democrats are responsible for businesses in small factory towns shutting down?  You are delusional.  

Those one factory towns have been losing their factories because they aren't practical... that's the thing.  You can either hire Cleetus the Redneck with his poor work attitude for $50,000 a year or you can hire Chang with a good work attitude for $10,000 a year.


----------



## P@triot (May 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, I worked for the Federal Government when I was in the Army.  Frankly, I've never been in anything since that was as well organized or well run.


And you know what is sad? Even as you served this country, you _still_ couldn’t get a meeting with the President of the United States. Even though he was literally your Commander in Chief, you _still_ couldn’t get a meeting with him.

Which, of course, is why you want the federal government controlling everything. You love an insulated fascist protected from the people.


----------



## P@triot (May 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, I worked for the Federal Government when I was in the Army.  Frankly, I've never been in anything since that was as well organized or well run.


And you know what is sad? Even as you served this country, you _still_ couldn’t get a meeting with the President of the United States. Even though he was literally your Commander in Chief, you _still_ couldn’t get a meeting with him.

Which, of course, is why you want the federal government controlling everything. You love an insulated fascist protected from the people.


----------



## P@triot (May 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, West Virginia hasn't gone to the Democrat since 1996.  Why do you get so many facts... wrong?


Senator Joe Manchin (D) vehemently disagrees with your dumb ass


----------



## P@triot (May 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> As for the Rust Belt three, Yeah, Trump promised them jobs...


…and then delivered like no President before (or since)! Record-low unemployment. Wages up across the nation. Manufacturing jobs flooding back to the US. Unprecedented prosperity. #MAGA


----------



## Rigby5 (May 20, 2021)

Constitutional government means strict definition and separation of jurisdiction between federal, state, county, and municipal, with everything that can be, to be as much local as possible.
Since the federal government is the most distant and has the largest constituency base, it should do the least possible.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 21, 2021)

P@triot said:


> And you know what is sad? Even as you served this country, you _still_ couldn’t get a meeting with the President of the United States. Even though he was literally your Commander in Chief, you _still_ couldn’t get a meeting with him.
> 
> Which, of course, is why you want the federal government controlling everything. You love an insulated fascist protected from the people.



I couldn't get a meeting with the governor, either.   The only time the Mayor of my little town wants to talk to us is during elections.   I'm not sure what your point is, Poodle.  

The main difference is the Federal Government is under a lot more scrutiny than State government. 



P@triot said:


> …and then delivered like no President before (or since)! Record-low unemployment. Wages up across the nation. Manufacturing jobs flooding back to the US. Unprecedented prosperity. #MAGA



Uh no. 

Sorry, Poodle. Trump is the first president since Hoover to post a net job loss.  

A lot of people I know are still digging their way out from Trump's "unprecedented" prosperity.  



P@triot said:


> Senator Joe Manchin (D) vehemently disagrees with your dumb ass



Are you fucking retarded?  We were talking about the EC, not who is in the Senate.  

The only time WV has ended up in the Blue column since 1980 was the two times Ross Perot split the right wing vote.


----------



## P@triot (May 22, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > And you know what is sad? Even as you served this country, you _still_ couldn’t get a meeting with the President of the United States. Even though he was literally your Commander in Chief, you _still_ couldn’t get a meeting with him.
> ...


Bullshit. I can get a meeting with my governor any time I want (and have). And every time you've been defeated kitty, you cry "I'm not sure what your point is".


----------



## P@triot (May 22, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > …and then delivered like no President before (or since)! Record-low unemployment. Wages up across the nation. Manufacturing jobs flooding back to the US. Unprecedented prosperity. #MAGA
> ...


We we're all there, kitty. We all saw it. Every time your failed ideology gets exposed, you try to rewrite history.

China released COVID-19 on the world
President Trump immediately moved to stop all travel from China
You bat-shit crazy, low-IQ extremists all cried "xenophobe" because no matter what *President Trump* did (including taking simple, fully constitutional measures to protect the US), "Orange Man Bad"
Governors (who had the constitutional authority) shut down their entire economies in hopes of undermining the astounding success of the Republican Party and *President Trump*
Those are the *facts*, and they cannot be argued, disputed, denied, or debated.


----------



## P@triot (May 22, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Senator Joe Manchin (D) vehemently disagrees with your dumb ass
> ...


No kitty. At that point, we were talking about the "Blue Wall" and how West Virginia votes. And they vote a shit-ton of blue. Well, that is until the Dumbocrat Party decided to stop the party of the low-wage worker and decided to wage an all-out war on powerful, affordable energy.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 23, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Bullshit. I can get a meeting with my governor any time I want (and have). And every time you've been defeated kitty, you cry "I'm not sure what your point is".



REally?  What fantasy world does this happen in?  That wasn't the governor, that was a delusion in your head. 



P@triot said:


> We we're all there, kitty. We all saw it. Every time your failed ideology gets exposed, you try to rewrite history.
> 
> China released COVID-19 on the world


Really? How did they do that.  They had an outbreak.  They moved to contain it.  They told the rest of the world it was a thing.   Trump failed to respond adequately. 



P@triot said:


> President Trump immediately moved to stop all travel from China



You have a funny notion of "immediate".  The first cases were reported in December.  he didn't completely ban travel to China until March, and then only Chinese Nationals, not Americans who were in China and trying to get back.  Like everything Trump did, he just made it worse.   



P@triot said:


> You bat-shit crazy, low-IQ extremists all cried "xenophobe" because no matter what *President Trump* did (including taking simple, fully constitutional measures to protect the US), "Orange Man Bad"



Um, yeah, because not even counting the rise in anti-Asian hate crimes he triggered, the ban made Americans working in China panic and get back here without being isolated or screened, which is how the damned thing spread as fast as it did.  



P@triot said:


> Governors (who had the constitutional authority) shut down their entire economies in hopes of undermining the astounding success of the Republican Party and *President Trump*



Really?  Funny thing, companies were shutting down their businesses before the state did.  Company I worked for last year, sent people to work from home weeks before Pritzker ordered the first lockdown.  Were all the businesses in on this anti-Trump conspiracy, too? 



P@triot said:


> Those are the *facts*, and they cannot be argued, disputed, denied, or debated.



Sure, you tell yourself that...  Future schools of government will be teaching Trump's response under "Don't do THAT."  




P@triot said:


> No kitty. At that point, we were talking about the "Blue Wall" and how West Virginia votes. And they vote a shit-ton of blue. Well, that is until the Dumbocrat Party decided to stop the party of the low-wage worker and decided to wage an all-out war on powerful, affordable energy.



Uh, guy, you have no idea what you were talking about.  You stated Trump broke the "Blue Wall".  But Romney won WV, McCain won WV, Bush won WV. He really didn't do anything new there, those people are just stupid for centuries of inbreeding.  

Yeah, they'll send Democrats to CONGRESS, because if they didn't have government spending in that state, they'd all fucking starve.  Not that this would be a bad thing.


----------



## P@triot (May 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > We we're all there, kitty. We all saw it. Every time your failed ideology gets exposed, you try to rewrite history.
> ...


Watching you try to constantly rewrite history for communists and fascists is as comical as it is _ridiculous_. 

Not only was the virus created by the Chinese government in a Wuhan lab, but more importantly, they actively covered it up (NY Times) - allowing it to spread all over the world, you lying stupid fuck.

They silenced (BBC) whistle-blowers and forced them to sign documents stating they had made “false statements”.

Stop posting your bullshit, fictional fantasy, you lying fuck. You know everything you’re saying is 100% bullshit. You’re just wasting everyone’s time.


----------



## P@triot (May 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > President Trump immediately moved to stop all travel from China
> ...


Bwahahaha!! Snowflake, it would be *illegal* for the President of the United States attempt to block US citizens from returning home.

You’re so damn dumb, it literally horrifies the rest of us!


----------



## P@triot (May 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > You bat-shit crazy, low-IQ extremists all cried "xenophobe" because no matter what *President Trump* did (including taking simple, fully constitutional measures to protect the US), "Orange Man Bad"
> ...







Holy shit…literally have tears on that one. It spread way faster (and deadlier) in Italy. Was Trump controlling Italy’s travel as well?


----------



## P@triot (May 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Governors (who had the constitutional authority) shut down their entire economies in hopes of undermining the astounding success of the Republican Party and *President Trump*
> ...





I’ve seen Joe this dumb before, but never this funny. Not a single business shut down their own operations. Not one. Some had workers work remotely. But they didn’t shut down operations.


----------



## P@triot (May 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> *Company I worked for last year*, sent people to work from home weeks before Pritzker ordered the first lockdown.


On a side note…anyone else notice that dumb-shit here can’t keep a job for more than 1 year? 

Every fuck’n year he mentions his “former company” from last year. What does that tell you? Nobody can tolerate this dill-hole for more than a few months.


----------



## P@triot (May 25, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, you have no idea what you were talking about.  You stated Trump *broke* the "Blue Wall".


WTF? I said *no* such thing. Wasn’t even talking about Trump. My comment was that the Dumbocrats are so incompetent that the “Blue Wall rejected them.

Post #959 kitty:


> Right? They saw that *Dumbocrats made their lives miserable* so they voted for President Trump. The so-called “Blue Wall” of West Virginia, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania all voted for Trump *after the Dumbocrats destroyed all of their jobs* and insulted the hell of of them for being hard-working, self-supporting Americans.


In your defense though, you are a low-IQ leftist so I really don’t expect you to follow the conversation.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 26, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Watching you try to constantly rewrite history for communists and fascists is as comical as it is _ridiculous_.
> 
> Not only was the virus created by the Chinese government in a Wuhan lab, but more importantly, they actively covered it up (NY Times) - allowing it to spread all over the world, you lying stupid fuck.



Oh, please, you are getting into Lizard People and Trilateralists next.  

There's no real evidence that TRUMP PLAGUE(TM) was created in a lab.  

Here's an article from that Commie Rag, Forbes. 









						No, Science Clearly Shows That COVID-19 Wasn’t Leaked From A Wuhan Lab
					

It occurred naturally, and scientists know this for certain.




					www.forbes.com
				






P@triot said:


> WTF? I said *no* such thing. Wasn’t even talking about Trump. My comment was that the Dumbocrats are so incompetent that the “Blue Wall rejected them.



Yeah, buddy, whatever...  Except WV hadn't voted for the Democrat in a presidential election since 1996.  And only then because Ross Perot split the white conservative vote.  

Meanwhile, President Biden was the first Democrat to take Arizona Since 1996,  and the first Democrat to take Georgia since 1980.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 26, 2021)

P@triot said:


> I’ve seen Joe this dumb before, but never this funny. Not a single business shut down their own operations. Not one. Some had workers work remotely. But they didn’t shut down operations.



Actually, that was the point, stupid.   They sent people to work remotely, they sent assembly teams home, all without the government telling them to do so, because unlike Trump, they knew this was some serious shit.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 26, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Bwahahaha!! Snowflake, it would be *illegal* for the President of the United States attempt to block US citizens from returning home.
> 
> You’re so damn dumb, it literally horrifies the rest of us!



Really?  Where does it say that?  The point was, his shutdown was based on racism and not science.  Science says you don't let anyone come back until the thing has passed.


----------



## JoeB131 (May 26, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Watching you try to constantly rewrite history for communists and fascists is as comical as it is _ridiculous_.
> ...


Correction- Bill Clinton took GA in 1992.  Unlike Poodle, I can admit a mistake.


----------



## P@triot (May 27, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Watching you try to constantly rewrite history for communists and fascists is as comical as it is _ridiculous_.
> ...


You’re just boring the shit out of everybody at this point. That was a left-wing NY Times article and I followed that up with a left-wing BBC article. All you do on this board is troll and spread propaganda because you lead a lonely and sad existence. Stop wasting everyone’s times. You’re going on block now because I don’t have time for fiction/fantasy and that is all you want to deal in.

But before I go, please allow me to humiliate you one last time. Here is your boy Joe Biden telling the American people that the US Intelligence community confirmed it came from a Chinese government lab:


> President Joe Biden said on May 26 that the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) believes there are “two likely scenarios” that may have caused the *CCP virus outbreak in China*, noting that a significant number of *officials believe the virus was spread due to a “laboratory accident*.”


You’re the only asshole who tries to deny that it came from China and that the Chinese government tried to cover it up (which led to the world-wide outbreak). See son, Donald Trump wasn’t President of Italy. Or India. Or Brazil.








						Biden: Some US Intel Members Believe COVID-19 Came From Chinese 'Laboratory Accident'
					

President Joe Biden said on May 26 that the U.S. Intelligence Community (IC) believes there are "two likely ...




					www.theepochtimes.com


----------



## JoeB131 (May 27, 2021)

P@triot said:


> You’re the only asshole who tries to deny that it came from China and that the Chinese government tried to cover it up (which led to the world-wide outbreak). See son, Donald Trump wasn’t President of Italy. Or India. Or Brazil.



Except no one denied it came from China.  We just don't think it was artificially made or that it was a conspiracy to make Trump look incompetent.   

India and Brazil are third world countries, with poor medical infrastructure, and they STILL had less Covid Death than we had.


----------



## P@triot (May 30, 2021)

We must restore constitutional government. Yes, classified information must exist to protect our enemies from knowing certain things.

But an object in the air (especially above US soil) that they are not able to identify is *not* a matter of National Security. At all. In any capacity.

That's a matter of a few elitist asshats believe the American people are children who can't handle being told the facts.








						Whistleblower Who Made UFO Reports Public Accuses Pentagon of Coordinated Campaign to Defame Him
					

Lue Elizondo, a former Pentagon official who made UFO reports public, is claiming that the U.S. military, including ...




					www.theepochtimes.com


----------



## P@triot (May 30, 2021)

Just like Nazi Germany. You need your papers to move about. This is the kind of society that the Democrats deliver. A totalitarian fascist state.








						Federal Government Taking 'Very Close Look' at Vaccine Passports for Travel: DHS Secretary
					

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said the federal government and his agency will evaluate whether ...




					www.theepochtimes.com


----------



## JoeB131 (May 30, 2021)

P@triot said:


> We must restore constitutional government. Yes, classified information must exist to protect our enemies from knowing certain things.
> 
> But an object in the air (especially above US soil) that they are not able to identify is *not* a matter of National Security. At all. In any capacity.
> 
> That's a matter of a few elitist asshats believe the American people are children who can't handle being told the facts.



Poodle dreams of the day that aliens abduct him.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 3, 2021)

The federal government is lying to you - even about issues that are *not* matters of National Security. The government has forgotten that they work for We the People…








						11 Takeaways From Fauci’s Emails About COVID-19
					

“It will blow your mind," Dr. Anthony Fauci writes of his celebrity status. "Our society is really totally nuts.”




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 4, 2021)

P@triot said:


> The federal government is lying to you - even about issues that are *not* matters of National Security. The government has forgotten that they work for We the People…



Fauci isn't the one who screwed up Covid Response, Poodle. 

That was Trump.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 17, 2021)

Imagine claiming that anyone (and I mean _anyone_) didn't have the "standing" to challenge the constitutionality of any law or regulation.


> By a vote of 7 to 2 the Supreme Court has upheld the Obamacare law for the third time, ducking the question of its constitutionality by ruling that those challenging it lacked the required legal standing to do so.


Remember folks - it was an average _citizen_ who brought Roe v. Wade all the way through the Supreme Court. This is the US Supreme Court merely wanting to avoid having to admit the Obamacare was egregiously unconstitutional.

We must restore constitutional government. It was stripped from us by the bat-shit crazy whack-job leftists. We have to restore it.








						Supreme Court Tosses Obamacare Challenge by 18 States on Grounds of Legal Standing
					

By a vote of 7–2, the Supreme Court has upheld the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act—commonly known as Obamacare—for ...




					www.theepochtimes.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 18, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Imagine claiming that anyone (and I mean _anyone_) didn't have the "standing" to challenge the constitutionality of any law or regulation.
> 
> 
> > By a vote of 7 to 2 the Supreme Court has upheld the Obamacare law for the third time, ducking the question of its constitutionality by ruling that those challenging it lacked the required legal standing to do so.
> ...



Actually, Poodle, the White Trash tool that they used to challenge the laws in Roe was a cutout.  

She had a team of lawyers who argued that these unworkable laws that no one was following had to go. 

The real problem is, there's no one who has "Standing" to challenge ObamaCare because anyone effected by it is BENEFITING.  

I'm not effected by Obamacare at all. I'm lucky enough to have private insurance.  So are most of the Right Wingers who whine loudly by it.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 19, 2021)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> ...


The NSA is not permitted to operate domestically and they *do*. The F.B.I. is required to obtain warrants and they *don’t*.

And yet the clown C_Clayton_Jones wants people to believe the United States is “currently functioning under constitutional government”.

Just let that sink in. Either he’s dumber than a pile of human feces on a San Francisco street _or_ he’s a pathological liar.








						NSA Agrees to Release Records on FBI's Improper Spying on 16,000 Americans
					

The National Security Agency (NSA) has agreed to release records on the FBI's improper spying on thousands of ...




					www.theepochtimes.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 19, 2021)

P@triot said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > “We must restore constitutional government”
> ...



Given that this is the Epoch Times, a bunch of crazy liars, I take it with a grain of salt. 

So out of 330,000,000 Americans, they illegally spied on 16,000 people who were obviously some real shitballs.   I'm willing to be that many of them were named "Mohammed".  

Incidently, no one else has this story except the Epoch Times.


----------



## Lastamender (Jun 19, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...


Nobody else has it because people already distrust a corrupt government. The MSM does not want their credibility ( the government's)  which is close to zero to get any lower.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 19, 2021)

Lastamender said:


> Nobody else has it because people already distrust a corrupt government. The MSM does not want their credibility ( the government's) which is close to zero to get any lower.



Right.   So the whole media, including Fox News, is ignoring this story, but the crazy Epoch Times has it.  

Actually, did you know that the Epoch Times is run by the Falun Gong Cult?  It really wasn't interested in American Politics until Trump came along.  









						The Epoch Times - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Lastamender (Jun 19, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Lastamender said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody else has it because people already distrust a corrupt government. The MSM does not want their credibility ( the government's) which is close to zero to get any lower.
> ...


Can you prove that? If you can't you shouldn't say it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 20, 2021)

Lastamender said:


> Can you prove that? If you can't you shouldn't say it.



Jesus Fucking Christ on a Pogo Stick, I just posted a link.  









						Falun Gong-aligned media push fake news about Democrats and Chinese communists
					

The Epoch Times, believed to be linked to the Chinese religious movement, is part of an anti-CCP influence operation tapping into the US right, according to a media watchdog




					www.theguardian.com
				




You guys are being played by Chinese cultists...


----------



## Lastamender (Jun 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Lastamender said:
> 
> 
> > Can you prove that? If you can't you shouldn't say it.
> ...


Biden is owned and played by the CCP. Their album is doing far more damage than the Falun-gong.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 20, 2021)

Lastamender said:


> Biden is owned and played by the CCP. Their album is doing far more damage than the Falun-gong.



Album?  

Never mind, we are getting into crazy land here.


----------



## Lastamender (Jun 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Lastamender said:
> 
> 
> > Biden is owned and played by the CCP. Their album is doing far more damage than the Falun-gong.
> ...


You play albums.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jun 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > Bwahahaha!! Snowflake, it would be *illegal* for the President of the United States attempt to block US citizens from returning home.
> ...



Actually, companies were forced to shut down and none did it voluntarily.
They were told what their building permit would allow as far as occupancy and density.
If they were not food related, they were closed except for delivery or outside pickup.
Like Best Buy was shut down by executive order. 
Home Depot had waiting lines with mask and density requirements.

Science says you block transportation, but only for the 12 day quarantine check.
I am anti-Trump, but Trump did try to block returning tourists, and the courts over ruled him.

But the masks and social distancing inside the US was wrong.
It prevented herd immunity so made the epidemic of 2 months, last forever instead.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jun 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



It is not hard to show the government is totally out of control.
For example, the War on Drugs is just as illegal and foolish as Prohibition was.
Not to mention things like the government lying about things like WMD in Iraq.


----------



## Rigby5 (Jun 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Lastamender said:
> 
> 
> > Nobody else has it because people already distrust a corrupt government. The MSM does not want their credibility ( the government's) which is close to zero to get any lower.
> ...



I would not necessarily believe them, but I sort of like Falun Gong.
They don't seem all that extreme to me?


----------



## Rigby5 (Jun 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> P@triot said:
> 
> 
> > The federal government is lying to you - even about issues that are *not* matters of National Security. The government has forgotten that they work for We the People…
> ...



Actually Trump did exactly what Fauci told him to.
And the problem is Fauci, with "flattening the curve".
That is well know historically, to prevent any epidemic from being able to end.
That takes a 2 month epidemic and stretches it out perpetually.
When you "flatten the curve", you conserve easy hosts, so then you prevent herd immunity and keep the epidemic alive forever.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Incidently, no one else has this story except the Epoch Times.


Thank you for proving that the “mainstream media” is nothing more than the propaganda arm of the Dumbocrat Party - refusing to cover major stories about government corruption involving the Dumbocrats.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 20, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Incidently, no one else has this story except the Epoch Times.


_Incidentally_, you’re spelling is atrocious and indicative of the left.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 20, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> Actually, companies were forced to shut down and none did it voluntarily.



Really? Company I worked for sent everyone to work from home long before Gov. Pritzker ordered a shutdown. 



Rigby5 said:


> They were told what their building permit would allow as far as occupancy and density.
> If they were not food related, they were closed except for delivery or outside pickup.
> Like Best Buy was shut down by executive order.
> Home Depot had waiting lines with mask and density requirements.



Yes, but those places opened up again once everyone imposed precautions...  



Rigby5 said:


> Science says you block transportation, but only for the 12 day quarantine check.
> I am anti-Trump, but Trump did try to block returning tourists, and the courts over ruled him.



Then he should have used those 12 days to institute screenings. He didn't.  



Rigby5 said:


> But the masks and social distancing inside the US was wrong.
> It prevented herd immunity so made the epidemic of 2 months, last forever instead.



Herd immunity would have required 70% of the population to get Covid.  So let's review.  We have had 33 million cases of Covid in the US, with 600,000 casualties.  That gives Covid a fatality rate of about 2%.  To get to herd immunity without a vaccine, you would need to infect 200 million people.   That would mean FOUR MILLION people would have died.  Probably a lot more, because the only reason why the covid death rate wasn't a lot higher is because it was spread out over many months, and the hospitals could effectively treat people.  If you had all 200 million cases in two months, the hospitals would have been overwealmed and treatable people would have died in corridors. 

What we did wasn't ideal.  We all suffered.  I lost a job during the course of it (but got a better one) and my personal business lost 70% of it's revenue.  So, yeah, this sucked for everyone.  But the alternative would have sucked a lot more. 




Rigby5 said:


> It is not hard to show the government is totally out of control.
> For example, the War on Drugs is just as illegal and foolish as Prohibition was.
> Not to mention things like the government lying about things like WMD in Iraq.



Uh, guy, the War on Drugs is what most of us wanted.   Kind of the same thing with Prohibition.  It was supported by vast majorities when it started.  

The government didn't "lie" about WMD's in Iraq, they were just wrong.  




Rigby5 said:


> I would not necessarily believe them, but I sort of like Falun Gong.
> They don't seem all that extreme to me?



Symbol of the Falun Gong... nothing to see here. 








Rigby5 said:


> Actually Trump did exactly what Fauci told him to.
> And the problem is Fauci, with "flattening the curve".
> That is well know historically, to prevent any epidemic from being able to end.
> That takes a 2 month epidemic and stretches it out perpetually.
> When you "flatten the curve", you conserve easy hosts, so then you prevent herd immunity and keep the epidemic alive forever.



Did Fauci tell him to hold Super Spreader events?  Did Fauci tell him to ridicule mask-wearing? Did Fauci tell him to incite nuts with guns to show up on Capitol Steps.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 20, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Thank you for proving that the “mainstream media” is nothing more than the propaganda arm of the Dumbocrat Party - refusing to cover major stories about government corruption involving the Dumbocrats.



Poodle, you think that news from the Falun Gong Cult is valid? 



P@triot said:


> _Incidentally_, you’re spelling is atrocious and indicative of the left.



Actually, I get paid for my writing, but never mind.   

But you avoid the question, are you really taking something from THIS cult seriously?


----------



## JimH52 (Jun 20, 2021)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”
> 
> Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> ...


“We must restore constitutional government” means the MAGA nuts are restless and want to hold another Insurrection like January 6th.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 20, 2021)

JimH52 said:


> “We must restore constitutional government” means the MAGA nuts are restless and want to hold another Insurrection like January 6th.



Naw, Poodle is just unhappy we don't limit the Federal government to what the Founding Slave Rapists wanted.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 20, 2021)

JimH52 said:


> “We must restore constitutional government” means the MAGA nuts are restless and want to hold another Insurrection like January 6th.


Mocking it means the marxist nuts are worried that constitutional government will actually be restored, preventing _your_ totalitarian fantasies of oppression.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 20, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Mocking it means the marxist nuts are worried that constitutional government will actually be restored, preventing _your_ totalitarian fantasies of oppression.



Actually, no, I worry that the GOP will keep trying to slip in these big-business attempts to destroy the protections working people have fought for over the last 100 years.


----------



## Missouri_Mike (Jun 20, 2021)

ScienceRocks said:


> The liberterian idea of constitutional government is a government that is powerless to do the will of the people and does only shit that they want. Liberterians and far right conservatives are a bunch of fascist assholes. Simply meaning that they think by the people means that the government should be so limited that the people shouldn't be able to elect a government that does more then sit on its dick.


Nice to see another of your socks giving you a thumbs up.

the federal government was always intended to pretty much sit on their dicks. It was meant to be a part time job, performed for free, not a fucking career in grifting massive wealth. They were to take cate of the national concerns, border security and national defense. That’s fucking it. Not your retirement or your education or your healthcare.


----------



## JimH52 (Jun 20, 2021)

P@triot said:


> JimH52 said:
> 
> 
> > “We must restore constitutional government” means the MAGA nuts are restless and want to hold another Insurrection like January 6th.
> ...


You MAGA nuts tried to destroy our country on January 6th.  Don't tell me anything about your stupid "Fantasies of Oppression."


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 21, 2021)

Missouri_Mike said:


> Nice to see another of your socks giving you a thumbs up.
> 
> the federal government was always intended to pretty much sit on their dicks. It was meant to be a part time job, performed for free, not a fucking career in grifting massive wealth. They were to take cate of the national concerns, border security and national defense. That’s fucking it. Not your retirement or your education or your healthcare.



Except that we had elections, and we voted for them to do exactly that.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 21, 2021)

Missouri_Mike said:


> the federal government was always intended to pretty much sit on their dicks. It was meant to be a part time job, performed for free, not a fucking career in grifting massive wealth. They were to take cate of the national concerns, border security and national defense. That’s fucking it. Not your retirement or your education or your healthcare.






When you see the posts of people like ScienceRocks you realize that the left's goal of dumbing down society by destroying our public education system, was successful.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 21, 2021)

Missouri_Mike said:


> the federal government was always intended to pretty much sit on their dicks. It was meant to be a part time job, performed for free, not a fucking career in grifting massive wealth. They were to take cate of the national concerns, border security and national defense. That’s fucking it. Not your retirement or your education or your healthcare.


I mean, for fuck's sake, they were given 18 enumerated powers _only_. 18. My fucking small children have more responsibility than that!!

The federal government was literally designed to be useless and impotent. It was supposed to be the bear-minimum that a state simply couldn't do (such as coining money, protecting intellectual property, etc.).


----------



## Missouri_Mike (Jun 21, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Missouri_Mike said:
> 
> 
> > the federal government was always intended to pretty much sit on their dicks. It was meant to be a part time job, performed for free, not a fucking career in grifting massive wealth. They were to take cate of the national concerns, border security and national defense. That’s fucking it. Not your retirement or your education or your healthcare.
> ...


It really got under way when Senators were voted on by popular vote. That was the first mistake. They were never intended to serve six years of fuck your people over kind of power.


----------



## P@triot (Jun 24, 2021)

Well, one small step towards restoring constitutional government (giving the people back the right to private property)








						Supreme Court issues stinging defeat to unions
					

The court struck down a law that would have given union organizers the right to enter private property without the owner's consent in order to attempt to organize workers




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Jun 25, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Well, one small step towards restoring constitutional government (giving the people back the right to private property)



Yeah. HOw dare those unions organize people!!!  

We didn't need a middle class in this country. We should all be happy with what the rich give us.  

Look how well that worked out for rich people in France.


----------



## Kondor3 (Jun 25, 2021)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide


Want to restore Constitutional government?

*Try fielding a better candidate next time that a majority of The People will vote for.*

Considering the walking talking piece-of-$hit you fielded *LAST* time, that should not prove too difficult.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 1, 2021)

Kondor3 said:


> Considering the walking talking piece-of-$hit you fielded *LAST* time, that should not prove too difficult.



President Trump was the most constitutional president we've had in the past 150 years (which is why you low-IQ fascists hated him)
You pieces of shit elected Barack Obama - who had a deep contempt for the US Constitution and thus wiped his ass with it just to show everyone how much he hated it
Just STFU already. Every time you post, you show the world that your a typical low-IQ leftist who needs government to provide the basics for him just so he can survive.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 1, 2021)

Well someone needs to explain to the "White House" that no such authority exists for them.








						White House weighs cracking down on secret ransomware payments, pursuing hackers
					

Going on offense against attackers and penetrating the secrecy surrounding attacks are two ways the Biden administration is pondering to tackle ransomware, a top White House official said on Tuesday. Anne Neuberger, the deputy national security adviser, said that that a joint FBI, U.S. Cyber...




					www.cyberscoop.com


----------



## P@triot (Jul 5, 2021)

Now remember folks, after WikiLeaks published the Snowden dump (which showed unimaginable levels of criminal activity by the federal government), asshat C_Clayton_Jones insisted that the United States was "operating under constitutional government". Just let that sink in for a moment.

The latest from the NSA (which is *not* permitted by law to operate domestically) is that their TAO (Tailored Access Operations) has been targeting completely innocent Americans under the orders of Obama (and now Biden).

If that were Nazi Germany enough, they been engaged in "Traffic Shaping" - the act of literally hacking all domestic servers, routers, etc. and routing the traffic overseas so that if they are ever finally bought to justice, these fuck'n assholes can state under oath "but the traffic came through foreign resources". Yeah, because you fucking routed it there to begin with via illegal hacking.

This is some of the most egregious crimes ever committed by the United States government, and this fuck'n clown CCJ will try to convince everyone we are "still operating under constitutional government". We haven't been for decades.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 6, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Now remember folks, after WikiLeaks published the Snowden dump (which showed unimaginable levels of criminal activity by the federal government), asshat C_Clayton_Jones insisted that the United States was "operating under constitutional government". Just let that sink in for a moment.
> 
> The latest from the NSA (which is *not* permitted by law to operate domestically) is that their TAO (Tailored Access Operations) has been targeting completely innocent Americans under the orders of Obama (and now Biden).
> 
> ...



Poodle whines that Obama actually kept America safe from Terrorism.  Too funny.


----------



## P@triot (Jul 21, 2021)

I screamed it was unconstitutional back in November 2014 when Dictator MaObama did it and it’s _still_ unconstitutional 7 years later. A member of the Executive Branch *cannot* make, alter, or abolish law. And that’s exactly what D.A.C.A. does.








						Federal Judge Stops Biden White House’s Authoritarian Move on Amnesty
					

This important federal court decision will help slow the nation's trend toward an authoritarian chief executive.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Jul 22, 2021)

P@triot said:


> I screamed it was unconstitutional back in November 2014 when Dictator MaObama did it and it’s _still_ unconstitutional 7 years later. A member of the Executive Branch *cannot* make, alter, or abolish law. And that’s exactly what D.A.C.A. does.



Actually, the law gives the Executive a lot of authority in how to 'execute" a law.  

The reality- we have 11 million undocumented immigrants living here, mostly because Americans WANT someone to do the crappy jobs. (They just don't want them dating their daughters.)  DACA was a recognition of how unworkable the law is. 

The reality- we have a bunch of laws on the books that are effectively unworkable because too many people don't follow them.   That's when you go back and fix them.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 24, 2021)

Who is going to tell the low-IQ left that this egregiously violates the US Constitution? You don’t have to take my word for it - just check the 10th Amendment. The federal government is _explicitly_ restricted to 18 enumerated powers and abortion *isn’t* one of them. 








						House Democrats Pass Bill Aiming to Codify Roe v. Wade
					

House Democrats pass a bill that would codify Roe v. Wade and massively expand abortions in the United States.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 24, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Well someone needs to explain to the "White House" that no such authority exists for them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hmm, I think they do.
Ransomware is internet commerce, which is interstate and under FCC jurisdiction.


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 24, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Now remember folks, after WikiLeaks published the Snowden dump (which showed unimaginable levels of criminal activity by the federal government), asshat C_Clayton_Jones insisted that the United States was "operating under constitutional government". Just let that sink in for a moment.
> 
> The latest from the NSA (which is *not* permitted by law to operate domestically) is that their TAO (Tailored Access Operations) has been targeting completely innocent Americans under the orders of Obama (and now Biden).
> 
> ...



I agree privacy is an inherent individual right, and actually it is illegal to listen in to Merkel, like Obama did.


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 24, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Poodle whines that Obama actually kept America safe from Terrorism.  Too funny.



The way to keep the US safe is to stop violating rights all over the world.
The argument can be made that is they are not doing anything illegal, then why should anyone care if their privacy is violated?
And the answer to that is that the US is doing too many illegal things, like the War on Drugs.


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 24, 2021)

P@triot said:


> I screamed it was unconstitutional back in November 2014 when Dictator MaObama did it and it’s _still_ unconstitutional 7 years later. A member of the Executive Branch *cannot* make, alter, or abolish law. And that’s exactly what D.A.C.A. does.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



DACA us different because the president is allowed leeway for refugees.

{...
“The Refugee Act of 1980” allowed the President the authority to admit refugees on an annual basis, in consultation with Congress in response to United Nations protocols in 1967 and 1969, derived from the 1951 United Nations Refugee Convention. This new legislation was the first time that our country used international standards and definitions for our immigration policies. “The Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986” addressed unauthorized immigration creating two amnesty programs “legalizing” about 2.7 million people who illegally entered the country. Because illegal immigration remained a problem, “The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996” was passed to provide greater controls on the borders and reduced benefits. The last change occurred with “The Homeland Security Act of 2002” which now has consolidated authority for border protection, naturalization, customs and immigration.
...}








						What Authority Does the U.S. Constitution Give the Federal Government Regarding Immigration?
					

What Authority Does the U.S. Constitution Give the Federal Government Regarding Immigration?                      Answer – The word “immigration” does not appear in the U.S. Constitution or any of its Amendments. Article I, Section 8, Clause 4 does read, “… To establish an uniform Rule of...




					theamericanview.com


----------



## Rigby5 (Sep 24, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Who is going to tell the low-IQ left that this egregiously violates the US Constitution? You don’t have to take my word for it - just check the 10th Amendment. The federal government is _explicitly_ restricted to 18 enumerated powers and abortion *isn’t* one of them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The 14th amendment ensures individual rights, so then the federal government DOES have jurisdiction over states violating individual rights.
Abortion is one of them.

{...
Amendment XIV​Section 1.​All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2.​Representatives shall be apportioned among the several states according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each state, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a state, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such state, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such state.

Section 3.​No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any state, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any state legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any state, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4.​The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any state shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5.​The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
...}


----------



## P@triot (Sep 25, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> *Ransomware* is internet *commerce*, which is interstate and under FCC jurisdiction.


Since when is crime “commerce”? Is bank robbery _also_ “commerce” in your mind?


----------



## P@triot (Sep 25, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> DACA us different because


Not it’s not


Rigby5 said:


> the president is allowed leeway for refugees.


No they are not. Nowhere in the US Constitution does it grant the President of the United States “leeway” for “refugees”.

Furthermore, none of these are “refugees”. Not one. So your own argument doesn’t even hold up against itself.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 25, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> The 14th amendment ensures individual rights,


Like the right to life. Thank you for reminding me that the 14th Amended outlaws abortion.


Rigby5 said:


> so then the federal government DOES have jurisdiction over states violating individual rights. Abortion is one of them.


Except that abortion isn’t a “right” and never was. There is no “right” to take a life. #YouTried


----------



## Markle (Sep 25, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> The 14th amendment ensures individual rights, so then the federal government DOES have jurisdiction over states violating individual rights.
> Abortion is one of them.
> 
> {...
> ...


Wrong


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 25, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> The way to keep the US safe is to stop violating rights all over the world.
> The argument can be made that is they are not doing anything illegal, then why should anyone care if their privacy is violated?
> And the answer to that is that the US is doing too many illegal things, like the War on Drugs.



I don't disagree.   Our middle east policy has been to fuck a hornet's nest and complain about getting stung. 

But as long as we let the Zionists and Oil Companies and War Profiteers dictate what our middle east policy is, we are going to keep pissing those people off and some of them are going to blow themselves up over it. 

Sadly, this kind of stupidity is where we have bipartisan agreement.   It won't change no matter who is president.  Obama got a lot of shit for merely asking the Zionists to be less dickish about stuff.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 25, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Like the right to life. Thank you for reminding me that the 14th Amended outlaws abortion.
> 
> Except that abortion isn’t a “right” and never was. There is no “right” to take a life. #YouTried



Fetuses aren't people, Poodle.  

If they were, women could be charged with child abuse for smoking, drinking or even having a crappy diet during Pregnancy.


----------



## JWBooth (Sep 25, 2021)

P@triot said:


> Who is going to tell the low-IQ left that this egregiously violates the US Constitution? You don’t have to take my word for it - just check the 10th Amendment. The federal government is _explicitly_ restricted to 18 enumerated powers and abortion *isn’t* one of them.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Most everything done by all sides in the last hundred years has been an egregious violation, it aint stopped ‘em yet.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Sep 25, 2021)

P@triot said:


> We must restore constitutional government


The irony of this, of course, is that conservatives have nothing but contempt for Constitutional government – for rightists to advocate for such a thing is true dishonesty.

Our democratic institutions are the most important component of Constitutional government, for example; institutions Republicans are working feverishly to undermine and dismantle.


----------



## progressive hunter (Sep 25, 2021)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The irony of this, of course, is that conservatives have nothing but contempt for Constitutional government – for rightists to advocate for such a thing is true dishonesty.
> 
> Our democratic institutions are the most important component of Constitutional government, for example; institutions Republicans are working feverishly to undermine and dismantle.


your premise on this is the biggest lie youve told to date,,

because we have a constitution the only democratic institution is voting for our reps,, the rest is bound by the constitution,,


----------



## P@triot (Sep 25, 2021)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The irony of this, of course, is that conservatives have nothing but contempt for Constitutional government


After getting *owned* in this thread - idiot CCJ went from "we strictly operating under constitutional government" to "ok, we're not, but it's the Republicans fault".

You've been caught lying already in this thread. You have 0 credibility son.


----------



## P@triot (Sep 25, 2021)

progressive hunter said:


> your premise on this is the biggest lie youve told to date,,
> 
> because we have a constitution the only democratic institution is voting for our reps,, the rest is bound by the constitution,,


Thank you! Lying is what CCJ does best. Hell, lying is the _only_ thing CCJ does. Thank you for setting the record straight and exposing his bullshit.


----------



## bripat9643 (Sep 25, 2021)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The irony of this, of course, is that conservatives have nothing but contempt for Constitutional government – for rightists to advocate for such a thing is true dishonesty.
> 
> Our democratic institutions are the most important component of Constitutional government, for example; institutions Republicans are working feverishly to undermine and dismantle.


Lie, lie, lie


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 25, 2021)

P@triot said:


> After getting *owned* in this thread - idiot CCJ went from "we strictly operating under constitutional government" to "ok, we're not, but it's the Republicans fault".
> 
> You've been caught lying already in this thread. You have 0 credibility son.



Or he doesn't agree with you on WHY we aren't operating under constitutional government.  

We are not doing so because the GOP has chosen to obstruct even simple things like "paying our bills".  

Not because the current government is doing things that the Founding Slave Rapists didn't think of like actual health care that doesn't involve leeches.


----------



## P@triot (Oct 22, 2021)

Even the hard-left Huffington Post acknowledges that we are not operating under constitutional government:


> Will House Speaker Nancy Pelosi come clean *now that it is clear that the National Security Agency (NSA) was turned loose on American citizens* well before 9/11? She has admitted knowing for several years about the Bush administration's *eavesdropping on Americans without a court warrant*. She was briefed on it when she was a ranking Democrat in the House Intelligence Committee when Bush and Cheney took office.
> 
> But was she told that within days of their taking office, the National Security Agency's *electronic vacuum cleaner had already begun to suck up information on Americans--criminal law and the Constitution be damned*?


And yet, dill-hole C_Clayton_Jones claims we are "currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’". Which means one of two things. Either he is profoundly ignorant of how his own government is currently operating or he is embracing unconstitutional government and trying to cover the fact that it is operating illegally.

We are *not* operating under constitutional government and have not been for more than 140 years now. So either CCJ is ignorant as hell or he's a liar. Either one doesn't bode well for CCJ. 









						What Did Pelosi Know, and When Did She Know It?
					

The president, vice president, and CIA director--not to mention the credulous crowd around Nancy Pelosi--have all been regurgitating a king-sized whopper aimed at providing "justification" for the NSA program.




					www.huffpost.com


----------



## P@triot (Dec 9, 2021)

This how the United States was intended to function. 50 independent states, responsible for themselves, and united only in 18 specific functions (hence delegated to the federal government):








						DeSantis' Proposed Florida State Guard Would Reduce Reliance on Feds
					

DeSantis' move toward self-reliance would benefit Florida’s emergency preparedness and response, and fiscally benefit the American taxpayers.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## Rigby5 (Dec 9, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> Or he doesn't agree with you on WHY we aren't operating under constitutional government.
> 
> We are not doing so because the GOP has chosen to obstruct even simple things like "paying our bills".
> 
> Not because the current government is doing things that the Founding Slave Rapists didn't think of like actual health care that doesn't involve leeches.



I am far left of everyone here, but the conservatives are right about somethings.
For example, expanding the debt limit is wrong, is not about paying our bills, but is stealing from future generations.
Public health care would be great, but for federal involvement would require an amendment.
There just is no legal basis for any federal involvement in health care.


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 10, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> I am far left of everyone here, but the conservatives are right about somethings.
> For example, expanding the debt limit is wrong, is not about paying our bills, but is stealing from future generations.
> Public health care would be great, but for federal involvement would require an amendment.
> There just is no legal basis for any federal involvement in health care.



The thing is, "expanding the debt limit" only becomes an issue when a Democrat becomes president and they want to mess with him.  This issue NEVER came up when Trump ran up 8 Trillion in new debt or Bush ran up 6 Trillion in new debt. 

As far a legal basis for federal involvement in health care, that horse left the barn a long time ago with Medicare, Medicaid, the Veteran's Administration, SCHIP, and so on.


----------



## JimH52 (Dec 10, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> The thing is, "expanding the debt limit" only becomes an issue when a Democrat becomes president and they want to mess with him.  This issue NEVER came up when Trump ran up 8 Trillion in new debt or Bush ran up 6 Trillion in new debt.
> 
> As far a legal basis for federal involvement in health care, that horse left the barn a long time ago with Medicare, Medicaid, the Veteran's Administration, SCHIP, and so on.


trump is going to try and punish McConnell for getting 14 repub senators to vote to allow the debt limit to rise.  Mitch thinks voters will punish the Dems...when the majority of the added debt came from the trump years.

trump is only interested in himself.  Screw the Country...as long as he gets what he wants.  The country cannot default on it's debt.  trump does not care.  He had pushed many businesses into bankruptcy.....It would be insanity to push the US into default.  But since trump is already insane, that does not matter to him.


----------



## Rigby5 (Dec 10, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> The thing is, "expanding the debt limit" only becomes an issue when a Democrat becomes president and they want to mess with him.  This issue NEVER came up when Trump ran up 8 Trillion in new debt or Bush ran up 6 Trillion in new debt.
> 
> As far a legal basis for federal involvement in health care, that horse left the barn a long time ago with Medicare, Medicaid, the Veteran's Administration, SCHIP, and so on.



I agree Trump also screwed up on the national debt.
But that does not change the fact we went from a 3 trillion dollar national debt to a 37 trillion dollar debt since Bush and his illegal invasion of Iraq.
This can't be good or legal.

And no, there can not be any federal involvement in health care, ever.
There is no legal way to do it.
Medicare is not federal involvement in health care actually, but instead is done by the states, with the feds just using Social Security funding.
VA is a private service, so is not really part of government at all.
SCHIP is just a funding method for state resources, using the IRS.
There likely should be no IRS, but there was an amendment for it, so it is legal.


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 11, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> I agree Trump also screwed up on the national debt.
> But that does not change the fact we went from a 3 trillion dollar national debt to a 37 trillion dollar debt since Bush and his illegal invasion of Iraq.
> This can't be good or legal.



It's also not accurate.  We went hit 3 Trillion in deb under Reagan.  It went up to 4.5 Trillion under Bush-1, stablized at 6 Trillion under Clinton (who posted surpluses), then Bush cut taxes for the rich and put a war on the credit card and jacked it up to 11 Trillion. Obama racked up another 8 trillion in debt and Trump racked up another 6 trillion.  

The real problem isn't "the war", it's that we want all this government and we don't want to pay for it. 



Rigby5 said:


> And no, there can not be any federal involvement in health care, ever.
> There is no legal way to do it.



Sure we do... 

Everything else said about the VA and Medicare is just plain wrong.  Those are federal programs, and they are legal and work just fine..


----------



## Rigby5 (Dec 11, 2021)

JoeB131 said:


> It's also not accurate.  We went hit 3 Trillion in deb under Reagan.  It went up to 4.5 Trillion under Bush-1, stablized at 6 Trillion under Clinton (who posted surpluses), then Bush cut taxes for the rich and put a war on the credit card and jacked it up to 11 Trillion. Obama racked up another 8 trillion in debt and Trump racked up another 6 trillion.
> 
> The real problem isn't "the war", it's that we want all this government and we don't want to pay for it.
> 
> ...



It is true Reagan borrowed recklessly for SDI, but since it ended the USSR, people are more ambivolent about that.
And it also is hard to compare over that long of a period unless you normalize it against the GDP.






The point is not to blame any one president since it is congress that is at fault, but to show we are heading off a cliff.

And it is NOT that we want all this government but don't want to pay for it.
We get almost NOTHING from all this spending.
It is about 75% military spending, that is totally useless to us.
We are not getting free tuition, health care, food subsidies, low income housing, welfare, etc.
We are not getting much of anything from the feds except the War on Drugs causing the US to have the largest incarceration percentage in the world.

And no, the VA and Medicare are NOT federal programs.
The VA is not because it is only available to vets.
A federal program has to be universal by definition.
Medicare is not because Medicare it is not universal either, you also have to pay for it, and it is ONLY a funding source and does not provide any of the provider services that are all private.

Nor was whether or not federal programs worked or were a good idea, at all relevant.
The POINT was that any federal health program is ILLEGAL without an amendment.


----------



## JoeB131 (Dec 11, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> It is true Reagan borrowed recklessly for SDI, but since it ended the USSR, people are more ambivolent about that.
> And it also is hard to compare over that long of a period unless you normalize it against the GDP.





Rigby5 said:


> The point is not to blame any one president since it is congress that is at fault, but to show we are heading off a cliff.



Okay, let's look at your chart.  The US hit well over 100% of GDP as debt after WWII... But by 1970's, it was down to a little over 20%.  Not because the govenment wasn't still fighting wars (Korea and Vietnam), or having big programs (The Great Society, the Space Program, the Interstate Highway System).  It started creeping up again in the 1980's, after Reagan got this whacky idea that you can increase military spending AND cut taxes for rich people.  

It went back down in the 1990's because Clinton showed fiscal responsibility in both raising taxes and trimming spending.  But Bush and after, it spiked right back up. 



Rigby5 said:


> And it is NOT that we want all this government but don't want to pay for it.
> We get almost NOTHING from all this spending.



Actually, not true. The biggest line items on the Federal Budget are Social Security (1.2 Trillion) and Medicare (800 billion).  Defense spending comes in at 768 billion.  Most of what the government spends are in fact payments to people.  



Rigby5 said:


> And no, the VA and Medicare are NOT federal programs.
> The VA is not because it is only available to vets.
> A federal program has to be universal by definition.



Are you fucking retarded?  That's not the definition of a federal program at all.  MOST federal programs only benefit a select group.  



Rigby5 said:


> Nor was whether or not federal programs worked or were a good idea, at all relevant.
> The POINT was that any federal health program is ILLEGAL without an amendment.



Yeah, okay...  Tell you what, I think we should give you and Poodle the "Constitutional program".  It's where you only get medical treatment available to the Founding Slave Rapists...  Next time you get sick, we'll send someone around for your blood letting. 

ON a serious note, the fact is most other industrialized countries have universal health care, and they spend less as a percentage of GDP than we do.  the money is there, it's just not being allocated properly.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 18, 2021)

Rigby5 said:


> …since Bush and his illegal invasion of Iraq.


Uhhhh….”illegal”? Son, the operations in Iraq were literally the most legal military operations ever.

The Bush Administration received a UN Security Council authorization and they received authorization from Congress.


----------



## P@triot (Dec 18, 2021)

We must restore constitutional government.


> What characterizes the years from the late ’60s/early ’70s up until the present is vast expansion of government power and intrusion into the lives of citizens. In other words, *the more government goes where it doesn’t belong*, *the more confidence and trust that citizens feel in their government deteriorate*.


Well that’s what happens when you operate illegally. People don’t trust those who break the law.








						'Conservative Solutions': Nikki Haley's Christmas Gift to America
					

America needs a 21st-century conservative makeover. Nikki Haley's "American Strength: Conservative Solutions Worth Fighting For" is it.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## P@triot (Jan 6, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “We must restore constitutional government”. Such is the ignorant nonsense of the TPM and others on the ridiculous right.
> 
> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


Just a reminder that C_Clayton_Jones desperately wants you to believe that "the United States is _currently_ functioning under constitutional government". Aside from the most blatantly obvious (like the fact that there are several hundred federal departments when the constitution only tasks the federal government with 18 specific responsibilities), there is this little gem:








						Venmo, PayPal Must Report Goods and Services Payments of $600 or Above to IRS
					

Third-party payment apps must report goods and services payments of $600 or above to Internal Revenue Service (IRS) ...




					www.theepochtimes.com
				



Remind me again where in the US Constitution it authorizes the federal government to receive reports about your spending habits? And no attempt to hide behind or twist the intent of taxes and/or the IRS can explain away this egregious violation of basic 4th Amendment rights. With no search warrant (due to absolutely no cause), you are reported to the federal government _every_ time you spend more than $600. Most couches cost more than $600. Most tables cost more than $600. All automobiles cost more than $600. There is very little you can buy without being reported on like you are a Jew in Nazi Germany.

Despite the willful ignorance of CCJ above, we are *not* operating under constitutional government, and have not been for well over 150 years now.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 6, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Remind me again where in the US Constitution it authorizes the federal government to receive reports about your spending habits?



16th Amendment, allowing for an income tax.   Happy to have sorted that out for you.


----------



## BackAgain (Jan 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> 16th Amendment, allowing for an income tax.   Happy to have sorted that out for you.


Fail. Allowing the tax of income doesn’t authorize the receipt of spending information.

Happy to correct your stupid misinterpretations.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 6, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> Fail. Allowing the tax of income doesn’t authorize the receipt of spending information.
> 
> Happy to correct your stupid misinterpretations.



The information wasn't being collected to track spending, it was being collected to track income... Fail.


----------



## BackAgain (Jan 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The information wasn't being collected to track spending, it was being collected to track income... Fail.


Nice try. You fail again. The question you purported to “answer” was:

“Remind me again where in the US Constitution it *authorizes the federal government to receive reports about your spending habits*?”

Your “answer” was that the amendment authorizing an income tax authorized it.  But it didn’t. Your purported answer was either dishonest or a great example of your eternally hopeless ignorance.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 6, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> Your “answer” was that the amendment authorizing an income tax authorized it. But it didn’t. Your purported answer was either dishonest or a great example of your eternally hopeless ignorance.



The 16th Amendment authorizes the government to track and tax income.  So yes, the government can totally track transactions over $600.00.   You lose again.


----------



## BackAgain (Jan 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The 16th Amendment authorizes the government to track and tax income.  So yes, the government can totally track transactions over $600.00.   You lose again.


The government may have a right to see how much I earn. (It’s an INCOME tax, you idiot.) 

That doesn’t grant them the right to see how much I spend. They may *claim* the authority. That doesn’t mean they *have* any such authority or that they _should_ have it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 6, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> The government may have a right to see how much I earn. (It’s an INCOME tax, you idiot.)
> 
> That doesn’t grant them the right to see how much I spend. They may *claim* the authority. That doesn’t mean they *have* any such authority or that they _should_ have it.



Okay, did they let all the retards have computer night tonight?  

The purpose was NOT to track spending, it was to track INCOME.   Because so many people are using Zelle and Paypal and other apps to take payment for services, the government needs a way to track that.  

This isn't fucking complicated.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> 16th Amendment, allowing for an income tax.   Happy to have sorted that out for you.


Where?


----------



## BackAgain (Jan 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, did they let all the retards have computer night tonight?



apparently. You’ve been posting.


----------



## BackAgain (Jan 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, did they let all the retards have computer night tonight?
> 
> The purpose was NOT to track spending, it was to track INCOME.   Because so many people are using Zelle and Paypal and other apps to take payment for services, the government needs a way to track that.
> 
> This isn't fucking complicated.


You are retarded.

If  the gubmint sees me paying some other individual $750.00, that doesn’t mean they are tracking income. They are tracking a payment of some unknown kind. And my purchases are none of their business.  And if I sell my old couch for a shit ton less than I paid for it, that too is none of their fucking business.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 7, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> If the gubmint sees me paying some other individual $750.00, that doesn’t mean they are tracking income. They are tracking a payment of some unknown kind. And my purchases are none of their business. And if I sell my old couch for a shit ton less than I paid for it, that too is none of their fucking business.



Yes, they are tracking the income of the person you gave the $750.00 to.  They really don't care what you bought, they care that the person receiving the $750 might be generating income that way and it's a red flag if it happens a lot through PayPal, Zelle, Ebay, etc.


----------



## BackAgain (Jan 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yes, they are tracking the income of the person you gave the $750.00 to.  They really don't care what you bought, they care that the person receiving the $750 might be generating income that way and it's a red flag if it happens a lot through PayPal, Zelle, Ebay, etc.


They are not tracking income in my example. So, you remain wrong. As always.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 7, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> They are not tracking income in my example. So, you remain wrong. As always.


Your example wasn't what Biden proposed.


----------



## BackAgain (Jan 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Your example wasn't what Biden proposed.


If I send out a payment on Venmo, and the gubmint tracks it, then that’s exactly what Brandon proposes.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 7, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> If I send out a payment on Venmo, and the gubmint tracks it, then that’s exactly what Brandon proposes.



Yes, to the person who receives it...    
Again, what they are looking for is patterns.   Not the occassional sale on Ebay or a gift to aunt Jenny, but the guy who gets lots of payments through cash apps, and then doesn't report them to the IRS.


----------



## BackAgain (Jan 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yes, to the person who receives it...
> Again, what they are looking for is patterns.   Not the occassional sale on Ebay or a gift to aunt Jenny, but the guy who gets lots of payments through cash apps, and then doesn't report them to the IRS.


Wrong. If I buy your used sofa, I haven’t earned anything. No reason for the gubmint to know about my purchase.

Also, you probably lost money on the selling of a used sofa. Not income. None of the gubmint’s fucking business.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 8, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> Wrong. If I buy your used sofa, I haven’t earned anything. No reason for the gubmint to know about my purchase.
> 
> Also, you probably lost money on the selling of a used sofa. Not income. None of the gubmint’s fucking business.



Not what was being proposed by the law... The law just required banks to record any transaction over $600.00. (Should also point that this proposal was dropped.) 

The IRS isn't going to care that you bought a sofa.  What they are going to care about is that the guy who was selling sofas every week and not reporting it on his 1040.


----------



## BackAgain (Jan 12, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not what was being proposed by the law... The law just required banks to record any transaction over $600.00. (Should also point that this proposal was dropped.)
> 
> The IRS isn't going to care that you bought a sofa.  What they are going to care about is that the guy who was selling sofas every week and not reporting it on his 1040.


I don’t care what their alleged purpose is or was. I care about the intrusive effect of it. It is not a proper way for our government to root out tax evasion.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 13, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> I don’t care what their alleged purpose is or was. I care about the intrusive effect of it. It is not a proper way for our government to root out tax evasion.



Why not?  Frankly, a lot of these services are already doing it.   Every year, PayPal sends me tax documentation for all the money I collect through PayPal.  (I've largely moved over to Zelle because it's easier to use and cheaper.)


----------



## BackAgain (Jan 13, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Why not?  Frankly, a lot of these services are already doing it.   Every year, PayPal sends me tax documentation for all the money I collect through PayPal.  (I've largely moved over to Zelle because it's easier to use and cheaper.)


If you use PayPal and they collect the string of entries for you, that’s between you and PayPal.  You can do anything legal with any other person or company on which you agree. When the government imposes it on you because THEY want your information, the government has crossed a line. Their official action negates agreement.

And if you say “but we have a representative gubmint and they can pass laws!” then the response is “they can only legitimately pass laws consistent with the Constitution.”


----------



## P@triot (Jan 13, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> Your “answer” was that the amendment authorizing an income tax authorized it.  But it didn’t.


I’m not exaggerating when I tell you that JoeB131 denies the sun is hot and air exists. He’s a total troll. Just here to try to get a reaction out of people.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 13, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The 16th Amendment authorizes the government to track and tax income.


Bwahahaha!! When I *spend* money, that is *not* _income_, you low-IQ imbecile. Do you even think for a millisecond before you post your nonsense?


----------



## P@triot (Jan 13, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The purpose was NOT to track spending, it was to track INCOME.


Bwahahaha!! Then why are they tracking the _spenders_ name, you low-IQ imbecile?


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 13, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yes, to the person who receives it...
> Again, what they are looking for is patterns.   Not the occassional sale on Ebay or a gift to aunt Jenny, but the guy who gets lots of payments through cash apps, and then doesn't report them to the IRS.


Yeah, the government never misuses any of the information it collects on taxpayers.

Why, that would be outrageous!


----------



## P@triot (Jan 13, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Again, *what they are looking for is patterns*…


Ruh-Roh Raggy! JoeyB changed his story. First Joey claimed they were merely “tracking income for *taxes*”.

But after the board embarrassed him, he’s now changed his story (as he always does) and is claiming the government is looking for “patterns”.

But here is the dirt little secret that low-IQ Joey doesn’t want you to know: the federal government has 0 authority to track my spending or my “patterns”. None. And only sick fucking fascist parasites like himself would argue that the government can or should.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 13, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Ruh-Roh Raggy! JoeyB changed his story. First Joey claimed they were merely “tracking income for *taxes*”.
> 
> But after the board embarrassed him, he’s now changed his story (as he always does) and is claiming the government is looking for “patterns”.
> 
> But here is the dirt little secret that low-IQ Joey doesn’t want you to know: the federal government has 0 authority to track my spending or my “patterns”. None. And only sick fucking fascist parasites like himself would argue that the government can or should.


I hope someone takes this to court.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 13, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> If you use PayPal and they collect the string of entries for you, that’s between you and PayPal. You can do anything legal with any other person or company on which you agree. When the government imposes it on you because THEY want your information, the government has crossed a line. Their official action negates agreement.
> 
> And if you say “but we have a representative gubmint and they can pass laws!” then the response is “they can only legitimately pass laws consistent with the Constitution.”



Right.
The 16th Amendment allows them to tax income.
By logic, you need laws and policies to be able to track income in order to tax it.



P@triot said:


> Ruh-Roh Raggy! JoeyB changed his story. First Joey claimed they were merely “tracking income for *taxes*”.
> 
> But after the board embarrassed him, he’s now changed his story (as he always does) and is claiming the government is looking for “patterns”.
> 
> But here is the dirt little secret that low-IQ Joey doesn’t want you to know: the federal government has 0 authority to track my spending or my “patterns”. None. And only sick fucking fascist parasites like himself would argue that the government can or should.



Except there's that pesky 16th Amendment.... 

It's pretty clear why this is needed in a "gig" economy.  A lot of transactions happen under the radar.


----------



## BackAgain (Jan 13, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Right.
> The 16th Amendment allows them to tax income.
> By logic, you need laws and policies to be able to track income in order to tax it.
> 
> ...


Way to ignore the point. You go ahead and pass laws to track income. No problem. But it is a huge “no” to tracking individuals’ spending.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 13, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Right.
> The 16th Amendment allows them to tax income.
> By logic, you need laws and policies to be able to track income in order to tax it.
> 
> ...


Any such laws cannot violate any of your constitutional rights, and the reporting requirement certainly does that.  The law being discussed here is an even more blatant violation.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 13, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Right.
> The 16th Amendment allows them to tax income.
> By logic, you need laws and policies to be able to track income in order to tax it.
> 
> ...


You're forgetting those pesky 4th amendment and 5th amendments.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Jan 13, 2022)

P@triot said:


> I’m not exaggerating when I tell you that JoeB131 denies the sun is hot and air exists. He’s a total troll. Just here to try to get a reaction out of people.


Joey is a human spambot.


----------



## P@triot (Jan 14, 2022)

bripat9643 said:


> You're forgetting those pesky 4th amendment and 5th amendments.


One cannot “forget” something they never learned. JoeyB isn’t particularly bright.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 14, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> Way to ignore the point. You go ahead and pass laws to track income. No problem. But it is a huge “no” to tracking individuals’ spending.



Not sure how you catch the tax evaders without tracking the spending... but never mind.   You guys blew this way out of proportion.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 14, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not sure how you catch the tax evaders without tracking the spending... but never mind.   You guys blew this way out of proportion.


You don't give a fuck of actually respecting the Constitution if it gets in the way of your agenda, do you Joe?


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 14, 2022)

bripat9643 said:


> You don't give a fuck of actually respecting the Constitution if it gets in the way of your agenda, do you Joe?



There's no constitutional issue here.   The 16th Amendment gives the government the right to track and tax income.   This year I am going to have to file a Schedule C for my resume writing business and a Schedule D for my rental property...   All income that goes beyond a regular paycheck that I get. Now, if I were a less than ethical person, I could not report this income, and how would the government know I was getting it unless they were tracking my bank account?  

So really, when the government starts tracking payments over $600, they are looking for unreported income.  They really don't care that you bought a couch on Ebay.  (Is Ebay still a thing?)  They worry that someone might be engaging in commerce and not paying taxes on it.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jan 14, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> There's no constitutional issue here.   The 16th Amendment gives the government the right to track and tax income.


Spending isn't income, you dumb fuck.   Payments from my bank account don't have a thing to do with my income because I'm not a business.  

You seem intent on proving that you're the world's biggest dumbfuck.  That's a clear violation of the 4th amendment and the 5th amendment.  Of course, being required to file taxes is already a violation of the 5th Amendment.


----------



## JoeB131 (Jan 14, 2022)

bripat9643 said:


> Spending isn't income, you dumb fuck. Payments from my bank account don't have a thing to do with my income because I'm not a business.
> 
> You seem intent on proving that you're the world's biggest dumbfuck. That's a clear violation of the 4th amendment and the 5th amendment. Of course, being required to file taxes is already a violation of the 5th Amendment.



Income is someone's payment, dummy.  If you are paying for something, someone else is receiving it as income. And of course, if you are paying people off the books, that's income tax evasion.  It's how all these Republicans get in trouble for not paying taxes for their illegal immigrant nannies.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


Hey C_Clayton_Jones - we know you’re a devout fascist and all, but we’re all wondering if you’d like to retract your hilarious previous propaganda that the United States is “currently functioning under constructional government”?

Because not even your low-IQ ass actually believes that:

Egregiously violating the 4th Amendment is “constitutional”
The C.I.A. hiding their mass surveillance of U.S. citizens (sans a warrant) from Congress is “constitutional”
How are you not humiliated _every_ time you post? 🤡 








						Secret memo shows the CIA is spying on you
					

The Central Intelligence Agency has used a "secret" program to collect data on American citizens in "bulk," according to a letter that was partially declassified on Thursday.What are the details?Two Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee — Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.) and Martin Heinrich (N.M.)...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Feb 15, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> *Income* is someone's payment,


Yep. And they _already_ track income, dumb-fuck. So why the need for this new law? Because this is not tracking “income”. This is tracking *spending*.

Not sure why you think denying reality is effective for you, but it’s not. At all. Everyone just views you as the board 🤡


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 15, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Hey C_Clayton_Jones - we know you’re a devout fascist and all, but we’re all wondering if you’d like to retract your hilarious previous propaganda that the United States is “currently functioning under constructional government”?
> 
> Because not even your low-IQ ass actually believes that:
> 
> ...


Didn't a secret memo come out that Trump was breaking the law and you didn't want to believe it?  Or you didn't care?

Isn't it also against the law to spy on Russia?  But I'm sure we do it.  Secretly of course.  We'd be stupid not to.  And with so many domestic terrorists living in this country, we'd be foolish not to spy on them as well.


----------



## The Original Tree (Feb 15, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Hey C_Clayton_Jones - we know you’re a devout fascist and all, but we’re all wondering if you’d like to retract your hilarious previous propaganda that the United States is “currently functioning under constructional government”?
> 
> Because not even your low-IQ ass actually believes that:
> 
> ...


*When you want to take Satan to The Prom, ask a girl who works for The FBI or CIA.*


----------



## Rigby5 (Feb 15, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, not true. The biggest line items on the Federal Budget are Social Security (1.2 Trillion) and Medicare (800 billion). Defense spending comes in at 768 billion. Most of what the government spends are in fact payments to people.




Totally wrong.

Social Security is not even remotely part of the Federal Budget.
It used to be totally self financing, and still is almost totally self financing.

Medicare is also self financing, actually being health insurance paid through Social Security.

The defense spending is actually much higher than recorded, since the VA, GIBill, and national debt interest is actually all defense spending really.

Here is a closer to more accurate view.






If you see Social Security being included, then it is not discretionary and is not real, but is fake instead.
Social Security is not and never can be part of the federal budget.


----------



## Richard-H (Feb 15, 2022)

Anybody that thinks that they have privacy on the internet or over their cell phone is a fool!

The government is the least of who you should be worried about spying on you....

Unless you're doing something tremendously illegal....


----------



## Theowl32 (Feb 15, 2022)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide


Well, let me explain or attempt to explain the uphill battle. This Constitutional government is supposed to be a REPUBLIC not a DEMOCRACY. That means voting was NEVER SUPPSED TO A RIGHT, cause the Founding Fathers knew all too well how quickly the country would fall into DEMOGOGUERY. 

dem·a·gog·uer·y
/ˈdeməˌɡäɡ(ə)rē/
Learn to pronounce
noun
political activity or practices that seek support by appealing to the desires and prejudices of ordinary people rather than by using rational argument.
"the demagoguery of political opportunists"

As a result of this country turning voting into a RIGHT, large swaths of people are voting out of pure emotion which means utter ignorance. These groups are susceptible to false promises. FREE FREE FREE FREE

That's demagoguery. The power hungry politicians have known this for a while and it is also quite simple separate groups out. Like predators that hunt their prey. They need to separate the herd to focus in on their target.

This country has been divided and conquered. We have no constitutional Republic. We aren't circling the bowl, we are down the drain. 

In order to win it back, the educational system, the media and entertainment industries need to be called out and thousands need to be tried for high treason. 

That's after we get to the courts and activist blackmailed judges and politicians.


----------



## bripat9643 (Feb 15, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Didn't a secret memo come out that Trump was breaking the law and you didn't want to believe it?  Or you didn't care?



Who issued the memo, the DNC?



sealybobo said:


> Isn't it also against the law to spy on Russia?


Nope.  Not at all.



sealybobo said:


> But I'm sure we do it.  Secretly of course.  We'd be stupid not to.  And with so many domestic terrorists living in this country, we'd be foolish not to spy on them as well.



Unfortunately it's against the law.


----------



## Rigby5 (Feb 15, 2022)

Theowl32 said:


> Well, let me explain or attempt to explain the uphill battle. This Constitutional government is supposed to be a REPUBLIC not a DEMOCRACY. That means voting was NEVER SUPPSED TO A RIGHT, cause the Founding Fathers knew all too well how quickly the country would fall into DEMOGOGUERY.
> 
> dem·a·gog·uer·y
> /ˈdeməˌɡäɡ(ə)rē/
> ...



But there also is no known way to maintain a constitutional republic without it also being some sort of at least representational democracy.
Democracy means "the people", and they are the best anyone can do.
Sure that is mob rule, but with all the money controlling the media, that is better than bureaucrats in DC ruling us.


----------



## bripat9643 (Feb 15, 2022)

Richard-H said:


> Anybody that thinks that they have privacy on the internet or over their cell phone is a fool!
> 
> The government is the least of who you should be worried about spying on you....
> 
> Unless you're doing something tremendously illegal....


Pure idiocy.  Who should we worry about more than the government?


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 15, 2022)

bripat9643 said:


> Who issued the memo, the DNC?
> 
> 
> Nope.  Not at all.
> ...


So is asking the president of another country to make shit up about your opponent.  Or asking the Governor of Georgia to come up with 200,000 votes however he has to do it.


----------



## bripat9643 (Feb 15, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> So is asking the president of another country to make shit up about your opponent.  Or asking the Governor of Georgia to come up with 200,000 votes however he has to do it.


He didn't ask any such thing, douchebag.  The law says Trump is allowed, even required, to request assistance from foreign governments to solve crimes.

The GA thing is a deliberate misinterpretation of what Trump said. 

Who are you trying to fool?


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 15, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> Totally wrong.
> 
> Social Security is not even remotely part of the Federal Budget.
> It used to be totally self financing, and still is almost totally self financing.



Completely misses the point I was making. 

I'd explain it to you again, but you still won't get it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Feb 15, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Yep. And they _already_ track income, dumb-fuck. So why the need for this new law? Because this is not tracking “income”. This is tracking *spending*.



Poodle, as someone who runs the kind of business we are talking about, I can tell you right now Zelle and PayPal are tracking every electronic payment I'm getting.


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 16, 2022)

bripat9643 said:


> Who issued the memo, the DNC?
> 
> 
> Nope.  Not at all.
> ...











						Jan. 6 Committee Focuses On Trump Scheme To Solicit Slates Of Fake Electors
					

The committee is zeroing in on a key part of Donald Trump’s plot to overturn the election: slates of fake electors from seven states Joe Biden won.




					www.huffpost.com
				




The House committee investigating the Jan. 6 assault on the Capitol sharpened its focus Tuesday on former President Donald Trump’s scheme to send slates of “false” electors to Congress in an attempt to overturn his election loss.

New subpoenas went out to six new witnesses, including two Trump campaign aides, state legislators and Republican Party officials from three of the states involved in the plan.

“The select committee is seeking information about efforts to send false slates of electors to Washington and change the outcome of the 2020 election,” committee chair Bennie Thompson, a Mississippi Democrat, said in a statement. “The select committee has heard from more than 550 witnesses, and we expect these six individuals to cooperate as well.”
Among the six are two new celebrities among Trump followers: Mark Finchem, an Arizona state lawmaker who is running to be the top elections official there, and Doug Mastriano, a Pennsylvania legislator who led the efforts to overturn Democrat Joe Biden’s victory in that state. Both reportedly also attended the Jan. 6 rally that turned into a deadly riot in the attempt to keep Trump in power.

Also subpoenaed: Kelli Ward, the chair of the Arizona Republican Party who was among the 11 fake Trump electors there; Laura Cox, the former chair of the Michigan Republican Party, who reportedly witnessed Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani pressure legislators to overturn Biden’s win in that state; and Michael Roman and Gary Michael Brown, two Trump campaign officials involved in promoting the fake elector plan.
All six have been ordered to turn over relevant documents and then sit for depositions next month.

According to Trump, Pence could have cited these “competing” slates of electors to ignore the electoral votes from those states entirely — and then, with Trump holding a lead in the remaining states, ruled him the winner.
But Pence made sure to sabotage that plan by crafting language that allowed him to ignore Trump’s fake slates of electors from the outset.

Trump became the first president in more than two centuries of elections to refuse to hand over power peacefully. Five people died in connection to the Capitol riot, four police officers died by suicide in the weeks and months following the assault, and another 140 officers were injured.

Despite this, Trump remains the dominant figure in the Republican Party and is openly speaking about running for the presidency again in 2024.


----------



## Richard-H (Feb 16, 2022)

bripat9643 said:


> Pure idiocy.  Who should we worry about more than the government?



Private business, organized crime, identity thieves...

Any other stupid questions?


----------



## bripat9643 (Feb 16, 2022)

Richard-H said:


> Private business, organized crime, identity thieves...
> 
> Any other stupid questions?


No.  None of them have 1/1000th as much power as the government.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Isn't it also against the law to spy on Russia?


Uh...no dumb ass. It is *not* against the law to spy on Russia. 

Why do people like you speak? You humiliate yourself when you make shit up.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2022)

Richard-H said:


> Private business


I'm sorry welfare queen, did Microsoft hold a Holocaust that we didn't know about? Because the last time I checked, the Holocaust was the result of a _government_ with too much power. Not a business.

How dumb are you exactly? Asking for a friend.


Richard-H said:


> organized crime


I'm sorry welfare queen, does the mob have a nuclear weapon and satellites in space that we don't know about?

How dumb are you exactly? Asking for a friend.


Richard-H said:


> identity thieves...


I'm sorry welfare queen, do identity thieves have the power to make, alter, or abolish law in the United States?

How dumb are you exactly? Asking for a friend.


Richard-H said:


> Any other stupid questions?


Any other _really_ stupid "answers" you'd like to provide the class?


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2022)

Friends, this 👇 is what a welfare queen looks like.


Richard-H said:


> Private business, organized crime, identity thieves...


Richard is so afraid to lose some government table scraps, that he will actually:

Fight for government to have unlimited power
Argue that "private business" wields more power than government
Argue that "organized crime" wields more power than government
Argue that "identity thieves" wield more power than government


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2022)

Richard-H said:


> Anybody that thinks that they have privacy on the internet or over their cell phone is a fool!


Anybody who loves welfare checks and food snaps more than liberty is not only a fool, they are also an _asshole_.

Sit down and shut the fuck up 🤡 


Richard-H said:


> The government is the least of who you should be worried about spying on you...


Nobody else _can_ spy on me, high school dropout. The identity thieves do not have satellites in space. The mob has absolutely no ability to tap my phones (land lines or cell). Private business hold absolutely 0 authority over me and cannot detain me for _any_ reason.


Richard-H said:


> Unless you're doing something tremendously illegal....


The government is the #1 threat to liberty...unless you're an asshole welfare queen who would rather trade everyone else's liberty in exchange for some food stamps and a petty welfare check each month.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> So is asking the president of another country to make shit up about your opponent.


Which never happened


sealybobo said:


> Or asking the Governor of Georgia to come up with 200,000 votes however he has to do it.


Which also never happened

Furthermore, every time we expose actual problems, you fucking piece of shit liberals scream "but Trump" or "but Bush". Neither of them are President.

Why do you piece of shit liberals believe in protecting Democrats at all cost - even if they are raping a child or burning the constitution? For fucks sake man.


----------



## Richard-H (Feb 16, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Anybody who loves welfare checks and food snaps more than liberty is not only a fool, they are also an _asshole_.
> 
> Sit down and shut the fuck up 🤡
> 
> ...



Spoken like the ignorant asshole that you are!

Yes, my taxes pay for other people's welfare checks and food stamps. I'm happy to contribute to the society that I live in, and have compassion for my fellow Americans.

If you don't think that organized crime can spy on you, you're a total fool. Identity thieves do find ways of accessing the data from satellites, besides there are a lot of ways to spy on people without satellites.

Private business has you by the balls and your just too stupid to realize it.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2022)

Richard-H said:


> Yes, my taxes pay for other people's welfare checks and food stamps.


Stop pretending like you pay taxes, you fuck'n parasite.


Richard-H said:


> I'm happy to contribute to the society that I live in, and have compassion for my fellow Americans.


If you even remotely believed that shit, you would give to *charity* rather than government.

Like all parasites, you want to trade my freedoms for your welfare check. Fuck _you_, 🤡 


Richard-H said:


> If you don't think that organized crime can spy on you, you're a total fool.


Low-IQ liberal doubles-down on his desperate claim that organized crime can spy on people more than the United States government can (or even _is_)


Richard-H said:


> Identity thieves do find ways of accessing the data from satellites,


Bwahahaha!


Richard-H said:


> besides there are a lot of ways to spy on people without satellites


So then you admit that the United State government is excessive in their intrusion? Oops. How dumb are you to defeat your own argument?


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 16, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Which never happened
> 
> Which also never happened
> 
> ...


Both happened.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2022)

Richard-H said:


> Private business has you by the balls and your just too stupid to realize it.


The United States government currently has you by the balls, the taint, the asshole, and has it's dick shoved down the back of your throat, and you're thanking them for it all because they give you a welfare check and some food stamps.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Both happened.


Yeah...no they didn't. And even *if* they had (and they didn't), unrelated to what is happening now, other than the fact that you worthless liberals want to protect your leaders at all costs, no matter how heinous their crimes.


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 16, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Stop pretending like you pay taxes, you fuck'n parasite.
> 
> If you even remotely believed that shit, you would give to *charity* rather than government.
> 
> ...


Interesting.  We show you how rich people and corporations pay no taxes, you say nonsense they pay plenty of taxes.  This guy pays taxes and you say he doesn't.


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 16, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Yeah...no they didn't. And even *if* they had (and they didn't), unrelated to what is happening now, other than the fact that you worthless liberals want to protect your leaders at all costs, no matter how heinous their crimes.


Maybe in 20 years you'll admit they did happen like now you guys sort of admit Bush lied us into Iraq.  Maybe when Trump's dead you'll admit yes he was shady.


----------



## 22lcidw (Feb 16, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Interesting.  We show you how rich people and corporations pay no taxes, you say nonsense they pay plenty of taxes.  This guy pays taxes and you say he doesn't.


Federal Progs have had opportunities to increase taxes and did not. In some local areas they have raised taxes enough to force people to move. They then start the cycle again. The people living in those states affected are forced to pay more and se Prog domination in rules and laws. Texas has this in its major cities now as an example. Florida has the three counites in the Southeast and Tampa and Orlando. The Prog politicians show their dictator ways when they can. Orlando and Orange County are transitioning too pure blue. And they have blown tens of billions of free dollars over the last few decades with Blue politicians and their agendas. They would be put to death in some parts of the world.


----------



## toobfreak (Feb 16, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government



Poor Demented Liar







STEALS national election, makes up two fake impeachments, rigs engineered "insurrection" and now top government officials exposed as traitors committing treason and espionage and this buffoon calls that a "constitutional" government."


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Interesting.  We show you how rich people and corporations pay no taxes, you say nonsense they pay plenty of taxes.  This guy pays taxes and you say he doesn't.


Interesting. We show you how the US had the highest corporate tax rates in the _world_ under Obama, and you refuse to accept reality.

We show you the welfare class like Richard, and you refuse to accept reality.

We show you that DNA proves that someone with a penis and a vagina is a man (not a woman), and you refuse to accept reality.

So I think we've established that you just don't want to accept reality because it doesn't align with your fucked-up ideology.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 16, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Maybe in 20 years you'll admit they did happen like now you guys sort of admit Bush lied us into Iraq.


Hahahahahaha!!! It has been *proven* (and acknowledge) that Iraq had WMD's. Bush never lied. 

Even MSNBC had an article about bomb technicians being attacked with Sarin Gas.

MS fucking NBC 

So to recap, you thought spying on Russia was "illegal". You thought Trump caused an "insurrection". And you thought Bush "lied us into Iraq".

All of which is 100% wrong. You might just be the most uninformed/misinformed person in the _history_ of USMB.


----------



## emilynghiem (Feb 16, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The 16th Amendment authorizes the government to track and tax income.  So yes, the government can totally track transactions over $600.00.   You lose again.


Dear JoeB131
For business accounts where transactions are income related, perhaps.

What causes objections is when personal interactions are audited "assuming these are business until proven otherwise."

That is backwards.

Individual liberties cannot be deprived by govt WITHOUT Due Process.

Where is the Due Process to prove these are business transactions BEFORE govt regulates them.

The laws requiring reporting should only apply to designated Business accounts used for income related transactions.

Govt cannot assume "business until proven to be nonbusiness personal" because after the fact, Govt will have already violated individual protections of liberty and due process.

This is similar to "assuming guilt until proven innocent" which is legally backwards.

If it helps to grasp how critical this concept is of Due Process: you can use it to explain very similar arguments defending individual "substantive due process" from govt enforcement of abortion laws BEFORE proving the person merited deprivation or not.

Legally, a person would have had to completed the legal proceedings before being punished or deprived of liberty. Arguments defending due process, whether gun rights abortion rights or other individual liberty from violation are based on objections to treating law abiding citizens as criminals before due process is conducted to prove guilt or abuses that merit loss of liberty or searches and seizures.

You may not agree with limiting govt in one case, such as with taxation, but when this same line of argument applies to issues where you don't want govt overreaching, suddenly Due Process becomes your friend you want to defend on principle. And Conservatives will have a harder time arguing with you where Due Process is involved. You may want to keep your Due Process rights handy, to use in other cases where it matters to you, and not give these up to Govt to violate.


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 17, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Hahahahahaha!!! It has been *proven* (and acknowledge) that Iraq had WMD's. Bush never lied.
> 
> Even MSNBC had an article about bomb technicians being attacked with Sarin Gas.
> 
> ...


You believe the media?  What a fucking fool.  You only don't believe it when it tells you something that doesn't jive with your warped way of thinking.  Suddenly you believe MSNBC? 

I told you stupid bastards, the media isn't liberal.  It only appears to be liberal.  At least MSNBC does.  It has advertisers. 

The media hasn't been liberal since it was taken over in 1996.  Telecommunications act.  Allowed 7 corporations to buy up and sensor the media.  Even MSNBC.

Ever wonder why there isn't one popular liberal radio talk show host on the radio?  There is an audience.  Why doesn't the stations that air guys like Rush Limbaugh put one or two liberals on at night?  They'd be popular shows in dead time slots.

I'll tell you why.  Because it's INVALUABLE that they get to spew nothing but right wing bullshit 24/7.  Even if a liberal would make them money, they'd rather give up that money and not let that message get out.  So they are a business who passes on profits in order to brainwash you 24/7.  Because that's worth more than the liberal show even if it's number 1 in ratings.

You are so brainwashed.


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 17, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Hahahahahaha!!! It has been *proven* (and acknowledge) that Iraq had WMD's. Bush never lied.
> 
> Even MSNBC had an article about bomb technicians being attacked with Sarin Gas.
> 
> ...


The United States asserted that Hussein's frequent lack of cooperation was a breach of Resolution 1441, but failed to convince the United Nations Security Council to pass a new resolution authorizing the use of force due to lack of evidence. Despite this, Bush asserted peaceful measures could not disarm Iraq of the weapons he alleged it to have and launched a second Gulf War instead. A year later, the United States Senate officially released the Senate Report of Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq which concluded that many of the Bush Administration's pre-war statements about Iraqi WMD were misleading and not supported by the underlying intelligence. United States–led inspections later found that Iraq had earlier ceased active WMD production and stockpiling; the war was called by many, including 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain, a "mistake".

Even Trump said Bush lied









						Yes, Trump Said Bush 'Lied' - FactCheck.org
					

Donald Trump denied that he ever accused President George W. Bush of lying about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. “I didn't say lie," Trump said. That’s false. Trump at least twice -- most recently in a debate last month -- said Bush "lied."




					www.factcheck.org


----------



## P@triot (Feb 17, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Ever wonder why there isn't one popular liberal radio talk show host on the radio?


Nope. Never wondered. I know. The left is made up of low-IQ imbeciles who would rather tune into reality tv and pop culture bullshit than follow what is going on with their government.

Their ratings are atrocious every time they try to put a left-wing show on the air. Which is why we are so informed and assholes like _you_ say embarrassing shit like “Bush lied us into Iraq”


----------



## P@triot (Feb 17, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Even Trump said Bush lied


You believe the Donald? What a fucking fool. You only don't believe Trump when he tells you something that doesn't jive with your warped way of thinking. Suddenly you believe DJT?


----------



## P@triot (Feb 17, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> A year later, the United States Senate officially released the Senate Report of Pre-war Intelligence on Iraq which concluded that many of the Bush Administration's pre-war statements about Iraqi WMD were misleading and not supported by the underlying intelligence.


Because the US government would *never* lie to you. 

Here snowflake, allow me to educate you. From Chuck Pfarerr's book, Seal Target: Geronimo


> It is a chilling *fact* that thousands of chemical weapons have been uncovered in Iraq. These weapons have been used by Al Qaeda against coalition and NATO forces on dozens of occasions. This has been *confirmed by countless sources*, most recently in the released *WikiLeaks cables*.
> 
> So why haven't the American people been told of the stock-piled caches of chemical WMD's uncovered in Iraq or of the chemical weapon attacks by Al Qaeda?
> 
> *The Republicans won’t touch this because it would reveal the incompetence of the Bush administration in failing to neutralize the danger of Iraqi WMD (instead of preventing Weapons of Mass Destruction from falling into the hands of terrorists, the 2003 invasion of Iraq has accelerated the acquisition, manufacture, and use of chemical weapons by Al Qaeda)*. *The Democrats won’t touch it because it would show President Bush was right to invade Iraq in the first place.* It is an axis of embarrassment.  *And the press won't touch it because they had already convinced themselves, and most of the American public, that Saddam Hussein didn’t have any WMD's*. The media turned a blind eye to continued reports of chemical weapon attacks because its own credibility was threatened. Several major outlets were deeply invested with the story line of an “unjustifiable war". Not many people can bear to admit they were wrong, especially in print, and especially if they have been very wrong for a very long time.


Don’t take it hard, Sealy. As a leftist, literally nobody on the planet expects you to be informed/enlightened. As we already established, you low-IQ leftist prefer mindless entertainment like reality tv (which is why they can’t keep a left-wing radio show on the air). Meanwhile, we conservatives are consuming books and news at an accelerated pace.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 17, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Maybe in 20 years you'll admit they did happen *like now you guys sort of admit Bush lied us into Iraq*.







Classified battle field reports exposed by WikiLeaks, you uninformed 🤡


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 17, 2022)

P@triot said:


> View attachment 602674
> 
> Classified battle field reports exposed by WikiLeaks, you uninformed 🤡


You believe what you want to believe. 

And funny, you guys voted for a guy who agrees with me Bush lied.  Funny.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 18, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> You believe what you want to believe.


That's the difference between you and I. I don't do "beliefs". I _only_ do *facts*. Classified cables released by WikiLeaks shows hundreds and hundreds of battle field reports discussing WMD's. Vx Gas. Sarin Gas. Mustard Gas. That is indisputable evidence that would hold up in any court in the world.

You were wrong. You are deeply uninformed. Which explains why you vote Dumbocrat.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 18, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> And funny, you guys voted for a guy who agrees with me Bush lied.  Funny.



I didn't vote for Trump. Ever. Not in 2016. Not in 2020 (you've yet to post _anything_ accurate)
Why is that "funny"? Are you so immature and idealistic that you would claim you've never disagreed with the comments of a Democrat?
Sorry low-IQ leftist, but I don't choose my representatives based on their views of George W. Bush. I actually worry about the US Constitution and issues. Only you left-wing pop-culture imbeciles worry about the rumors, he-said/she-said nonsense.


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 18, 2022)

P@triot said:


> That's the difference between you and I. I don't do "beliefs". I _only_ do *facts*. Classified cables released by WikiLeaks shows hundreds and hundreds of battle field reports discussing WMD's. Vx Gas. Sarin Gas. Mustard Gas. That is indisputable evidence that would hold up in any court in the world.
> 
> You were wrong. You are deeply uninformed. Which explains why you vote Dumbocrat.


Bullshit.  I don't believe that intel.  And I don't know why you do.  You seem to be a cherry picker. Is Wikileaks the most reliable source?

Is Julian Assange a patriot in your eyes?


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 18, 2022)

P@triot said:


> I didn't vote for Trump. Ever. Not in 2016. Not in 2020 (you've yet to post _anything_ accurate)
> Why is that "funny"? Are you so immature and idealistic that you would claim you've never disagreed with the comments of a Democrat?
> Sorry low-IQ leftist, but I don't choose my representatives based on their views of George W. Bush. I actually worry about the US Constitution and issues. Only you left-wing pop-culture imbeciles worry about the rumors, he-said/she-said nonsense.


Clearly you Trump supporters/defenders don't care if your candidate is a conspiracy theorist.  Trump was the original birther.  The conspiracy that Obama was born in Kenya.  Racist and liar.  Check check. 

You don't care that your candidate is a conspiracy theorist nutjob?  You wouldn't care if he believed the earth was flat?  Of course you wouldn't   He denied the election was real, unemployment numbers weren't real, global warming isn't real.

So of course you forgave him for saying Bush lied us into Iraq.  There were no WMD's and he knew it.  Trump says a lot of stupid shit right?


----------



## P@triot (Feb 19, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Trump was the original birther.  The conspiracy that Obama was born in Kenya.  Racist and liar.  Check check.


Except that it's *not* "check". Trump isn't even remotely a racist. That's a false claim from the side of actual racists.

Trump provided tens of thousands of jobs throughout his life to black people. You and your fellow left-wing idiots keep them locked in ghettos and not produce a _single_ job for them.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 19, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> The conspiracy that Obama was born in Kenya.


This one is going to sting a bit. But remember, this medicine is for your own good.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 19, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> So of course *you forgave him for saying Bush lied* us into Iraq.  *There were no WMD's and he knew it*.  Trump says a lot of stupid shit right?


Freudian Slip!! *If* there were no WMD's, then I have nothing to "forgive him" for as he spoke the truth in that case, *and* it means Trump isn't a "conspiracy theorist".

You fuck up _every_ time you post


----------



## P@triot (Feb 19, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Bush lied us into Iraq.  There were no WMD's and he knew it.


You were literally just shown *classified battle field reports* by WikiLeaks *proving* there were absolutely WMD's and still you sit denying reality. It's just like your gender nonsense, when you deny that someone with a penis and testicles is male.

It's so bizarre how you people would rather humiliate yourself than admit that the sources you turn to for "information" are just playing you like a fiddle with propaganda.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 19, 2022)

P@triot said:


> View attachment 602674
> 
> Classified battle field reports exposed by WikiLeaks, you uninformed 🤡


Poor sealybobo finds reality so difficult to deal with, she has to spend her life denying it.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 19, 2022)

We haven't been operating under constitutional government for centuries now.


> They seek to combat *the left’s attempt to bury our constitutional order and replace it with a matrix of identity politics, vast social spending, and other objectives*


Despite the ignorance and racism of C_Clayton_Jones beliefs otherwise, it is not "constitutional" to inject black people with syphilis as the federal government did in the Tuskegee Experiments. It is not "constitutional" to conduct mass surveillance on all 330 million Americans (including children) without a warrant granted on evidence and/or probable cause. It is not "constitutional" to instruct members of the executive branch to stand down while mass crimes are committed like an invasion at our borders and arson on federal property.








						What Is National Conservatism?
					

Chris DeMuth gives a view into the new approach to conservative thinking offered by National Conservatism.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## sartre play (Feb 19, 2022)

P@triot said:


> The people tasked with enforcing our laws are the same people violating our most important laws....
> 
> Beyond the controversial ways stingray technology works, the secrecy and deception law enforcement agencies use to cloak their use of the devices is also troubling. Law enforcement agencies around the country have routinely used the devices without obtaining a warrant from judges. In cases where they did obtain a warrant, they often deceived judges about the nature of the technology they planned to use. Instead of telling judges that they intended to use a stingray or cell site simulator, they have often mischaracterized the technology, describing it as a pen register device instead.
> 
> Hacker Lexicon: Stingrays, the Spy Tool the Government Tried, and Failed, to Hide


Could you expand on stingray tech? Never heard of it?


----------



## sartre play (Feb 19, 2022)

P@triot said:


> I'm not sure how I feel about that one. Part of me understands that view. But part of me says, as a constituent, I want more voice/power over the people representing me in Washington.


If you want more power over the people representing you in Washington, Then join those who want money out. It takes money to buy a seat at the table.


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (Feb 19, 2022)

Meanwhile..in spite of the never ending crying guess where most of the Cuntservatives on this forum will be shopping today ?
Yep, they'll be running down to their local Costco, target or shopping on Amazon.


----------



## sartre play (Feb 19, 2022)

P@triot said:


> What a sad indictment on the current state of the U.S. The Constitution already protects and guarantees my religious freedoms. Why in the hell would I need additional laws for that? And if libtards won't obey the Constitution - what makes _anyone_ think they will obey this law?
> 
> Religious Freedom Bill Creeps Forward in Congress


Its a political move and has nothing to do with religious freedom.


----------



## sartre play (Feb 19, 2022)

As long as both party's can convince you that party is more important than country you will continue to vote against the best interest of our country. they Divide us and then continue to do dumb things in our name.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 19, 2022)

sartre play said:


> Could you expand on stingray tech? Never heard of it?


From the subheading in that article:


> A stingray is a controversial surveillance tool that *impersonates a legitimate cell tower to trick mobile phones into connecting to them* and revealing their location.


If you have a legitimate warrant - then fine. But the government is doing all of this shit without any warrants. Just mass fucking surveillance on the American people.


----------



## sartre play (Feb 19, 2022)

P@triot said:


> From the subheading in that article:
> 
> If you have a legitimate warrant - then fine. But the government is doing all of this shit without any warrants. Just mass fucking surveillance on the American people.


Thanks, will make a note to look it up.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 19, 2022)

sartre play said:


> If you want more power over the people representing you in Washington, Then join those who want money out. It takes money to buy a seat at the table.


Oh I'm *100%* for that. Even had a proposal for how _easily_ that can be done right here on USMB. Take a look.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 19, 2022)

sartre play said:


> Thanks, will make a note to look it up.


Well more important than looking up that tool, look up the following _programs_ by the NSA:

Stellar Wind
Thin Thread
Trail Blazer


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 19, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Except that it's *not* "check". Trump isn't even remotely a racist. That's a false claim from the side of actual racists.
> 
> Trump provided tens of thousands of jobs throughout his life to black people. You and your fellow left-wing idiots keep them locked in ghettos and not produce a _single_ job for them.


Many times trump hired people and didn’t pay them. He was the king of that. Take me to court.

No question many of those people screwed over by trump were black.


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 19, 2022)

P@triot said:


> You were literally just shown *classified battle field reports* by WikiLeaks *proving* there were absolutely WMD's and still you sit denying reality. It's just like your gender nonsense, when you deny that someone with a penis and testicles is male.
> 
> It's so bizarre how you people would rather humiliate yourself than admit that the sources you turn to for "information" are just playing you like a fiddle with propaganda.


Bullshit!


----------



## para bellum (Feb 19, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Clearly you Trump supporters/defenders don't care if your candidate is a conspiracy theorist.  Trump was the original birther.  The conspiracy that Obama was born in Kenya.  Racist and liar.  Check check.


Check again.  









						Birtherism: Where it all began
					

The seed of the idea was planted back in 2008.




					www.politico.com


----------



## P@triot (Feb 20, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> Bullshit!


Well _that_ is an intelligent response


----------



## P@triot (Feb 20, 2022)

para bellum said:


> Check again.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


sealybobo is so devoid of facts, he literally has yet to post a _single_ accurate statement in this thread. Un. Fucking. Believable.


----------



## para bellum (Feb 20, 2022)

P@triot said:


> sealybobo is so devoid of facts, he literally has yet to post a _single_ accurate statement in this thread. Un. Fucking. Believable.


I'm afraid to try to read the whole thread.

I was hoping it was about an Article V Convention, and I found birtherism, lol.

I like the thread title though, I wouldn't mind some movement in the Constitutional direction.


----------



## sealybobo (Feb 21, 2022)

P@triot said:


> sealybobo is so devoid of facts, he literally has yet to post a _single_ accurate statement in this thread. Un. Fucking. Believable.


Am I supposed to be taking you guys seriously?  We MUST restore constitutional government.  LOL.  Fuck off.  LOL..


----------



## P@triot (Feb 21, 2022)

sealybobo said:


> We MUST restore constitutional government.  *LOL*.  *Fuck off*.  *LOL*..


They 👆 don’t even attempt to mask their contempt for the US Constitution.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 21, 2022)

para bellum said:


> I was hoping it was about an Article V Convention


Nah. This thread is about exposing the repulsive unconstitutional actions of the Dumbocrats.


----------



## P@triot (Feb 21, 2022)

We must restore constitutional government…


> For two years, Americans have been partially or entirely deprived of fundamental freedoms—of assembly, speech, religious liberty, making a living, a child’s right to an education, access to early treatment for a potentially deadly virus, and more—for the first time in American history.


Every day, we see liberty eroded a little more. Every damn day.








						COVID-19 and the Failure of America’s Major Religions
					

Most religious leaders have become almost indistinguishable from their secular counterparts, which explains their sheepish pandemic response.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## Richard-H (Feb 22, 2022)

P@triot said:


> The United States government currently has you by the balls, the taint, the asshole, and has it's dick shoved down the back of your throat, and you're thanking them for it all because they give you a welfare check and some food stamps.



The only thing that you've proven in your replies to me is that you are an idiot and an asshole, and not worth continuing this discussion.


----------



## P@triot (Mar 1, 2022)

Richard-H said:


> The only thing that you've proven in your replies to me is that you are an idiot and an asshole, and not worth continuing this discussion.


You sound “triggered”. That happens when the left is forced to confront reality (something they hate having to do!).


----------



## P@triot (Mar 1, 2022)

Joe Biden during the State of the Union Address:


> “Why should anyone on a terrorist list be able to purchase a firearm? Why?”


Oh I don’t know Joe, maybe because as a devout fascist fuck, you label _anyone_ who won’t bow to you as a “terrorist”.








						Biden decries Trump mob: 'Don't call them protesters. They were domestic terrorists'
					

President-elect denounces one of America’s ‘darkest days’ and condemns Trump for inciting violence that took place




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## P@triot (May 2, 2022)

Remember folks, these unconstitutional mother-fuckers will yell the loudest when the next Donald Trump is enjoying the unconstitutional powers they created out of thin air.


> "Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, himself a font of untruths, *doesn’t explain under what constitutional power* he proposes to oversee Americans’ speech"


Perfect example of why Democrats don't adhere to the US Constitution EVER. It limits their power. And they _hate_ having their power limited.








						Biden's Ministry of Truth
					

Alejandro Mayorkas told Congress that his agency is creating a "Disinformation Governance Board" to combat "misinformation" from Russia.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## JimH52 (May 2, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Remember folks, these unconstitutional mother-fuckers will yell the loudest when the next Donald Trump is enjoying the unconstitutional powers they created out of thin air.
> 
> Perfect example of why Democrats don't adhere to the US Constitution EVER. It limits their power. And they _hate_ having their power limited.
> 
> ...


January 6th


----------



## Missouri_Mike (May 2, 2022)

JimH52 said:


> January 6th


Nobody gives a fuck.


----------



## BULLDOG (May 2, 2022)

Missouri_Mike said:


> Nobody gives a fuck.


Like most that advocate lawlessness, you hope nobody gives a fuck.


----------



## dudmuck (May 2, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Remember folks, these unconstitutional mother-fuckers will yell the loudest when the next Donald Trump is enjoying the unconstitutional powers they created out of thin air.
> 
> Perfect example of why Democrats don't adhere to the US Constitution EVER. It limits their power. And they _hate_ having their power limited.
> 
> ...


We want the ability to lie to the American people with no consequences! - Republicans


----------



## JimH52 (May 2, 2022)

Missouri_Mike said:


> Nobody gives a fuck.


Says the Insurrectionist


----------



## Missouri_Mike (May 2, 2022)

BULLDOG said:


> Like most that advocate lawlessness, you hope nobody gives a fuck.


Jan 6th. Nobodody gives a fuck.


----------



## Missouri_Mike (May 2, 2022)

JimH52 said:


> Says the Insurrectionist


Nobody gives a fuck.


----------



## JimH52 (May 2, 2022)

Missouri_Mike said:


> Nobody gives a fuck.


Don't miss the Public Hearings coming up.  They will make the Benghazi fiasco look like a kids birthday party.  We will all find out how treasonous trump and his enablers were leading up to his mob attack on the US Capitol.  GOOD STUFF!


----------



## jc456 (May 2, 2022)

dudmuck said:


> We want the ability to lie to the American people with no consequences! - Republicans


Name a lie. Been asking and asking


----------



## dudmuck (May 2, 2022)

jc456 said:


> Name a lie. Been asking and asking


one that comes to mind is the big lie.
But there are many more, and i'm tired.


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

JimH52 said:


> January 6th


When Dumbocrats claimed a standard, peaceful protest was an “insurrection”? Yeah, I guess that’s another good example of the left attempting to strip basic constitutional rights.


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

dudmuck said:


> We want the ability to lie to the American people with no consequences! - Republicans


“We want the ability to force the American people to consume misinformation and disinformation only!” - Democrats


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

JimH52 said:


> Says the Insurrectionist


Says the disinformation clown calling a peaceful protest an “insurrection” 🙄


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

BULLDOG said:


> Like most that advocate lawlessness, you hope nobody gives a fuck.


Like all who advocate totalitarian fascism, you hope to leverage disinformation and misinformation for powers/authority that simply doesn’t exist 🤷🏼‍♂️


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

dudmuck said:


> We want the ability to lie to the American people *with no consequences*! - Republicans


Fascists loathe the 1st Amendment. They hate that they cannot control all speech, information, etc.


----------



## bripat9643 (May 3, 2022)

dudmuck said:


> We want the ability to lie to the American people with no consequences! - Republicans


ROFL!    You vill answer to the Ministry of Truth if you don't speak the official party truth!


----------



## BULLDOG (May 3, 2022)

P@triot said:


> When Dumbocrats claimed a standard, peaceful protest was an “insurrection”? Yeah, I guess that’s another good example of the left attempting to strip basic constitutional rights.


You think you have a constitutional right to attempt a coup? Really?


----------



## jc456 (May 3, 2022)

dudmuck said:


> one that comes to mind is the big lie.
> But there are many more, and i'm tired.


what was the lie?  The election was stolen, it's called a coup!!!!!


----------



## jc456 (May 3, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Fascists loathe the 1st Amendment. They hate that they cannot control all speech, information, etc.


Ain't that a fact.  only their voice is to be heard.  We've heard them yelling and karening all over the globe as a matter of fact.  Karen's being Karen's.  too fking funny.  Hey demofks, nanny nanny boo boo.


----------



## JimH52 (May 3, 2022)

jc456 said:


> Name a lie. Been asking and asking


trump: there was massive voter fraud in the 2020 presidential election.

This has to be the biggest lie ever told by a former, "so called", president. He tried to overturn a fair election and ruin our electoral system and he is a GIANT P O S.


----------



## JimH52 (May 3, 2022)

jc456 said:


> what was the lie?  The election was stolen, it's called a coup!!!!!



YOU are a liar!


----------



## JimH52 (May 3, 2022)

P@triot said:


> When Dumbocrats claimed a standard, peaceful protest was an “insurrection”? Yeah, I guess that’s another good example of the left attempting to strip basic constitutional rights.


The "peaceful protest" that beat policemen, broken windows, defecated on the walls of the capitol, sprayed bear spray on police, beat police with flag poles, and erected a hangman's noose for the VP.

Is that the "peaceful protest" you are taking about.  The once that was instigated by TFG...who is a large piece of smelly sh*t.  And you want these people to defend the Constitution...after they tried to destroy it?

*YOU ARE A BALD FACE LIAR!*​


----------



## bripat9643 (May 3, 2022)

JimH52 said:


> The "peaceful protest" that beat policemen, broken windows, defecated on the walls of the capitol, sprayed bear spray on police, beat police with flag poles, and erected a hangman's noose for the VP.
> 
> Is that the "peaceful protest" you are taking about.  The once that was instigated by TFG...who is a large piece of smelly sh*t.  And you want these people to defend the Constitution...after they tried to destroy it?
> 
> *YOU ARE A BALD FACE LIAR!*​


You forgot arson, assault and murder.   They also threw Molotov cocktails

BTW, it's rare that I see people use the phrase "bald faced liar" correctly.


----------



## JimH52 (May 3, 2022)

Missouri_Mike said:


> Nobody gives a fuck.


Do you have Jello for brains?


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

BULLDOG said:


> You think you have a constitutional right to attempt a coup? Really?


Absolutely not. Which is why I believe ANTIFA should be executed. They overthrew actual US territories, setting up "Autonomous Zones".


----------



## jc456 (May 3, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Absolutely not. Which is why I believe ANTIFA should be executed. They overthrew actual US territories, setting up "Autonomous Zones".


they are similar to the white helmets.


----------



## JimH52 (May 3, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Absolutely not. Which is why I believe ANTIFA should be executed. They overthrew actual US territories, setting up "Autonomous Zones".


What?


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

JimH52 said:


> The "peaceful protest" that beat policemen


Not a single police officer was "beaten". If the Ministry of Truth actually cared about truth, you would be executed today!


JimH52 said:


> broken windows


Broken windows does *not* = "insurrection" 


JimH52 said:


> defecated on the walls of the capitol


Broken windows does *not* = "insurrection" 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





JimH52 said:


> sprayed bear spray on police


Not a single police officer was "bear-sprayed". If the Ministry of Truth actually cared about truth, you would be executed today!


JimH52 said:


> beat police with flag poles


As established in your first lie, not a single police officer was "beaten". If the Ministry of Truth actually cared about truth, you would be executed today!


JimH52 said:


> and erected a hangman's noose for the VP.


A noose is not illegal, fascist little snowflake.

Now how about you fascists hanging and burning George W. Bush in effigy?


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

JimH52 said:


> What?


Are you illiterate? ANTIFA overthrew actual US territories, setting up "Autonomous Zones". Ask a trusted adult to read that to you again and then explain it.


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

JimH52 said:


> The once that was instigated by TFG...who is a large piece of smelly sh*t.  And you want these people to defend the Constitution...after they tried to destroy it?


Fascist little snowflake - sucking off the government teat - *President Trump* didn't "instigate" _anything_. I know this is hard for you mindless minions to understand, but conservatives don't listen to leaders. We are free men with free thoughts who do what we want (you beta males who bow to your leaders just wouldn't understand).

But listen sweetie...Trump Derangement Syndrome is _serious_. Real serious. I've seen it fuck people up. And it has clearly fucked you up. Please get help immediately. There are support groups and comprehensive treatments for TDS.


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

There is no "right" to take a human life. While the low-IQ left still has yet to grasp that, it's good to see that the Supreme Court is correcting a horrific wrong.








						U.S. abortion battle reignites as Supreme Court signals it will overturn Roe v Wade — Reuters
					

President Joe Biden on Tuesday criticized as "radical" a draft U.S. Supreme Court decision that would overturn the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that legalized abortion nationwide, a bombshell that was denounced by Democrats and stunned even some moderate Republicans.




					apple.news


----------



## JimH52 (May 3, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Not a single police officer was "beaten". If the Ministry of Truth actually cared about truth, you would be executed today!
> 
> Broken windows does *not* = "insurrection"
> 
> ...


YOU are a liar!  The videos prove you are a LIAR.  I don't debate with Liars like you.  BYE!


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

JimH52 said:


> I don't debate with Liars like you.


Spoken like fascist tool who knows he got owned 🤷‍♂️


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


Come on C_Clayton_Jones - tell us all again how the United States is "currently functioning under constitutional government"


> The unconstitutional surveillance program at issue is called PRISM, under which the NSA, FBI, and CIA gather and search through Americans’ international emails, internet calls, and chats without obtaining a warrant. When Edward Snowden blew the whistle on PRISM in 2013, the program included at least nine major internet companies, including Facebook, Google, Apple, and Skype. Today, it very likely includes an even broader set of companies.


Even the extremist left-wing ACLU _vehemently_ disagrees with you, clown. 








						The NSA Continues to Violate Americans' Internet Privacy Rights
					

A federal court will be scrutinizing one of the National Security Agency’s worst spying programs on Monday. The case has the potential to restore crucial privacy protections for the millions of Americans who use the internet to communicate with family, friends, and others overseas.




					www.aclu.org


----------



## dudmuck (May 3, 2022)

P@triot said:


> There is no "right" to take a human life. While the low-IQ left still has yet to grasp that, it's good to see that the Supreme Court is correcting a horrific wrong.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

dudmuck said:


>


Is there a point behind your meme? 

Life _is_ sacred and it _is_ your job to support yourself.


----------



## dudmuck (May 3, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Is there a point behind your meme?
> 
> Life _is_ sacred and it _is_ your job to support yourself.


----------



## P@triot (May 3, 2022)

dudmuck said:


>


Perfect illustration of the way you Democrats think. Use force to destroy liberty.


----------



## Missouri_Mike (May 3, 2022)

JimH52 said:


> Don't miss the Public Hearings coming up.  They will make the Benghazi fiasco look like a kids birthday party.  We will all find out how treasonous trump and his enablers were leading up to his mob attack on the US Capitol.  GOOD STUFF!


Nobody gives a fuck. Your Jan 6th committee is a fucking clown show.


----------



## JimH52 (May 4, 2022)

Missouri_Mike said:


> Nobody gives a fuck. Your Jan 6th committee is a fucking clown show.


*AND YOU STILL LOSE!


*​


----------



## JimH52 (May 4, 2022)

Missouri_Mike said:


> Nobody gives a fuck. Your Jan 6th committee is a fucking clown show.


Narrow majority says trump should be criminally charged over January 6th attack on Capitol.









						Narrow majority of Americans say Trump should face criminal charges over Jan 6, new poll finds
					

52 per cent of Americans want to see the former president criminally charged for encouraging the Capitol riot




					sports.yahoo.com


----------



## P@triot (May 5, 2022)

JimH52 said:


> Narrow majority says trump should be criminally charged over January 6th attack on Capitol.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Hey JimH52 - is that the same poll that said Hitlery Clinton would "win in a landslide"?!?


----------



## P@triot (May 5, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> The United States is currently functioning under Constitutional government, nothing needs to be ‘restored’ – the notion is moronic, baseless idiocy.


Your own party literally doesn’t even know _how_ the federal government functions under the constitution 









						Even CNN is embarrassed when Dem Congressman shows she has NO CLUE how the Supreme Court works
					

Seattle Rep. Pramila Jayapal made a complete fool of herself on live TV




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Jul 24, 2022)

The left doesn’t even know the most _basic_ tenants of the US Constitution 🤦‍♂️








						Elena Kagan gets lesson in constitutional history after warning about court losing public approval
					

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan expressed concern Thursday over what she believes is the danger of the Supreme Court straying from public opinion.What did Kagan say?Speaking at a judicial conference in Montana, Kagan warned democracy is endangered when the highest court in a land loses touch...




					www.theblaze.com


----------

