NRA to endorse Harry Reid?

[rightwinger]

The NRA: Endorsing Harry Reid? - The Week

The National Rifle Association, a staunch defender of Second Amendment rights, tends to be politically aligned with conservatives and the GOP. But the group is reportedly "leaning towards" endorsing Senate majority leader Harry Reid — a pro-gun rights Democrat — in his reelection bid against GOP opponent Sharron Angle, and many conservatives are accusing it of selling out.

 

[Harry Dresden]

The NRA: Endorsing Harry Reid? - The Week

The National Rifle Association, a staunch defender of Second Amendment rights, tends to be politically aligned with conservatives and the GOP. But the group is reportedly "leaning towards" endorsing Senate majority leader Harry Reid — a pro-gun rights Democrat — in his reelection bid against GOP opponent Sharron Angle, and many conservatives are accusing it of selling out.

hey their thing is the 2nd ammendment....if Reid stands up for it and Angle doesnt.....fuck Angle....

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

If Harry Reid has a reliable track record in standing up and protecting the Second Amendment then I don't see any reason why he shouldn't get their endorsement, unless they believe that Angle would be even more reliable.

Interestingly though, take a look at who on the Supreme Court ruled against the Second Amendment guaranteeing an individual right to bear arms just a few weeks ago. The three Democrats and the one just as leftist Republican. Are those the kind of judges that Reid has and will support?

 

[VaYank5150]

The NRA: Endorsing Harry Reid? - The Week

The National Rifle Association, a staunch defender of Second Amendment rights, tends to be politically aligned with conservatives and the GOP. But the group is reportedly "leaning towards" endorsing Senate majority leader Harry Reid — a pro-gun rights Democrat — in his reelection bid against GOP opponent Sharron Angle, and many conservatives are accusing it of selling out.

hey their thing is the 2nd ammendment....if Reid stands up for it and Angle doesnt.....fuck Angle....

Since Angle has been dodging the media for weeks now, how does anyone know WHERE she stands on the 2nd Amendment?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Since Angle has been dodging the media for weeks now, how does anyone know WHERE she stands on the 2nd Amendment?

It's a safe assumption that she is a strong supporter of it.

 

[VaYank5150]

Since Angle has been dodging the media for weeks now, how does anyone know WHERE she stands on the 2nd Amendment?

It's a safe assumption that she is a strong supporter of it.

So, what other assumptions will the voters be forced to make? Is it safe to assume she still supports banning alcohol? Does she still support elimintaing the Department of Education?

 

[ConHog]

Since Angle has been dodging the media for weeks now, how does anyone know WHERE she stands on the 2nd Amendment?

It's a safe assumption that she is a strong supporter of it.

So, what other assumptions will the voters be forced to make? Is it safe to assume she still supports banning alcohol? Does she still support elimintaing the Department of Education?

Hey, not taking a public stand on any issue worked for Obama in his election bid.

 

[rightwinger]

It's a safe assumption that she is a strong supporter of it.

So, what other assumptions will the voters be forced to make? Is it safe to assume she still supports banning alcohol? Does she still support elimintaing the Department of Education?

Hey, not taking a public stand on any issue worked for Obama in his election bid.

Sorry to hear you missed the entirety of the last election...

Hope you are feeling better

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Since Angle has been dodging the media for weeks now, how does anyone know WHERE she stands on the 2nd Amendment?

It's a safe assumption that she is a strong supporter of it.

So, what other assumptions will the voters be forced to make? Is it safe to assume she still supports banning alcohol? Does she still support elimintaing the Department of Education?

Name a staunch conservative who isn't supportive of the Second Amendment. If you're that dense that's your problem, not mine.

As for eliminating alcohol or the Dept of Education, neither one is going to happen so who give a shit. The Dept of Ed should be eliminated anyway. The Federal government has no Constitutional authority to be involved in education.

 

[VaYank5150]

It's a safe assumption that she is a strong supporter of it.

So, what other assumptions will the voters be forced to make? Is it safe to assume she still supports banning alcohol? Does she still support elimintaing the Department of Education?

Name a staunch conservative who isn't supportive of the Second Amendment. If you're that dense that's your problem, not mine.

As for eliminating alcohol or the Dept of Education, neither one is going to happen so who give a shit. The Dept of Ed should be eliminated anyway. The Federal government has no Constitutional authority to be involved in education.

This is true. I cannot wait to see what happens after the Fed stops feeding money to the public schools systems and the states have to actually pay for ALL that is required.

 

[rightwinger]

It's a safe assumption that she is a strong supporter of it.

So, what other assumptions will the voters be forced to make? Is it safe to assume she still supports banning alcohol? Does she still support elimintaing the Department of Education?

Name a staunch conservative who isn't supportive of the Second Amendment. If you're that dense that's your problem, not mine.

As for eliminating alcohol or the Dept of Education, neither one is going to happen so who give a shit. The Dept of Ed should be eliminated anyway. The Federal government has no Constitutional authority to be involved in education.

What makes you think the federal government has no authority to be involved in education? Is it your opinion or can you site a legal finding?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

What makes you think the federal government has no authority to be involved in education? Is it your opinion or can you site a legal finding?

It's called the Constitution of the United States. Try reading it some time.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

This is true. I cannot wait to see what happens after the Fed stops feeding money to the public schools systems and the states have to actually pay for ALL that is required.

I imagine it will be exactly the same as before the Feds started giving money. The Dept of Education was created by Jimmy Carter. It's only slightly older than 30 years and since it's conception there has been a steady decline in the quality of public schools. Furthermore, the US spends more money on public education per student than any other country in the world and we have some of the worst results, so as far as I can tell, cutting Federal funding certainly isn't going to make things any worse.

 

[Brubricker]

What makes you think the federal government has no authority to be involved in education? Is it your opinion or can you site a legal finding?

It's called the Constitution of the United States. Try reading it some time.

The education powers reserved to the states are not hindered in any way by the existence of the Dept. of Education. Each state retains 100% full control over its schools. No part of the Dept. of Education inhibits that control. You may not like that the department exists but there is not one word in the Constitution that prohibits it from existing.

 

[CMike]

The NRA: Endorsing Harry Reid? - The Week

The National Rifle Association, a staunch defender of Second Amendment rights, tends to be politically aligned with conservatives and the GOP. But the group is reportedly "leaning towards" endorsing Senate majority leader Harry Reid — a pro-gun rights Democrat — in his reelection bid against GOP opponent Sharron Angle, and many conservatives are accusing it of selling out.

"reportedly" By whom?

"leaning towards" Says whom?

Sewers are dangerous for the mind.

 

[rightwinger]

What makes you think the federal government has no authority to be involved in education? Is it your opinion or can you site a legal finding?

It's called the Constitution of the United States. Try reading it some time.

Can you show me where the Constitution prohibits the Federal Government from being involved in Education? General Welfare clause allows them to do what is necessary for the good of the people.

Show case law that prohibits the Dept of Education....if it is unconstitutional as you say, there must be tons of cases prohibitung Federal involvement

 

[CMike]

What makes you think the federal government has no authority to be involved in education? Is it your opinion or can you site a legal finding?

It's called the Constitution of the United States. Try reading it some time.

Can you show me where the Constitution prohibits the Federal Government from being involved in Education? General Welfare clause allows them to do what is necessary for the good of the people.

Show case law that prohibits the Dept of Education....if it is unconstitutional as you say, there must be tons of cases prohibitung Federal involvement

No it doesn't SewerBoy. If it did, it wouldn't have said that the all powers not designated to the federal government belongs to the states.

It would have said that the federal government can do whatever the fuck they want about anything.

It didn't say that. Did it?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Can you show me where the Constitution prohibits the Federal Government from being involved in Education?

I don't have to. You've got it backwards and perhaps that's your problem. The Constitution doesn't say what the Feds can't do, it says what they can do so if it doesn't say they can do it, they can't do it. It's really not that hard to understand.

This discussion has been had with you multiple times with multiple people and I'm not going to waste my time rehashing it with you again. If you want to wallow in your own ignorance that's your privilege.

 

[ConHog]

What makes you think the federal government has no authority to be involved in education? Is it your opinion or can you site a legal finding?

It's called the Constitution of the United States. Try reading it some time.

Can you show me where the Constitution prohibits the Federal Government from being involved in Education? General Welfare clause allows them to do what is necessary for the good of the people.

Show case law that prohibits the Dept of Education....if it is unconstitutional as you say, there must be tons of cases prohibitung Federal involvement

Nice try, but no.

Here's the man himself talking about said clause

Thomas Jefferson explained the latter general welfare clause for the United States: “[T]he laying of taxes is the power, and the general welfare the purpose for which the power is to be exercised. They [Congress] are not to lay taxes ad libitum for any purpose they please; but only to pay the debts or provide for the welfare of the Union. In like manner, they are not to do anything they please to provide for the general welfare, but only to lay taxes for that purpose.”

Want more?

In 1824 Chief Justice John Marshall described in obiter dictum a further limit on the General Welfare Clause in Gibbons v. Ogden: "Congress is authorized to lay and collect taxes, &c. to pay the debts and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States. ... Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States."

Prior to 1936, the United States Supreme Court had imposed a narrow interpretation on the Clause, as demonstrated by the holding in Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co., in which a tax on child labor was an impermissible attempt to regulate commerce beyond that Court's equally narrow interpretation of the Commerce Clause. This narrow view was later overturned in United States v. Butler. There, the Court agreed with Associate Justice Joseph Story's construction in Story's 1833 Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States. Story had concluded that the General Welfare Clause was not a general grant of legislative power, but also dismissed Madison's narrow construction requiring its use be dependent upon the other enumerated powers. Consequently, the Supreme Court held the power to tax and spend is an independent power and that the General Welfare Clause gives Congress power it might not derive anywhere else. However, the Court did limit the power to spending for matters affecting only the national welfare.

Shortly after Butler, in Helvering v. Davis,[14] the Supreme Court interpreted the clause even more expansively, conferring upon Congress a plenary power to impose taxes and to spend money for the general welfare subject almost entirely to its own discretion. Even more recently, the Court has included the power to indirectly coerce the states into adopting national standards by threatening to withhold federal funds in South Dakota v. Dole. To date, the Hamiltonian view of the General Welfare Clause predominates in case law.

So, until the progressive retards infected the system. The correct interpretation was used.

 

[Gunny]

The NRA: Endorsing Harry Reid? - The Week

The National Rifle Association, a staunch defender of Second Amendment rights, tends to be politically aligned with conservatives and the GOP. But the group is reportedly "leaning towards" endorsing Senate majority leader Harry Reid — a pro-gun rights Democrat — in his reelection bid against GOP opponent Sharron Angle, and many conservatives are accusing it of selling out.

Maybe they need to grow a brain? The collective vote is what matters, not 1 Dem. Reid's an imbecile and the fact he's a Democrat says it all.