If you want to know what is wrong with America - click on this thread

[Sallow]

Check the thread.

Yes - please do!!!

They were defining law in terms of actual legislation.

Law is law. Nobody even mentioned the word "legislation". You're desperately trying to sue this excuse that IlarMeilyr handed you (you're not even bright enough to think of your own excuses)



Which you would never claim was "open to interpretation" or "living, breathing" yet your highly uninformed ass tries to make that outrageous case about the Constitution



It's not? It doesn't govern the actions of people (like preventing oppressive Dumbocrats from preventing my right to speak, or my right to worship, or my right to own and carry firearms?).

Do you have any idea how absurd you sound when you say the highest law of the land is not "in terms of law"?!? If it's the highest LAW in the land (and we've clearly established that it is), then it is law in terms of law. God Almighty, you don't even possess the humility to admit when you are this glaringly wrong?!?



And he quadruples-down on his ignorance! No, really Sallow, it is LAW in every sense. "Not actual law" -



Exactly!!! And law (like littering which you seem to think is the epitome of law) defines what we can and can't do...

That's the distinction.

You haven't made a distinction - you've made nonsensical babble based on the lack of humility to admit when you're glaring wrong.

But it's hard to argue with people that have no idea what they are talking about.

Tell me about it! Do you have the any idea how painful it is PROVING you are dead WRONG and still having to listen to you use the utterly absurd phrases "not actual law" and "it's not law in that sense" (when your example for the "sense" is littering)

Doesn't this really give insight into the mind of a Dumbocrat? The Constitution is not "real" or "actual" law. But littering? Well Christ Almighty, that is serious "real" law!

Alrighty.

Lets put your theory to the test.

SHUT UP!

Yeah you..SHUT UP!

Gosh..I just violated the LAW didn't I?

The one in the very first Amendment.

Call the cops..let them know.

Tell me what happens.

I'll wait.

 

[Sallow]

Here's another challenge.

Come to NYC..take your assault rifle out of the trunk of your car..and walk down Times Square.

Fill me in on the results.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Check the thread.

Yes - please do!!!



Law is law. Nobody even mentioned the word "legislation". You're desperately trying to sue this excuse that IlarMeilyr handed you (you're not even bright enough to think of your own excuses)



Which you would never claim was "open to interpretation" or "living, breathing" yet your highly uninformed ass tries to make that outrageous case about the Constitution



It's not? It doesn't govern the actions of people (like preventing oppressive Dumbocrats from preventing my right to speak, or my right to worship, or my right to own and carry firearms?).

Do you have any idea how absurd you sound when you say the highest law of the land is not "in terms of law"?!? If it's the highest LAW in the land (and we've clearly established that it is), then it is law in terms of law. God Almighty, you don't even possess the humility to admit when you are this glaringly wrong?!?



And he quadruples-down on his ignorance! No, really Sallow, it is LAW in every sense. "Not actual law" -



Exactly!!! And law (like littering which you seem to think is the epitome of law) defines what we can and can't do...



You haven't made a distinction - you've made nonsensical babble based on the lack of humility to admit when you're glaring wrong.

But it's hard to argue with people that have no idea what they are talking about.

Tell me about it! Do you have the any idea how painful it is PROVING you are dead WRONG and still having to listen to you use the utterly absurd phrases "not actual law" and "it's not law in that sense" (when your example for the "sense" is littering)

Doesn't this really give insight into the mind of a Dumbocrat? The Constitution is not "real" or "actual" law. But littering? Well Christ Almighty, that is serious "real" law!

Alrighty.

Lets put your theory to the test.

SHUT UP!

Yeah you..SHUT UP!

Gosh..I just violated the LAW didn't I?

The one in the very first Amendment.

Call the cops..let them know.

Tell me what happens.

I'll wait.

Silly.

Some private person telling someone else to "shut up" violates no Constitutional provision.

You are neither Congress, itself, Sallow (the First Amendment) NOR are you one of the States (taking incorporation doctrine and the 14th Amendment into account).

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Here's another challenge.

Come to NYC..take your assault rifle out of the trunk of your car..and walk down Times Square.

Fill me in on the results.

The New York STATE laws regarding weapons may or may not be in conflict with the 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

But the NY State Penal LAW is still the law of the State.

If it is someday ultimately determined to be a law that is violative of the 2nd Amendment, then the law will be struck down, as void.

In light of some RECENT decisions by the SCOTUS, the question of the Constitutionality of the NY Penal Law sections on weapons (assault weapons or otherwise) may not be as firmly resolved as you might assume.

 

[healthmyths]

Check the thread.

Yes - please do!!!



Law is law. Nobody even mentioned the word "legislation". You're desperately trying to sue this excuse that IlarMeilyr handed you (you're not even bright enough to think of your own excuses)



Which you would never claim was "open to interpretation" or "living, breathing" yet your highly uninformed ass tries to make that outrageous case about the Constitution



It's not? It doesn't govern the actions of people (like preventing oppressive Dumbocrats from preventing my right to speak, or my right to worship, or my right to own and carry firearms?).

Do you have any idea how absurd you sound when you say the highest law of the land is not "in terms of law"?!? If it's the highest LAW in the land (and we've clearly established that it is), then it is law in terms of law. God Almighty, you don't even possess the humility to admit when you are this glaringly wrong?!?



And he quadruples-down on his ignorance! No, really Sallow, it is LAW in every sense. "Not actual law" -



Exactly!!! And law (like littering which you seem to think is the epitome of law) defines what we can and can't do...



You haven't made a distinction - you've made nonsensical babble based on the lack of humility to admit when you're glaring wrong.

But it's hard to argue with people that have no idea what they are talking about.

Tell me about it! Do you have the any idea how painful it is PROVING you are dead WRONG and still having to listen to you use the utterly absurd phrases "not actual law" and "it's not law in that sense" (when your example for the "sense" is littering)

Doesn't this really give insight into the mind of a Dumbocrat? The Constitution is not "real" or "actual" law. But littering? Well Christ Almighty, that is serious "real" law!

Alrighty.

Lets put your theory to the test.

SHUT UP!

Yeah you..SHUT UP!

Gosh..I just violated the LAW didn't I?

The one in the very first Amendment.

Call the cops..let them know.

Tell me what happens.

I'll wait.

NSA now knows... so be looking for a knock on the door courtesy of Obama!

 

[deltex1]

Here we have an American citizen who is entitled to vote but is completely and thoroughly ignorant of his own government, the laws that govern his nation, the issues, or the candidates. Sadly, this is ALL Democrats/Liberals//Progressives:

HERE Sallow states that the Constitution is not the law

HERE Sallow doubles-down on his extraordinary ignorance (was he not required to take US Government in high school like the rest of us?)

HERE Sallow triples-down on his extraordinary ignorance

And here are the simple facts (easily found by anyone not too lazy to take 11 seconds for a simple search) which indisputably proves that he is dead wrong. If Dumbocrat voters don't even know these basics, how can they possibly be trusted to cast an informed, responsible vote?

Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, known as the Supremacy Clause, establishes the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, and U.S. Treaties as "the supreme law of the land"

Supremacy Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Many thanks for your critique of Shallow...hopefully his friends explain it to him

 

[konradv]

What a great thread and it clearly shows what is wrong with America. It's the divided polarize state of the populace. I present the symbolic example of my comment:
"Here we have an American citizen who is entitled to vote but is completely and thoroughly ignorant of his own government, the laws that govern his nation, the issues, or the candidates. Sadly, this is ALL Democrats/Liberals//Progressives".
I'd say there a lot of ignorance as demonstrated by the fact that people vote way too much against their well-being after swallowing everything about their ideology.
People in the US just let their ideology dictate their lives even when it has a negative belief that effects their day-to-day lives. Hence, we get a dysfunctional elected government as evident by the current state of our Executive and legislative branches of government.
That's what is really wrong with America.

You forgot about the deep pockets of lobbyists......I get tired of the bought and paid for politicians

People are always talking about broken promises by this politician or that politician. The problem is they can't keep them all, but they have to make them to get campaign contributions. Go to public funding of elections and politicians would have to make fewer promises and hopefully just those they really intended to keep. Those they do would also be less expensive, because they don't have to go "hat in hand" to special interests. Couple that with the amount of time saved by not having to attend fund raiser after fund raiser and they'd actually have the time to read a bill or two!

 

[P@triot]

Here's another challenge.

Come to NYC..take your assault rifle out of the trunk of your car..and walk down Times Square.

Fill me in on the results.

This is the equivalent of saying rape and murder laws aren't "real" laws since there are literally millions of both instances which occur every year.

Just because a city, state, or county over steps their authority doesn't render the Constitution void. Just like the anti-gun laws of D.C. and of Illinois were properly and legally over turned by the Supreme Court (the actual role of the Supreme Court).

With each post, you dig yourself a deeper hole for yourself. You really need to find an ounce of humility and just admit you were speaking out previously from a place of ignorance. You're completely uneducated on the U.S. Constitution. Everything you know about it stems from radical left-wing websites shoveling misinformation for an agenda.

 

[P@triot]

Check the thread.

Yes - please do!!!



Law is law. Nobody even mentioned the word "legislation". You're desperately trying to sue this excuse that IlarMeilyr handed you (you're not even bright enough to think of your own excuses)



Which you would never claim was "open to interpretation" or "living, breathing" yet your highly uninformed ass tries to make that outrageous case about the Constitution



It's not? It doesn't govern the actions of people (like preventing oppressive Dumbocrats from preventing my right to speak, or my right to worship, or my right to own and carry firearms?).

Do you have any idea how absurd you sound when you say the highest law of the land is not "in terms of law"?!? If it's the highest LAW in the land (and we've clearly established that it is), then it is law in terms of law. God Almighty, you don't even possess the humility to admit when you are this glaringly wrong?!?



And he quadruples-down on his ignorance! No, really Sallow, it is LAW in every sense. "Not actual law" -



Exactly!!! And law (like littering which you seem to think is the epitome of law) defines what we can and can't do...



You haven't made a distinction - you've made nonsensical babble based on the lack of humility to admit when you're glaring wrong.

But it's hard to argue with people that have no idea what they are talking about.

Tell me about it! Do you have the any idea how painful it is PROVING you are dead WRONG and still having to listen to you use the utterly absurd phrases "not actual law" and "it's not law in that sense" (when your example for the "sense" is littering)

Doesn't this really give insight into the mind of a Dumbocrat? The Constitution is not "real" or "actual" law. But littering? Well Christ Almighty, that is serious "real" law!

Alrighty.

Lets put your theory to the test.

SHUT UP!

Yeah you..SHUT UP!

Gosh..I just violated the LAW didn't I?

The one in the very first Amendment.

Call the cops..let them know.

Tell me what happens.

I'll wait.

Um - freedom of speech protects your right to speak out and say "shut up". Saying "shut up" does NOT prevent me from talking, therefore you have no in fact violated my rights in any capacity...

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Yes - please do!!!



Law is law. Nobody even mentioned the word "legislation". You're desperately trying to sue this excuse that IlarMeilyr handed you (you're not even bright enough to think of your own excuses)



Which you would never claim was "open to interpretation" or "living, breathing" yet your highly uninformed ass tries to make that outrageous case about the Constitution



It's not? It doesn't govern the actions of people (like preventing oppressive Dumbocrats from preventing my right to speak, or my right to worship, or my right to own and carry firearms?).

Do you have any idea how absurd you sound when you say the highest law of the land is not "in terms of law"?!? If it's the highest LAW in the land (and we've clearly established that it is), then it is law in terms of law. God Almighty, you don't even possess the humility to admit when you are this glaringly wrong?!?



And he quadruples-down on his ignorance! No, really Sallow, it is LAW in every sense. "Not actual law" -



Exactly!!! And law (like littering which you seem to think is the epitome of law) defines what we can and can't do...



You haven't made a distinction - you've made nonsensical babble based on the lack of humility to admit when you're glaring wrong.



Tell me about it! Do you have the any idea how painful it is PROVING you are dead WRONG and still having to listen to you use the utterly absurd phrases "not actual law" and "it's not law in that sense" (when your example for the "sense" is littering)

Doesn't this really give insight into the mind of a Dumbocrat? The Constitution is not "real" or "actual" law. But littering? Well Christ Almighty, that is serious "real" law!

Alrighty.

Lets put your theory to the test.

SHUT UP!

Yeah you..SHUT UP!

Gosh..I just violated the LAW didn't I?

The one in the very first Amendment.

Call the cops..let them know.

Tell me what happens.

I'll wait.

Um - freedom of speech protects your right to speak out and say "shut up". Saying "shut up" does NOT prevent me from talking, therefore you have no in fact violated my rights in any capacity...

And, even if HE alone did constitute all of Congress, simply saying it does not amount to passing a "law."

 

[Harry Dresden]

Well thank God! Sorry chief, but I refuse to join forces with anti-Americans. I refuse to join forces with ignorant buffoons. I refuse to join forces with people who stand against the U.S. Constitution.

I proudly stand "divided" against people who advocate (either knowingly or unknowingly) for the destruction of the U.S.

hey Rotty.....many Americans would refuse to go along with people who have this guys mentality too.......this guy sounds like someone who would let the Govt do whatever they want without ANY resistance on his part at all...i wonder if he would be the same way if the Govt. OUTLAWED the Constitution?.....

If the government outlawed cell phones tomorrow, I'd throw my blackberry away faster than you can say fuck it. If they outlawed donuts, I'd never eat another donut. The fact that you assholes are so fucking extreme that you can't walk away from that stupid ass narcotic just proves prison is exactly the fuck where you belong....

No - I wouldn't. Because my RIGHTS are not up for debate. They come from God. My blackberry did not. Your narcotics also did not come from God.

No amount of your nonsensical babble will ever justify your drug addiction. But hey, keep trying if it gets you off. I'm happy to keep pointing out your failures and inconsistencies in your attempts.

Because my RIGHTS are not up for debate. They come from God
your rights came from "GOD"?.....was he at the table with the guys who wrote the constitution?....

Your narcotics also did not come from God.

who put pot in the wilderness?....Man?....

I'm happy to keep pointing out your failures and inconsistencies in your attempts.

...yea sure you are.....anyone who would roll over like you would for the whims of the Govt......is someone who would let this Govt turn into a Dictatorship....without even a struggle.....you sound like a fucking pussy to me.....

 

[P@triot]

you sound like a fucking pussy to me.....

Says the passivist stoner who throws a hissy because government won't let him get high...

The fact that you can't even face life without getting stoned shows which one of us is the real pussy. I'm not the one who has to run to a chemical to deal with reality, bitch.

 

[P@triot]

Because my RIGHTS are not up for debate. They come from God[/B]
your rights came from "GOD"?.....was he at the table with the guys who wrote the constitution?....

Shocking, the little coward who can't face life without hiding behind his chemicals is completely and totally ignorant of reality (who would have thunk it).

Here stoner boy, allow me to educate you:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,”

Creator = God (have to explain everything to a stoner)

Our founders stated clearly & unequivocally that your rights come from God, and that undeniable reality is so self-evident (so painfully obvious), it requires no explanation. And that government is instituted solely for the purpose of securing those rights from God.

Now how sad is it that I have to explain this to you?

Excerpt From: States, United. “United States Declaration of Independence.” iBooks.
This material may be protected by copyright.

Check out this book on the iBookstore: https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/united-states-declaration/id392612030?mt=11

 

[Harry Dresden]

you sound like a fucking pussy to me.....

Says the passivist stoner who throws a hissy because government won't let him get high...

The fact that you can't even face life without getting stoned shows which one of us is the real pussy. I'm not the one who has to run to a chemical to deal with reality, bitch.

Says the passivist stoner who throws a hissy because government won't let him get high...

they wont?.....in Ca. you can have up to an Ounce dipshit....

The fact that you can't even face life without getting stoned shows which one of us is the real pussy.


havent been high in years dumbass....

I'm not the one who has to run to a chemical to deal with reality,

Chemical?.....now what the fuck are you talking about......

 

[Harry Dresden]

Because my RIGHTS are not up for debate. They come from God[/B]
your rights came from "GOD"?.....was he at the table with the guys who wrote the constitution?....

Shocking, the little coward who can't face life without hiding behind his chemicals is completely and totally ignorant of reality (who would have thunk it).

Here stoner boy, allow me to educate you:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,”

Creator = God (have to explain everything to a stoner)

Our founders stated clearly & unequivocally that your rights come from God, and that undeniable reality is so self-evident (so painfully obvious), it requires no explanation. And that government is instituted solely for the purpose of securing those rights from God.

Now how sad is it that I have to explain this to you?

Excerpt From: States, United. “United States Declaration of Independence.” iBooks.
This material may be protected by copyright.

Check out this book on the iBookstore: https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/united-states-declaration/id392612030?mt=11

so the big guy was sitting there with them?......did he tell them to keep Religion and Politics separate?.....or was that the Black waiter who was there?.....

oh and you still haven't explained this.....Your narcotics also did not come from God.
if Pot wasnt put here by God.....who put it on the planet?......wait i bet you think Thomas Jefferson did......right?....

 

[rdean]

Here we have an American citizen who is entitled to vote but is completely and thoroughly ignorant of his own government, the laws that govern his nation, the issues, or the candidates. Sadly, this is ALL Democrats/Liberals//Progressives:

HERE Sallow states that the Constitution is not the law

HERE Sallow doubles-down on his extraordinary ignorance (was he not required to take US Government in high school like the rest of us?)

HERE Sallow triples-down on his extraordinary ignorance

And here are the simple facts (easily found by anyone not too lazy to take 11 seconds for a simple search) which indisputably proves that he is dead wrong. If Dumbocrat voters don't even know these basics, how can they possibly be trusted to cast an informed, responsible vote?

Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, known as the Supremacy Clause, establishes the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, and U.S. Treaties as "the supreme law of the land"

Supremacy Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are black people worth 3/5ths of a white? It kinda seems that way in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3. If it's open to interpretation, wouldn't that make it a "template"? Just asking.

 

[P@triot]

so the big guy was sitting there with them?

Someone is not dealing well with getting owned by facts...

The framers made it very clear. The fact that you pose as some pro-framer libertarian yet have no fuck'n clue about their beliefs or the results of their work is an embarrassment that you're just going to have to deal with (probably by getting high knowing a fuck'n loser like you).

......did he tell them to keep Religion and Politics separate

Except that was not written into the U.S. Constitution and to this day, still does not exist anywhere in the U.S. Constitution.

Oops! Once again we see the poser get exposed!

if Pot wasnt put here by God.....who put it on the planet?......wait i bet you think Thomas Jefferson did......right?....

Where did I say it "wasn't put there by God"? How do you go from "put there by God" to "he wants me to pull it from the Earth, roll it up, stick inside of paper, light it all on fire, and then inhale the smoke which is the result of it burning"?

Guess what you stupid little bitch - babies are put there by God. Do you interpret that to mean he intends for you to light them on fire and smoke them?

 

[Annie]

And Sallow is supposed to represent the best among them on these boards.

I have several boomarks of the Liberals on these boards promoting Salon.com's article that Hitler was pro-gun---yet none of them seem to be able to refute the part of the Gun Control law that said "Jews may not possess firearms."

Seriously, this has always reminded me of the 'law' that teaching slaves to read or write was a crime punishable by death.

 

[P@triot]

Here we have an American citizen who is entitled to vote but is completely and thoroughly ignorant of his own government, the laws that govern his nation, the issues, or the candidates. Sadly, this is ALL Democrats/Liberals//Progressives:

HERE Sallow states that the Constitution is not the law

HERE Sallow doubles-down on his extraordinary ignorance (was he not required to take US Government in high school like the rest of us?)

HERE Sallow triples-down on his extraordinary ignorance

And here are the simple facts (easily found by anyone not too lazy to take 11 seconds for a simple search) which indisputably proves that he is dead wrong. If Dumbocrat voters don't even know these basics, how can they possibly be trusted to cast an informed, responsible vote?

Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, known as the Supremacy Clause, establishes the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, and U.S. Treaties as "the supreme law of the land"

Supremacy Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are black people worth 3/5ths of a white? It kinda seems that way in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3. If it's open to interpretation, wouldn't that make it a "template"? Just asking.

Except that it is not open to interpretation (any more than a speed limit is "open to interpretation"). The law is the law. It's written in stone while law and until such time as it is legally altered.

 

[P@triot]

Here we have an American citizen who is entitled to vote but is completely and thoroughly ignorant of his own government, the laws that govern his nation, the issues, or the candidates. Sadly, this is ALL Democrats/Liberals//Progressives:

HERE Sallow states that the Constitution is not the law

HERE Sallow doubles-down on his extraordinary ignorance (was he not required to take US Government in high school like the rest of us?)

HERE Sallow triples-down on his extraordinary ignorance

And here are the simple facts (easily found by anyone not too lazy to take 11 seconds for a simple search) which indisputably proves that he is dead wrong. If Dumbocrat voters don't even know these basics, how can they possibly be trusted to cast an informed, responsible vote?

Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, known as the Supremacy Clause, establishes the U.S. Constitution, federal statutes, and U.S. Treaties as "the supreme law of the land"

Supremacy Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are black people worth 3/5ths of a white? It kinda seems that way in Article 1, Section 2, Paragraph 3. If it's open to interpretation, wouldn't that make it a "template"? Just asking.

Sadly, southern Dumbocrats demanded that black people be considered 0/5 of a white person. They demanded that black people be PROPERTY. But when it came time for the census, Dumbocrats demanded that their property be suddenly considered as "people" so that they could receive more representation in Washington and retain their slaves. Republicans called them on this hypocrisy and after a long and bitter battle, the compromise between them was to count the slaves as 3/5's of a person. Of course, the GOP eventually freed the slaves and made sure that they became 5/5's of a person and FREE. Now that I educated you on the history, what does this have to do with anything?