National Guard won't be allowed to stop illegal aliens!

[MaggieMae]

I love the way Ravi ran away again when her lies were exposed.

Why don't you leave her alone? She has just as much right to post her opinions as you do, and she is NOT always wrong, not by a long shot. There are very few people here who intentionally "lie" by the way.

 

[del]

Further to your first point, the cons want to repeal the 14th Amendment now. It doesn't fit with their agenda for the cleansing of America.

the 14th amendment, like many things, has outlived its usefulness.

How do you figure that?

the citizenship clause was written specifically to prevent the disenfranchisement of former slaves as was done in the dred scott decision. i'm willing to bet that there are no former slaves in danger of disenfranchisement at this point in time.

 

[Yurt]

Wrong. Under Bush a law was passed allowing the Federal government to seize control of the NG that was deployed by the state's governor...but that law was repealed.

The Federal government can only federalize the guard on matters of national security, i.e. the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and to use along the border.

exactly...so why do people havea problem with the guard beign deployed to the border?

No idea. I'd rather see the border patrol get more funding though and leave the NG for "real" problems.

i agree with that...further, most NG's are part time and not training everyday to defend the border

 

[MaggieMae]

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America

So is to promote the general welfare, preventing and mitigating the effects of disease fits nicely into promoting the general welfare which healthcare provides, as much or more so then defending against unarmed immigrants seeking work, many of whom are women and childern.
Should all aspects of healthcare and prevention be cut from the Federal Budget? Funds such as those which helped Salk develop the polio vaccine, should they be cut too?

Further to your first point, the cons want to repeal the 14th Amendment now. It doesn't fit with their agenda for the cleansing of America.

lord...hyperbole much...

Yeah, I've picked up some bad habits participating in this forum.

 

[Yurt]

Further to your first point, the cons want to repeal the 14th Amendment now. It doesn't fit with their agenda for the cleansing of America.

lord...hyperbole much...

Yeah, I've picked up some bad habits participating in this forum.

lol

 

[ConHog]

and that doesn't even address the lie you told about the desegregation law Ravi, do you really not have enough integrity to admit you were wrong about that?

Of course you don't and that is why you are a lying piece of shit.

 

[del]

and that doesn't even address the lie you told about the desegregation law Ravi, do you really not have enough integrity to admit you were wrong about that?

Of course you don't and that is why you are a lying piece of shit.

oh, put a sock in it, you snivelling bag o' shit.

 

[MaggieMae]

the 14th amendment, like many things, has outlived its usefulness.

How do you figure that?

the citizenship clause was written specifically to prevent the disenfranchisement of former slaves as was done in the dred scott decision. i'm willing to bet that there are no former slaves in danger of disenfranchisement at this point in time.

Well, I think the word "slave" being replaced by the word "minority" is probably a given. There's other stuff in that amendment too, not just that part.

 

[del]

How do you figure that?

the citizenship clause was written specifically to prevent the disenfranchisement of former slaves as was done in the dred scott decision. i'm willing to bet that there are no former slaves in danger of disenfranchisement at this point in time.

Well, I think the word "slave" being replaced by the word "minority" is probably a given. There's other stuff in that amendment too, not just that part.

true, but that part has long since become unnecessary, imo.

 

[Ravi]

and that doesn't even address the lie you told about the desegregation law Ravi, do you really not have enough integrity to admit you were wrong about that?

Of course you don't and that is why you are a lying piece of shit.

What part of this don't you understand? I posted it before and Jillian also schooled you on history.

The Little Rock Nine was a group of African-American students who were enrolled in Little Rock Central High School in 1957. The ensuing Little Rock Crisis, in which the students were initially prevented from entering the racially segregated school by Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus, and then attended after the intervention of President Eisenhower, is considered to be one of the most important events in the African-American Civil Rights Movement. On their first day of school, guards at the school would not let them in and they were followed by mobs making threats to lynch.[1]
The U.S. Supreme Court issued its historic Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, 347 U.S. 483, on May 17, 1954. The decision declared all laws establishing segregated schools to be unconstitutional, and it called for the desegregation of all schools throughout the nation.[2]

I owe you two more neg reps for lying...I'll never be able to keep up.

 

[ConHog]

and that doesn't even address the lie you told about the desegregation law Ravi, do you really not have enough integrity to admit you were wrong about that?

Of course you don't and that is why you are a lying piece of shit.

oh, put a sock in it, you snivelling bag o' shit.

How about, **** YOU, the ***** lied PERIOD and you don't have the personal integrity to call her out for it.

 

[ConHog]

and that doesn't even address the lie you told about the desegregation law Ravi, do you really not have enough integrity to admit you were wrong about that?

Of course you don't and that is why you are a lying piece of shit.

What part of this don't you understand? I posted it before and Jillian also schooled you on history.

The Little Rock Nine was a group of African-American students who were enrolled in Little Rock Central High School in 1957. The ensuing Little Rock Crisis, in which the students were initially prevented from entering the racially segregated school by Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus, and then attended after the intervention of President Eisenhower, is considered to be one of the most important events in the African-American Civil Rights Movement. On their first day of school, guards at the school would not let them in and they were followed by mobs making threats to lynch.[1]
The U.S. Supreme Court issued its historic Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, 347 U.S. 483, on May 17, 1954. The decision declared all laws establishing segregated schools to be unconstitutional, and it called for the desegregation of all schools throughout the nation.[2]

I owe you two more neg reps for lying...I'll never be able to keep up.

A court order is not a law you moron. Courts can't pass laws. THEREFOR in my original post when I said that he was ignoring a COURT ORDER I was CORRECT, when you later came along and said he was ignoring a law you were INCORRECT.

Basic civics you dumb *****.

 

[del]

and that doesn't even address the lie you told about the desegregation law Ravi, do you really not have enough integrity to admit you were wrong about that?

Of course you don't and that is why you are a lying piece of shit.

oh, put a sock in it, you snivelling bag o' shit.

How about, **** YOU, the ***** lied PERIOD and you don't have the personal integrity to call her out for it.

blah, blag\h, blah. you were and continue to be wrong. suck on it.

 

[Ravi]

How pathetic. State and local laws allowed for segregation. The governor could not legally authorize his NG to enforce a law that was declared unconstitutional.

And no, declaring something unconstitutional isn't a court order. It is merely an interpretation of the constitution.

 

[ConHog]

How pathetic. State and local laws allowed for segregation. The governor could not legally authorize his NG to enforce a law that was declared unconstitutional.

And no, declaring something unconstitutional isn't a court order. It is merely an interpretation of the constitution.

Damn you are stupid. Your claim was that President used the NG to enforce a law. he did no such thing. He used the NG to enforce a court order, as I claimed in my OP.

You are now trying to change that, but your very words are there for all to read. You are now trying to claim you said the same ******* thing I said that the President used the NG to make sure a court order nullifying bad law was enforced." IF that was your original argument why then did you even post to try to correct me?

I'll tell you why, because you clearly thought that there was indeed a LAW in 1957 making segregation in public schools illegal.

Just admit to a mistake and move on...

My kingdom for an honest liberal.......

 

[Yurt]

and that doesn't even address the lie you told about the desegregation law Ravi, do you really not have enough integrity to admit you were wrong about that?

Of course you don't and that is why you are a lying piece of shit.

What part of this don't you understand? I posted it before and Jillian also schooled you on history.

The Little Rock Nine was a group of African-American students who were enrolled in Little Rock Central High School in 1957. The ensuing Little Rock Crisis, in which the students were initially prevented from entering the racially segregated school by Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus, and then attended after the intervention of President Eisenhower, is considered to be one of the most important events in the African-American Civil Rights Movement. On their first day of school, guards at the school would not let them in and they were followed by mobs making threats to lynch.[1]
The U.S. Supreme Court issued its historic Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kansas, 347 U.S. 483, on May 17, 1954. The decision declared all laws establishing segregated schools to be unconstitutional, and it called for the desegregation of all schools throughout the nation.[2]

I owe you two more neg reps for lying...I'll never be able to keep up.

A court order is not a law you moron. Courts can't pass laws. THEREFOR in my original post when I said that he was ignoring a COURT ORDER I was CORRECT, when you later came along and said he was ignoring a law you were INCORRECT.

Basic civics you dumb *****.

you're confusing law with laws....they are two technically different terms

a court ruling can and does become law, however, they do not create laws as congress does. its called common law....

 

[Yurt]

How pathetic. State and local laws allowed for segregation. The governor could not legally authorize his NG to enforce a law that was declared unconstitutional.

And no, declaring something unconstitutional isn't a court order. It is merely an interpretation of the constitution.

it can be a court order though....like the cali prop 8 case, it was deemed unconstitutional, but he stayed his order on allowing homosexuals to marry pending appeal

 

[Ravi]

How pathetic. State and local laws allowed for segregation. The governor could not legally authorize his NG to enforce a law that was declared unconstitutional.

And no, declaring something unconstitutional isn't a court order. It is merely an interpretation of the constitution.

Damn you are stupid. Your claim was that President used the NG to enforce a law. he did no such thing. He used the NG to enforce a court order, as I claimed in my OP.

You are now trying to change that, but your very words are there for all to read. You are now trying to claim you said the same ******* thing I said that the President used the NG to make sure a court order nullifying bad law was enforced." IF that was your original argument why then did you even post to try to correct me?

I'll tell you why, because you clearly thought that there was indeed a LAW in 1957 making segregation in public schools illegal.

Just admit to a mistake and move on...

My kingdom for an honest liberal.......

I never claimed the president used the NG to enforce a law. He took the governor's authority over them away and sent in the MILITARY.

You're so fucked in the head you can't remember what is posted from one page to the next.

 

[ConHog]

What part of this don't you understand? I posted it before and Jillian also schooled you on history.

I owe you two more neg reps for lying...I'll never be able to keep up.

A court order is not a law you moron. Courts can't pass laws. THEREFOR in my original post when I said that he was ignoring a COURT ORDER I was CORRECT, when you later came along and said he was ignoring a law you were INCORRECT.

Basic civics you dumb *****.

you're confusing law with laws....they are two technically different terms

a court ruling can and does become law, however, they do not create laws as congress does. its called common law....

The United States federal government (as opposed to the states) only partially has a common law system. United States federal courts only act as interpreters of statutes and the constitution by elaborating and precisely defining the broad language (connotation 1(b) above), but, unlike state courts, do not act as an independent source of common law


Common law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Ravi]

How pathetic. State and local laws allowed for segregation. The governor could not legally authorize his NG to enforce a law that was declared unconstitutional.

And no, declaring something unconstitutional isn't a court order. It is merely an interpretation of the constitution.

it can be a court order though....like the cali prop 8 case, it was deemed unconstitutional, but he stayed his order on allowing homosexuals to marry pending appeal

But not in this one particular case. Declaring a law unconstitutional means it is unconstitutional. The stay in the prop 8 case is because that case will go to SCOTUS. In the Arkansas case, SCOTUS has the final word.