Obame re: guns" "I am constrained by a system that the Founders put in place"

[M14 Shooter]

Obama: ?I Am Constrained By A System That Our Founders Put In Place? « CBS DC
Thank God for that.

Did it ever occur to the Incompetent-in-Chief, or any of His useful idiot supporters, that the constitution was created for very purpose of keeping the government from running roughshod over the rights of the people?

Must realy suck for Him, not being able to dictate His agenda.

 

[jwoodie]

Another SCOTUS appointment and that won't be a problem...

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Has it ever occurred to morons like you that the even many of the people who ratified the US Constitution admitted the Constitution is a flawed document?

The Southern states used the Constitution to keep the government from running roughshod over the rights of the people to own and trade in Slavery?

 

[legaleagle_45]

Another SCOTUS appointment and that won't be a problem...

Probably not... as the next vacancy is projected to be Ginsburg.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Another SCOTUS appointment and that won't be a problem...

Not true. If you admit the Constitution constrains you it constrains you. An amendment would be needed to change that, not an opinion.

If President Obama had said a 'ruling' constrained him you'd have a valid argument.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Another SCOTUS appointment and that won't be a problem...

I believe the Secular Messiah made that statement with regard to having to deal with Congress, but yes - the fact that current jurisprudence gets hin His way as well is a valid point.

They believe the state should have a monopoly on force; to achieve this, they must eliminate the armed citizenry. All of their actions are simply means to this end.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Another SCOTUS appointment and that won't be a problem...

Probably not... as the next vacancy is projected to be Ginsburg.

Joins in on an invalid argument. The USMB House, Legal Eagle Strikes Again!

 

[martybegan]

Has it ever occurred to morons like you that the even many of the people who ratified the US Constitution admitted the Constitution is a flawed document?

The Southern states used the Constitution to keep the government from running roughshod over the rights of the people to own and trade in Slavery?

And the way to fix said document is via amendments, not Supreme Court Roluette.

The inital constitution did not really protect slavery, it tolerated it and took it into account with respects to representative count.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Another SCOTUS appointment and that won't be a problem...

Probably not... as the next vacancy is projected to be Ginsburg.

Way past due.

 

[Some Guy]

Has it ever occurred to morons like you that the even many of the people who ratified the US Constitution admitted the Constitution is a flawed document?

Flawed in some ways perhaps, not in every way.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Another SCOTUS appointment and that won't be a problem...

I believe the Secular Messiah made that statement with regard to having to deal with Congress, but yes - the fact that current jurisprudence gets hin His way as well is a valid point.

They believe the state should have a monopoly on force; to achieve this, they must eliminate the armed citizenry. All of their actions are simply means to this end.

The President did NOT say jurisprudence gets in his way if he said the Constitution did.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Has it ever occurred to morons like you that the even many of the people who ratified the US Constitution admitted the Constitution is a flawed document?

Flawed in some ways perhaps, not in every way.

You'll have to excuse Dante - he doesn't fit in well with adults who would like to have an honest, civil discussion.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Has it ever occurred to morons like you that the even many of the people who ratified the US Constitution admitted the Constitution is a flawed document?

The Southern states used the Constitution to keep the government from running roughshod over the rights of the people to own and trade in Slavery?

And the way to fix said document is via amendments, not Supreme Court Roluette.

The inital constitution did not really protect slavery, it tolerated it and took it into account with respects to representative count.

Distinction with a difference? Have to get back to you here.

B initial constitution, do you mean the Constitution before any amendments?

Why Dante says the US Constitution protected the owning and trading of slavery is the fact that only in County Courts of Common Pleas in Massachusetts, the Territorial Court in Oregon State, and State Supreme Courts in the USA did the Federal Constitutional rights of Slave Owners and the Slave Trade lose challenges.

The US Supreme Court upheld the Constitutional rights of Slave Owners and Traders guaranteed in the US Constitution, until the US Constitution itself was amended.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Has it ever occurred to morons like you that the even many of the people who ratified the US Constitution admitted the Constitution is a flawed document?

Flawed in some ways perhaps, not in every way.

What? Did you just knock down a straw man?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Has it ever occurred to morons like you that the even many of the people who ratified the US Constitution admitted the Constitution is a flawed document?

Flawed in some ways perhaps, not in every way.

You'll have to excuse Dante - he doesn't fit in well with adults who would like to have an honest, civil discussion.

Honest and civil? You have done neither in your time here.

First: civility: the OP is not civil

Second: honesty: Invalid arguments are not exactly honest

 

[M14 Shooter]

Has it ever occurred to morons like you that the even many of the people who ratified the US Constitution admitted the Constitution is a flawed document?

The Southern states used the Constitution to keep the government from running roughshod over the rights of the people to own and trade in Slavery?

And the way to fix said document is via amendments, not Supreme Court Roluette.

The inital constitution did not really protect slavery, it tolerated it and took it into account with respects to representative count.

Don't follow the red herring - you'll just smell like fish.

 

[Katzndogz]

Aw the po baby! Maybe he can have a few union protests and change all that.

 

[ima]

Just ban bullets. Bullets don't enjoy any constitutional protection, it's the right to bear arms, not bullets.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Has it ever occurred to morons like you that the even many of the people who ratified the US Constitution admitted the Constitution is a flawed document?

The Southern states used the Constitution to keep the government from running roughshod over the rights of the people to own and trade in Slavery?

And the way to fix said document is via amendments, not Supreme Court Roluette.

The inital constitution did not really protect slavery, it tolerated it and took it into account with respects to representative count.

Distinction with a difference? Have to get back to you here.

B initial constitution, do you mean the Constitution before any amendments?

Why Dante says the US Constitution protected the owning and trading of slavery is the fact that only in County Courts of Common Pleas in Massachusetts, the Territorial Court in Oregon State, and State Supreme Courts in the USA did the Federal Constitutional rights of Slave Owners and the Slave Trade lose challenges.

The US Supreme Court upheld the Constitutional rights of Slave Owners and Traders guaranteed in the US Constitution, until the US Constitution itself was amended.

post amended

 

[M14 Shooter]

Just ban bullets. Bullets don't enjoy any constitutional protection, it's the right to bear arms, not bullets.

Ban words. Words don't enjoy any constitutional protection.