Congress Shall Make NO LAW....

Taichiliberal said:
All you've done so far is IGNORE what I've sourced, repeat "no it's not", and then post the transcript as if THAT'S the be all end all (maybe you should READ IT).

Neither you or Bravo know or want to know about the ramifications and implications of the decision. Fortunately, the adults do. So spew your next predictable jibe or repetition. You're done. adios.
Click to expand...

Technically speaking, the SCOTUS ruling is indeed the "be all end all" on this issue. Your opinion, and the opinion of left-wing nitwits, have NOTHING to do with this.

Indeed there will be ramifications to this, as was so eloquently pointed out, there are ramifications to EVERY SCOTUS decision! Implications? What, you mean they dared to IMPLY that people have FREEDOM OF SPEECH! :eek: GASP! How DARE they!

What the "adults" want, I am sure, is for you to go to bed! Say Goodnight Chicklet!
 
Dixie said:
Technically speaking, the SCOTUS ruling is indeed the "be all end all" on this issue. Your opinion, and the opinion of left-wing nitwits, have NOTHING to do with this.

Indeed there will be ramifications to this, as was so eloquently pointed out, there are ramifications to EVERY SCOTUS decision! Implications? What, you mean they dared to IMPLY that people have FREEDOM OF SPEECH! :eek: GASP! How DARE they!

What the "adults" want, I am sure, is for you to go to bed! Say Goodnight Chicklet!
Click to expand...

Does the federal government have the responsibility to repel invaders at the border?
 
AssHatZombie said:
It is time for breaking a 'rule' in favor of average citizens. I know you like to reserve these priveliges for banks and large corporations, but that shit is just wearing too thin.


You don't determine what's the right way to travel, you're just another run of the mill neocon fascist bootlick blowhard. ANd you think it makes you enlightened, that' the funny thing.
Click to expand...
It isn't about "reserving" it for anybody, it is about respecting the documents that we live by. It would be astoundingly poor judgment to ignore the governing documents that restrict our government just because you think it is okay in "just this instance"... It's a recipe for totalitarianism. There is a reason we expect the constitution to be followed, it limits the government's power over individuals (and in this instance some of those happen to be shareholders in companies). If you don't like aspects of those restrictions then there is recourse to change it without "just this once it's okay to ignore it"...

It's not okay to "just this once" the documents into obscurity.
 
Taichiliberal said:
And there you have it, folks. This idiot just contradicted his previous statements....and he's too fucking dumb and/or proud to recognize and/or admit it.

Dealing with the buffoon is like going to a gunfight and Bravo brings a knife! I'm done kicking his ass, he's doing a fine job of it himself.
Click to expand...

Ahhhh...the post I've been expecting....proof he finally knows he been pwned....

Its so predictable.... I've seen this post on a regular basis....because I own his ass on a regular basis....

Any one following the thread sees you tapdancing like Sammy Davis...changing the topic, linking your far left sites as if they are proof of anything....spouting bullshit that isn't even an issue of contention and claiming you've proved something....
You're a joke with a now predictiable punchline...
becoming more boring by the day....
You were entertaining for awhile but the you need some new material....

You remain..."a true coward unable to admit he's wrong on any level"
 
Damocles said:
It isn't about "reserving" it for anybody, it is about respecting the documents that we live by. It would be astoundingly poor judgment to ignore the governing documents that restrict our government just because you think it is okay in "just this instance"... It's a recipe for totalitarianism. There is a reason we expect the constitution to be followed, it limits the government's power over individuals (and in this instance some of those happen to be shareholders in companies). If you don't like aspects of those restrictions then there is recourse to change it without "just this once it's okay to ignore it"...

It's not okay to "just this once" the documents into obscurity.
Click to expand...

But it was ok to bailout banks. Which you were for doing the right way. don't fucking deny it. Extra constitutional is fine when it's time to pay the bankers.

The documents we live by are getting shredded everyday. We can at least stop a full descent into fascism by stopping full coporate ownage of electioneering.

Get hoisted on your own pitard, disingenuous masonic sold out shill.
 
AssHatZombie said:
But it was ok to bailout banks. Which you were for doing the right way. don't fucking deny it. Extra constitutional is fine when it's time to pay the bankers.

The documents we live by are getting shredded everyday. We can at least stop a full descent into fascism by stopping full coporate ownage of electioneering.

Get hoisted on your own pitard, disingenuous masonic sold out shill.
Click to expand...

Let's stop with the dramatics, SCOTUS didn't rule that corporations fully own electioneering. Far from it! What you are advocating, is removing the voice of corporations, because you view that as one less influence on the body politic, and that is better. But it's not better if it allows the other influences to continue and dominate without challenge!

As it stood, progressive activist groups like MoveOn.org, could use the money of uber-wealthy liberals like George Soros, to spread anti-capitalist, anti-business ideology, and foment hate for corporations... evil maniacal corporations... out of control corrupt power hungry organizations coming for our freedoms... they pour this shit on for the entire election cycle and effectively brainwash people into thinking it might be true! WHO in politics is speaking up for the other side? Aside from the US Chamber of Commerce, there is no other entity speaking on behalf of business and corporations, defending or even challenging the negative propaganda from the progressives, and the result is ...OBAMA!

THAT is the system YOU think is better, is an improvement over what we had! With the ruling, we will now have a political voice speaking on behalf of business and commerce, to combat the progressive socialists.

Now AssClown.... let me be clear.... In a Utopian Fantasy World, where magic rainbow ponies float around in the sky on clouds, and sprinkle us all with 'happy dust'... I would also prefer a system where NO money from ANY group influenced politics! But THAT scenario is NEVER going to happen, we will NEVER live in THAT world! It's very important you not lose sight of that reality... what you are wanting to have, will NEVER be! The money, and yes, even the corruption, will find its way into politics, despite our efforts.

It is with that full understanding, you must realize the "best" system is where EVERY voice can be heard, and there are NO restrictions on FREE SPEECH!

THANKS SCOTUS!
 
Dixie said:
Let's stop with the dramatics, SCOTUS didn't rule that corporations fully own electioneering. Far from it! What you are advocating, is removing the voice of corporations, because you view that as one less influence on the body politic, and that is better. But it's not better if it allows the other influences to continue and dominate without challenge!

As it stood, progressive activist groups like MoveOn.org, could use the money of uber-wealthy liberals like George Soros, to spread anti-capitalist, anti-business ideology, and foment hate for corporations... evil maniacal corporations... out of control corrupt power hungry organizations coming for our freedoms... they pour this shit on for the entire election cycle and effectively brainwash people into thinking it might be true! WHO in politics is speaking up for the other side? Aside from the US Chamber of Commerce, there is no other entity speaking on behalf of business and corporations, defending or even challenging the negative propaganda from the progressives, and the result is ...OBAMA!

THAT is the system YOU think is better, is an improvement over what we had! With the ruling, we will now have a political voice speaking on behalf of business and commerce, to combat the progressive socialists.

Now AssClown.... let me be clear.... In a Utopian Fantasy World, where magic rainbow ponies float around in the sky on clouds, and sprinkle us all with 'happy dust'... I would also prefer a system where NO money from ANY group influenced politics! But THAT scenario is NEVER going to happen, we will NEVER live in THAT world! It's very important you not lose sight of that reality... what you are wanting to have, will NEVER be! The money, and yes, even the corruption, will find its way into politics, despite our efforts.

It is with that full understanding, you must realize the "best" system is where EVERY voice can be heard, and there are NO restrictions on FREE SPEECH!

THANKS SCOTUS!
Click to expand...



Blah blah blah.So many strawmen.

Let's disallow any organization with foreign ownership or membership. That'd be fine with me.

This we should do right away.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Blah blah blah.So many strawmen.

Let's disallow any organization with foreign ownership or membership. That'd be fine with me.

This we should do right away.
Click to expand...

So many strawmen, yet none were pointed out, AMAZING!

Again, hardhead... you are attempting to control something you can't! You want to regulate something you have no control over! And ultimately, what it all boils down to, is what do you want to be told....

Joe Politician received $30 million from RainbowPonies.org, a benevolent organization dedicated to the dreams of Utopia.... OR... Joe Politician received $30 million from Kim Sung Dung, a wealthy Chinese businessman. Either way, the $30 million is coming from Kim Sung Dung, to influence Joe Politician into giving him something, the difference is what you are told.
 
Dixie said:
Technically speaking, the SCOTUS ruling is indeed the "be all end all" on this issue. Your opinion, and the opinion of left-wing nitwits, have NOTHING to do with this.

Indeed there will be ramifications to this, as was so eloquently pointed out, there are ramifications to EVERY SCOTUS decision! Implications? What, you mean they dared to IMPLY that people have FREEDOM OF SPEECH! :eek: GASP! How DARE they!

What the "adults" want, I am sure, is for you to go to bed! Say Goodnight Chicklet!
Click to expand...

Once again, you demonstrate that the only lightweight chiclet here is YOU. Congress can take steps to nullify the Shrub appointed agenda. Here stupid, learn something, or just cover your eyes and ears like the dumb monkey you are:
 
Taichiliberal said:
Once again, you demonstrate that the only lightweight chiclet here is YOU. Congress can take steps to nullify the Shrub appointed agenda. Here stupid, learn something, or just cover your eyes and ears like the dumb monkey you are:
Click to expand...

Sorry Chicklet, Congress can't overrule the Supreme Court. If they could, I doubt abortion would still be legal. But it was a nice thought you had there for a moment, Chicklet!

(And btw, watch it with the "racist" comments, I am 1/16 African-American, and the word "monkey" is somewhat offensive to me.)
 
Dixie said:
Sorry Chicklet, Congress can't overrule the Supreme Court. If they could, I doubt abortion would still be legal. But it was a nice thought you had there for a moment, Chicklet!

(And btw, watch it with the "racist" comments, I am 1/16 African-American, and the word "monkey" is somewhat offensive to me.)
Click to expand...

Once again, you demonstrate what a dishonest and ignorant neocon clown you are. I never said Congress can "over rule" the SCOTUS, I said they can nullify the ruling. Ever hear of a law being repealed, bunky? As I tried to school you before, the 14th Amendment is at the crux of this, and the last line reads like this:

"The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."

Congress can enforce the 14th Amendment amendment language, to which the SCOTUS decision has repealed without due process. The Supreme Court has the power to interpret the Constitution, not to repeal it or any part of it.

There is no language in the Constitution that gives power to the Court to usurp the very essence of the Constitution or any of its Amendments.

All Congress has to do is pass a statement or declaration, via a majority vote, that denounces the SCOTUS decision and that becomes the enforceable law. If someone has a problem with that, then SCOTUS can hear their case and determine if it has merit. That's all they're allowed to do as per the 14th Amendment. They cannot effectively repeal it. ( with thanks to Silhouette for pointing this out)

Oh, and as for your sudden declaration of black heritage...given your documented defense and apologetic attitude on these boards regarding the Confederate flag, Americas slavery history, various white supremacist dogma, etc., I strongly suggest you keep quiet about this, because the "1 drop of Negro blood" mindset still exists for the aforementioned folk you stand up for...and that means you'd find yourself without many of your like minded friends and many some new enemies. Now, why don't you waste a LOT of time lying about who you are, what you didn't say, how you're always right and everyone else is wrong, blah, blah etc.? I expect nothing less from you. :cof1:
 
More mindless drivel from the mindless.

I assure you, the Congress does NOT have the power to nullify a Supreme Court ruling on the 1st Amendment, and that IS what this was about. You can harp on with you partisan rants about the 14th all you like, but this isn't about the 14th, and even IF it were, the 1st trumps it anyway because it's in the Bill of Rights.

Damo was right, your only Congressional recourse is to amend the Constitution and change the 1st Amendment, and I don't think you are going to do that. Your balloon has about sailed, chicklet... you and Nancy Pelosi are about to be on the outside looking in!
 
Dixie said:
More mindless drivel from the mindless.

I assure you, the Congress does NOT have the power to nullify a Supreme Court ruling on the 1st Amendment, and that IS what this was about. You can harp on with you partisan rants about the 14th all you like, but this isn't about the 14th, and even IF it were, the 1st trumps it anyway because it's in the Bill of Rights.

Damo was right, your only Congressional recourse is to amend the Constitution and change the 1st Amendment, and I don't think you are going to do that. Your balloon has about sailed, chicklet... you and Nancy Pelosi are about to be on the outside looking in!
Click to expand...

There you have it folks.....this dumbass can't even read correctly, as I never stated that Congress can nullify scotus on the 1st amendment!

That's the crux of the dishonest neocon....they don't address what YOU state, they fabricate a text based on what THEY want you to say, then procede on that false basis. I detest liars, and therefore find further honest discussion with such folk like Dixie impossible.

Just Plain Politics! - View Single Post - Congress Shall Make NO LAW....
 
Atheistmark said:
Political campaigns should be regulated. If the supreme court erronously decides that this is wrong, we should impeach the fuckers or pass a constitutional amendment, whichever comes first. Someone shouldn't have a million times the speech just because they have a million times the money. That's evil.
Click to expand...

Right on!
 
Dixie said:
So many strawmen, yet none were pointed out, AMAZING!

Again, hardhead... you are attempting to control something you can't! You want to regulate something you have no control over! And ultimately, what it all boils down to, is what do you want to be told....

Joe Politician received $30 million from RainbowPonies.org, a benevolent organization dedicated to the dreams of Utopia.... OR... Joe Politician received $30 million from Kim Sung Dung, a wealthy Chinese businessman. Either way, the $30 million is coming from Kim Sung Dung, to influence Joe Politician into giving him something, the difference is what you are told.
Click to expand...

We can control it. We're gonna pass a law.
 
Taichiliberal said:
There you have it folks.....this dumbass can't even read correctly, as I never stated that Congress can nullify scotus on the 1st amendment!

That's the crux of the dishonest neocon....they don't address what YOU state, they fabricate a text based on what THEY want you to say, then procede on that false basis. I detest liars, and therefore find further honest discussion with such folk like Dixie impossible.

Just Plain Politics! - View Single Post - Congress Shall Make NO LAW....
Click to expand...

Why are you talking like you have an audience being entertained by your stupidity? Does that make you feel like you're making a point here?

You did indeed say: "I never said Congress can "over rule" the SCOTUS, I said they can nullify the ruling." So you can lie and claim you didn't say this all you like, it's right there for your audience to see! ...And there you have it folks!

As I said, Congress CAN'T overturn or nullify the Supreme Court's decisions, other than to pass an amendment to the constitution and then have it ratified by the states. Since this case was ruled on the grounds of the 1st Amendment, that is the one you are wanting to repeal.... GOOD LUCK!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top