'Living Constitution' Faces a Mercy Killing

[ThoughtCrimes]

Don't believe anyone said the left had SUCCEEDED, just that they wanted to.

Your straw man is like saying that because I haven't actually become a millionaire, that's proof that I don't want to be one.

The implication of action was in the other poster's statement, which certainly didn't imply collective inaction. No straw man existed in this now three-way exchange until your post hit the board!

Dismissed!

I just heard "Blah de blah RUN AWAYYYYY!!!"

Was that what you meant to say?

I just heard "Blah de blah RUN AWAYYYYY!!!"

Was that what you meant to say?

No not at all. Properly decoded what I meant was...you're wrong, you intended a not so subtle slight and went off topic in the process now, so piss the fuck off! Did I make that clear this time or are you going to troll some more?

So in fact, that WAS what you were saying. Glad we cleared that up.

So in fact, that WAS what you were saying. Glad we cleared that up.

No! But if that smooths your disturbed psyche to believe that, believe away because I have no interest in counting coup!

 

[Cecilie1200]

Don't believe anyone said the left had SUCCEEDED, just that they wanted to.

Your straw man is like saying that because I haven't actually become a millionaire, that's proof that I don't want to be one.

The implication of action was in the other poster's statement, which certainly didn't imply collective inaction. No straw man existed in this now three-way exchange until your post hit the board!

Dismissed!

I just heard "Blah de blah RUN AWAYYYYY!!!"

Was that what you meant to say?

I just heard "Blah de blah RUN AWAYYYYY!!!"

Was that what you meant to say?

No not at all. Properly decoded what I meant was...you're wrong, you intended a not so subtle slight and went off topic in the process now, so piss the fuck off! Did I make that clear this time or are you going to troll some more?

So in fact, that WAS what you were saying. Glad we cleared that up.

So in fact, that WAS what you were saying. Glad we cleared that up.

No! But if that smooths your disturbed psyche to believe that, believe away because I have no interest in counting coup!

You apparently also have no interest in clear, honest discussion, otherwise you wouldn't keep going on and on about "You have to prove something you didn't say, because I've decided that you said it!"

 

[Missouri_Mike]

The problem is the left doesn’t just want to limit rights they want to limit them to the point they don’t exist.

The problem is the left doesn’t just want to limit rights they want to limit them to the point they don’t exist.

Give just three examples of current Federal statutes or SCOTUS precedents that have the effect of limiting Constitutional rights, "...to the point they don’t exist."

DC gun laws

Pay attention to what was written. DC gun laws are were never Federal statutes and if you're going to try to tie that to Heller, I suggest you read the first two paragraphs of Section III that Scalia wrote, which includes what Richard-H wrote and to which you responded. So it looks like you can't name just three Federal statutes or SCOTUS precedents to back up your boast that;

The problem is the left doesn’t just want to limit rights they want to limit them to the point they don’t exist.

So you have no problem with states passing anti abortion legislation. After all it’s not federal and you can’t name three laws that currently limit it to the point it doesn’t exist. All good then right? Guns are safe, abortions are safe. No need to fret over who becomes the next judge on the SCOTUS.

So you have no problem with states passing anti abortion legislation. After all it’s not federal and you can’t name three laws that currently limit it to the point it doesn’t exist. All good then right? Guns are safe, abortions are safe. No need to fret over who becomes the next judge on the SCOTUS.

So you CAN'T come up with three examples of "...current Federal statutes or SCOTUS precedents that have the effect of limiting Constitutional rights, "...to the point they don’t exist."" And therefore can't substantiate your claim with even one! Got it!!

Are you just retarding around your moms basement? I’m thinking since you can’t have a serious conversation making your points you must not be capable of doing so.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

The implication of action was in the other poster's statement, which certainly didn't imply collective inaction. No straw man existed in this now three-way exchange until your post hit the board!

Dismissed!

I just heard "Blah de blah RUN AWAYYYYY!!!"

Was that what you meant to say?

I just heard "Blah de blah RUN AWAYYYYY!!!"

Was that what you meant to say?

No not at all. Properly decoded what I meant was...you're wrong, you intended a not so subtle slight and went off topic in the process now, so piss the fuck off! Did I make that clear this time or are you going to troll some more?

So in fact, that WAS what you were saying. Glad we cleared that up.

So in fact, that WAS what you were saying. Glad we cleared that up.

No! But if that smooths your disturbed psyche to believe that, believe away because I have no interest in counting coup!

You apparently also have no interest in clear, honest discussion, otherwise you wouldn't keep going on and on about "You have to prove something you didn't say, because I've decided that you said it!"

Seems we’re dealing with a moron here.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I just heard "Blah de blah RUN AWAYYYYY!!!"

Was that what you meant to say?

I just heard "Blah de blah RUN AWAYYYYY!!!"

Was that what you meant to say?

No not at all. Properly decoded what I meant was...you're wrong, you intended a not so subtle slight and went off topic in the process now, so piss the fuck off! Did I make that clear this time or are you going to troll some more?

So in fact, that WAS what you were saying. Glad we cleared that up.

So in fact, that WAS what you were saying. Glad we cleared that up.

No! But if that smooths your disturbed psyche to believe that, believe away because I have no interest in counting coup!

You apparently also have no interest in clear, honest discussion, otherwise you wouldn't keep going on and on about "You have to prove something you didn't say, because I've decided that you said it!"

Seems we’re dealing with a moron here.

A moron?! Here?! On THIS message board?! Say it ain't so!