Exactly How ‘Supreme’ Is The Court???

[saltydancin]

6. This is the corruption that has seeped into our judiciary:
"We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is."
Charles Evans Hughes.
Why????
The Constitution is written in English.
7. This is how the Left ‘fundamentally transforms’ America:
“They justify this power grab by claiming that the Constitution is a “living, breathing” document. Translated, that means, “When we are in charge, the Constitution means whatever the hell we say it means.” All dressed up in the obligatory legal doublespeak, of course.” The Supreme Court is Destroying National Unity

Sounds as if this "living breathing" document point-counterpoint has been cooperating all along as the communism of liberal Christianity is little more than monetary tabulations, or the bottom line is what the legal death count produces while all else is irrelevant .

I find your post more gibberish and jargon than evincing an ability to articulate a point.

You must get that a lot, huh?

Only from the super egos master race national religion of Islam Christiananality pedophile mentalities engaged in some master plan of homicidal scoiopsychopathic human farming techniques.

The lack of a clear and cogent post is pretty much evidence of a lack of a clear and cogent mind.
Don't you agree?

Your cognitive dissonance exhibits more of a compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance of evidence in lack of acknowledgement where utilizing every form of tyranny over the mind of man clearly substantiates your engaged position.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Marburg V. Madison exposed a flaw. One that needed to be addressed. There was no Judicial Review. You are correct. But... Here is the rub, one was needed. There had to be a final say on issues of law. Congress should have passed an Amendment laying the process out, but they let the Court assume the mantle. By not acting, they endorsed the action. Inaction is a choice. Doing nothing, is action.

There had to be a point where someone decided what the law meant, or how the Constitution would be applied. I’ve often pointed out that the First Amendment for example, does not say. “The Supreme Court shall upon review, find that any laws passed by Congress, and Signed by the President, or approved by a 2/3rd majority of the Congress, shall not abridge Freedom of Speech.” Etc.

It says Congress shall pass no laws. But it doesn’t have a remedy. Like the Ten Commandments, the penalty is apparently left up to God. The Fourth Amendment says that we shall be secure in our person and papers free from Unreasonable Search. Ok. What is unreasonable? Again, no one is listed as to decide what is, and is not unreasonable If it was simply left to the judge hearing the case, then what? If you get a right wing Judge, an Unreasonable Search might never exist. If you get a left wing judge, no search is ever reasonable. And those individual rulings would stand, unchallengeable. There being no where to take the question for an answer for a standardized opinion applicable for all.

So a point where the final binding answer would be found was needed. A point where the Constituional prohibition against Congress passing a law prohibiting would be enforced. Do I agree with all their decisions? No. But I voted for Gore, and shouted Coward at the computer when Bush signed the Campaign Finance Reform law. Why?

Bush signed it and said he believed it was Unconstitutional. If he honestly believed it. He should not have passed the buck to the Supreme Court. But he did. I don’t have to agree with your stated beliefs, but I can admire someone who stands by those I don’t agree with. I did not agree with Alan Colmes on many issues. But I respected him tremendously. I respected him because he was consistent in his views no matter if it was the left or right doing the dumb and previously disapproved thing. He did not castigate the Right for doing things while giving the left a pass. I respected that.

Like the Ten Commandments, the Bill of Rights was intended to be a guide, a general principle we could all agree upon. The problem is, we all define those things differently. Many people believe that there is no such thing as cruel and unusual. Any punishment the baddie gets is not only warranted, but totally acceptable. The Rack is too good for them.

On the other hand, there are those who think any incarceration is cruel and unusual. Would you like that decision made on a case by case basis with only the whim of the Judge as the deciding factor? I mean, you could go into court for a traffic ticket and be sentenced to hard labor for months or years, because the Judge didn’t get any the night before, and no where could you appeal that ruling as inappropriate to the crime.

One was not provided, and one was desperately needed. Congress accepted it when they did not legislate a fix.

"There had to be a point where someone decided what the law meant, or how the Constitution would be applied."

Applied???
The Constitution is written in English.

The intention was for a Supreme Court to show how the languge of the Constitution either allowed a law, or did not.

If not....the Supreme Court has no business adjudicating....and the state courts had that right. That's federalism.




"...decision made on a case by case basis with only the whim of the Judge as the deciding factor?"
That's the situation we have currently.



Elected executives should simply overrule any Supreme Court decision not consistent with the will of the people:
Where does the Constitution state that the Supreme Court decision must be the final word?????



“Jefferson: to “consider the judges the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions [is] a very dangerous doctrine indeed and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.”

Jackson: “The opinion of the judges has no more authority over Congress than the opinion of Congress has over the judges, and on that point the President is independent of both.”

Lincoln: “f the policy of the government upon vital questions affecting the whole people is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court . . . the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.”

Franklin Roosevelt: Proposed speech stating that if the Supreme Court should invalidate a certain New Deal measure, he would not “stand idly by and... permit the decision of the Supreme Court to be carried through to its logical inescapable conclusion.” Quoted in Kathleen M. Sullivan et al., “Constitutional Law,” pg. 20– 24 (15 ed., 2004).



It is well past time to rein in this loose cannon.

Again, yes, it was sort of needed. Let’s take an easy one. Miranda. Prior to Miranda, we had the right to remain silent. Since Miranda, not so much, but we can get to that in a moment. Miranda created a right. That right that was created, was the duty of police, when questioning someone, to inform that person that they did in fact have the rights to an attorney, and to remain silent. Yes, we had that right before, but given the quality of education through history, people either may not know about it, or refuse to allow it.

Even today, those rights are denied people. The right to remain silent, or to stop answering questions at any time. Now, that right is proof of your guilt. SCOTUS ruling: Silence can be evidence as guilt

I disagree with that. It could also be that the decision to stop answering questions is the realization that the police are trying to make it look like you are guilty. The the right to an attorney has also been shat upon. The Supreme Court deciding that the defendant asking for a “Lawyer Dog.” Was not the use of the word Dog as man, dude, pal, buddy or whatever. But instead the literal request of a canine who was admitted to the BAR.

Those cases should have been decided the other way. But as Miranda established a new right, most cases erode your existing rights. The exceptions to the rights, the unreasonable search and seizure definition.

Without that adjudication ability however, then what those terms mean differs from court to court, judge to judge, and person to person. Imagine the state of American Police without clear examples of what is allowed, and what is not. In one case, the police can conduct a search for a weapon and find something else, and have the evidence admitted, in the next case, nearly identical, the search would be thrown out.

In one case the trial Judge decides that because the police told you that you could not leave you were merely detained while they asked questions for a report. You were not under arrest, so you were not entitled to the rights including to remain silent. In the next court room over, the police essentially placed you under arrest when the blue lights came on to stop you for failure to signal a lane change. The first words out of the officers mouth should have been to inform the defendant that he was under arrest. In the very next court room, a case is thrown out because the police arrested a man for a crime, but he was not indicted for that crime by a Grand Jury before hand.

So to adjudicate those cases you have to create rights in the effort to protect the existing rights. Where do property rights end? Do I have a right to burn toxic chemicals on my property? Does the government have the right to tell me not to do it? Without those rights established, or yet another exception, I wouldn’t know, and neither would you.

As for me, I believe the exceptions to the clearly stated rights should be few, and extreme. The right to freedom of speech should trump everything except perhaps immediate public danger, the classic yelling fire in the theater scenario. Cruel and Unusual should trump everything including the stupid assed ticking time bomb scenario.

The silence as an admission of guilt should never have been allowed. Otherwise the police could just stand there shouting various crimes at you, and your inability to answer them all would be an admission of guilt. Then again, I believe that a lot of things that are allowed as exceptions, should never have been.

Interesting post.....thank you.



But I really would rather continuing to hammer in the fact that the Supreme Court has stolen.....stolen.....powers that the Constitution does not award them.


1. The Constitution is the only set of laws that the people of this nation have agreed to be governed by. The Founders knew that, by man's nature, aggrandizement would always be sought; this included the courts. So, March 4, 1794, Congress passed the 11th amendment:
"The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State."

a. You see, in 1792, Virginia had refused to respond to the Court at all (Grayson, et. al. v. Virginia) (Page 26 of 44) - The Impact of State Sovereign Immunity: A Case Study authored by Shortell, Christopher.





2. Remember, the original conception for our government was federalism, "... a system of government in which sovereignty is constitutionally divided between a central governing authority and constituent political units (such as states or provinces).
Federalism is a system based upon democratic rules and institutions in which the power to govern is shared between national and provincial/state governments,..." Federalism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As they own the schools and the media, the simpleminded have been trained to foam at the mouth whenever they hear the phrase "states rights."

a. Again: the understanding of the colonies that ratified the Constitution was one in which they retained a degree of sovereignty.




3. But, in 1793, the Supreme Court claimed jurisdiction over a sovereign state (Chisholm v. Georgia).

a. The court claimed that the preamble referred to the desires "to establish justice" and "to ensure domestic tranquility," and this gave the court the right to resolve any disputes. Justice Wilson went right for the throat: "To the Constitution of the United States the term SOVEREIGN, is totally unknown."
Chisholm v. Georgia | Natural Law, Natural Rights, and American Constitutionalism

4. This was not what the Federalists had argued when the Constitution was being debated.
The agreement was that federal courts could hear such suits when they had been initiated by the states. And that is exactly what is stated in the 11th amendment: federal court's jurisdiction had to be read narrowly!

a. The 11th amendment explicitly denies the federal courts jurisdiction over lawsuits "prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State."

b. The issue was about exactly how much authority had been granted to the federal courts through the Constitution. The purpose of this amendment was to limit federal courts to the strict confines of article III.
"The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Constitution,"p.56, Kevin R. C. Gutzman





5. In 1801, John Marshall was appointed Chief Justice, and he consistently tried to reduce any limits on federal power. Case in point, in the 1821 decision in Cohens v. Virginia, he found that the 11th amendment only banned suits against states that were initiated in federal courts.

Nonsense: this was not the intent of the amendment, but rather an intent to extend the jurisdiction of the federal courts and the federal government.





6. Marshall represents a pivotal point in the pirating of power by the federal government.
Consider the Judiciary act of 1789, in which section 25 hands powers to the court: " One of the most controversial provisions of the act, Section 25, granted the Supreme Court jurisdiction to hear appeals of decisions from the high courts of the states when those decisions involved questions of the constitutionality of state or federal laws or authorities." History of the Federal Judiciary

a. Had Marshall read the amendment through the prism of it's intended purpose, how would he have viewed section 25?
Yup: unconstitutional.





John Marshall, as is true of most modern judges, expressed his hostility toward limitations of federal power.



And, living under a cloak of stupidity, far too many folks imagine the the clear language of a law is unintelligible until some anointed one in a black robe tells them what is says.

The time is long past to smack the judges back into the role they were assigned.

 

[PoliticalChic]

6. This is the corruption that has seeped into our judiciary:
"We are under a Constitution, but the Constitution is what the judges say it is."
Charles Evans Hughes.
Why????
The Constitution is written in English.
7. This is how the Left ‘fundamentally transforms’ America:
“They justify this power grab by claiming that the Constitution is a “living, breathing” document. Translated, that means, “When we are in charge, the Constitution means whatever the hell we say it means.” All dressed up in the obligatory legal doublespeak, of course.” The Supreme Court is Destroying National Unity

Sounds as if this "living breathing" document point-counterpoint has been cooperating all along as the communism of liberal Christianity is little more than monetary tabulations, or the bottom line is what the legal death count produces while all else is irrelevant .

I find your post more gibberish and jargon than evincing an ability to articulate a point.

You must get that a lot, huh?

Only from the super egos master race national religion of Islam Christiananality pedophile mentalities engaged in some master plan of homicidal scoiopsychopathic human farming techniques.

The lack of a clear and cogent post is pretty much evidence of a lack of a clear and cogent mind.
Don't you agree?

Your cognitive dissonance exhibits more of a compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance of evidence in lack of acknowledgement where utilizing every form of tyranny over the mind of man clearly substantiates your engaged position.

Are you serious, Clark???
Outwardly, you appear to be a normal person, in the same way that a shaken soda can looks until you pop it open.

 

[saltydancin]

Sounds as if this "living breathing" document point-counterpoint has been cooperating all along as the communism of liberal Christianity is little more than monetary tabulations, or the bottom line is what the legal death count produces while all else is irrelevant .

I find your post more gibberish and jargon than evincing an ability to articulate a point.

You must get that a lot, huh?

Only from the super egos master race national religion of Islam Christiananality pedophile mentalities engaged in some master plan of homicidal scoiopsychopathic human farming techniques.

The lack of a clear and cogent post is pretty much evidence of a lack of a clear and cogent mind.
Don't you agree?

Your cognitive dissonance exhibits more of a compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance of evidence in lack of acknowledgement where utilizing every form of tyranny over the mind of man clearly substantiates your engaged position.

Are you serious, Clark???
Outwardly, you appear to be a normal person, in the same way that a shaken soda can looks until you pop it open.

Subconsciously, in that SCOTUS Rehnquist supreme immaculate drug trafficking conception democide for one who had not been born yet, much less even conceived; this national religion of being cross conditioned way beyond therapy for an Islam slavery pedophilia trade as Christ existed before God for an ethnic cleansing diatribe tautology is about as normal as one nation under God with equal justice under law federal perjury gets.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I find your post more gibberish and jargon than evincing an ability to articulate a point.

You must get that a lot, huh?

Only from the super egos master race national religion of Islam Christiananality pedophile mentalities engaged in some master plan of homicidal scoiopsychopathic human farming techniques.

The lack of a clear and cogent post is pretty much evidence of a lack of a clear and cogent mind.
Don't you agree?

Your cognitive dissonance exhibits more of a compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance of evidence in lack of acknowledgement where utilizing every form of tyranny over the mind of man clearly substantiates your engaged position.

Are you serious, Clark???
Outwardly, you appear to be a normal person, in the same way that a shaken soda can looks until you pop it open.

Subconsciously, in that SCOTUS Rehnquist supreme immaculate drug trafficking conception democide for one who had not been born yet, much less even conceived; this national religion of being cross conditioned way beyond therapy for an Islam slavery pedophilia trade as Christ existed before God for an ethnic cleansing diatribe tautology is about as normal as one nation under God with equal justice under law federal perjury gets.

If I throw you a going away party......

....would you?

 

[saltydancin]

That

Only from the super egos master race national religion of Islam Christiananality pedophile mentalities engaged in some master plan of homicidal scoiopsychopathic human farming techniques.

The lack of a clear and cogent post is pretty much evidence of a lack of a clear and cogent mind.
Don't you agree?

Your cognitive dissonance exhibits more of a compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance of evidence in lack of acknowledgement where utilizing every form of tyranny over the mind of man clearly substantiates your engaged position.

Are you serious, Clark???
Outwardly, you appear to be a normal person, in the same way that a shaken soda can looks until you pop it open.

Subconsciously, in that SCOTUS Rehnquist supreme immaculate drug trafficking conception democide for one who had not been born yet, much less even conceived; this national religion of being cross conditioned way beyond therapy for an Islam slavery pedophilia trade as Christ existed before God for an ethnic cleansing diatribe tautology is about as normal as one nation under God with equal justice under law federal perjury gets.

If I throw you a going away party......

....would you?

In the Christian Nation formerly known as the USA with Nazington, Drugs of Christianity replacing Washington, D.C.; that supreme swastika up Uranus court of lynching enforcement already has thrown a party for the past 40 years being chic......

 

[PoliticalChic]

That

The lack of a clear and cogent post is pretty much evidence of a lack of a clear and cogent mind.
Don't you agree?

Your cognitive dissonance exhibits more of a compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance of evidence in lack of acknowledgement where utilizing every form of tyranny over the mind of man clearly substantiates your engaged position.

Are you serious, Clark???
Outwardly, you appear to be a normal person, in the same way that a shaken soda can looks until you pop it open.

Subconsciously, in that SCOTUS Rehnquist supreme immaculate drug trafficking conception democide for one who had not been born yet, much less even conceived; this national religion of being cross conditioned way beyond therapy for an Islam slavery pedophilia trade as Christ existed before God for an ethnic cleansing diatribe tautology is about as normal as one nation under God with equal justice under law federal perjury gets.

If I throw you a going away party......

....would you?

In the Christian Nation formerly known as the USA with Nazington, Drugs of Christianity replacing Washington, D.C.; that supreme swastika up Uranus court of lynching enforcement already has thrown a party for the past 40 years being chic......

C'mon, now.....the truth: do you form your posts by tossing Scrabble tiles our of that little velvet pouch?

 

[saltydancin]

That

Your cognitive dissonance exhibits more of a compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance of evidence in lack of acknowledgement where utilizing every form of tyranny over the mind of man clearly substantiates your engaged position.

Are you serious, Clark???
Outwardly, you appear to be a normal person, in the same way that a shaken soda can looks until you pop it open.

Subconsciously, in that SCOTUS Rehnquist supreme immaculate drug trafficking conception democide for one who had not been born yet, much less even conceived; this national religion of being cross conditioned way beyond therapy for an Islam slavery pedophilia trade as Christ existed before God for an ethnic cleansing diatribe tautology is about as normal as one nation under God with equal justice under law federal perjury gets.

If I throw you a going away party......

....would you?

In the Christian Nation formerly known as the USA with Nazington, Drugs of Christianity replacing Washington, D.C.; that supreme swastika up Uranus court of lynching enforcement already has thrown a party for the past 40 years being chic......

C'mon, now.....the truth: do you form your posts by tossing Scrabble tiles our of that little velvet pouch?

Party on Garth & Wayne...…!

 

[saltydancin]

Only from the super egos master race national religion of Islam Christiananality pedophile mentalities engaged in some master plan of homicidal scoiopsychopathic human farming techniques.

The lack of a clear and cogent post is pretty much evidence of a lack of a clear and cogent mind.
Don't you agree?

Your cognitive dissonance exhibits more of a compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance of evidence in lack of acknowledgement where utilizing every form of tyranny over the mind of man clearly substantiates your engaged position.

Are you serious, Clark???
Outwardly, you appear to be a normal person, in the same way that a shaken soda can looks until you pop it open.

Subconsciously, in that SCOTUS Rehnquist supreme immaculate drug trafficking conception democide for one who had not been born yet, much less even conceived; this national religion of being cross conditioned way beyond therapy for an Islam slavery pedophilia trade as Christ existed before God for an ethnic cleansing diatribe tautology is about as normal as one nation under God with equal justice under law federal perjury gets.

If I throw you a going away party......

....would you?

Getting all those thieving US Constitution - old glory arsonists together to continue to party protecting & serving a supreme swastika up Uranus court ought to be a well attended going away jihad crusade further throwing the USA ...….

 

[saltydancin]

Only from the super egos master race national religion of Islam Christiananality pedophile mentalities engaged in some master plan of homicidal scoiopsychopathic human farming techniques.

The lack of a clear and cogent post is pretty much evidence of a lack of a clear and cogent mind.
Don't you agree?

Your cognitive dissonance exhibits more of a compulsive-obsessive avoidance-acceptance of evidence in lack of acknowledgement where utilizing every form of tyranny over the mind of man clearly substantiates your engaged position.

Are you serious, Clark???
Outwardly, you appear to be a normal person, in the same way that a shaken soda can looks until you pop it open.

Subconsciously, in that SCOTUS Rehnquist supreme immaculate drug trafficking conception democide for one who had not been born yet, much less even conceived; this national religion of being cross conditioned way beyond therapy for an Islam slavery pedophilia trade as Christ existed before God for an ethnic cleansing diatribe tautology is about as normal as one nation under God with equal justice under law federal perjury gets.

If I throw you a going away party......

....would you?

Guessing I missed the party again, but again missing Federal Lynching churchstate of hate KKK cops protecting Arab terrorists that threatened POTUS & to nuke Temple Mount would be supreme in a supreme swastika up Uranus national religion court of thieving US Constitution - old glory arsonists.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

So, it only takes 5 people to over-rule the Constitution and fundamentally transform America .......

That sucks

Me thinks that today there should be 109 "justices", in proportion to the increase in population.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So, it only takes 5 people to over-rule the Constitution and fundamentally transform America .......

That sucks

Me thinks that today there should be 109 "justices", in proportion to the increase in population.

No, Basic.....the answer is to treat the Supreme Court decisions the same way red and green lights are treated in Rome.....

....as merely a suggestion.

 

[saltydancin]

So, it only takes 5 people to over-rule the Constitution and fundamentally transform America .......

That sucks

Me thinks that today there should be 109 "justices", in proportion to the increase in population.

No, Basic.....the answer is to treat the Supreme Court decisions the same way red and green lights are treated in Rome.....

....as merely a suggestion.

Never been out of the continental 48, so have no idea how red & green lights are treated in Rome; but with this Christian Nation national religion decision of "serve the Pope or die", guessing it's always treated in Rome as merely Christmas .

 

[PoliticalChic]

So, it only takes 5 people to over-rule the Constitution and fundamentally transform America .......

That sucks

Me thinks that today there should be 109 "justices", in proportion to the increase in population.

No, Basic.....the answer is to treat the Supreme Court decisions the same way red and green lights are treated in Rome.....

....as merely a suggestion.

Never been out of the continental 48, so have no idea how red & green lights are treated in Rome; but with this Christian Nation national religion decision of "serve the Pope or die", guessing it's always treated in Rome as merely Christmas .

I'm really startin' to worry, now....

Your posts are actually sounding like English!


I thought I'd need a lobotomy to understand your wavelength.




Oh....and in Rome, the world's worst drivers....they pay no attention to the lights.

 

[saltydancin]

So, it only takes 5 people to over-rule the Constitution and fundamentally transform America .......

That sucks

Me thinks that today there should be 109 "justices", in proportion to the increase in population.

No, Basic.....the answer is to treat the Supreme Court decisions the same way red and green lights are treated in Rome.....

....as merely a suggestion.

Never been out of the continental 48, so have no idea how red & green lights are treated in Rome; but with this Christian Nation national religion decision of "serve the Pope or die", guessing it's always treated in Rome as merely Christmas .

I'm really startin' to worry, now....

Your posts are actually sounding like English!


I thought I'd need a lobotomy to understand your wavelength.




Oh....and in Rome, the world's worst drivers....they pay no attention to the lights.

Looks as if they in Rome pay no attention to lights like SCOTUS pays no attention any evidence contrary to the national religion protocol of an Islamidiotocracy Christian Nation; which waves people off.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So, it only takes 5 people to over-rule the Constitution and fundamentally transform America .......

That sucks

Me thinks that today there should be 109 "justices", in proportion to the increase in population.

No, Basic.....the answer is to treat the Supreme Court decisions the same way red and green lights are treated in Rome.....

....as merely a suggestion.

Never been out of the continental 48, so have no idea how red & green lights are treated in Rome; but with this Christian Nation national religion decision of "serve the Pope or die", guessing it's always treated in Rome as merely Christmas .

I'm really startin' to worry, now....

Your posts are actually sounding like English!


I thought I'd need a lobotomy to understand your wavelength.




Oh....and in Rome, the world's worst drivers....they pay no attention to the lights.

Looks as if they in Rome pay no attention to lights like SCOTUS pays no attention any evidence contrary to the national religion protocol of an Islamidiotocracy Christian Nation; which waves people off.

Hard to cut through that fog of your posts...but this nation has always been one based on Judeo-Christian tradition.

Don't let the recent cryto-Islamist Obama fool you with this sort of sophistry:

'Islam has been Woven into the Fabric of our Country Since its Founding'

 

[saltydancin]

So, it only takes 5 people to over-rule the Constitution and fundamentally transform America .......

That sucks

Me thinks that today there should be 109 "justices", in proportion to the increase in population.

No, Basic.....the answer is to treat the Supreme Court decisions the same way red and green lights are treated in Rome.....

....as merely a suggestion.

Never been out of the continental 48, so have no idea how red & green lights are treated in Rome; but with this Christian Nation national religion decision of "serve the Pope or die", guessing it's always treated in Rome as merely Christmas .

I'm really startin' to worry, now....

Your posts are actually sounding like English!


I thought I'd need a lobotomy to understand your wavelength.




Oh....and in Rome, the world's worst drivers....they pay no attention to the lights.

Looks as if they in Rome pay no attention to lights like SCOTUS pays no attention any evidence contrary to the national religion protocol of an Islamidiotocracy Christian Nation; which waves people off.

Hard to cut through that fog of your posts...but this nation has always been one based on Judeo-Christian tradition.
Don't let the recent cryto-Islamist Obama fool you with this sort of sophistry:
'Islam has been Woven into the Fabric of our Country Since its Founding'

Wouldn't even bother with O'bummer & the Islamidiotocracy act like Mr Ed...….maybe as nearly 20 years later some source of truth M.A.G.A. scheme after the Federal Lynching churchstate of hate in protecting Arab terrorists, who in all statistical probability were training flying carpets for Islam that threatened POTUS & to nuke Temple Mount to protect & serve thieving US Constitution arsonists; might as well be from a talking horse as much as any liberal or conservative republican or democratic character source.

 

[saltydancin]

I'm really startin' to worry, now....
Your posts are actually sounding like English!
I thought I'd need a lobotomy to understand your wavelength
Hard to cut through that fog of your posts...but this nation has always been one based on Judeo-Christian tradition.
Don't let the recent cryto-Islamist Obama fool you with this sort of sophistry:
'Islam has been Woven into the Fabric of our Country Since its Founding'

This Christian Nation in being liberal & Christian at the same time certainly has discovered a schizoid spacetime occupation with it's national religion of KKK churchstate of hate lynching enforcement protecting & serving Arab terrorists that threatened POTUS & to nuke Temple Mount prior to 9/11 in order for their second coming jihad crusade of thieving US Constitution - old glory arsonists in making a Nazington, Drugs of Christianity swastika up Uranus court to be supreme in it's Islamidiotocracy more perfect union of liberal Islam Christiananality pedophile mentalities.​

 

[saltydancin]

.

Hard to cut through that fog of your posts...but this nation has always been one based on Judeo-Christian tradition.
Don't let the recent cryto-Islamist Obama fool you with this sort of sophistry:
'Islam has been Woven into the Fabric of our Country Since its Founding'

Apparently the Islam-Christian tradition has replaced if it hasn't been the foundation all along......

 

[PoliticalChic]

.

Hard to cut through that fog of your posts...but this nation has always been one based on Judeo-Christian tradition.
Don't let the recent cryto-Islamist Obama fool you with this sort of sophistry:
'Islam has been Woven into the Fabric of our Country Since its Founding'

Apparently the Islam-Christian tradition has replaced if it hasn't been the foundation all along......

There is no such thing as "the Islam-Christian tradition."