Is This An Example Of States Rights?

[The Rabbi]

Plase quote the language of the 14th amendment that says no person may be discriminated against due to color creed etc.

Again, see Section 5 of the 14th Amendment (as I previously stated)!

Which doesnt say anything about restaurants, or black people or race or color or anything like that.
See you get your ass handed to you because you quote things you dont understand. You do that because you're dumb. And ignorant.

Yeah, the Constitution doesn't mention cars either. Does that mean car registrations and drivers licenses are unconstitutional too?

You're just a silly boy.

Sorry, find where the Constitution mentions cars so the federal government can control registrations and licenses. I'll wait.
Stupid, stupid, man.

It doesn't have to mention cars anymore than it had to specifically mention railroads, or steam ships, or even wagons being pulled by a team or horses for that matter since interstate commerce may be involved and the fact that cars can travel across state lines which, of course, is within the purview of federal control. Or haven't you heard of the Commerce Department and/or the Department of Transportation, the latter of which takes it's responsibility seriously when it comes to the interstate transport of goods up to and including hazardous materials. And you're heard of the Interstate road system, haven't you?

Why don't you stop embarrassing yourself? You look like a damn fool.

Me?
You're the one suggesting the federal government requires registration and licensing of cars as authorized by the Constitution. Where is your federally issued car tag? Post a picture or STFU.

 

[Mustang]

Again, see Section 5 of the 14th Amendment (as I previously stated)!

Which doesnt say anything about restaurants, or black people or race or color or anything like that.
See you get your ass handed to you because you quote things you dont understand. You do that because you're dumb. And ignorant.

Yeah, the Constitution doesn't mention cars either. Does that mean car registrations and drivers licenses are unconstitutional too?

You're just a silly boy.

Sorry, find where the Constitution mentions cars so the federal government can control registrations and licenses. I'll wait.
Stupid, stupid, man.

It doesn't have to mention cars anymore than it had to specifically mention railroads, or steam ships, or even wagons being pulled by a team or horses for that matter since interstate commerce may be involved and the fact that cars can travel across state lines which, of course, is within the purview of federal control. Or haven't you heard of the Commerce Department and/or the Department of Transportation, the latter of which takes it's responsibility seriously when it comes to the interstate transport of goods up to and including hazardous materials. And you're heard of the Interstate road system, haven't you?

Why don't you stop embarrassing yourself? You look like a damn fool.

Me?
You're the one suggesting the federal government requires registration and licensing of cars as authorized by the Constitution. Where is your federally issued car tag? Post a picture or STFU.

You need to take a class in reading comprehension because I never said that the federal gov't requires registration and licensing of cars. But they probably could if they wanted to since nothing prohibits it and since almost everyone drives on federal interstate highways and travels from state to state at least occasionally.

But leave it to you to miss the point anyway. Automobiles do NOT have to be specifically mentioned in the Constitution in order for the federal gov't to have a constitutional right to regulate automobiles (which are mass form of transportation, after all). In fact, the feds already do regulate cars when it comes to the manufacture and sale of automobiles.

 

[bripat9643]

So the federal government has no role in telling restaurants whom they must serve.

The Constitution (14th amendment) says that no person my be discriminated against due to color, race etc.

If you throw a black guy out of your restaurant because you don't like black guys, you are violating the Constitution, and the Fed can prosecute you for it.

If you throw out a black guy because he stole the silverware, you are not violating the Constitution, and the Fed govt has no say. But his lawyer will pretend you did it because you didn't like black guys, and will sue you under the 14th amendment in Federal court anyway.

Plase quote the language of the 14th amendment that says no person may be discriminated against due to color creed etc.

Again, see Section 5 of the 14th Amendment (as I previously stated)!

Which doesnt say anything about restaurants, or black people or race or color or anything like that.
See you get your ass handed to you because you quote things you dont understand. You do that because you're dumb. And ignorant.

Yeah, the Constitution doesn't mention cars either. Does that mean car registrations and drivers licenses are unconstitutional too?

You're just a silly boy.

Building cars and issuing driver's licenses isn't something the federal government does, nimrod.

 

[The Rabbi]

Which doesnt say anything about restaurants, or black people or race or color or anything like that.
See you get your ass handed to you because you quote things you dont understand. You do that because you're dumb. And ignorant.

Yeah, the Constitution doesn't mention cars either. Does that mean car registrations and drivers licenses are unconstitutional too?

You're just a silly boy.

Sorry, find where the Constitution mentions cars so the federal government can control registrations and licenses. I'll wait.
Stupid, stupid, man.

It doesn't have to mention cars anymore than it had to specifically mention railroads, or steam ships, or even wagons being pulled by a team or horses for that matter since interstate commerce may be involved and the fact that cars can travel across state lines which, of course, is within the purview of federal control. Or haven't you heard of the Commerce Department and/or the Department of Transportation, the latter of which takes it's responsibility seriously when it comes to the interstate transport of goods up to and including hazardous materials. And you're heard of the Interstate road system, haven't you?

Why don't you stop embarrassing yourself? You look like a damn fool.

Me?
You're the one suggesting the federal government requires registration and licensing of cars as authorized by the Constitution. Where is your federally issued car tag? Post a picture or STFU.

You need to take a class in reading comprehension because I never said that the federal gov't requires registration and licensing of cars. But they probably could if they wanted to since nothing prohibits it and since almost everyone drives on federal interstate highways and travels from state to state at least occasionally.

But leave it to you to miss the point anyway. Automobiles do NOT have to be specifically mentioned in the Constitution in order for the federal gov't to have a constitutional right to regulate automobiles (which are mass form of transportation, after all). In fact, the feds already do regulate cars when it comes to the manufacture and sale of automobiles.

Thats so absurd only an ignoramus could write that.
But anyway, is there anything the federal government could not mandate, control, or regulate?

 

[bripat9643]

Which doesnt say anything about restaurants, or black people or race or color or anything like that.
See you get your ass handed to you because you quote things you dont understand. You do that because you're dumb. And ignorant.

Yeah, the Constitution doesn't mention cars either. Does that mean car registrations and drivers licenses are unconstitutional too?

You're just a silly boy.

Sorry, find where the Constitution mentions cars so the federal government can control registrations and licenses. I'll wait.
Stupid, stupid, man.

It doesn't have to mention cars anymore than it had to specifically mention railroads, or steam ships, or even wagons being pulled by a team or horses for that matter since interstate commerce may be involved and the fact that cars can travel across state lines which, of course, is within the purview of federal control. Or haven't you heard of the Commerce Department and/or the Department of Transportation, the latter of which takes it's responsibility seriously when it comes to the interstate transport of goods up to and including hazardous materials. And you're heard of the Interstate road system, haven't you?

Why don't you stop embarrassing yourself? You look like a damn fool.

Me?
You're the one suggesting the federal government requires registration and licensing of cars as authorized by the Constitution. Where is your federally issued car tag? Post a picture or STFU.

You need to take a class in reading comprehension because I never said that the federal gov't requires registration and licensing of cars. But they probably could if they wanted to since nothing prohibits it and since almost everyone drives on federal interstate highways and travels from state to state at least occasionally.

But leave it to you to miss the point anyway. Automobiles do NOT have to be specifically mentioned in the Constitution in order for the federal gov't to have a constitutional right to regulate automobiles (which are mass form of transportation, after all). In fact, the feds already do regulate cars when it comes to the manufacture and sale of automobiles.

The authority to regulate private businesses does have to be mentioned in the Constitution for the federal government to regulate private business, and there's no language to support such authority.

The federal governmnt does a lot of things the Constitution doesn't actually allow. Congress wipes its ass on the Constitution every day of the week.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Constitution (14th amendment) says that no person my be discriminated against due to color, race etc.

If you throw a black guy out of your restaurant because you don't like black guys, you are violating the Constitution, and the Fed can prosecute you for it.

If you throw out a black guy because he stole the silverware, you are not violating the Constitution, and the Fed govt has no say. But his lawyer will pretend you did it because you didn't like black guys, and will sue you under the 14th amendment in Federal court anyway.

Plase quote the language of the 14th amendment that says no person may be discriminated against due to color creed etc.

Again, see Section 5 of the 14th Amendment (as I previously stated)!

Which doesnt say anything about restaurants, or black people or race or color or anything like that.
See you get your ass handed to you because you quote things you dont understand. You do that because you're dumb. And ignorant.

Yeah, the Constitution doesn't mention cars either. Does that mean car registrations and drivers licenses are unconstitutional too?

You're just a silly boy.

Building cars and issuing driver's licenses isn't something the federal government does, nimrod.

It's a states rights issue. Like marriage. Or divorce. Or adoption. Or everything else the Constitution doesnt specifically mentioon. But this asshole is so cluless he thinks the fed gov can control everything. Hell, he probably wants that.

 

[bripat9643]

Yeah, the Constitution doesn't mention cars either. Does that mean car registrations and drivers licenses are unconstitutional too?

You're just a silly boy.

Sorry, find where the Constitution mentions cars so the federal government can control registrations and licenses. I'll wait.
Stupid, stupid, man.

It doesn't have to mention cars anymore than it had to specifically mention railroads, or steam ships, or even wagons being pulled by a team or horses for that matter since interstate commerce may be involved and the fact that cars can travel across state lines which, of course, is within the purview of federal control. Or haven't you heard of the Commerce Department and/or the Department of Transportation, the latter of which takes it's responsibility seriously when it comes to the interstate transport of goods up to and including hazardous materials. And you're heard of the Interstate road system, haven't you?

Why don't you stop embarrassing yourself? You look like a damn fool.

Me?
You're the one suggesting the federal government requires registration and licensing of cars as authorized by the Constitution. Where is your federally issued car tag? Post a picture or STFU.

You need to take a class in reading comprehension because I never said that the federal gov't requires registration and licensing of cars. But they probably could if they wanted to since nothing prohibits it and since almost everyone drives on federal interstate highways and travels from state to state at least occasionally.

But leave it to you to miss the point anyway. Automobiles do NOT have to be specifically mentioned in the Constitution in order for the federal gov't to have a constitutional right to regulate automobiles (which are mass form of transportation, after all). In fact, the feds already do regulate cars when it comes to the manufacture and sale of automobiles.

Thats so absurd only an ignoramus could write that.
But anyway, is there anything the federal government could not mandate, control, or regulate?

Not according to Mustang and Nazi Pelosi.