American Patriot Pat Buchanan Discusses 'Our Judicial Dictatorship' (He's Right!)

[Steve_McGarrett]

Pat breaks it down and speaks the truth.


JAMES EDWARDS Blog Archive Pat Buchanan Our Judicial Dictatorship - JAMES EDWARDS

 

[Luddly Neddite]

He's the opposite of a patriot.

Just like you.

 

[Moonglow]

He's the opposite of a patriot.

Just like you.

They are still butt hurt of Roe vs Wade also...

 

[TEA Party Patriot]

He's the opposite of a patriot.

Just like you.

What is unpatriotic about him?

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

He's the opposite of a patriot.

Just like you.

I highly doubt that!

 

[Moonglow]

He's the opposite of a patriot.

Just like you.

What is unpatriotic about him?

His combover that makes him resemble the fascist...

 

[TEA Party Patriot]

He's the opposite of a patriot.

Just like you.

What is unpatriotic about him?

His combover that makes him resemble the fascist...

You're up to 29,693 posts here, over the course of 3 years. Is this how you got to that point? Half-assed drive-by comments about some minor detail of a story?

 

[Moonglow]

He's the opposite of a patriot.

Just like you.

What is unpatriotic about him?

His combover that makes him resemble the fascist...

You're up to 29,693 posts here, over the course of 3 years. Is this how you got to that point? Half-assed drive-by comments about some minor detail of a story?
...

I don't count your post as a 1/4 ass worthy post...

 

[Mustang]

Pat breaks it down and speaks the truth.


JAMES EDWARDS Blog Archive Pat Buchanan Our Judicial Dictatorship - JAMES EDWARDS

Remember the good ol' days when freedom-loving white protestants were free to discriminate and pass laws which codified discrimination against people who were NOT white protestants? You know what I mean? Like against Jews and Catholics? Catholics like you, Pat!

 

[NYcarbineer]

So Buchanan says:

"The instrument of revolution is judicial review, the doctrine that makes the Supreme Court the final arbiter, the decider, of what the Constitution says, and cedes to the Court limitless power to overturn laws enacted by the elective branches of government."

So Buchanan thinks judicial review is the evil?

Funny he didn't think judicial review was anything of the kind when he was touting a Court's decision he LIKED:

"How many spoke out against the infamous Washington, D.C., gun law that was overturned by the Supreme Court in the 2007 Heller decision?"

Who Is Winning the Gun War - Pat Buchanan - Page full

 

[Hossfly]

He's the opposite of a patriot.

Just like you.

What is unpatriotic about him?

His combover that makes him resemble the fascist...

Are you running for Jerk-Of-The-Month, Moonpie? Pat Buchanan is absolutely correct. These pukey liberal judges are making unconstitutional decisions every day for the benefit of the ungodly, i.e. abominal crimes are now the accepted law of the land and the laws of the land are being declared criminal. America is sinning it's way into extinction at breakneck speed.

 

[mdk]

Pat Buchanan is just upset the court didn't rule the way he wished. He'll get over it.

The will of the majority means squat when the their will violates the Constitution. It was the will of the people, via their councilors, that enacted very absurd and restrictive gun laws in DC. Those laws were very much a violation of the Constitution. Just like all these gay marriage bans.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

And judicial supremacy is NOT in the constitution. In fact the very first words of the constitution are "all legislative powers herein granted are vested in a congress of the united states." Courts have no authority to write laws yet they do it all the time. They also rewrite the constitution at will even though the constitution says only congress and the states can do that.

 

[Moonglow]

He's the opposite of a patriot.

Just like you.

What is unpatriotic about him?

His combover that makes him resemble the fascist...

Are you running for Jerk-Of-The-Month, Moonpie? Pat Buchanan is absolutely correct. These pukey liberal judges are making unconstitutional decisions every day for the benefit of the ungodly, i.e. abominal crimes are now the accepted law of the land and the laws of the land are being declared criminal. America is sinning it's way into extinction at breakneck speed.

I don't know if they were worse than say fugitive slave laws that were upheld..upheld...three branches and yet they wanted one to review laws, what else can be done when you want a case settled by some fashion without recognizing the verdict...??

 

[midcan5]

Strange how rights for conservatives are only about their right to impose their religious beliefs on others. Religious fundamentalism does not guide nor create the law in this nation and hopefully never will.

know what really causes homosexuality.... US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Is homosexuality a choice a mental illness or something simply inherent US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Is homosexuality a choice a mental illness or something simply inherent US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Christians Aren t Required By Law Now To Go To Hell Forever In Arizona US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Thank a Liberal US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Why liberals shun the term using progressives instead... US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Christy bans gay conversion therapy US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Pat Buchanan is just upset the court didn't rule the way he wished. He'll get over it.

The will of the majority means squat when the their will violates the Constitution. It was the will of the people, via their councilors, that enacted very absurd and restrictive gun laws in DC. Those laws were very much a violation of the Constitution. Just like all these gay marriage bans.

It's about states rights and 'We The People'. LIBERAL activist judges are overturning the decisions voted for by the majority of 'We The People' on issues that do not adhere to American moral traditions that has sustained this nation since its founding.

 

[Moonglow]

And judicial supremacy is NOT in the constitution. In fact the very first words of the constitution are "all legislative powers herein granted are vested in a congress of the united states." Courts have no authority to write laws yet they do it all the time. They also rewrite the constitution at will even though the constitution says only congress and the states can do that.

In the spirit of a faster moving republic, there were certain measures installed to speed up the process...thus administrative law was introduced...

 

[Siete]

Buchanan is the most prominent defender of accused Nazis in America. The most famous case is that of John Demanjuk, who was accused of being an infamous death camp guard named Ivan the Terrible. Buchanan proclaimed his innocence for years, against ample criticism, and felt vindicated when an Israeli court declared there was not enough evidence to convict Demanjuk of being Ivan.
Buchanan continues to declare that Demanjuk has been proved "innocent". Actually, a key piece of evidence (from German documents) that exonerated him as Ivan showed Demanjuk to be a willing guard at Sobibor, another extermination camp where 250,000 died. Even the National Review, while generally defending Demanjuk and Buchanan's support for him, concedes that "Demanjuk was probably guilty of being a lesser accomplice in the Nazi machinery of genocide. That is a fair summary of the Israeli court's findings."
More to the point, Demanjuk is only one of several accused Nazis Buchanan has defended in one way or another. These include Karl Linnas (Buchanan personally appealed to Ed Meese, then Attorney General, to block his deportation to the Soviet Union); Klaus Barbie (Buchanan did not oppose his trial, but argued the US should not have apologized to France for sheltering Barbie after WWII); Arthur Rudolph, a rocket scientist involved in slave labor and severe punishments at a German rocket factory (Buchanan argued his confession was a "lie" while acknowledging he was a "nominal member of the Nazi party and of the SA until 1934"); and Frank Walus (of all the accused, the one most likely innocent.)
One of the most striking examples is Kurt Waldheim, the disgraced former UN leader. Buchanan repeatedly attacked him during his tenure, but once his Nazi past came out, Pat complained that "the ostracism of President Waldheim [has] an aspect of moral bullying and the singular stench of selective indignation." He also rationalized that "like others in Hitler's army, Lt. Waldheim looked the other way."
In each of these cases, Buchanan found a factual reason to defend the accused, an appeal to justice. But put together, it is striking how often he rushes to the defense of accused Nazis. He has also attacked the US Justice Department's Office of Special Investigation (which pursues war criminals) more generally:
"You've got a great atrocity that occurred 35, 45 years ago.... Why... put millions of dollars [into] investigating that?"

 

[Moonglow]

Pat Buchanan is just upset the court didn't rule the way he wished. He'll get over it.

The will of the majority means squat when the their will violates the Constitution. It was the will of the people, via their councilors, that enacted very absurd and restrictive gun laws in DC. Those laws were very much a violation of the Constitution. Just like all these gay marriage bans.

It's about states rights. The constitution starts out as 'We The People'. LIBERAL activist judges are overturning the decisions voted for by the majority of 'We The People' on issues that do not adhere to American moral traditions that has sustained this nation since its founding.

Not really, since the Civil War states have been pulled into centralization of the federal government, and it was started by the GOP, ghee....

 

[mdk]

Pat Buchanan is just upset the court didn't rule the way he wished. He'll get over it.

The will of the majority means squat when the their will violates the Constitution. It was the will of the people, via their councilors, that enacted very absurd and restrictive gun laws in DC. Those laws were very much a violation of the Constitution. Just like all these gay marriage bans.

It's about states rights and 'We The People'. LIBERAL activist judges are overturning the decisions voted for by the majority of 'We The People' on issues that do not adhere to American moral traditions that has sustained this nation since its founding.

I could care less what "we the people" want if that want is in violation of the US Constitution. Social conservatives can cry all they wish about State's Right but those people don't have the right to craft discriminatory and unconstitutional laws under guise of state's right.