Your Choice: Liberalism or the Constitution

[PoliticalChic]

This thread is yet another example of the arrogance and ignorance typical of the OP and common to most on the right; particularly their ignorance of the Constitution and its case law.

1. "This thread is yet another example of the arrogance ...."

Arrogance? Confidence? Well, I do blur the line....

...but it's your fault!

My post destroy yours with such metronomic regularity.....how could I be other than?


2."....ignorance of the Constitution and its case law."

Destroying you is so 'fish in the barrel' that I have to help you out just to cut the boredom.

See...if you had any cachet, any possibility that you were correct....you'd be able to give a half dozen or so errors in my posts.

Actually, I know more about the Constitution than you do.
Case law, as you know is simply made up.

But you cannot....so you remain C_Chamber_Pot, the Quasimodo of the USMB.

3.Bet you look like him, too....

View attachment 36507

You need counseling. Maybe one of those re-education camps fascists like you support, though I'm confident you would be transferred right quickly to a Locked Psychiatric Facility.

Oh,....you poor thing.....I caught you lying and now you had to run off and hide.....


You can come back....we'll just blame it on senescence.....

I haven't gone anywhere. There are only two reasons for your post ^^^: You are a liar, or you are challenged by reality. I tend to believe both are in play.

First of all....I never lie.

Secondly....I just showed that you do.


Gee....I was doing you a favor, accepting your lies based on your senility.
Don't you want to thank me?

 

[Wry Catcher]

This thread is yet another example of the arrogance and ignorance typical of the OP and common to most on the right; particularly their ignorance of the Constitution and its case law.

1. "This thread is yet another example of the arrogance ...."

Arrogance? Confidence? Well, I do blur the line....

...but it's your fault!

My post destroy yours with such metronomic regularity.....how could I be other than?


2."....ignorance of the Constitution and its case law."

Destroying you is so 'fish in the barrel' that I have to help you out just to cut the boredom.

See...if you had any cachet, any possibility that you were correct....you'd be able to give a half dozen or so errors in my posts.

Actually, I know more about the Constitution than you do.
Case law, as you know is simply made up.

But you cannot....so you remain C_Chamber_Pot, the Quasimodo of the USMB.

3.Bet you look like him, too....

View attachment 36507

You need counseling. Maybe one of those re-education camps fascists like you support, though I'm confident you would be transferred right quickly to a Locked Psychiatric Facility.

Oh,....you poor thing.....I caught you lying and now you had to run off and hide.....


You can come back....we'll just blame it on senescence.....

I haven't gone anywhere. There are only two reasons for your post ^^^: You are a liar, or you are challenged by reality. I tend to believe both are in play.

First of all....I never lie.

Secondly....I just showed that you do.


Gee....I was doing you a favor, accepting your lies based on your senility.
Don't you want to thank me?

Your first sentence is a lie; as is your second. Narcissists lie, to themselves and to others.

 

[Contumacious]

Does it bother you that the Ninth Amendment may pave the way for rights for other groups of people or on other issues that you might not approve of? Is the Ninth Amendment too general for you?

IF IF IF IF IF

The Constitution and the Ninth Amendment were still in effect they would have paved the way for rights for other groups of people that you would not approve . For example you and your ilk would NOT approve of my right NOT to be forced to

a) feed you
2) clothe you
3) insure you
4) provide free education up to , and including , community college
5) quench your thirst
6) refuse to pay for invading every country on the face of mother earth


As a matter of fact , the SCOTUS has REFUSED to recognized that the Ninth Amendment even exists - it hard to create a police state when the Constitution declares natural rights.

Bureaucrats like fascism, wherein they determine what rights, if any, the people will have.


.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "This thread is yet another example of the arrogance ...."

Arrogance? Confidence? Well, I do blur the line....

...but it's your fault!

My post destroy yours with such metronomic regularity.....how could I be other than?


2."....ignorance of the Constitution and its case law."

Destroying you is so 'fish in the barrel' that I have to help you out just to cut the boredom.

See...if you had any cachet, any possibility that you were correct....you'd be able to give a half dozen or so errors in my posts.

Actually, I know more about the Constitution than you do.
Case law, as you know is simply made up.

But you cannot....so you remain C_Chamber_Pot, the Quasimodo of the USMB.

3.Bet you look like him, too....

View attachment 36507

You need counseling. Maybe one of those re-education camps fascists like you support, though I'm confident you would be transferred right quickly to a Locked Psychiatric Facility.

Oh,....you poor thing.....I caught you lying and now you had to run off and hide.....


You can come back....we'll just blame it on senescence.....

I haven't gone anywhere. There are only two reasons for your post ^^^: You are a liar, or you are challenged by reality. I tend to believe both are in play.

First of all....I never lie.

Secondly....I just showed that you do.


Gee....I was doing you a favor, accepting your lies based on your senility.
Don't you want to thank me?

Your first sentence is a lie; as is your second. Narcissists lie, to themselves and to others.

Well, then...let's review.

You stated this lie: "Maybe one of those re-education camps fascists like you support,..."


I challenged you to show that it wasn't a bald-faced, unmitigated fabrication....your attempt at revenge for how often I've shown what an idiot you are....

.....and you have since ignored the challenge.



I gave you a chance to apologize and beg forgiveness.....

 

[PoliticalChic]

Funny how a very conservative Supreme Court doesn't have any problems, only the Pub Propaganda Machine and the hater dupes...

Today, February 5th, 1937.......King Franklin the First, aka Franklin Roosevelt, unveiled his attempt to subvert the United States Constitution, by simply making the Supreme Court his rubber stamp.

This was the date of his announcing his court-packing plan.

So....how did you plan to celebrate?



BTW....real Americans.....at that time the category included Democrats.......rebelled.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Funny how a very conservative Supreme Court doesn't have any problems, only the Pub Propaganda Machine and the hater dupes...

Today, February 5th, 1937.......King Franklin the First, aka Franklin Roosevelt, unveiled his attempt to subvert the United States Constitution, by simply making the Supreme Court his rubber stamp.

This was the date of his announcing his court-packing plan.

So....how did you plan to celebrate?



BTW....real Americans.....at that time the category included Democrats.......rebelled.

That was not unconstitutional.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Does it bother you that the Ninth Amendment may pave the way for rights for other groups of people or on other issues that you might not approve of? Is the Ninth Amendment too general for you?

IF IF IF IF IF

The Constitution and the Ninth Amendment were still in effect they would have paved the way for rights for other groups of people that you would not approve . For example you and your ilk would NOT approve of my right NOT to be forced to

a) feed you
2) clothe you
3) insure you
4) provide free education up to , and including , community college
5) quench your thirst
6) refuse to pay for invading every country on the face of mother earth


As a matter of fact , the SCOTUS has REFUSED to recognized that the Ninth Amendment even exists - it hard to create a police state when the Constitution declares natural rights.

Bureaucrats like fascism, wherein they determine what rights, if any, the people will have.


.

You don't have any right to refuse to pay constitutional taxes.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This thread is yet another example of the arrogance and ignorance typical of the OP and common to most on the right; particularly their ignorance of the Constitution and its case law.

1. "This thread is yet another example of the arrogance ...."

Arrogance? Confidence? Well, I do blur the line....

...but it's your fault!

My post destroy yours with such metronomic regularity.....how could I be other than?


2."....ignorance of the Constitution and its case law."

Destroying you is so 'fish in the barrel' that I have to help you out just to cut the boredom.

See...if you had any cachet, any possibility that you were correct....you'd be able to give a half dozen or so errors in my posts.

Actually, I know more about the Constitution than you do.
Case law, as you know is simply made up.

But you cannot....so you remain C_Chamber_Pot, the Quasimodo of the USMB.

3.Bet you look like him, too....

View attachment 36507

You need counseling. Maybe one of those re-education camps fascists like you support, though I'm confident you would be transferred right quickly to a Locked Psychiatric Facility.

Oh,....you poor thing.....I caught you lying and now you had to run off and hide.....


You can come back....we'll just blame it on senescence.....

I haven't gone anywhere. There are only two reasons for your post ^^^: You are a liar, or you are challenged by reality. I tend to believe both are in play.

First of all....I never lie.

Secondly....I just showed that you do.


Gee....I was doing you a favor, accepting your lies based on your senility.
Don't you want to thank me?

I proved you lied the other day. Go look it up.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Operation Choke Point no longer exists.

Do you admit you lie more frequently than you do anything else except breath?

FDIC retreats on Operation Choke Point - The Washington Post

Do you admit you might be the least informed RWnut on USMB?

How about this, Liar:
So....instead of having to agree that the government’s controversial program known as Operation Choke Point, cutting off financial services or credit card processors or banks to lawful businesses, is an underhanded way of infringing citizens protections under the second amendment....

...the Liar attempts to change the subject to felons doing something or other.

What is your point exactly?

Serious?

You've always been a liar, and will always be so.

Case closed.

You've never caught me in a single lie.

 

[NYcarbineer]

11. So....if one is a Progressive/Liberal, and sees the Constitution as bar to the rapid reversal of the Founder's conception of America.....what will they do?

Stick to the amendment process??
Hardly.

After all...Americans wouldn't accept the changes that these Leftists demand.



Well then, ignore the Constitution, have the judges pretend that they have found the 'right' instructions.....and we'll give out food stamps in place of rights.
Lots of food stamps.....it worked with Esau.




The Constitution as written thwarts progressive objectives, but it must be temporarily respected out of political necessity because of its historic value. To handle this problem politically, progressives claim loyalty to a "living" Constitution, one that can be interpreted according to the needs of the time, and leaves out amendments....and places re-writing of the Constitution in the hands of unelected Liberal judges.

They pretend that the constitutional amendment process is obsolete -- legislators and judges can rationalize as constitutional almost any act they choose to legalize.



12. Supreme Court Chief Justice Rehnquist warned of this sort of attack:

"..... [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

As long as judges retain the power of interpretation, the Constitution has to be a 'living' document.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Funny how a very conservative Supreme Court doesn't have any problems, only the Pub Propaganda Machine and the hater dupes...

Today, February 5th, 1937.......King Franklin the First, aka Franklin Roosevelt, unveiled his attempt to subvert the United States Constitution, by simply making the Supreme Court his rubber stamp.

This was the date of his announcing his court-packing plan.

So....how did you plan to celebrate?



BTW....real Americans.....at that time the category included Democrats.......rebelled.

That was not unconstitutional.

Subverting the Constitution not unconstitutional?

Oh...wait....you're the liar.

I get it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. "This thread is yet another example of the arrogance ...."

Arrogance? Confidence? Well, I do blur the line....

...but it's your fault!

My post destroy yours with such metronomic regularity.....how could I be other than?


2."....ignorance of the Constitution and its case law."

Destroying you is so 'fish in the barrel' that I have to help you out just to cut the boredom.

See...if you had any cachet, any possibility that you were correct....you'd be able to give a half dozen or so errors in my posts.

Actually, I know more about the Constitution than you do.
Case law, as you know is simply made up.

But you cannot....so you remain C_Chamber_Pot, the Quasimodo of the USMB.

3.Bet you look like him, too....

View attachment 36507

You need counseling. Maybe one of those re-education camps fascists like you support, though I'm confident you would be transferred right quickly to a Locked Psychiatric Facility.

Oh,....you poor thing.....I caught you lying and now you had to run off and hide.....


You can come back....we'll just blame it on senescence.....

I haven't gone anywhere. There are only two reasons for your post ^^^: You are a liar, or you are challenged by reality. I tend to believe both are in play.

First of all....I never lie.

Secondly....I just showed that you do.


Gee....I was doing you a favor, accepting your lies based on your senility.
Don't you want to thank me?

I proved you lied the other day. Go look it up.

You're lying....how unusual.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Do you admit you lie more frequently than you do anything else except breath?

FDIC retreats on Operation Choke Point - The Washington Post

Do you admit you might be the least informed RWnut on USMB?

How about this, Liar:
So....instead of having to agree that the government’s controversial program known as Operation Choke Point, cutting off financial services or credit card processors or banks to lawful businesses, is an underhanded way of infringing citizens protections under the second amendment....

...the Liar attempts to change the subject to felons doing something or other.

What is your point exactly?

Serious?

You've always been a liar, and will always be so.

Case closed.

You've never caught me in a single lie.

Y'know....you've got a point there....not a 'single' lie.

When it comes to lies, you're a multi-tasker.

 

[NYcarbineer]

FDIC retreats on Operation Choke Point - The Washington Post

Do you admit you might be the least informed RWnut on USMB?

How about this, Liar:
So....instead of having to agree that the government’s controversial program known as Operation Choke Point, cutting off financial services or credit card processors or banks to lawful businesses, is an underhanded way of infringing citizens protections under the second amendment....

...the Liar attempts to change the subject to felons doing something or other.

What is your point exactly?

Serious?

You've always been a liar, and will always be so.

Case closed.

You've never caught me in a single lie.

Y'know....you've got a point there....not a 'single' lie.

When it comes to lies, you're a multi-tasker.

Cite one.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Funny how a very conservative Supreme Court doesn't have any problems, only the Pub Propaganda Machine and the hater dupes...

Today, February 5th, 1937.......King Franklin the First, aka Franklin Roosevelt, unveiled his attempt to subvert the United States Constitution, by simply making the Supreme Court his rubber stamp.

This was the date of his announcing his court-packing plan.

So....how did you plan to celebrate?



BTW....real Americans.....at that time the category included Democrats.......rebelled.

That was not unconstitutional.

Subverting the Constitution not unconstitutional?

Oh...wait....you're the liar.

I get it.

Passing legislation that is not unconstitutional is not 'subverting' the Constitution. There is no constitutional provision setting the number of justices. The number of justices was set at 9 by legislation, in 1869.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Funny how a very conservative Supreme Court doesn't have any problems, only the Pub Propaganda Machine and the hater dupes...

Today, February 5th, 1937.......King Franklin the First, aka Franklin Roosevelt, unveiled his attempt to subvert the United States Constitution, by simply making the Supreme Court his rubber stamp.

This was the date of his announcing his court-packing plan.

So....how did you plan to celebrate?



BTW....real Americans.....at that time the category included Democrats.......rebelled.

That was not unconstitutional.

Subverting the Constitution not unconstitutional?

Oh...wait....you're the liar.

I get it.

Passing legislation that is not unconstitutional is not 'subverting' the Constitution. There is no constitutional provision setting the number of justices. The number of justices was set at 9 by legislation, in 1869.

Here's how it happened:

1. In 1937, Roosevelt tried to pack the judiciary, by stuffing more Liberals and KKKers on the Supreme Court, and in 1938 attempted to purge Democrat Senators who defeated the scheme.

While his tactic failed,his strategy succeeded:he made cowards of the Justices, effectivelydoing away with the 'checks and balances'provided by an independent Supreme Court.


a. Democrat Senator Ashurst of Arizona, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time,denounced court packing as a "prelude to tyranny,"but, when Roosevelt announced it, Ashurst issued a one-line statement late that afternoon saying he was in "favor of the President's proposal."
"No Senator can change his mind quicker than I."
Henry F. Ashurst - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Talk about Lock-step Liberals.



b. Patriotic Democrat Carter Glass of Virginia, explained it as follows: "Why, if the President asked Congress to commit suicide tomorrow they'd do it."

Sound like the ObamaCare vote?




2. Lest any believe that Roosevelt's actions were less than design, he himself disclosed in his first inaugural address, delivered on March 4, 1933, that his idea of leadership had no boundary, and, in fact, did not exclude dictatorship. He made clear that if Congress did not follow his orders, "I shall not evade the clear course of duty that will then confront me. I shall ask the Congress for.... -broad executive power to wage a war against the emergency as great as the power that would be given me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe.... for discipline and direction under leadership."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution,"p.64


a. From Congressional hearings, 1973:
“Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency.”
Freedomsite.net



3. Other tyrants, the same:
"Obama vows to act alone if Congress doesn't cooperate"
Obama vows to act alone if Congress doesn't cooperate | recordonline.com


Constitution be damned!


So....when one thinks about it, essentially, in 2012, 65,899,660 voters cast their ballot for a monarchy, and against the Constitution.

You too, right?

 

[regent]

Funny how a very conservative Supreme Court doesn't have any problems, only the Pub Propaganda Machine and the hater dupes...

Today, February 5th, 1937.......King Franklin the First, aka Franklin Roosevelt, unveiled his attempt to subvert the United States Constitution, by simply making the Supreme Court his rubber stamp.

This was the date of his announcing his court-packing plan.

So....how did you plan to celebrate?



BTW....real Americans.....at that time the category included Democrats.......rebelled.

So the Congress shot down the Court packing thing but the Court saw the light and began to see FDR's programs as Constitutional. So who won the battle the Court battle, Congress or FDR? Remember, a stich in time saved nine.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Funny how a very conservative Supreme Court doesn't have any problems, only the Pub Propaganda Machine and the hater dupes...

Today, February 5th, 1937.......King Franklin the First, aka Franklin Roosevelt, unveiled his attempt to subvert the United States Constitution, by simply making the Supreme Court his rubber stamp.

This was the date of his announcing his court-packing plan.

So....how did you plan to celebrate?



BTW....real Americans.....at that time the category included Democrats.......rebelled.

That was not unconstitutional.

Subverting the Constitution not unconstitutional?

Oh...wait....you're the liar.

I get it.

Passing legislation that is not unconstitutional is not 'subverting' the Constitution. There is no constitutional provision setting the number of justices. The number of justices was set at 9 by legislation, in 1869.

Here's how it happened:

1. In 1937, Roosevelt tried to pack the judiciary, by stuffing more Liberals and KKKers on the Supreme Court, and in 1938 attempted to purge Democrat Senators who defeated the scheme.

While his tactic failed,his strategy succeeded:he made cowards of the Justices, effectivelydoing away with the 'checks and balances'provided by an independent Supreme Court.


a. Democrat Senator Ashurst of Arizona, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee at the time,denounced court packing as a "prelude to tyranny,"but, when Roosevelt announced it, Ashurst issued a one-line statement late that afternoon saying he was in "favor of the President's proposal."
"No Senator can change his mind quicker than I."
Henry F. Ashurst - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Talk about Lock-step Liberals.



b. Patriotic Democrat Carter Glass of Virginia, explained it as follows: "Why, if the President asked Congress to commit suicide tomorrow they'd do it."

Sound like the ObamaCare vote?




2. Lest any believe that Roosevelt's actions were less than design, he himself disclosed in his first inaugural address, delivered on March 4, 1933, that his idea of leadership had no boundary, and, in fact, did not exclude dictatorship. He made clear that if Congress did not follow his orders, "I shall not evade the clear course of duty that will then confront me. I shall ask the Congress for.... -broad executive power to wage a war against the emergency as great as the power that would be given me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe.... for discipline and direction under leadership."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution,"p.64


a. From Congressional hearings, 1973:
“Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency.”
Freedomsite.net



3. Other tyrants, the same:
"Obama vows to act alone if Congress doesn't cooperate"
Obama vows to act alone if Congress doesn't cooperate | recordonline.com


Constitution be damned!


So....when one thinks about it, essentially, in 2012, 65,899,660 voters cast their ballot for a monarchy, and against the Constitution.

You too, right?

You were going to prove what FDR did was unconstitutional,

or did you give up on that?

 

[Nosmo King]

PoliticalChic

Can you pose an unloaded question just once please?

Instead of asking a question like "Do you still beat your wife?", try something a little more honest.

The manner in which you pose questions does not beg for an answer, it begs for a defense against the indefensible. "Liberalism vs. the constitution. what a steaming pile of intellectual lassitude.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Your choice, GOP. Follow wingnuts and the path of the Whigs, or acknowledge reality.

Shouldn't you be off throwing virgins in a volcano to appease the gods and stave of "globul war ming?"

Acknowledging the reality of your carbon sins and how they have angered Gaea?