Shakespeare Was Right About Lawyers....

[PoliticalChic]

You imagination is showing.

I’m not irritated at all. It’s actually a bit concerning that you’d want anyone to be.

I expect better from you.

Expect whatever you wish.

My motto: Trample the weak and hurtle the dead.

 

[BackAgain]

Expect whatever you wish.

My motto: Trample the weak and hurtle the dead.

Stick to writing coherently. (That used to be your strength.)

You don’t trample all that much; and you certainly don’t hurtle. And definitely have slipped a bit.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What sort of lawyer would be employed to maintain the Constituton....yet hate free speech????

This sort:

Democrat Kagan.


"In her 1993 article "Regulation of Hate Speech and Pornography After R.A.V," for the University of Chicago Law Review, Kagan writes:

"I take it as a given that we live in a society marred by racial and gender inequality, that certain forms of speech perpetuate and promote this inequality, and that the uncoerced disappearance of such speech would be cause for great elation."

In a 1996 paper, "Private Speech, Public Purpose: The Role of Governmental Motive in First Amendment Doctrine," Kagan argued it may be proper to suppress speech because it is offensive to society or to the government.
That paper asserted First Amendment doctrine is comprised of "motives and ... actions infested with them" and she goes so far as to claim that "First Amendment law is best understood and most readily explained as a kind of motive-hunting."

Kagan's name was also on a brief, United States V. Stevens, dug up by the Washington Examiner, stating: "Whether a given category of speech enjoys First Amendment protection depends upon a categorical balancing of the value of the speech against its societal costs."
If the government doesn't like what you say, Elena Kagan believes it is the duty of courts to tell you to shut up. If some pantywaist is offended by what you say, Elena Kagan believes your words can be "disappeared".
WyBlog -- Elena Kagan's America: some speech can be "disappeared"

Elena Kagan Radical anti-gun nut?

Via The Volokh Conspiracy comes this blast from Elena Kagan’s past. The Chicago Tribune’s James Oliphant reports: “According to records at the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Littl…

thedaleygator.wordpress.com

Brandenburg v. Ohio - Wikipedia

 

[PoliticalChic]

Stick to writing coherently. (That used to be your strength.)

You don’t trample all that much; and you certainly don’t hurtle. And definitely have slipped a bit.

This is not the first time in this very thread where you have missed the humor in posts.

Don't come back until you have had coffee.

 

[BackAgain]

This is not the first time in this very thread where you have missed the humor in posts.

Don't come back until you have had coffee.

Sometimes — when you imagine you’re being witty — it turns out that you’re just wrong.

I recommend maybe that you should start drinking — heavily!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Sometimes — when you imagine you’re being witty — it turns out that you’re just wrong.

I recommend maybe that you should start drinking — heavily!

Perhaps the problem is you being half-witty.

 

[BackAgain]

Perhaps the problem is you being half-witty.

Nah. It’s simply that your posting has sunk to a new low.

I tell ya, I’m so old I even remember when you could make a good point. It took a long time for you to get there. But good nonetheless.

Now? — not so much. Alas.

But if it makes you feel any better, you are beginning to show signs of grinding down and soon you’ll be committed to sounding like a lib. They will embrace you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Nah. It’s simply that your posting has sunk to a new low.

I tell ya, I’m so old I even remember when you could make a good point. It took a long time for you to get there. But good nonetheless.

Now? — not so much. Alas.

But if it makes you feel any better, you are beginning to show signs of grinding down and soon you’ll be committed to sounding like a lib. They will embrace you.

Still sulking, huh?

 

[BackAgain]

Still sulking, huh?

No. Why would I?

I just lost a little respect for you. That’s all. Not exactly a big deal. Why are you trying to make it something more?

 

[PoliticalChic]

No. Why would I?

I just lost a little respect for you. That’s all. Not exactly a big deal. Why are you trying to make it something more?

"I just lost a little respect for you."

I can't begin to tell you how crushed I am.

Know why?

 

[BackAgain]

"I just lost a little respect for you."

I can't begin to tell you how crushed I am.

Know why?

I don’t really care.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I don’t really care.

Really?

Posting five or six responses casts the lie to that.

 

[BackAgain]

Really?

Posting five or six responses casts the lie to that.

Nope. It doesn’t. A reply is just a reply. Caring about your opinions is altogether different.

On matters of politics and government, I have enjoyed many of your posts. But you do occasionally have some damnably stupid takes.

And I don’t mind letting you know when you’ve run off the rails. If that ruffles your feathers, too bad. Toughen up.

Your reaction to my first comment on this thread suggests that you’re a bit off today. The balance of our exchange speaks for itself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Nope. It doesn’t. A reply is just a reply. Caring about your opinions is altogether different.

On matters of politics and government, I have enjoyed many of your posts. But you do occasionally have some damnably stupid takes.

And I don’t mind letting you know when you’ve run off the rails. If that ruffles your feathers, too bad. Toughen up.

Your reaction to my first comment on this thread suggests that you’re a bit off today. The balance of our exchange speaks for itself.

Seven angry posts????

Yup....it sure does spell "I don't care."

 

[hjmick]

What William Shakespeare was saying was, if you want anarchy and a lack of freedoms, kill all the lawyers.

If one was truly familiar with Shakespeare’s Henry VI, they would know that, at this juncture in the play Jack Cade’s rebellion was picking up steam. Dick, the butcher, was a member of this rebellion.

As Dick utters the famous words “first thing we do, let’s kill all the lawyers,” he was referring to ways that the rebellion might be successful. They realized that to succeed, they must get rid of the people who knew and enforced the system of laws. They did not want any educated and informed opposition to their plans against the government.

If you are trying to create anarchy through rebellion, the first objectives would be to get rid of legal process, individual rights, and the truth. The members of Cade's rebellion realized it would be the lawyers who would stand up and identify how individual rights were being abused and due process was not being afforded. It would be the lawyers who would see that the rebellion sought to take away freedoms rather than grant them.

 

[surada]

I've never seen a post of yours that is honest or truthful.


So you're a lawyer????

That's because you're ignorant.

 

[BackAgain]

Seven angry posts????

Yup....it sure does spell "I don't care."

You are now posting like a cross between a severely brain damaged libtard and bodecea (which is even worse).

None of my posts have been angry.

Also, since you seem to have lost the ability to comprehend (like the libtards), you need to try to focus. What I don’t care about is your opinion. That doesn’t mean I don’t care about anything. I do!

I care to try to snap you out of it.

Uphill battle today. Take one Midol and call me in a week.

 

[Lisa558]

1. William Shakespeare's Henry VI, Part 2, Act IV, Scene 2. The full quote is: "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers"

….and it might work! ‘Cause if we kill ‘em all….we could claim at our trial that we didn’t have adequate representation.


2. We should consider this, as they write all those laws just to keep business coming, with this resut:

How many laws does the average American break each day?​

https://www.quora.com › How-many-laws-does-the-avera...
Nov 28, 2019 — The annual number averages between 100,000–160,000. This would make the daily average between 274–438. To be clear, this is the conservative number estimated ...


3. “Boston civil-liberties lawyer Harvey Silverglate calls his new book "Three Felonies a Day," referring to the number of crimes he estimates the average American now unwittingly commits because of vague laws.” L. Gordon Crovitz: You Commit Three Felonies a Day


4. 12 Everyday Things You Didn't Know Were Illegal
https://www.rd.com › Knowledge › Facts
Sep 5, 2020 — You've probably broken every single one of these laws. · You're breaking the law · Using a fake name online · Stealing Wi-Fi · Ignoring your eBay ...
‎Using A Fake Name Online · ‎Stealing Wi-Fi · ‎Having A Few Too Many Drinks


5. 10 Rules You've Broken at Work without Even Realizing
https://www.careeraddict.com › 10-laws-you-ve-broken...
Jul 5, 2022 — Browse our list of the 10 most common rules that people break at work without even realizing.
‎1. Working From A Different... · ‎2. Creating Cliques · ‎3. Using Your Work Email For...


6. 11 Laws You Could Be Breaking Without Knowing It
https://www.moneytalksnews.com › Articles › More
Mar 28, 2022 — 1. Gambling · 2. Hosting a movie night · 3. Sharing your Netflix password · 4. Singing 'Macarena' in public · 5. Using Wi-Fi without permission · 6.







And, just by the way.......guess which party most lawyers vote for.

Reminds me of a joke:

Q: Why are there so many lawyers in California and so many sewage treatment plants in NJ?

A: Because the two states flipped a coin to see which got which, and NJ won.

 

[themirrorthief]

You've been careless with your endorsement of fascism!

You can crawl it back by claiming it was just intended as a joke or it was an attempt to troll.

Or you can run with it! I would much prefer that.

show me a lawyer and I will show you a liar, a thief, and a politician