democrats don't understand what fascism is

Uncensored2008 said:
If you mean the senate alone, say so.
Click to expand...

What's pathetic about you is that the post you responded to SAID the House and Senate:

LV426 said:
You said that they would kill the minority...why did you say that if you didn't think it was true?

Also...True or False, prior to 1837, every single vote in the House and Senate was done along majority lines.
Click to expand...

You chopped the Senate part out of your response because you knew the answer was also going to be majority vote.

This is why I said that you're really bad at posting on the internet.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
There is no "minority rule" you lying little shit. Merely "super majority" thresholds for certain actions.
Click to expand...

Right, like Impeachment or a Constitutional Amendment.

Not for passing basic legislation...all that happened via majority vote from the founding of the country until 1837.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
YOU have never read the Constitution and have utterly no clue what is in the document you and your filthy party seek to end.
Click to expand...

You don't know what you're saying.

You think the Constitution enshrines minority rights to stop any legislation by calling for a 2/3 vote in the Senate to impeach?

How are the two related?
 
LV426 said:
You're the dishonest one because you never show your work, and you throw tantrums anytime someone takes what you wrote and shoves it back into your fat, stupid face.

I quote you in full because you all whine like this whenever I destroy you on these threads.

You're doing exactly what I predicted you would do because I've seen your behavior so many times before from other, stupid people.

So it's not novel or unique or special...it's tedious.
Click to expand...


One thing we have established beyond all doubt in this thread, you're a lying cunt.

You're also a coward - you know full well you can't survive an honest debate - so you cut little out of context snippets in hopes that the hating points you cut and paste from whatever fascist hate site does your thinking for you, can be shoe-horned it.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
{The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.}
Click to expand...

That's for Impeachments ONLY...what was the original rule for every other vote in the Senate?
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Look above, moron.
Click to expand...

So all you were able to identify is Impeachment...and you did a half-assed job there too because you forgot about Constitutional Amendments requiring more than a majority vote.

You weren't able to apply that to every other vote because the Constitution doesn't apply it to every other vote.

So because it requires 2/3 of the vote to Impeach or add a Constitutional Amendment, that every other vote requires 2/3? Why do you think that?
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Here is what I actually posted, you lying little fuck;

{ROFL

You suffer from delusions of relevance, little drone.

Avoid you?

Despite the moronic shit you post being utterly irrelevant, I continue to grant you the courtesy of responding.

You really are not entirely sane, are you?}

THIS is why people ignore you - you're a lying cunt. No one is "running" from you - they just blow liars like you off as not worthy of response.
Click to expand...

Thanks for re-posting your excuses for everyone to see.

You always seem to have an excuse for whenever you don't have an answer.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
You're also a coward - you know full well you can't survive an honest debate - so you cut little out of context snippets in hopes that the hating points you cut and paste from whatever fascist hate site does your thinking for you, can be shoe-horned it.
Click to expand...

Now you're just being a hack and using every single attack against me that I levied against you...only I did it first and didn't copy off the other person.

I quote you in full because you all whine the fake context excuse.

There's no context tricks being played here...you are just THAT fucking terrible.
 
LV426 said:
All that shit was after the fact, and all those people were authoritarians who have more in common with YOU than with me.

After all, you are the one who is arguing against majority rules...and all the authoritarians you listed never had democratic majority rule.

So it turns out that you are the one who needs to learn history, since you lie and fake it here in your JPP safe space.
Click to expand...


Again moron, democracy is simply a form of direct votes, generally absent constitutional protections for minority rights.

And THIS is what has fascists' like you up in arms, the fact that you can't crush minority rights.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Again moron, democracy is simply a form of direct votes, generally absent constitutional protections for minority rights.
Click to expand...

And none of the authoritarians you listed achieved majority power through a democratic vote.

Every single example you gave is of a minority gaining control over the majority, likely through violent means, in order to impose its will.

1/6 was your attempt at that.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
And THIS is what has fascists' like you up in arms, the fact that you can't crush minority rights.
Click to expand...

Where in the Constitution, other than Impeachment and Amendment, does it say majority rules doesn't count?

You fancy yourself some kind of Constitutional expert...so it's time to show your work.

Let's see it!
 
Rightys are able to redefine things and think their new definitions replace the old ones. Other rightys fall in line. But the left and academia are still using the old defs, the real ones. We understand Fascism just fine. However, your new definitions are not acceptable.
 
Nordberg said:
Rightys are able to redefine things and think their new definitions replace the old ones. Other rightys fall in line. But the left and academia are still using the old defs, the real ones. We understand Fascism just fine. However, your new definitions are not acceptable.
Click to expand...


What is it you think has been "redefined?"

You seem to reject reality in favor of pablum.

Benito Mussolini defined what Fascism is - and it is virtually identical to what democrats promote today.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top