Radical New Congress Constitution rule irks House Democrats

[JakeStarkey]

Simply not so. The words of the Constitution are very specific.

American history, American law, American government, and the American constitution disagree with your conclusion.

No jake it is only ignorant fools such as YOU who disagree. Bugger off.

I imagine John Marshall, just like John Roberts today, laugh when they think of folks like you.

 

[nraforlife]

American history, American law, American government, and the American constitution disagree with your conclusion.

No jake it is only ignorant fools such as YOU who disagree. Bugger off.

I imagine John Marshall, ...................

You imagine, i will go with Reality

 

[JakeStarkey]

No jake it is only ignorant fools such as YOU who disagree. Bugger off.

I imagine John Marshall, ...................

You imagine, i will go with Reality

nralife lives in a delusional world of his internet opinion shared by perhaps six other persons.

 

[taichiliberal]

Wake the **** up, you neocon/oather/birther/teabagging clowns!


Constitutional Whitewash
What House Republicans left out when they read (parts of) America's founding document.

http://www.slate.com/id/2280249/

How many bills were passed under the Shrub WITHOUT any input by the Dems?
The rules set by the Courts, Congress and the Constitution weren't followed when Iraq was invaded and occupied, where was all the protests by you neocon parrots then?

Bottom line: the GOP plays you for suckers, and you just throw yourselves over the back of the chair with a smile and ask for another.

 

[Barb]

Wake the **** up, you neocon/oather/birther/teabagging clowns!


Constitutional Whitewash
What House Republicans left out when they read (parts of) America's founding document.

What House Republicans left out when they read (parts of) America's founding document. - By Dahlia Lithwick - Slate Magazine

How many bills were passed under the Shrub WITHOUT any input by the Dems?
The rules set by the Courts, Congress and the Constitution weren't followed when Iraq was invaded and occupied, where was all the protests by you neocon parrots then?

Bottom line: the GOP plays you for suckers, and you just throw yourselves over the back of the chair with a smile and ask for another.

Oh, sweetness. Bad example.
Only ONE stood against that, and yes, she was a dem, but she stood alone, ALONE. Like, um, all by her damnedself.
Barbara Lee.
My first two names. That little bit made me happy.
The ONLY little bit that made me happy.
And that she WAS a Dem.
But still, you have to understand the pressure they ALL were under, and the craven political self preservation they worked within. It was an (off) election year. It had already been ESTABLISHED that iffen you weren't with the WH you were with those wild eyed devils that wanted us converted or kilt. It was HOLY WAR (THAT WASN'T really), and GAWD KNOWS that our secular nation is TOTALLY AGAINST a theocracy (unless it was the Cold war, which pitted us GAWD fearing Christians against those GAWDLESS Communists), that stoned women for being impure....
unless they want birth control.
For Christ sakes people.
It really doesn't GET any more ludicrous.
Its ALL the same ******* PAGE of Leviticus,
except for the shellfish
the tweed
the haircuts
and the hypocrisy.
EMBRACE it. ALL of you.

 

[Big Fitz]

Wake the **** up, you neocon/oather/birther/teabagging clowns!


Constitutional Whitewash
What House Republicans left out when they read (parts of) America's founding document.

What House Republicans left out when they read (parts of) America's founding document. - By Dahlia Lithwick - Slate Magazine

How many bills were passed under the Shrub WITHOUT any input by the Dems?
The rules set by the Courts, Congress and the Constitution weren't followed when Iraq was invaded and occupied, where was all the protests by you neocon parrots then?

Bottom line: the GOP plays you for suckers, and you just throw yourselves over the back of the chair with a smile and ask for another.

Since the GOP controlled all of congress for 2 of the 8 years of W's term, lots.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Why does the left think the constitution is a nasty word. I have read nearly all of it and it reads pretty good and looks like it was originally designed to benefit everyone. Remember that courts are run by lawyers. Keep your head down.

You made a premise. Got any proof that the Right is any better than Left about the goodness of the Constitution. I think both far left and far right don't like it particularly.

 

[Vanquish]

Why does the left think the constitution is a nasty word. I have read nearly all of it and it reads pretty good and looks like it was originally designed to benefit everyone. Remember that courts are run by lawyers. Keep your head down.

More partisan bullshit. The left loves the constitution just as much as the right. Freedom of Speech...Due Process...Right to Vote...remember all that? Those are usually liberal issues.

It's ridiculous for someone to post that one side or the other loves the constitution more. Makes you sound like an idiot.

 

[Big Fitz]

The left loves the constitution just as much as the right.

How about the little bits of 'fat' like the Second Amendment? "Hateful speech" and fairness doctrines designed to shut down discenting opinion on the internet and media? The Fourth Amendment after being buggered by the RICO statute? How about the 10th Amendment that forbids so much of what the federales do for social services? The efforts to enshrine racism, sexism and anti-judeochristianity in the law by trying to drive through the ERA, and ban all expressions of Judeo-Christian faith in public?

Love the Constitution? laughable. Only as a tool to provide cover for tyranny maybe.

 

[Vanquish]

Bah. They both love it...albeit mostly different parts. To say one side doesn't like it makes someone a complete buffoon.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Why does the left think the constitution is a nasty word. I have read nearly all of it and it reads pretty good and looks like it was originally designed to benefit everyone. Remember that courts are run by lawyers. Keep your head down.

More partisan bullshit. The left loves the constitution just as much as the right. Freedom of Speech...Due Process...Right to Vote...remember all that? Those are usually liberal issues.

It's ridiculous for someone to post that one side or the other loves the constitution more. Makes you sound like an idiot.

I said far left and far right don't like the Constitution, and I certainly stand by it.

 

[Charles_Main]

Why does the left think the constitution is a nasty word. I have read nearly all of it and it reads pretty good and looks like it was originally designed to benefit everyone. Remember that courts are run by lawyers. Keep your head down.

More partisan bullshit. The left loves the constitution just as much as the right. Freedom of Speech...Due Process...Right to Vote...remember all that? Those are usually liberal issues.

It's ridiculous for someone to post that one side or the other loves the constitution more. Makes you sound like an idiot.

I said far left and far right don't like the Constitution, and I certainly stand by it.

Both sides support the constitution when they see fit, and are willing to bend it to meet their needs as well.

The one example on the left that I point out is their support for Roe V Wade. IMO whether you support abortion or not, if you love our Constitution you should be against Roe V Wade. As IMO that ruling clearly expanded the Feds power into an Area meant for the states. However most on the left seem willing to over look the questionable constitutionality of the ruling because they like the out come.

As the saying goes, the Ends do not justify the means.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Shut up, Big Fitz, you one-sided homer. The 2nd Amendment does not mean you get an anti-aircraft artillery system. The Fairness Doctrine is about presenting ALL the facts; what is wrong with that? Is that not what you want: a fair and honest discussion? Is that not the American way? Racisim and sexism are both on a two-way street. And who is enshrining anti-judeochristianity in the law. Judeo-Christianity does not support the ERA and no has banned all Judeo-Christian expressions in public.

You are a pathetic lying home for the far far right that consists of 9% of the voters. Who do you think you are? Just pathetic.

The left loves the constitution just as much as the right.

How about the little bits of 'fat' like the Second Amendment? "Hateful speech" and fairness doctrines designed to shut down discenting opinion on the internet and media? The Fourth Amendment after being buggered by the RICO statute? How about the 10th Amendment that forbids so much of what the federales do for social services? The efforts to enshrine racism, sexism and anti-judeochristianity in the law by trying to drive through the ERA, and ban all expressions of Judeo-Christian faith in public?

Love the Constitution? laughable. Only as a tool to provide cover for tyranny maybe.

 

[JakeStarkey]

More partisan bullshit. The left loves the constitution just as much as the right. Freedom of Speech...Due Process...Right to Vote...remember all that? Those are usually liberal issues.

It's ridiculous for someone to post that one side or the other loves the constitution more. Makes you sound like an idiot.

I said far left and far right don't like the Constitution, and I certainly stand by it.

Both sides support the constitution when they see fit, and are willing to bend it to meet their needs as well.

The one example on the left that I point out is their support for Roe V Wade. IMO whether you support abortion or not, if you love our Constitution you should be against Roe V Wade. As IMO that ruling clearly expanded the Feds power into an Area meant for the states. However most on the left seem willing to over look the questionable constitutionality of the ruling because they like the out come.

As the saying goes, the Ends do not justify the means.

Very good. The wacks wrap themselves up in the flag and drive to knife the other side. Homers from the far right and far left need to be put down by the great center of American decency and honor.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Bah. They both love it...albeit mostly different parts. To say one side doesn't like it makes someone a complete buffoon.

Which side is objecting to having it read in Congress?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Bah. They both love it...albeit mostly different parts. To say one side doesn't like it makes someone a complete buffoon.

Which side is objecting to having it read in Congress?

Neither side, you sissy sweetmeat.

 

[taichiliberal]

Wake the **** up, you neocon/oather/birther/teabagging clowns!


Constitutional Whitewash
What House Republicans left out when they read (parts of) America's founding document.

What House Republicans left out when they read (parts of) America's founding document. - By Dahlia Lithwick - Slate Magazine

How many bills were passed under the Shrub WITHOUT any input by the Dems?
The rules set by the Courts, Congress and the Constitution weren't followed when Iraq was invaded and occupied, where was all the protests by you neocon parrots then?

Bottom line: the GOP plays you for suckers, and you just throw yourselves over the back of the chair with a smile and ask for another.

Oh, sweetness. Bad example.
Only ONE stood against that, and yes, she was a dem, but she stood alone, ALONE. Like, um, all by her damnedself.
Barbara Lee.
My first two names. That little bit made me happy.
The ONLY little bit that made me happy.
And that she WAS a Dem.
But still, you have to understand the pressure they ALL were under, and the craven political self preservation they worked within. It was an (off) election year. It had already been ESTABLISHED that iffen you weren't with the WH you were with those wild eyed devils that wanted us converted or kilt. It was HOLY WAR (THAT WASN'T really), and GAWD KNOWS that our secular nation is TOTALLY AGAINST a theocracy (unless it was the Cold war, which pitted us GAWD fearing Christians against those GAWDLESS Communists), that stoned women for being impure....
unless they want birth control.
For Christ sakes people.
It really doesn't GET any more ludicrous.
Its ALL the same ******* PAGE of Leviticus,
except for the shellfish
the tweed
the haircuts
and the hypocrisy.
EMBRACE it. ALL of you.

Oh honeybunch, you overlooked that I've made TWO seperate points:

1) The nonsense about EVERY little item in Congress meeting some strick interpretation of the Constituion is bogus, as the Shrub & company passed NUMEROUS bills WITHOUT Dems being in House.

2) The stipulation for the Iraq war was that the Shrub & company had to PROVE to the Congress that there was evidence of imminent threat to US interests.....the Shrub & Company also had to prove such to the UN......THEY DID NEITHER, and if you research properly you'll note that both the UN and various Congressmen/Senators stated such.

So all this nonsense about "constitutionality" from the GOP is at best nonsense, at least hypocrisy.

 

[taichiliberal]

Wake the **** up, you neocon/oather/birther/teabagging clowns!


Constitutional Whitewash
What House Republicans left out when they read (parts of) America's founding document.

What House Republicans left out when they read (parts of) America's founding document. - By Dahlia Lithwick - Slate Magazine

How many bills were passed under the Shrub WITHOUT any input by the Dems?
The rules set by the Courts, Congress and the Constitution weren't followed when Iraq was invaded and occupied, where was all the protests by you neocon parrots then?

Bottom line: the GOP plays you for suckers, and you just throw yourselves over the back of the chair with a smile and ask for another.

Since the GOP controlled all of congress for 2 of the 8 years of W's term, lots.

The GOP had control of the House and the Senate for 6 years under the Shrub. The last two years they lost the House, but STILL had the deciding vote in the Senate.

My previous points stand. Next time Fitz, do your homework so you'll know WTF you're talking about before your fingers hit the keys....makes you look less silly.

 

[taichiliberal]

Shut up, Big Fitz, you one-sided homer. The 2nd Amendment does not mean you get an anti-aircraft artillery system. The Fairness Doctrine is about presenting ALL the facts; what is wrong with that? Is that not what you want: a fair and honest discussion? Is that not the American way? Racisim and sexism are both on a two-way street. And who is enshrining anti-judeochristianity in the law. Judeo-Christianity does not support the ERA and no has banned all Judeo-Christian expressions in public.

You are a pathetic lying home for the far far right that consists of 9% of the voters. Who do you think you are? Just pathetic.

The left loves the constitution just as much as the right.

How about the little bits of 'fat' like the Second Amendment? "Hateful speech" and fairness doctrines designed to shut down discenting opinion on the internet and media? The Fourth Amendment after being buggered by the RICO statute? How about the 10th Amendment that forbids so much of what the federales do for social services? The efforts to enshrine racism, sexism and anti-judeochristianity in the law by trying to drive through the ERA, and ban all expressions of Judeo-Christian faith in public?

Love the Constitution? laughable. Only as a tool to provide cover for tyranny maybe.

Going off topic for a second: For YEARS I've heard neocon parrots and pundits whine about the "liberally biased media".....and YET they wail like banshees against the Fairness Doctrine.....WHICH WOULD GUARANTEE THAT ALL MEDIA MUST SET ASIDE A PORTION (to be determined) of their programming for alternative viewpoints.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Shut up, Big Fitz, you one-sided homer. The 2nd Amendment does not mean you get an anti-aircraft artillery system. The Fairness Doctrine is about presenting ALL the facts; what is wrong with that? Is that not what you want: a fair and honest discussion? Is that not the American way? Racisim and sexism are both on a two-way street. And who is enshrining anti-judeochristianity in the law. Judeo-Christianity does not support the ERA and no has banned all Judeo-Christian expressions in public.

You are a pathetic lying home for the far far right that consists of 9% of the voters. Who do you think you are? Just pathetic.

How about the little bits of 'fat' like the Second Amendment? "Hateful speech" and fairness doctrines designed to shut down discenting opinion on the internet and media? The Fourth Amendment after being buggered by the RICO statute? How about the 10th Amendment that forbids so much of what the federales do for social services? The efforts to enshrine racism, sexism and anti-judeochristianity in the law by trying to drive through the ERA, and ban all expressions of Judeo-Christian faith in public?

Love the Constitution? laughable. Only as a tool to provide cover for tyranny maybe.

Going off topic for a second: For YEARS I've heard neocon parrots and pundits whine about the "liberally biased media".....and YET they wail like banshees against the Fairness Doctrine.....WHICH WOULD GUARANTEE THAT ALL MEDIA MUST SET ASIDE A PORTION (to be determined) of their programming for alternative viewpoints.

There's a big difference between expecting the media, which prates to the rest of us about how unbiased and objective they are, to actually hold themselves to that standard, and expecting the government to step in and control things and mandate "fairness". Think hard and see if you can figure out what the difference is.