yet more brain studies and politics

SmarterThanYou said:
the supreme court has not ALWAYS been controlled by conservatives. It was a liberal supreme court, as well as many liberal appellate courts, that rewrote the right to bear arms from an Individual right to a so called 'collective' right, meaning that one had to be in a government supported military unit to own a gun. Then a Liberal supreme court agreed that the commerce clause allowed congress to regulate anything a person may own, possess, manufacture, or sell. Now, that doesn't mean I support conservative supreme courts also, because they are just as bad about rewriting the constitution and bill of rights as well.

so next?
Click to expand...

Please refer to the thread 'yet more brain studies and politics'...seek out information on right wing paranoia and insecurity.

In general terms, when liberals control the Supreme Court people's rights are increased. When conservatives control the court people's rights are restricted. Liberal courts protect the little guy, conservative courts protect the big guy, including government and especially law enforcement.

Conservatives are not 'tough on crime' they are tough on freedom and liberty. Any thinking man can see it, and only the dogmatic ideologue can't.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
So are you trying to tell me that fear is not a physiological mediated autonomic response?
Click to expand...

I'm saying that is one type of fear, but you are trying to tell me that fear is ONLY that, which is a false premise. It ignores what causes fear. Fear does not exist in a vacuum either there is a real threat, or one is predicted before one gets this response. Ignoring the cause to zero in solely on the reaction is where you meet your error. Those with greater imagination can better predict future scenarios that may cause problems and wish to avoid them, creating a response...
 
Bfgrn said:
A strong argument can be made for both sides of that case, but I concur with the minority for the most part. It opens the door to bullying.
Click to expand...

you do know that the courts liberal majority decided that case, right? and what strong argument can be made for taking private property to give to another private entity to provide a larger tax base?
 
Mott the Hoople said:
No. They're irrrational and extremist fantasy but what's to be afraid of? The'll never become reality.
Click to expand...

The point twit, is that just because someone disagrees with a certain 'change' doesn't mean they are afraid of anything. Many of the 'changes' proposed by so called progressives are moronic irrational extremist fantasies as well. Yet those are supposedly what conservatives 'fear' according to nuts like you.
 
SmarterThanYou said:
you do know that the courts liberal majority decided that case, right? and what strong argument can be made for taking private property to give to another private entity to provide a larger tax base?
Click to expand...

The court held that if an economic project creates new jobs, increases tax and other city revenues, and revitalizes a depressed urban area (even if not blighted), then the project qualifies as a public use. wiki
 
Bfgrn said:
The court held that if an economic project creates new jobs, increases tax and other city revenues, and revitalizes a depressed urban area (even if not blighted), then the project qualifies as a public use. wiki
Click to expand...

which is a complete travesty of what the takings clause was written about by the founders, but with you being a liberal, i'm not surprised that you wish to discount the words of old dead guys.

and weren't you complaining earlier about how catering to corporate interests was a conservative thing? guess you changed your viewpoints, eh?

what happens when you let 9 black robed tyrants interpret the constitution according to their beliefs?
 
SmarterThanYou said:
which is a complete travesty of what the takings clause was written about by the founders, but with you being a liberal, i'm not surprised that you wish to discount the words of old dead guys.

and weren't you complaining earlier about how catering to corporate interests was a conservative thing? guess you changed your viewpoints, eh?

what happens when you let 9 black robed tyrants interpret the constitution according to their beliefs?
Click to expand...

Do you have a reading problem or a comprehension problem?

Bfgrn said:
A strong argument can be made for both sides of that case, but I concur with the minority for the most part. It opens the door to bullying.
Click to expand...
 
King of Reason said:
Kelo is seriously the most tyrannical and insipid decision in my lifetime.
Click to expand...

What a ridiculous right wing off the cliff pile of paranoia. HERE is the heart of why you right wingers have a problem with it.

"Republicans care more about property, Democrats care more about people"
Ted Sorensen - President Kennedy's Special Counsel & Adviser, and primary speechwriter
 
SmarterThanYou said:
That and Connick v. Thompson.
Click to expand...

Connick v. Thompson is right wing autoritarianism at it's worst. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was so bothered by the majority decision that she read her dissent from the bench for the first time that term.

That is why the liberal dominated Supreme Court ruled in Brady v. Maryland that the government has a duty to disclose material evidence to the defense, which could tend to change the outcome of a trial.
 
Bfgrn said:
Connick v. Thompson is right wing autoritarianism at it's worst. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was so bothered by the majority decision that she read her dissent from the bench for the first time that term.

That is why the liberal dominated Supreme Court ruled in Brady v. Maryland that the government has a duty to disclose material evidence to the defense, which could tend to change the outcome of a trial.
Click to expand...

maybe you can explain then, why the Obama admin argued that you have no right not to be framed?

and citizens united the worst decision ever? please
 
http://www.libertymind.com/

The liberal agenda’s basic principles are not only antithetical to our most cherished liberties; they are also directly contrary to all that is good and noble in the human enterprise. The Liberal Mind is the first work to explain why modern liberalism appeals to the irrational tendencies of the human mind. It is the first work to explain how liberalism can be defeated.

In the course of this analysis, The Liberal Mind asks and answers the following critical question: Why would anyone want a political system that restricts personal freedom instead of enhancing it; denounces personal responsibility instead of promoting it; surrenders personal sovereignty instead of honoring it; attacks the philosophical foundations of liberty instead of defending them; encourages government dependency instead of self-reliance; and undermines the character of the people by making them wards of the state?
 
this is the most hilarious thread to pop up on jpp in some time....though i'm not surprised at the liberals who fell for the "science"....

:lol:
 
SmarterThanYou said:
maybe you can explain then, why the Obama admin argued that you have no right not to be framed?

and citizens united the worst decision ever? please
Click to expand...

Be specific on your charge. And who said Obama is a liberal? He is a huge disappointment to liberals and progressives. If Ted Kennedy were still here, he would take Obama to the woodshed.

Citizens United is THE worst decision handed down by the right wing corporatists on the Supreme Court. It was judicial activism on steroids. It says that MONEY trumps democracy. I know the right wing mind cannot digest those concepts.
 
Bfgrn said:
Be specific on your charge. And who said Obama is a liberal? He is a huge disappointment to liberals and progressives. If Ted Kennedy were still here, he would take Obama to the woodshed.

Citizens United is THE worst decision handed down by the right wing corporatists on the Supreme Court. It was judicial activism on steroids. It says that MONEY trumps democracy. I know the right wing mind cannot digest those concepts.
Click to expand...

this is totally moronic. how is a decision that ALLOWS an entity to spend money on something worse than a decision that DENIES rights and liberties to a PERSON?

your ideology is pathetically inept.

and specificity? it was discussed on this very board.

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...rgues-that-you-have-no-right-not-to-be-framed
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top