Herman Cain said that he would Not appoint a Muslim to any position in his administra

[Uncensored2008]

Uncensored gets more shrill the worse his argument becomes.

So, you're claiming that cabinet appointment are protected by equal employment law? Is that your claim, dummy?

 

[bodecea]

DUMB ASS. I AM A LAWYER WHO WINS CASES BASED ON TITLE VII ALL THE TIME.
Translation: You don't know shit compared to me.

ROFL

Yer just a legend in your own mind.

Where you have gone off the rails (translation: are totally incorrect) is that I'm not saying that Title VII is a religious test. This is about discrimination. Not hiring someone based on their religion is UNLAWFUL AND ACTIONABLE.

Appointment to the cabinet is not hiring. For a lawyer, you sure are ignorant of legal concepts.

Appointment to the cabinet is by design, based on ideological factors, you ignorant slut.

BTW, I am NOT a lawyer - nor do I pretend to be one on the internet.....

Is that a veiled jab that I'm not who I claim to be? I'd be more than happy to prove it, if that's your assertion.

I'm glad you don't claim to be one based on your poor knowledge of the law.

Yes, a cabinet appointment is a job. There's pay involved.

Cabinet officials receive an amount of pay determined by Title 5 of the United States Code. According to 5 U.S.C. § 5312, Cabinet level positions qualify for Level I pay, which amounts to $199,700. Some cabinet-level officials, including the Vice President and the White House Chief of Staff, have their salaries determined differently.

Citation

It must hurt to be pwnd so many times in one day.

It was a HOOT when he tried to use 1600s ENGLISH law to disprove the "No Religious Test" part of Article VI of the Constitution....It was PARTICULARLY funny when he was questioning my intelligence while doing it.

 

[bodecea]

Uncensored gets more shrill the worse his argument becomes.

So, you're claiming that cabinet appointment are protected by equal employment law? Is that your claim, dummy?

Read the Constitution...particularly Article VI.....and remember, Uncensored....that is the US Constitution...not something ENGLISH from the 1600s.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Is that a veiled jab that I'm not who I claim to be?

There is nothing "veiled" about it. It's an open statement that anyone can claim to be anything on the internet.

I'd be more than happy to prove it, if that's your assertion.

If you do, you're a fool. You don't know who I am. Reveal nothing on the internet, if you have any brains.

I'm glad you don't claim to be one based on your poor knowledge of the law.

ROFL

Maybe you are a lawyer, you have no integrity.

Yes, a cabinet appointment is a job. There's pay involved.

What a fucking moron.

So it's your claim that there must be equal consideration, absent ideological or non-job related considerations?

Excuse me while I laugh at you..

BWAHAHAHAHAHA

{The President appoints several levels of Cabinet and agency officers. Usually the appointments are controlled directly through the White House and close to the President. For example, the President appoints the head of each Cabinet level department, such the Secretary of State. But power and politics kick in immediately }

The Appointments Process

Does it hurt to be that stupid? I mean actual, physical pain?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Uncensored gets more shrill the worse his argument becomes.

So, you're claiming that cabinet appointment are protected by equal employment law? Is that your claim, dummy?

Read the Constitution...particularly Article VI.....and remember, Uncensored....that is the US Constitution...not something ENGLISH from the 1600s.

What article again? I think you put the wrong roman numeral up there

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[bodecea]

Is that a veiled jab that I'm not who I claim to be?

There is nothing "veiled" about it. It's an open statement that anyone can claim to be anything on the internet.

I'd be more than happy to prove it, if that's your assertion.

If you do, you're a fool. You don't know who I am. Reveal nothing on the internet, if you have any brains.

I'm glad you don't claim to be one based on your poor knowledge of the law.

ROFL

Maybe you are a lawyer, you have no integrity.

Yes, a cabinet appointment is a job. There's pay involved.

What a fucking moron.

So it's your claim that there must be equal consideration, absent ideological or non-job related considerations?

Excuse me while I laugh at you..

BWAHAHAHAHAHA

{The President appoints several levels of Cabinet and agency officers. Usually the appointments are controlled directly through the White House and close to the President. For example, the President appoints the head of each Cabinet level department, such the Secretary of State. But power and politics kick in immediately }

The Appointments Process

Does it hurt to be that stupid? I mean actual, physical pain?

As I pointed out....Uncensored gets more shrill the more he feels his argument being lost.

 

[bodecea]

So, you're claiming that cabinet appointment are protected by equal employment law? Is that your claim, dummy?

Read the Constitution...particularly Article VI.....and remember, Uncensored....that is the US Constitution...not something ENGLISH from the 1600s.

What article again? I think you put the wrong roman numeral up there

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article VI....the last phrase of the last sentence in that article:

; but no religiouse Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Read the Constitution...particularly Article VI.....and remember, Uncensored....that is the US Constitution...not something ENGLISH from the 1600s.

Uhh, dummy? The prohibition of religious tests was in direct reference to the fact that England had religious tests, the "dead white guys" didn't want the same established here.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Read the Constitution...particularly Article VI.....and remember, Uncensored....that is the US Constitution...not something ENGLISH from the 1600s.

What article again? I think you put the wrong roman numeral up there

Article Six of the United States Constitution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Article VI....the last phrase of the last sentence in that article:

; but no religiouse Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

hmmmmmmm i may just sit and opine on that a bit now.....federalist papers here I come .

I dont think the intent was presidential cabinets but the language sure does fit. I'll get back to you if i find anything noteworthy.

 

[bodecea]

Read the Constitution...particularly Article VI.....and remember, Uncensored....that is the US Constitution...not something ENGLISH from the 1600s.

Uhh, dummy? The prohibition of religious tests was in direct reference to the fact that England had religious tests, the "dead white guys" didn't want the same established here.

Exactly...and that is why to have a politician say that he would apply a religious test...ergo, if you are a Muslim, you are not even considered, is unConstitutional.

 

[Vanquish]

Does it hurt to be that stupid? I mean actual, physical pain?

I've been published in the HILJ...that's Harvard International Law Journal. I wouldn't know.
Why dont you answer that for us?

You've cited to no authority while I have cited to the actual constitution. You lose.

Yet you keep protesting. You must really think the last person who posts "wins" somehow.

 

[Vanquish]

Read the Constitution...particularly Article VI.....and remember, Uncensored....that is the US Constitution...not something ENGLISH from the 1600s.

Uhh, dummy? The prohibition of religious tests was in direct reference to the fact that England had religious tests, the "dead white guys" didn't want the same established here.

And that's exactly what Cain is trying to do!! The common sense of this must be escaping you. People came here to escape religious intolerance...and here he is INSTITUTING IT!!

 

[Uncensored2008]

If uncensored were ever in a position to hire and fire people....you'd probably be makings some new clients.

Izzatrite, dummy?

ROFL

 

[bodecea]

If uncensored were ever in a position to hire and fire people....you'd probably be makings some new clients.

Izzatrite, dummy?

ROFL

Shrill.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Exactly...and that is why to have a politician say that he would apply a religious test...

If someone had, you would have a point - but Cain never said one had to prove they were a Baptist, or a Protestant or even a Christian.

You see dummy, the religious tests are not what Madcow claims them to be. First off, as I already illustrated, they are affirmative - i.e. you demonstrate that you have the proper faith. Secondly, they are specific to elected office. In England, a Catholic couldn't be elected to Parliament while religious tests were enforced. Ellison shows that a Muslim can indeed be elected.

ergo, if you are a Muslim, you are not even considered, is unConstitutional.

Somewhat like with Obama, if you are a capitalist, you are not even considered. Such are the privileges of office. Or with you, if you are a black conservative, you're not even considered....

Nothing "unconstitutional" about it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I've been published in the HILJ...that's Harvard International Law Journal. I wouldn't know.

You must have a hell of an editor, then.

Why dont you answer that for us?

I'm not the one making utterly stupid claims - I have no choice but to defer to you..

You've cited to no authority while I have cited to the actual constitution. You lose.

You have misrepresented the constitution.

Yet you keep protesting.

Protesting? I'm just pointing out that you're full of shit; which you fully know.

You are spewing bullshit for partisan effect.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And that's exactly what Cain is trying to do!!

No, it is not.

Sad that you are too stupid to grasp this....

 

[bodecea]

Exactly...and that is why to have a politician say that he would apply a religious test...

If someone had, you would have a point - but Cain never said one had to prove they were a Baptist, or a Protestant or even a Christian.

You see dummy, the religious tests are not what Madcow claims them to be. First off, as I already illustrated, they are affirmative - i.e. you demonstrate that you have the proper faith. Secondly, they are specific to elected office. In England, a Catholic couldn't be elected to Parliament while religious tests were enforced. Ellison shows that a Muslim can indeed be elected.

ergo, if you are a Muslim, you are not even considered, is unConstitutional.

Somewhat like with Obama, if you are a capitalist, you are not even considered. Such are the privileges of office. Or with you, if you are a black conservative, you're not even considered....

Nothing "unconstitutional" about it.

You realize it is a religious test to say that you will NOT hire or appoint someone to government if they are of a particular religion, right?

 

[Uncensored2008]

You realize it is a religious test to say that you will NOT hire or appoint someone to government if they are of a particular religion, right?

I demonstrated long ago that your claim is false.

 

[bodecea]

And that's exactly what Cain is trying to do!!

No, it is not.

Sad that you are too stupid to grasp this....

shrillness