Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Nothing there says they can't fund a university, or the FAA, or the FBI. Try again.Really, show us where it says that? How about the FAA or the FBI? No funding for those either?"Why Liberals Hate Free Speech"
Ben Carson wants government to punish universities for speech he disagrees with and liberals "hate" free speech - such is the idiocy of the thread premise.
Punish?
You dope....read the Constitution....the federal government has no authority to fund any university.
You really should take some law courses, C_Chamber_Pot.
"Really, show us where it says that?"
Gads, you're a dope.
Article 1, section 8 lists the only things the federal government has the authority to do.
Go ahead...borrow a copy of the Constitution....look for any funding of education.....on any level.
OK....I'll educate you:
1. Our Founders envisioned the states as laboratories of democracy and enshrined into our Constitution the principle of federalism. Under federalist principles, the American people endowed the national government with a defined set of limited, enumerated powers in the Constitution. Any powers beyond those specifically given to the federal government fall entirely within the province of the states. Federalism protects liberty by protecting against the overreaching of any one branch of our federal government, and is part of the uniquely American system of checks and balances.
Paloma Zepeda, "Reinventing the Right."
2. The idea that the reach of the federal government would be restricted to a few enumerated powers is articulated by Madison in Federalist No. 45:
“The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the State governments are numerous and indefinite."
You're busted, huh?
Bet you wish you had the education I have.
And yet again, you continue to lie even after it's been pointed out that no one can prove the man actually said this.When you can't prove that a man actually said something, you are now allowed to post that he did, and if you do, you are lying. That's how it works. You have to be able to prove someone actually said something, not ask others to prove that he didn't.What you posted, a quote of something a man did not say, is a lie, but I bet you keep posting it. When you post something someone did not say, you're lying. Now you know.1. Actually the lie is yours.
The article does not claim that he didn't say it.
2. It does attribute the same meaning of the quote to his friend and fellow Socialist...you know, like you....Upton Sinclair, in a correspondence between Sinclair and Thomas.
3. Reagan biographer Lou Cannon noted that this was a suspect quotation, and that he could find no evidence of it. Thomas did say that both major political parties had borrowed items from the Socialist Party platform.
Gotcha?
Where does you link say he didn't say it?
It doesn't.
You're fibbing again.
I, on the other hand, never lie.
An example, Donald Trump said, "Hillary Clinton would be a far better president than I ever could be so I urge you to vote for her, not me". Now, prove he didn't say that and if you can't then it's true (at least you believe so)...
Hey....look at this, you Socialist:
Norman Mattoon Thomas > Quotes > Quotable Quote
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of “liberalism,” they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform.”
― Norman Mattoon Thomas
A quote by Norman Mattoon Thomas
They don't need to. If you can't prove that he said it, and you post that he did, you're lying. It's a simple concept, that you should have learned as a child.But no one says he didn't say it...
PaintMyHouse is so far above me that I can't even reach his glorious dick which I would gladly suck even after he fucked Hillary Clinton in the ass!
The lie is the same regardless of how many websites you find it on. They are all lying, probably without knowing it in most cases, but you do know, and you continue to lie.And yet again, you continue to lie even after it's been pointed out that no one can prove the man actually said this.When you can't prove that a man actually said something, you are now allowed to post that he did, and if you do, you are lying. That's how it works. You have to be able to prove someone actually said something, not ask others to prove that he didn't.What you posted, a quote of something a man did not say, is a lie, but I bet you keep posting it. When you post something someone did not say, you're lying. Now you know.
Where does you link say he didn't say it?
It doesn't.
You're fibbing again.
I, on the other hand, never lie.
An example, Donald Trump said, "Hillary Clinton would be a far better president than I ever could be so I urge you to vote for her, not me". Now, prove he didn't say that and if you can't then it's true (at least you believe so)...
Hey....look at this, you Socialist:
Norman Mattoon Thomas > Quotes > Quotable Quote
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of “liberalism,” they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform.”
― Norman Mattoon Thomas
A quote by Norman Mattoon Thomas
Hey....look at this!
Norman Thomas Quote
Quotes by Category | Quotes by Person | Quotes of the Day
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under
the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist
program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without
knowing how it happened."
by:
Norman Thomas
(1884-1968) six-time U.S. Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America
Source:
1948 - from an interview during the presidential campaign,
Norman Thomas Quote - Liberty Quotes Blog
In your face, boyyyeeeeee!
They don't need to. If you can't prove that he said it, and you post that he did, you're lying. It's a simple concept, that you should have learned as a child.But no one says he didn't say it...
Like so:
PaintMyHouse is far above me that I can't even reach his glorious dick which I would gladly such even after he fucked Hillary Clinton in the ass!
Now you have two websites, one saying it's from a speech in 1944 and another from an interview in 1948? So, which is it? And until you can prove that he said it, if you say he did, you are lying.They don't need to. If you can't prove that he said it, and you post that he did, you're lying. It's a simple concept, that you should have learned as a child.But no one says he didn't say it...
Like so:
PaintMyHouse is far above me that I can't even reach his glorious dick which I would gladly such even after he fucked Hillary Clinton in the ass!
FROM A 1944 NORMAN THOMAS SPEECH:
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism.
But, under the name of “liberalism”,
they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program,
until one day America will be a socialist nation,
without knowing how it happened.”
“I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party.
The Democratic Party has adopted our platform.”
Norman Thomas, Socialist Party of America, Leading American socialist, Liberalism, Presidential Candidate, Democratic Party has adopted our platform
Go ahead....waiting for your 'is not, is notttttt!" post.
Got anyone beside you who denies he said it?
Anyone?
The lie is the same regardless of how many websites you find it on. They are all lying, probably without knowing it in most cases, but you do know, and you continue to lie.And yet again, you continue to lie even after it's been pointed out that no one can prove the man actually said this.When you can't prove that a man actually said something, you are now allowed to post that he did, and if you do, you are lying. That's how it works. You have to be able to prove someone actually said something, not ask others to prove that he didn't.Where does you link say he didn't say it?
It doesn't.
You're fibbing again.
I, on the other hand, never lie.
An example, Donald Trump said, "Hillary Clinton would be a far better president than I ever could be so I urge you to vote for her, not me". Now, prove he didn't say that and if you can't then it's true (at least you believe so)...
Hey....look at this, you Socialist:
Norman Mattoon Thomas > Quotes > Quotable Quote
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of “liberalism,” they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform.”
― Norman Mattoon Thomas
A quote by Norman Mattoon Thomas
Hey....look at this!
Norman Thomas Quote
Quotes by Category | Quotes by Person | Quotes of the Day
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under
the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist
program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without
knowing how it happened."
by:
Norman Thomas
(1884-1968) six-time U.S. Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America
Source:
1948 - from an interview during the presidential campaign,
Norman Thomas Quote - Liberty Quotes Blog
In your face, boyyyeeeeee!
And
"Source:
1948 - from an interview during the presidential campaign"
Find it, and post it.
The lie is the same regardless of how many websites you find it on. They are all lying, probably without knowing it in most cases, but you do know, and you continue to lie.And yet again, you continue to lie even after it's been pointed out that no one can prove the man actually said this.When you can't prove that a man actually said something, you are now allowed to post that he did, and if you do, you are lying. That's how it works. You have to be able to prove someone actually said something, not ask others to prove that he didn't.
An example, Donald Trump said, "Hillary Clinton would be a far better president than I ever could be so I urge you to vote for her, not me". Now, prove he didn't say that and if you can't then it's true (at least you believe so)...
Hey....look at this, you Socialist:
Norman Mattoon Thomas > Quotes > Quotable Quote
“The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of “liberalism,” they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democratic Party has adopted our platform.”
― Norman Mattoon Thomas
A quote by Norman Mattoon Thomas
Hey....look at this!
Norman Thomas Quote
Quotes by Category | Quotes by Person | Quotes of the Day
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under
the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist
program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without
knowing how it happened."
by:
Norman Thomas
(1884-1968) six-time U.S. Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America
Source:
1948 - from an interview during the presidential campaign,
Norman Thomas Quote - Liberty Quotes Blog
In your face, boyyyeeeeee!
And
"Source:
1948 - from an interview during the presidential campaign"
Find it, and post it.
"The lie is the same regardless of how many websites you find it on. They are all lying,..."
"Silly boy ya self-destroyer. Silly boy ya self-destroyer
Silly boy you got so much to live for
So much to aim for, so much to try for
You blowing it all with paranoia
Youre so insecure you self-destroyer
(and it goes like this, here it goes)
Paranoia, the destroyer
(here it goes again)
Paranoia, the destroyer
Dr. Dr. Help me please, I know you'll understand..."
The Kinks
There is another of your lies!!!!"Why Liberals Hate Free Speech"
Ben Carson wants government to punish universities for speech he disagrees with and liberals "hate" free speech - such is the idiocy of the thread premise.
Punish?
You dope....read the Constitution....the federal government has no authority to fund any university.
You really should take some law courses, C_Chamber_Pot.
You're on a roll. Keep it up. I'm enjoying this.Just found this reviewing the thread. Why don't you respond to the posts consigned to you and address the subject matter of those facts within that post rather than to my posts to others regarding other matters? That's rhetorical! That must be so you can avoid addressing the falsehoods, errors and stupidity of your "arguments" of C&P's I've laid open to the bone.Taking a victory lap when you weren't even on the right track smacks of pitiful hubris, Chica! Very damn stupid and sophomoric, too!I would never confuse tenacity with indifference to honesty, good character or outright unwarranted chutzpah.Damn, but you are a gadfly!
What I know is you pulled the tail of a she-wolf.
I don't always agree with PC, but she has tenacity.
Oooo.....look who's sulking because of the spankings I've been forced to administer.
Look for more ahead.
Why, when I already put you in your place?
If you need a shoulder to cry on, pull over to the side of the road.
This is where you prove that she lied about something, or shut your yap. Just saying.The only thing you know how to put in its place is your ass in a chair! You're nothing but a fraud and someone to be pitied for their lack of character and abject dishonesty! You are a known quantity, Chica, and you have marked yourself. One last thing. To claim you never lie after you have been caught out lying so many times is really fucking stupid!Just found this reviewing the thread. Why don't you respond to the posts consigned to you and address the subject matter of those facts within that post rather than to my posts to others regarding other matters? That's rhetorical! That must be so you can avoid addressing the falsehoods, errors and stupidity of your "arguments" of C&P's I've laid open to the bone.Taking a victory lap when you weren't even on the right track smacks of pitiful hubris, Chica! Very damn stupid and sophomoric, too!I would never confuse tenacity with indifference to honesty, good character or outright unwarranted chutzpah.
What I know is you pulled the tail of a she-wolf.
I don't always agree with PC, but she has tenacity.
Oooo.....look who's sulking because of the spankings I've been forced to administer.
Look for more ahead.
Why, when I already put you in your place?
If you need a shoulder to cry on, pull over to the side of the road.
The federal governments powers are outlined in the Constitution. Any powers not given to the federal government belong to the state. Any court decision that states otherwise is unconstitutional. Now, don't you look stupid?There is another of your lies!!!!"Why Liberals Hate Free Speech"
Ben Carson wants government to punish universities for speech he disagrees with and liberals "hate" free speech - such is the idiocy of the thread premise.
Punish?
You dope....read the Constitution....the federal government has no authority to fund any university.
You really should take some law courses, C_Chamber_Pot.
I've proven beyond any doubt by producing citations from U S v. Butler (1936) that your earlier claim that, "...the federal government has no authority to fund any university...." is false and is made manifestly so in the decision. But rather than admit your error, you lie to avoid admitting you're WRONG and double, double and then double down again. Hubris and stupidity compliment your penchant to lie, Chica!
There is another of your lies!!!!"Why Liberals Hate Free Speech"
Ben Carson wants government to punish universities for speech he disagrees with and liberals "hate" free speech - such is the idiocy of the thread premise.
Punish?
You dope....read the Constitution....the federal government has no authority to fund any university.
You really should take some law courses, C_Chamber_Pot.
I've proven beyond any doubt by producing citations from U S v. Butler (1936) that your earlier claim that, "...the federal government has no authority to fund any university...." is false and is made manifestly so in the decision. But rather than admit your error, you lie to avoid admitting you're WRONG and double, double and then double down again. Hubris and stupidity compliment your penchant to lie, Chica!
Actually it's you holding on to ignorance!The federal governments powers are outlined in the Constitution. Any powers not given to the federal government belong to the state. Any court decision that states otherwise is unconstitutional. Now, don't you look stupid?There is another of your lies!!!!"Why Liberals Hate Free Speech"
Ben Carson wants government to punish universities for speech he disagrees with and liberals "hate" free speech - such is the idiocy of the thread premise.
Punish?
You dope....read the Constitution....the federal government has no authority to fund any university.
You really should take some law courses, C_Chamber_Pot.
I've proven beyond any doubt by producing citations from U S v. Butler (1936) that your earlier claim that, "...the federal government has no authority to fund any university...." is false and is made manifestly so in the decision. But rather than admit your error, you lie to avoid admitting you're WRONG and double, double and then double down again. Hubris and stupidity compliment your penchant to lie, Chica!
My statement was 100 percent accurate. The Constitution did not give government the power to fund colleges. Therefore, such power belongs to the states. The federal government has amassed such power, and trampled state rights to the point that the government basically controls everything. This is NOT what our founding fathers wanted. It's also the reason our country is such a mess.Actually it's you holding on to ignorance!The federal governments powers are outlined in the Constitution. Any powers not given to the federal government belong to the state. Any court decision that states otherwise is unconstitutional. Now, don't you look stupid?There is another of your lies!!!!"Why Liberals Hate Free Speech"
Ben Carson wants government to punish universities for speech he disagrees with and liberals "hate" free speech - such is the idiocy of the thread premise.
Punish?
You dope....read the Constitution....the federal government has no authority to fund any university.
You really should take some law courses, C_Chamber_Pot.
I've proven beyond any doubt by producing citations from U S v. Butler (1936) that your earlier claim that, "...the federal government has no authority to fund any university...." is false and is made manifestly so in the decision. But rather than admit your error, you lie to avoid admitting you're WRONG and double, double and then double down again. Hubris and stupidity compliment your penchant to lie, Chica!
Your first statement is nearly correct. However, those powers ENUMERATED (not outlined) may be direct or implied! Very important significance in that differentiation!
Your second statement is in error. You should read and understand my critique of your first statement, then do the same for ALL of Article I and then the same for Amendment X.
Your third statement is totally in error! The founders' intent of each portion of the Constitution were laid out in The Federalist as scribed by Hamilton, Madison and Jay before the ratification of the Constitution to inform The People of its contents to replace the unworkable Articles of Confederation! Hamilton wrote Federalist #78 through #83 regarding the Judicial Branch. I suggest you read those to find the basis of judicial review and it's reasoning (#78). I further suggest that you study closely what Chief Justice Marshall wrote in his LANDMARK decision in Marbury v. Madison (1803) regarding judicial review. Also, engrave the following in your mind for future reference:
"We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges [Supreme Court, sic] say it is." [Emphasis Added] < Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes >
You can suck up to Chica to curry it's favor, but that is a really ill advised proposition!
One last thing. Before you state someone LOOKS STUPID, check to make sure you know just what the fuck you are talking about. Hopefully, you will take that as a lesson learned.
Actually it's you holding on to ignorance!The federal governments powers are outlined in the Constitution. Any powers not given to the federal government belong to the state. Any court decision that states otherwise is unconstitutional. Now, don't you look stupid?There is another of your lies!!!!"Why Liberals Hate Free Speech"
Ben Carson wants government to punish universities for speech he disagrees with and liberals "hate" free speech - such is the idiocy of the thread premise.
Punish?
You dope....read the Constitution....the federal government has no authority to fund any university.
You really should take some law courses, C_Chamber_Pot.
I've proven beyond any doubt by producing citations from U S v. Butler (1936) that your earlier claim that, "...the federal government has no authority to fund any university...." is false and is made manifestly so in the decision. But rather than admit your error, you lie to avoid admitting you're WRONG and double, double and then double down again. Hubris and stupidity compliment your penchant to lie, Chica!
Your first statement is nearly correct. However, those powers ENUMERATED (not outlined) may be direct or implied! Very important significance in that differentiation!
Your second statement is in error. You should read and understand my critique of your first statement, then do the same for ALL of Article I and then the same for Amendment X.
Your third statement is totally in error! The founders' intent of each portion of the Constitution were laid out in The Federalist as scribed by Hamilton, Madison and Jay before the ratification of the Constitution to inform The People of its contents to replace the unworkable Articles of Confederation! Hamilton wrote Federalist #78 through #83 regarding the Judicial Branch. I suggest you read those to find the basis of judicial review and it's reasoning (#78). I further suggest that you study closely what Chief Justice Marshall wrote in his LANDMARK decision in Marbury v. Madison (1803) regarding judicial review. Also, engrave the following in your mind for future reference:
"We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges [Supreme Court, sic] say it is." [Emphasis Added] < Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes >
You can suck up to Chica to curry it's favor, but that is a really ill advised proposition!
One last thing. Before you state someone LOOKS STUPID, check to make sure you know just what the fuck you are talking about. Hopefully, you will take that as a lesson learned.
There is another of your lies!!!!"Why Liberals Hate Free Speech"
Ben Carson wants government to punish universities for speech he disagrees with and liberals "hate" free speech - such is the idiocy of the thread premise.
Punish?
You dope....read the Constitution....the federal government has no authority to fund any university.
You really should take some law courses, C_Chamber_Pot.
I've proven beyond any doubt by producing citations from U S v. Butler (1936) that your earlier claim that, "...the federal government has no authority to fund any university...." is false and is made manifestly so in the decision. But rather than admit your error, you lie to avoid admitting you're WRONG and double, double and then double down again. Hubris and stupidity compliment your penchant to lie, Chica!
Cite where the Constitution gives such authority.....
Can't, can you.
OK...OK...It's too late to prevent you from making an ass of yourself, but....stop begging: here's further remediation:
The only document by which American have agreed to be governed is the United States Constitution. In fact, it is known as 'the law of the land.'
1. All Supreme Court Justices may only vote according to the language of the United States Constitution.
2. Any issue not specific to the enumerated powers may not be legislated by the federal government....and must remain within the province of the state courts.
That would be American jurisprudence.
3. The Constitution itself provided the exact, and only, method of altering the text.....the amendment process.
Any other alteration is an illegal act.....the method of Liberals and Progressives.
4. If any legislation can be shown to be consistent with the language of the Constitution, as used during ratification, it must.....must....be found constitutional.
If not covered by the enumerated powers, Article 1, section 8, it must be only judged by state law.
Never make the mistake of posting that Supreme Court Justices have any.....any.....authority to change, alter, re-write the Constitution.
1. "....if you post right-wing dogma and sound like a paranoid moron on a site with leftist bent, don't expect to be hanging around too long..."
What!!!!
You waited almost 400 posts before agreeing with the title of the thread????
Yup: "Liberals Hate Free Speech"
(You put your foot in your mouth again, huh?)
2. "They've seen more than enough of your kind..."
Hey....watch it buster!
You never saw 'my kind' before. I'm one of a kind....and the best you've ever encountered.
Creating these threads .... one of my vanities. I find it satisfying to perform, convivial, competitive, absorbing and even artistic.
What amazes me is that poets don't rush home, unpack their pens, and write odes....paeans.... to my posts!
I’m kind of surprised I’m not an action figure by now.
I fully support free speech. I'm a liberal, we invented it. Most are not like me.
Actually it's you holding on to ignorance!The federal governments powers are outlined in the Constitution. Any powers not given to the federal government belong to the state. Any court decision that states otherwise is unconstitutional. Now, don't you look stupid?There is another of your lies!!!!"Why Liberals Hate Free Speech"
Ben Carson wants government to punish universities for speech he disagrees with and liberals "hate" free speech - such is the idiocy of the thread premise.
Punish?
You dope....read the Constitution....the federal government has no authority to fund any university.
You really should take some law courses, C_Chamber_Pot.
I've proven beyond any doubt by producing citations from U S v. Butler (1936) that your earlier claim that, "...the federal government has no authority to fund any university...." is false and is made manifestly so in the decision. But rather than admit your error, you lie to avoid admitting you're WRONG and double, double and then double down again. Hubris and stupidity compliment your penchant to lie, Chica!
Your first statement is nearly correct. However, those powers ENUMERATED (not outlined) may be direct or implied! Very important significance in that differentiation!
Your second statement is in error. You should read and understand my critique of your first statement, then do the same for ALL of Article I and then the same for Amendment X.
Your third statement is totally in error! The founders' intent of each portion of the Constitution were laid out in The Federalist as scribed by Hamilton, Madison and Jay before the ratification of the Constitution to inform The People of its contents to replace the unworkable Articles of Confederation! Hamilton wrote Federalist #78 through #83 regarding the Judicial Branch. I suggest you read those to find the basis of judicial review and it's reasoning (#78). I further suggest that you study closely what Chief Justice Marshall wrote in his LANDMARK decision in Marbury v. Madison (1803) regarding judicial review. Also, engrave the following in your mind for future reference:
"We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges [Supreme Court, sic] say it is." [Emphasis Added] < Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes >
You can suck up to Chica to curry it's favor, but that is a really ill advised proposition!
One last thing. Before you state someone LOOKS STUPID, check to make sure you know just what the fuck you are talking about. Hopefully, you will take that as a lesson learned.
""We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges [Supreme Court, sic] say it is." [Emphasis Added] < Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes >"
This is exactly the sort of lie that Progressives/Liberals tell, and fools like you accept.
There is no such right attached to being a judge.
A real judge, Wm. Rehnquist explained it thus:
"[Liberal judicial activism] seems instead to be based upon the proposition that federal judges, perhaps judges as a whole, have a role of their own,
quite independent of popular will, to play in solving society’s
problems. Once we have abandoned the idea that the authority
of the courts to declare laws unconstitutional is somehow tied
to the language of the Constitution that the people adopted, a
judiciary exercising the power of judicial review appears in a
quite different light."
THE NOTION OF A LIVING CONSTITUTION*
WILLIAM H. REHNQUIST
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol29_No2_Rehnquist.pdf
Hart to fathom whether you are more stupid and vulgar, or more corrupt.
In either case, you are disgusting.
