Choose: Progressives or the Constitution

[NYcarbineer]

Was the decision in Brown vs. Board of Education 'unconstitutional'.

Should states have retained the right to institutionalized segregation in their public schools?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Of course I choose Progressives. The Constitution just puts too many shackles on Government.

The Constitution surely is one hell of a pesky document for those who put ideology before Country.

Is that meant to explain why Political Chic was for the right of privacy before she was against it?

 

[Sallow]

Classic Liberalism is a term made up by Conservatives. It's a little like Compassionate Conservative without the hilarity.

 

[Sallow]

Of course I choose Progressives. The Constitution just puts too many shackles on Government.

The Constitution surely is one hell of a pesky document for those who put ideology before Country.

True.

That's why you folks continue to use it like toilet paper.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I take it that the author of this thread would assert there are no rights to property protected by the Constitution either?

 

[tjvh]

Of course I choose Progressives. The Constitution just puts too many shackles on Government.

The Constitution surely is one hell of a pesky document for those who put ideology before Country.

True.

That's why you folks continue to use it like toilet paper.

That's your entire mantra, reverse the truth and hope it sticks.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Classic Liberalism is a term made up by Conservatives. It's a little like Compassionate Conservative without the hilarity.

It's an attempt to assign beliefs to people based on what someone who shared the same 'name' in the past believed in.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Of course I choose Progressives. The Constitution just puts too many shackles on Government.

The Constitution surely is one hell of a pesky document for those who put ideology before Country.

True.

That's why you folks continue to use it like toilet paper.

You get things backwards so often, one has to be dyslexic to read 'em.


Another name for Liberal/progressives:

Pragmatist:
A non-originalist who gives substantial weight to judicial precedent or the consequences of alternative interpretations, so as to sometimes favor a decision "wrong" on originalist terms because it promotes stability or in some other way promotes the public good.
Theories of Constitutional Interpretation

 

[NYcarbineer]

Of course I choose Progressives. The Constitution just puts too many shackles on Government.

The Constitution surely is one hell of a pesky document for those who put ideology before Country.

Is that meant to explain why Political Chic was for the right of privacy before she was against it?

Without objection from the now mute respondent, the motion carries,

PC is a prime example of someone who puts ideology before Country.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I take it that the author of this thread would assert there are no rights to property protected by the Constitution either?

Read the Constitution.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The Constitution surely is one hell of a pesky document for those who put ideology before Country.

True.

That's why you folks continue to use it like toilet paper.

You get things backwards so often, one has to be dyslexic to read 'em.


Another name for Liberal/progressives:

Pragmatist:
A non-originalist who gives substantial weight to judicial precedent or the consequences of alternative interpretations, so as to sometimes favor a decision "wrong" on originalist terms because it promotes stability or in some other way promotes the public good.
Theories of Constitutional Interpretation

Would that be like someone who cited the Ninth Amendment to assert the existence of a non-enumerated right to homeschool?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The Constitution surely is one hell of a pesky document for those who put ideology before Country.

Is that meant to explain why Political Chic was for the right of privacy before she was against it?

Without objection from the now mute respondent, the motion carries,

PC is a prime example of someone who puts ideology before Country.

You're busted.

As soon as you try to make me the center of the conversation as opposed to the OP.....it's all over.

It's the equivalent of throwing in the white towel.

 

[tjvh]

Of course I choose Progressives. The Constitution just puts too many shackles on Government.

The Constitution surely is one hell of a pesky document for those who put ideology before Country.

Is that meant to explain why Political Chic was for the right of privacy before she was against it?

No it was meant to explain how the loony Liberal utopian dream keeps getting railroaded by the Constitution and conservative public opinion. It's why liberals remain so angry even after their Messiah Obama won a second term... Which of course was really Bush's fourth term.

 

[PoliticalChic]

True.

That's why you folks continue to use it like toilet paper.

You get things backwards so often, one has to be dyslexic to read 'em.


Another name for Liberal/progressives:

Pragmatist:
A non-originalist who gives substantial weight to judicial precedent or the consequences of alternative interpretations, so as to sometimes favor a decision "wrong" on originalist terms because it promotes stability or in some other way promotes the public good.
Theories of Constitutional Interpretation

Would that be like someone who cited the Ninth Amendment to assert the existence of a non-enumerated right to homeschool?

Don't change the subject: why don't Liberals endorse the amendment process?

 

[NYcarbineer]

I take it that the author of this thread would assert there are no rights to property protected by the Constitution either?

Read the Constitution.

Your opinion is not in the Constitution. I'll take your mute-ness on this, another in your long list of dodges,

to mean that you do think there is, but you can't bear to say so because you'd have to concede that it's there despite being non-explicit.

That brings down your argument that there are no rights in the Constitution unless the Constitution states their existence explicitly.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You get things backwards so often, one has to be dyslexic to read 'em.


Another name for Liberal/progressives:

Pragmatist:
A non-originalist who gives substantial weight to judicial precedent or the consequences of alternative interpretations, so as to sometimes favor a decision "wrong" on originalist terms because it promotes stability or in some other way promotes the public good.
Theories of Constitutional Interpretation

Would that be like someone who cited the Ninth Amendment to assert the existence of a non-enumerated right to homeschool?

Don't change the subject: why don't Liberals endorse the amendment process?

Let me repeat the question:

Would that be like someone who cited the Ninth Amendment to assert the existence of a non-enumerated right to homeschool?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Is that meant to explain why Political Chic was for the right of privacy before she was against it?

Without objection from the now mute respondent, the motion carries,

PC is a prime example of someone who puts ideology before Country.

You're busted.

As soon as you try to make me the center of the conversation as opposed to the OP.....it's all over.

It's the equivalent of throwing in the white towel.

My post is directed at your opinions. Are you denying that anything in the OP is your opinion?

 

[PoliticalChic]

I take it that the author of this thread would assert there are no rights to property protected by the Constitution either?

Read the Constitution.

Your opinion is not in the Constitution. I'll take your mute-ness on this, another in your long list of dodges,

to mean that you do think there is, but you can't bear to say so because you'd have to concede that it's there despite being non-explicit.

That brings down your argument that there are no rights in the Constitution unless the Constitution states their existence explicitly.

Gee.....I suggest you "read" and you act like a blonde would act at the thought of taking a shower at the Bates Motel.

How typical of a Liberal....waiting for the bumper-sticker to tell you what to think.

 

[Sallow]

The Constitution surely is one hell of a pesky document for those who put ideology before Country.

True.

That's why you folks continue to use it like toilet paper.

That's your entire mantra, reverse the truth and hope it sticks.

Reverse what truth?

Here's the truth.

Conservative Constitution:
Us American folks got us the right to have us some shootin' irons so we can shoot government officials in the face, blow up buildings and shoot up schools when ever we be unhappy wit' da commies.

That's about it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Would that be like someone who cited the Ninth Amendment to assert the existence of a non-enumerated right to homeschool?

Don't change the subject: why don't Liberals endorse the amendment process?

Let me repeat the question:

Would that be like someone who cited the Ninth Amendment to assert the existence of a non-enumerated right to homeschool?

Repeat all you like.

I've never been good at taking orders.
Kinda like Pavlov's cat.


So....you can discuss the OP, or write your own.