Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton

[P@triot]

Like I said above, anyone who has other ideas can be dismissed. All ya do, all ya got.

Well...you were wrong above and you're wrong again here. Kind of a typical progressive - never learn from history.

 

[Fenton Lum]

But liberals don't do that. They simply violate the law.

How do 'liberals' (plural) violate the law? What laws have they broken?

Wouldn't it be much easier to cite what laws they haven't broken?

Let's see - they've banned guns in Washington D.C., Chicago, and New York (100% illegal/unconstitutional).
New York implemented "Stop & Frisk" without probable cause (100% illegal/unconstitutional).
Implemented gay marriage in all 50 states through the Supreme Court (100% illegal/unconstitutional).

And I can't even fit all of the federal stuff that liberals have illegally/unconstitutionally implemented into this post (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, and hundreds of departments - such as the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, etc.).

Reckon ya better alert the authorities.

 

[Fenton Lum]

Like I said above, anyone who has other ideas can be dismissed. All ya do, all ya got.

Well...you were wrong above and you're wrong again here. Kind of a typical progressive - never learn from history.

You'd better focus on prosecuting all that illegal activity you think you've spotted hon, good luck with that.

 

[P@triot]

But liberals don't do that. They simply violate the law.

How do 'liberals' (plural) violate the law? What laws have they broken?

Wouldn't it be much easier to cite what laws they haven't broken?

Let's see - they've banned guns in Washington D.C., Chicago, and New York (100% illegal/unconstitutional).
New York implemented "Stop & Frisk" without probable cause (100% illegal/unconstitutional).
Implemented gay marriage in all 50 states through the Supreme Court (100% illegal/unconstitutional).

And I can't even fit all of the federal stuff that liberals have illegally/unconstitutionally implemented into this post (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, and hundreds of departments - such as the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, etc.).

Reckon ya better alert the authorities.

Snark....when progressives can't dispute the truth they find inconvenient.

 

[Fenton Lum]

But liberals don't do that. They simply violate the law.

How do 'liberals' (plural) violate the law? What laws have they broken?

Wouldn't it be much easier to cite what laws they haven't broken?

Let's see - they've banned guns in Washington D.C., Chicago, and New York (100% illegal/unconstitutional).
New York implemented "Stop & Frisk" without probable cause (100% illegal/unconstitutional).
Implemented gay marriage in all 50 states through the Supreme Court (100% illegal/unconstitutional).

And I can't even fit all of the federal stuff that liberals have illegally/unconstitutionally implemented into this post (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare, and hundreds of departments - such as the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, etc.).

Reckon ya better alert the authorities.

Snark....when progressives can't dispute the truth they find inconvenient.

Are we a nation of laws or are we not? How do you propose to deal with all this "criminal" activity?

 

[P@triot]

Like I said above, anyone who has other ideas can be dismissed. All ya do, all ya got.

Well...you were wrong above and you're wrong again here. Kind of a typical progressive - never learn from history.

You'd better focus on prosecuting all that illegal activity you think you've spotted hon, good luck with that.

I don't "think" those items (and many more) are unconstitutional - I know they are. And so does anyone who has ever actually read the U.S. Constitution.

 

[P@triot]

Are we a nation of laws or are we not?

Obviously we are not. Not since the rise of the cancer known as progressivism.

How do you propose to deal with all this "criminal" activity?

I was hoping you would tell me since you are clearly the smartest girl in America...

 

[NotfooledbyW]

P@triot, post: 15450027

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare,

Social Security is illegal? Enacting it through elected Representative in Congress and signed into law by the President is violating the law. My god, you are absolutely insane. Nothing you say about anything can be considered rational thinking. You not only do not know what law is, you don't know what our system of representative democracy was designed to do.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

P@triot, post: 15450602

I don't "think" those items (and many more) are unconstitutional - I know they are. And so does anyone who has ever actually read the U.S. Constitution.

You know more than one of the founders? What a miserable joke you are. Hamilton's view on potential issues such as the Social Security Act is referred to as the doctrine of implied powers. The doctrine of implied powers prevailed when the Supreme Court found Social Security to be constitutional and lawful for the federal government to pass laws and taxes that improve the general welfare.

Now P@triot wants us to believe he understands the Constitution's intent more than Alexander Hamilton.

 

[P@triot]

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare,

Social Security is illegal? Enacting it through elected Representative in Congress and signed into law by the President is violating the law. My god, you are absolutely insane. Nothing you say about anything can be considered rational thinking. You not only do not know what law is, you don't know what our system of representative democracy was designed to do.

The problem NotfooledbyW is that you're astoundingly ignorant. The U.S. Constitution clearly and explicitly establishes that the federal government is restricted to 18 enumerated powers and 18 enumerated poweds only. And not one of those is the power to create retirement plans or force people into them.

The fact that you don't know that much is sad (because it illustrates you've never even read the Constitution) and it is why you are woefully unqualified to be discussing any of this with me.

 

[P@triot]

I don't "think" those items (and many more) are unconstitutional - I know they are. And so does anyone who has ever actually read the U.S. Constitution.

You know more than one of the founders? What a miserable joke you are. Hamilton's view on potential issues such as the Social Security Act is referred to as the doctrine of implied powers. The doctrine of implied powers prevailed when the Supreme Court found Social Security to be constitutional and lawful for the federal government to pass laws and taxes that improve the general welfare.

Now P@triot wants us to believe he understands the Constitution's intent more than Alexander Hamilton.

There are no "implied" powers and the founders were exceptionally clear on that. The states have all of the power and came together to voluntarily delegate 18 powers to the federal government. Here is just one of a zillion writings from our founders on this indisputable reality:

CONSTITUTION (U.S.), Limits Federal Jurisdiction. –It may be impracticable to lay down any general formula of words which shall decide at once, and with precision in every case, this limit of jurisdiction. But there are two canons which will guide us safely in most of the cases.

1st. The capital and leading object of the Constitution was to leave with the states all authorities which respected their own citizens only, and to transfer to the United States those which respected citizens of foreign or other states; to make us several as to ourselves, but one as to all others. In the latter case, then, constructions should lean to the general jurisdiction if the words will bear it; and in favor of the states in the former, if possible to be so construed. And, indeed, between citizens and citizens of the same state and under their own laws, I know but a single case in which a jurisdiction is given to the general government. That is where anything but gold or silver is made a lawful tender, or the obligation of contracts is any otherwise impaired. The separate legislatures had so often abused that power that the citizens themselves chose to trust it to the general rather than to their own special authorities.

2nd. On every question of construction, carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed. – Thomas Jefferson (1823)

Excerpt From: Andrew M. Allison. “The Real Thomas Jefferson: The True Story of America's Philosopher of Freedom.” iBooks. This material may be protected by copyright.

Check out this book on the iBooks Store: The Real Thomas Jefferson

 

[NotfooledbyW]

P@triot, post: 15450027

Let's see - they've banned guns in Washington D.C., Chicago, and New York (100% illegal/unconstitutional).

Wait a minute! Conservatives and liberals have contributed to the ban on the general public's ownership of rocket propelled grenades, fully automatic weapons, tanks, artillery and weaponized fighter jets and helicopters.

They (conservatives) must be violating the law in your mind because every right thinking constitution loving patriot must arm themselves to the teeth in order prepare for the armed overthrow of a tyrannical federal government led by the likes of Barack Obama or Hilliary Clinton.

How dare conservatives break the law by banning much needed weaponry from people like you P@triot that knows the constitution so well and that defending it requires more than a bunch of yahoos with pitchforks to AK47's. You can't go up against the US Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, and Coast Guard with 'unbanned' weapons only.

 

[P@triot]

Let's see - they've banned guns in Washington D.C., Chicago, and New York (100% illegal/unconstitutional).

Wait a minute! Conservatives and liberals have contributed to the ban on the general public's ownership of rocket propelled grenades, fully automatic weapons, tanks, artillery and weaponized fighter jets and helicopters.

They (conservatives) must be violating the law in your mind because every right thinking constitution loving patriot must arm themselves to the teeth in order prepare for the armed overthrow of a tyrannical federal government led by the likes of Barack Obama or Hilliary Clinton.

How dare conservatives break the law by banning much needed weaponry from people like you P@triot that knows the constitution so well and that defending it requires more than a bunch of yahoos with pitchforks to AK47's. You can't go up against the US Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, and Coast Guard with 'unbanned' weapons only.

Why the ignorant, snarky response? Progressives illegally and unconstitutionally banned firearms in those areas just like I said. Rather than admitting that, you go on a rant with stuff that isn't even true (nobody has outlawed helicopters - many people fly them as a hobby). For that matter - nobody has outlawed fully automatic weapons. I have personally fired a Tommy Gun that legally belongs to a friend of mine and another friend owns a fully automatic uzi (though I haven't had the privilege yet of firing that one). Both were purchased within in the last couple of years.

As usual, you spread misinformation because you're an ignorant progressive who has no clue what he's talking about. Just so you don't attempt to argue this and embarrass yourself further - at the time that an automatic weapons ban went into effect, they had no choice but to grandfather in existing automatic weapons. That means it is 100% legal to own, buy, or sell any full automatic weapon manufactured before the ban (such as the Tommy Gun from the 1930's and the uzi my other friend owns from the early 1980's). Idiot.

 

[P@triot]

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, Obamacare,

Social Security is illegal? Enacting it through elected Representative in Congress and signed into law by the President is violating the law.

In all seriousness...it really is sad that you are so ignorant that you believe whatever Congress signs into law is legal. They could, tomorrow, sign into law that it's ok to hang black people. Would that make it "legal" in your ignorant mind? They could, tomorrow, vote and sign a law saying that you no longer have a 1st Amendment right. Would that make it "legal" in your mind?

See, the people who founded this nation were exponentially smarter than you and realized that just because someone was elected, doesn't mean they would necessarily follow the will of their constituents (as proven over and over by progressives). As such, they restrained the power of those elected officials with the U.S. Constitution. You should really try reading it sometime. Here is the great Thomas Jefferson to explain it to you:

"...in questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution..." - Thomas Jefferson (1798)

You sir, are an embarrassment to America. To lazy to read the U.S. Constitution. To greedy for handouts to care. Just a good little obedient minion. I only hope that all of the federal government power that you desire is turned against you and people like you and not the wise and informed people who actually respected and cherished the freedom that someone else died to provide for them.

 

[Ame®icano]

HILLARY’S GREATEST NIGHTMARE IS COMING TRUE

No one likes her.

 

[P@triot]

The level of corruption with Hitlery Clinton is staggering...

With Election Day trial looming, feds drop charges against U.S. arms dealer who threatened to reveal Clinton info

 

[Ame®icano]

Oops

Watchdog group accuses Clinton campaign of election law violations

A nonpartisan watchdog group Thursday called for a federal investigation of Hillary Clinton’s campaign committee, accusing it of illegally accepting millions of dollars worth of “opposition research” and other assistance from Correct the Record, an outside super-PAC, in violation of U.S. election laws.

How is it always the case that leftists are violating the election laws?

 

[P@triot]

Oops

Watchdog group accuses Clinton campaign of election law violations

A nonpartisan watchdog group Thursday called for a federal investigation of Hillary Clinton’s campaign committee, accusing it of illegally accepting millions of dollars worth of “opposition research” and other assistance from Correct the Record, an outside super-PAC, in violation of U.S. election laws.

How is it always the case that leftists are violating the election laws?

Because that is who they are at their core. Fascists. They can't accept that the American people have spoken and unilaterally reject their bat-shit crazy ideology. So they rig elections, violate the law, and leverage a host of unethical measures to achieve their oppressive utopia.

 

[P@triot]

 

[P@triot]

The Dumbocrats are feeling really desperate (for some reason). I know Hitlery Clinton is completley unelectable but she's facing an equally unelectable liberal in Donald Trump.

U.S. Says Russia Directed Hacks to Influence Elections