Democracy and Majority Rule

[JakeStarkey]

bripat's comments are irrelevant, because he is anarchist.

 

[bripat9643]

You're a moron, Fakey.

You've never supported a single thing you've ever posted in this forum.

You would sound more intelligent if you just shut the fuck up.

Son, you made a whiny crybaby assertion that you won't be able to support.

You ignored the democratic practices in the Constitution.

You have ignored Jefferson.

Your argument is unbalance and thus will fail.

 

[bripat9643]

The assertion is implied that democracy and majority rule are somehow bad.

Of course they are bad, Fakey. How is being forced to do something you don't want to do any better because a mass of nitwits wants you to rather than a single nitwit?

They aren't as long as we have a constitution with minority rights.

OK, you can apologize now and step off, son.

In other words, so long as we don't have complete majority rule.

I rest my case.

 

[bripat9643]

Want to know who else had a low opinion of democracy? Every dictator who ever ruled. Democracy is not so much a form of government but an activity and a quality of a society that goes into the overall level of freedom. Mass protest is the most basic form of democracy, where voices are joined in an unmistakable message to the powers that be.

Democracy is a form of government. Democracy is not freedom. It's mob rule. A lynch mob is the essence of Democracy.

 

[bripat9643]

Everything in the Constitution is based on majority rule. Minority rights in the Constitution only exist because majorities established protections for them.

Congress would vote down the Bill of Rights if it was on the docket today.

 

[JakeStarkey]

bripat's comments are twaddle

 

[bripat9643]

The Far Right equate Democracy with runaway socialism: no wonder people of intelligence laugh at them.

So does the far left, dipstick. I've seen plenty of the turds in here argue that if a government isn't socialist, then it can't be a genuine democracy.

We are a Constitutional Republic that runs generally on democratic principles. Checks and balances till work. Minority protections still are in place.

The checks and balances failed 150 years ago. There are no protections for people who make more money than you. They have a target on their back. Obama has been blasting away at it for the last 4 years.

The Diamond Daves and beretta304s etc are not going to overturn the Will of the People, when DD and B can't even marshal an argument for their position, which is "we lost, wah!"

There's really no point in arguing with anyone as obviously retarded as you.

 

[Clementine]

Is there anyone here who believes that the doubling of government dependents has nothing to do with the election results?

Once people realize they can vote themselves money from the public, it's the beginning of the end.

The big supporters are the unions and the welfare crowd. They want someone who will redistribute the country's wealth.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The far right and the libertarians are merely whining.

They can't win the game, thus they want to change the rules.

They can't and they won't.

 

[bripat9643]

bripat's comments are irrelevant, because he is anarchist.

You comments are irrelevant because you are a moron.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Keep Diggin', TEABAGGERS!!!​

WorldNutzDaily:
Obama Can Be Stopped!!​

.

.

.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Says the bripat the moron.

bripat's comments are irrelevant, because he is anarchist.

You comments are irrelevant because you are a moron.

 

[beretta304]

The larger you type the more you melt down, son.

Your OP has been fail from your first post. Tis what tis.

1) No we don't.. we have constitutional law that is supposed to prevent things even if the will of the people wants it...
2) No... it is supposed to.. .it has been thwarted continually... many things done OUTSIDE of the limited powers the government is granted
3) No, they do not when thwarted
4) Never said it did.. pointed out your blatant double talk
5) You mentioned it, so to you it evidently did matter... you tried to assert in a feeble attempt to put words in my mouth, as you have continually done

He's been lying all day and as you said putting words into others mouths which is exactly why I refuse to give his frustrated lying ass a serious response.

Is that why you're still trolling around?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Love watching beretta, who fail the OP, and bripat moroning around. Morons just being morons.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Governments are of the people.

Meaningless twaddle.

If governments can't be oppressed why are conservatives constantly harping on 'state's rights'?

The people in the states are oppressed, not the governments.

So what's your point? Or was your intention to make another pointless post?

If so, well done.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Love watching beretta, who fail the OP, and bripat moroning around. Morons just being morons.

Bripat is here to make beretta look smart. Bripat gets a biscuit every time he does.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Bareass still bellyaching about the fact that the majority of Americans don't see things the way that he does.

Did you read the article? That's not what this is about. The concern is that so many Americans don't understand the purpose, and the limitations, of democracy in our government.

Today's Americans think Congress has the constitutional authority to do anything upon which they can get a majority vote. We think whether a measure is a good idea or a bad idea should determine its passage as opposed to whether that measure lies within the enumerated powers granted Congress by the Constitution. Unfortunately, for the future of our nation, Congress has successfully exploited American constitutional ignorance or contempt.

Did you read the Constitution’s case law?

Obviously the article’s author did not.

Chief Justice Marshall also reaffirmed the settled fact that the Constitution has always afforded Congress powers both enumerated and implied. McCulloch v. Maryland (1819).

“But that’s not in the Constitution…” is a failed and ignorant argument.

Congress represents the will of the people, its measures are presumed to be Constitutional until a court rules otherwise. Ogden v. Saunders (1827).

The people are thus free to compel their elected representatives to amend or repeal legislation they consider offensive to the Constitution; and failing that, seek relief in the Federal courts to have measures perceived un-Constitutional made subject to judicial review.

The people ultimately decide what is or is not Constitutional, or within the authority of Congress, be that through the ballot box or the courts.

Therefore, the article is incorrect, Congress has not “successfully exploited American constitutional ignorance or contempt,” on the contrary, the American people are for the most part very knowledgeable about their Constitution, the Founding Document’s very case law is evidence of that.

 

[bripat9643]

Love watching beretta, who fail the OP, and bripat moroning around. Morons just being morons.

Bripat is here to make beretta look smart. Bripat gets a biscuit every time he does.

You make everyone look smart, including tree stumps.

 

[beretta304]

Love watching beretta, who fail the OP, and bripat moroning around. Morons just being morons.

Bripat is here to make beretta look smart. Bripat gets a biscuit every time he does.

And you're here toooooooooooooooooooooooooooo......that's right........... troll around, divert a few threads, throw out a few straw man arguments, dangling a few red herrings and otherwise deflect, evade and personally attack. All....while never contributing a thing.

 

[GuyPinestra]

To the op, then stop claiming on other posts we are a democracy. Also if you don't like it, leave.

Fuck that!

How about this...

We kick out all you motherfuckers who scream 'Democracy NOW!"