AnotherDem ShowsDisdain for Constitution: "I think the Constitution is wrong" w/Video

[WillowTree]

Well that's another way of saying you couldn't debate me, if you tried.

But that's okay. At least you're honest enough to admit your limitiations.

So, you admit, you are a low grade troll. How refreshingly honest. Oh too bad! You already neg repped me. You can't do it now!

poor delusional freak.

the only troll in this post is you.

and you aren't worth my time because you're really, truly, beyond mind-numbingly stupid.

perhaps that simple fact is beyond your comprehension.

If's she's not worth the time why do you take the time to tell her she's not worth the time? Isn't that time consuming counselor?

 

[WillowTree]

Somebody explain to me why demonRats are in a snit about corporations donating money but think nothing of unions donating money? SNIT! and fair thee well SNIT. It's most unbecoming.

 

[jillian]

Well that's another way of saying you couldn't debate me, if you tried.

But that's okay. At least you're honest enough to admit your limitiations.

So, you admit, you are a low grade troll. How refreshingly honest. Oh too bad! You already neg repped me. You can't do it now!

poor delusional freak.

the only troll in this post is you.

and you aren't worth my time because you're really, truly, beyond mind-numbingly stupid.

perhaps that simple fact is beyond your comprehension.

If's she's not worth the time why do you take the time to tell her she's not worth the time? Isn't that time consuming counselor?

no. that's just for amusement.

 

[California Girl]

Apparently, all that open honesty was too much for CG. She left. AW!!!!!!!!

Funny how you get all confident because someone disappears for a couple of hours. You are aware how fucking hysterically stupid makes you look, right?

I think we see who's stupid, when the most you could add to the debate was the "open honesty" that it's okay to express the Constitution is wrong, but any "open honesty" criticizing that is just more "open honesty" than you can stand.

Your post proves one thing... Ya can't fix stupid.

 

[California Girl]

yes...*we* do.... yours.



yes. you are.



why do you laugh at the end of every post? it makes you sound like you need meds.

And Jillian with her sharp and steel debating skills graces us with her presence. Oh no, what will we do.

We better run conservatives. We have no chance of winning now!!!!!!

Why do I have so many smilies at the end? Dealing with posters like YOU!

I can't help but laugh!

i keep telling you, hon... i don't 'debate' idiots like you. i laugh at you.

you know, that whole 'you can't teach a pig to talk thing'.

if cali and i agree about someone unequivocally, i figure that says it all.

It really does, doesn't it.

One thing that both Jillian and I have in common.... neither of us are very good at suffering the stupid.

 

[WillowTree]

And Jillian with her sharp and steel debating skills graces us with her presence. Oh no, what will we do.

We better run conservatives. We have no chance of winning now!!!!!!

Why do I have so many smilies at the end? Dealing with posters like YOU!

I can't help but laugh!

i keep telling you, hon... i don't 'debate' idiots like you. i laugh at you.

you know, that whole 'you can't teach a pig to talk thing'.

if cali and i agree about someone unequivocally, i figure that says it all.

It really does, doesn't it.

One thing that both Jillian and I have in common.... neither of us are very good at suffering the stupid.

oh the fucking irony.

 

[The Infidel]

i keep telling you, hon... i don't 'debate' idiots like you. i laugh at you.

you know, that whole 'you can't teach a pig to talk thing'.

if cali and i agree about someone unequivocally, i figure that says it all.

It really does, doesn't it.

One thing that both Jillian and I have in common.... neither of us are very good at suffering the stupid.

oh the fucking irony.

 

[Sallow]

Money given to a candidate expresses my views and support for him. Money is free expression in politics.

That's an extrapolation with no basis in the Constitution..or in the very definition of speech. And, it's a logical fallacy.

And considering many corporate entities are using messages as a smoke screen for their true agenda..its a very dangerous fallacy.

Sucks to be you that the USSC disagrees.

Celebrating activist judges that legislate from the Bench? Especially since they've conflated this particular case to reverse nearly a century of precedence.

Okay..but that sort of throws out that old conservative chestnut that they do don't do such things.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I think we see the stupidity here.

yes...*we* do.... yours.

Hypocritical and dumb as hell.

yes. you are.

why do you laugh at the end of every post? it makes you sound like you need meds.

Because she can't seriously debate.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sucks to be you that the USSC disagrees.

l:

Sucks for you that the USSC disagrees with you on abortion, doesn't it.

boohoo.

I'm still waiting for you to show me where in the Constitution it allows abortion?

Roe v. Wade.

Unless of course you think the Constitution is wrong to allow the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Sucks to be you that the USSC disagrees.

l:

Sucks for you that the USSC disagrees with you on abortion, doesn't it.

boohoo.

Why do you like killing babies?

Your horrible!

Abortion isn't a foolproof solution. The OP is proof of that.

 

[NYcarbineer]

You heard it here first peoples.

Liberals are let slipping what they really think.

Give them enough time, I knew they would!

Can't you answer the question.

I say, yes, the Constitution was wrong when it didn't protect the right of women to vote.

What's your opinion?

I told you Carbiner, you're right, the Constitution is wrong.

Now how do you want to change it in the Citizens United Case?

I'm waiting!

Amend the Constitution or overturn the ruling or legislate an alternative limitation on campaign financing that passes constitutional muster. Those, I think, are your only choices.

 

[Charles_Main]

On the heels of Phil "I don't care about the Constitution" Hare, we have another Dem who doesn't care for the Constitution when it gets in their way.

And then he denies saying it in the same debate!

We have a lousy Supreme Court decision that has opened the floodgates, and so we have to deal within the realm of constitutionality. And a lot of the campaign finance bills that we have passed have been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. I think the Constitution is wrong. I don’t think that money is the same thing as human beings.

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA): ‘I Think the Constitution Is Wrong’ - Big Government

Sorry the videos are from eyeblast, not youtube. If there is a way to post 'em here, I haven't figured it out. You will have to follow the link to see the videos.

Give a liberal long enough and he will reveal exactly who he is and what he thinks. I told you liberals don't like the Constitution. It gives too many rights to their opponents. Liberals think only they should have rights. Anyone else should be silenced.

That's exactly what McGovern is saying. He doesn't like what his opponents will say with that free speech, so he thinks the Constitution is wrong.

Spoken like a true liberal.

If you think something in the constitution is wrong, you can change it with an Amendment. That is the beautiful part of it.

The ugly truth of it is both sides often attempt to use means other than the Amendment process to change it.

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

The Constitution has been wrong..and it's shown dramatically..by the Constitution itself. For example Amendment 18 abolishes liquor..and Amendment 21 repeals 18.

What you just posted does not demonstrate that the Constitution has been wrong. It shows that "We The People", during those specific times, sought reformation, and exercised their rights in a proper manner via the Constitution.

 

[California Girl]

i keep telling you, hon... i don't 'debate' idiots like you. i laugh at you.

you know, that whole 'you can't teach a pig to talk thing'.

if cali and i agree about someone unequivocally, i figure that says it all.

It really does, doesn't it.

One thing that both Jillian and I have in common.... neither of us are very good at suffering the stupid.

oh the fucking irony.

You wouldn't know irony if it handed you its business card.

 

[goldcatt]

The Constitution has been wrong..and it's shown dramatically..by the Constitution itself. For example Amendment 18 abolishes liquor..and Amendment 21 repeals 18.

What you just posted does not demonstrate that the Constitution has been wrong. It shows that "We The People", during those specific times, sought reformation, and exercised their rights in a proper manner via the Constitution.

To be fair, some of those Amendments were designed to correct flaws in the original that only showed up through practice. Or in one case, to repeal an Amendment that was shown to be flawed in practice. No human and no compromise is perfect. Some changes are reflective of changing attitudes, but some do indeed address these imperfections.

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

The Constitution has been wrong..and it's shown dramatically..by the Constitution itself. For example Amendment 18 abolishes liquor..and Amendment 21 repeals 18.

What you just posted does not demonstrate that the Constitution has been wrong. It shows that "We The People", during those specific times, sought reformation, and exercised their rights in a proper manner via the Constitution.

To be fair, some of those Amendments were designed to correct flaws in the original that only showed up through practice. Or in one case, to repeal an Amendment that was shown to be flawed in practice. No human and no compromise is perfect. Some changes are reflective of changing attitudes, but some do indeed address these imperfections.

I agree that the Constitution is not perfect. The founders recognized such the day the document was signed. Sallow made a very poor post.

 

[goldcatt]

What you just posted does not demonstrate that the Constitution has been wrong. It shows that "We The People", during those specific times, sought reformation, and exercised their rights in a proper manner via the Constitution.

To be fair, some of those Amendments were designed to correct flaws in the original that only showed up through practice. Or in one case, to repeal an Amendment that was shown to be flawed in practice. No human and no compromise is perfect. Some changes are reflective of changing attitudes, but some do indeed address these imperfections.

I agree that the Constitution is not perfect. The founders recognized such the day the document was signed. Sallow made a very poor post.

And we still debate the same arguments they went round about today, just with different details. Did you ever stop to think about whether the inherent tensions in the system are deliberate or simply reflective of the compromises that were forced in order to get a working system at all? Either way maybe it doesn't matter....but I do think the debate, and the willingness to opine that something in the document or system it created is "wrong", is important to keep the whole thing in balance.

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

On the heels of Phil "I don't care about the Constitution" Hare, we have another Dem who doesn't care for the Constitution when it gets in their way.

And then he denies saying it in the same debate!

We have a lousy Supreme Court decision that has opened the floodgates, and so we have to deal within the realm of constitutionality. And a lot of the campaign finance bills that we have passed have been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. I think the Constitution is wrong. I don’t think that money is the same thing as human beings.

Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA): ‘I Think the Constitution Is Wrong’ - Big Government

Sorry the videos are from eyeblast, not youtube. If there is a way to post 'em here, I haven't figured it out. You will have to follow the link to see the videos.

Give a liberal long enough and he will reveal exactly who he is and what he thinks. I told you liberals don't like the Constitution. It gives too many rights to their opponents. Liberals think only they should have rights. Anyone else should be silenced.

That's exactly what McGovern is saying. He doesn't like what his opponents will say with that free speech, so he thinks the Constitution is wrong.

Spoken like a true liberal.

I don't see any "disdain" in Jim's comment. I do see him using a bad choice of words and confusing a SCOTUS ruling with the Constitution itself. That is not the same thing as having "disdain" for the foundation of this Republic, not matter how you try and twist the context into your own logical fallacy argument.

 

[BasicGreatGuy]

To be fair, some of those Amendments were designed to correct flaws in the original that only showed up through practice. Or in one case, to repeal an Amendment that was shown to be flawed in practice. No human and no compromise is perfect. Some changes are reflective of changing attitudes, but some do indeed address these imperfections.

I agree that the Constitution is not perfect. The founders recognized such the day the document was signed. Sallow made a very poor post.

And we still debate the same arguments they went round about today, just with different details. Did you ever stop to think about whether the inherent tensions in the system are deliberate or simply reflective of the compromises that were forced in order to get a working system at all? Either way maybe it doesn't matter....but I do think the debate, and the willingness to opine that something in the document or system it created is "wrong", is important to keep the whole thing in balance.

Nothing wrong with honest debate about the subject matter. The problems come from those charged with upholding, defending, and protecting the Constitution; "We The People."