Bsnub is English again today :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by bsnub
Fake ass motherfucker.
Printable View
Bsnub is English again today :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by bsnub
Fake ass motherfucker.
...*cough*...their interpretation of the constitution...Quote:
Originally Posted by harrybarracuda
There is no interpretation don't even try that shit.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomcat
Where do you liberals get off fukin interpreting the constitution in some other way than it was explicitly meant at the time of writing and the way the procedure is to get things changed? Fuck that.
For real, this issue, and your ideas and feelings on it are one of the main reasons why getting the SC seats and cockblocking the court from going full retard were so important, and a huge reason a Trump vote was necessary for a lot of people. It has nothing to do with 'transphobia' or 'bigotry' or 'racism' or 'jesus' its the actual country itself and what its founded on.
In all seriousness you guys want to literally change the foundation of the fucking country to fit your twisted narrative, going through hundreds of years of factual US history, bending and skewing the truth and blatantly lying at every instance trying to build some sort of case along the way. Its probably one of the most ridiculous 'things' thats been brought into the light with this election cycle and you people.
Its total bullshit and a root core reason why you will never be taken seriously under any real sellable political platform and a majority will never buy it.
^
Under the constitution Obama had the right to appoint a SC Judge, and the Senate had the obligation to accept or reject his choice. If rejected Obama would have to appoint another one.
The Republican senate chose to do neither and threatened to filibuster, thus ignoring the Constitution.
Exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomcat
And they were rewarded in discarding constitutional procedure stealing a SCOTUS seat.Quote:
Originally Posted by pickel
In reality Repubtards do not give two shits about the constitution unless it fits in their agenda. For that matter they care fuck all for state rights either. It's all bluster until it no longer fits their agenda.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
^...:rofl:...Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
Slick, the ISIS apologist...Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
You literally want to change the constitution and believe this to be 'innovation'? And people that believe in the country and the system are somehow crazy? Is this really what you are saying?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomcat
Do you believe Obama had the right to nominate a SC Judge? Do you believe the Senate had the obligation to take part in the process?Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
If you don't believe those two things, then you don't believe in the Constitution.
...of course not: that's what you're saying...Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
...the constitution has already been subject to innovation: 27 times in fact...the founding fathers, in their wisdom, recognized that no document could be so perfectly worded that it would stand for all time unchanged...
...btw: "innovation" is a curse word among Muslim fundamentalists who insist that Mohammed's every twitch (as related by folks who never knew or met him) be repeated exactly by all Muslims forever...similar to your argument that the constitution must remain uninterpreted...Muslims would understand that notion perfectly...
Thats just your simpleton way of forcing someone to fit inside, or outside, little word-trap.Quote:
Originally Posted by pickel
I believe the Filibuster to be Constitutional, because it is, you guys just don't like it, therefore its wrong, and unconstitutional, because it was used against your party.
Now I might not like it if its successfully used against policy or choices that I like, but since I believe it to be Constitutional, and I'm not a total fucking retarded liberal hypocrite, I'm not gonna go out and whine and cry like a bunch of little nancy-pants because I lost, or my party lost, or that one choice/policy didnt happen and start calling everything that I don't like "unconstitutional" when, in fact, its not. Thats called lying, incase you suckers forgot.
Jefferson said this;Quote:
Originally Posted by tomcat
"Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of nineteen years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force, and not of right."
And this;
Forty years [after a] Constitution... was formed,... two-thirds of the adults then living are... dead. Have, then, the remaining third, even if they had the wish, the right to hold in obedience to their will and to laws heretofore made by them, the other two-thirds who with themselves compose the present mass of adults? If they have not, who has? The dead? But the dead have no rights. They are nothing, and nothing can not own something. Where there is no substance, there can be no accident [i.e., attribute]." --Thomas Jefferson to Samuel Kercheval, 1816. (*) ME 15:42
I never said that. It was written with a clear intention and you people want to change that intention under the guise of it being a living document. It can be changed and ratified, there are procedures for that, but the intention should always remain in its intended form.Quote:
Originally Posted by tomcat
so: you're upset about procedural matters, not the substance of the discussion...Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
the intention, as I understand it was to provide a document that describes liberty and justice for all...not just the folks that look, act or think like you..."intention" sounds like your dog whistle for "my interpretation"...Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
There was no filibuster you moron. The Repubtards simply refused to schedule hearings and that is a violation of constitutional protocol and was unprecedented in history.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
You go around calling people simpletons and stupid but then you show yourself to be an ill informed ignoramus. Laughable.
What's this all about?
Sad old kunt. Still got his knickers in a twist since Obama took the piss out of him there and also can't ban certain news organisations.Quote:
Donald Trump on Saturday capped a week of tumultuous relations with the press by saying he will not attend this year’s White House correspondents’ dinner, which is scheduled for 29 April.
“I will not be attending the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner this year,” the president wrote on Twitter. “Please wish everyone well and have a great evening!”
The news came as relations between the Trump administration and the news media, which he has called “the enemy of the American people”, have sunk to new lows. On Friday, leading outlets including the New York Times, CNN and the Guardian were excluded from a briefing by press secretary Sean Spicer while friendlier conservative organisations were admitted.
Editors of excluded organisations expressed anger, although White House Correspondents Association (WHCA) president Jeff Mason, of Reuters, attempted to calm troubled waters.
In a statement on Saturday, Mason said the WHCA “looks forward to having its annual dinner” and added: “The WHCA takes note of President Donald Trump’s announcement on Twitter that he does not plan to attend the dinner, which has been and will continue to be a celebration of the first amendment and the important role played by an independent news media in a healthy republic.
“We look forward to shining a spotlight at the dinner on some of the best political journalism of the past year and recognizing the promising students who represent the next generation of our profession.”
Trump has recently reacted angrily to a series of reports citing anonymous sources in the White House, law enforcement and intelligence agencies about chaos in his administration, alleged contacts between campaign staff and Russian agents, and White House attempts to rebut such reports.
Trump at CPAC: I oppose fake news, not the media
The difficult relationship between Trump – whose senior adviser Steve Bannon, formerly chief of the rightwing website Breitbart News, has repeatedly called the press “the opposition party” – and the media has already contributed to a number of withdrawals from the correspondents’ dinner and related events.
This week Bloomberg followed Vanity Fair and the New Yorker in saying it would not host a party tied to the dinner. The New York Times has not attended the event since 2008; the Guardian will not attend this year. This week, Buzzfeed reported that another favourite target of Trump’s, CNN, was considering pulling out as well.
Trump followed a familiar path on Friday night, when he wrote on Twitter: “FAKE NEWS media knowingly doesn’t tell the truth. A great danger to our country. The failing @nytimes has become a joke. Likewise @CNN. Sad!”
Many observers have linked Trump’s run for the presidency with events at the 2011 correspondents’ dinner, in which Barack Obama ridiculed the businessman, who was in attendance, over his championing of the so-called “birther” movement.
The dinner is a traditionally lighthearted affair, celebrities mixing with journalists at tables and comedians “roasting” the president of the day, as Stephen Colbert did to George W Bush in an infamous speech from 2006. The president traditionally speaks as well.
The first dinner was held in 1921 and Calvin Coolidge was the first president to attend, in 1924. Since then every president has attended the dinner at least once.
The story of the week is Trump, Russia and the FBI. The rest is a distraction
Malcolm Nance
Ronald Reagan did not attend in 1981 – after being shot – and Jimmy Carter and Richard Nixon did not always sit down for dinner. Obama attended all eight events while he was in office.
According to the History Channel the dinner has been cancelled three times: following the death of former president William Howard Taft, in 1930, after the US entry into the second world war in 1942, and in 1951, during the Korean war.
In January, Trump skipped the Alfalfa Club dinner, another key event in the social calendar of a city in which the president is happy to pose as an outsider.
Rob Mahoney, deputy executive director of the Committee to Protect Journalists, told the Guardian on Saturday Trump should “act as a champion of press freedom” around the world, rather than attacking the media in a way that could “send a signal to other countries that it is OK to verbally abuse journalists and undermine their credibility”.
In a statement, Guardian US editor Lee Glendinning said the exclusion of news outlets from Friday’s briefing was “deeply troubling and divisive” and added: “Holding power to account is an essential part of the democratic process, and that’s exactly what the Guardian will continue to do.”
Maybe they should invite Alec Baldwin in his stead and have a real laugh.:bananaman:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...nner-not-going
...I would have chosen pitiable as today is the Lord's day...Quote:
Originally Posted by bsnub
I never said there was you dense prick. This shit is right over your head with a giant swoosh and you are too thick to even hear it.Quote:
Originally Posted by bsnub
I said I believe the filibuster to be constitutional. Goddamn are you fucking blind as well as retarded?
Im replying to this:
And since we are on the subject, pickle, Obama has partaken in the "Unconstitutional" Filibuster his own fucking self:Quote:
Originally Posted by pickel
Obama criticized Supreme Court filibuster of Alito even as he joined it | PolitiFact
And no, for the record, what Senate Republicans did to block Garland's vote was controversial, but not "Unconstitutional" and fucking believe me, if you pukes had a chance, you would, and will, I'm sure, utilize every tactic possible to cockblock anything you can from Trump without a single care in the world.
Sorry not sorry.
Oh bullshit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
FTFYQuote:
Originally Posted by Slick
Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter.
Thomas Jefferson
Most rock journalism is people who can't write, interviewing people who can't talk, for people who can't read.
Frank Zappa (1940-1993) American composer and rock (Probably referring to CNN) :)
Our government has three official branches—the executive, legislative, and judicial. But some say there is a fourth unofficial branch that is just as important. Thomas Jefferson once described what the fourth branch was. He wrote: "The basis of our government being the opinion of the people, the very first object should be to keep that right; and were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers, or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter."Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Chuchok
The fourth branch of our government is its free press.
Copy/pasting shit like you wrote it eh?Quote:
Originally Posted by bsnub
Never said I wrote it you spastic. To anyone with more than a double digit IQ it is painfully obvious to be a continuation of Jefferson's quote. Did you miss this box above;Quote:
Originally Posted by Slick
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Chuchok