Obama's back door Gun control

Howey said:
Of course you don't want the truth. How will your half brain be able to believe the ridiculous crap you read Dicksee?
Click to expand...

Oh, I wasn't aware that liberals hold a monopoly on what is the 'truth'? I know that y'all think you do, but that just shows how easily you can be led.

Oh, and the name is j-mac Howie.
 
Rune said:
God damn. Do you even read your own links? 2/3 of the senate must approve, yet 58 senators are opposed? Do you understand basic math at all?
Click to expand...

So it's OK for the Government to suggest such things, even when the majority are against it.

Well; that does explain Obama care. :D
 
j-mac said:
I have to ask, are all the liberals on this board just immature, insulting hacks, or is that just the only way they think they can argue, is through Sol Alinsky tactics?

Listen, tell me hack, how many recess appointments did Bush just declare the Congress in recess when they weren't and make the appointment?
Click to expand...

The problem with the liberals, on this board, and probably others, is that they all get the same talking points, at the same time.
It's probably a mass e-mailing or such. :D
 
SmarterthanYou said:
Kelo v. New London? Citizens United? i'm guessing that you agree with all the USSC decisions, opinions, and ideas?
Click to expand...

Guess again? Try to be correct this time. I have been decrying CU since I joined the forum, wtf are you talking about? Furthermore, when have I ever stood against private property rights taken by business interests?

Tell us, STY, do you think Obama can do as j-mac has suggested here?
 
Rune said:
Guess again? Try to be correct this time. I have been decrying CU since I joined the forum, wtf are you talking about? Furthermore, when have I ever stood against private property rights taken by business interests?

Tell us, STY, do you think Obama can do as j-mac has suggested here?
Click to expand...

with as weak minded and cowardly as our congress has been, Obama might very well be able to do something like that, but that's the fault of congress.

What I pointedly asked YOU was your apparent supreme faith in the decisions of the USSC. especially after you had the temerity to challenge me on my feelings of USSC decisions.

So, do you agree with all the courts decisions? or are only the ones you agree with constitutional?????
 
Rune said:
Crazy or just stupid?
Click to expand...

USFREEDOM911 said:
The problem with the liberals, on this board, and probably others, is that they all get the same talking points, at the same time.
It's probably a mass e-mailing or such. :D
Click to expand...

I don't see us posting silly claims from chain emails that were debunked over two years ago. That's you guys.

Talking points, by definition, are backed by facts. Chain emails? Not so much. :)
 
SmarterthanYou said:
with as weak minded and cowardly as our congress has been, Obama might very well be able to do something like that, but that's the fault of congress.

What I pointedly asked YOU was your apparent supreme faith in the decisions of the USSC. especially after you had the temerity to challenge me on my feelings of USSC decisions.

So, do you agree with all the courts decisions? or are only the ones you agree with constitutional?????
Click to expand...

Did you somehow miss this thread, which I started?

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/showthread.php?41700-Defend-Citizens-United

As to the Supremes? Their rulings are law, whether I like them or not.
 
Rune said:
Tell us, STY, do you think Obama can do as j-mac has suggested here?
Click to expand...

STY said:
with as weak minded and cowardly as our congress has been, Obama might very well be able to do something like that, but that's the fault of congress.
Click to expand...

It's not a hypothetical, this happened.

Pfeiffer also attempts to preempt opponents' arguments that Senators are still technically in session, thus preventing the President from making a recess appointment.

"The Senate has effectively been in recess for weeks, and is expected to remain in recess for weeks," he writes. "In an overt attempt to prevent the President from exercising his authority during this period, Republican Senators insisted on using a gimmick called 'pro forma' sessions, which are sessions during which no Senate business is conducted and instead one or two Senators simply gavel in and out of session in a matter of seconds. But gimmicks do not override the President's constitutional authority to make appointments to keep the government running."

http://consumerist.com/2012/01/pres...nt-cordray-as-financial-protection-chief.html
Click to expand...

Obama not waiting for congress appointed the CFPB head even though congress was IN SESSION! This is a lawless administration.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
their rulings are NOT law!!!!! WE THE PEOPLE have the ultimate power in jury nullification. Do YOU believe in Jury Nullification?
Click to expand...

Yes I believe in jury nullification. That does not change the fact that the Supreme's rulings are law, unless and until they are modified by legislation or constitutional ammendment.

Tell me, STY, when was the last time a jury had a chance to nullify a decision by the Supreme Court?
 
j-mac said:
It's not a hypothetical, this happened.



Obama not waiting for congress appointed the CFPB head even though congress was IN SESSION! This is a lawless administration.
Click to expand...

Tell me, j-mac, did they laugh you out of the last forum you were on, or are you truly an expert on chitlins and four wheel drive? You sure as shit have no idea what the fuck you are talking about here.
 
Rune said:
Yes I believe in jury nullification. That does not change the fact that the Supreme's rulings are law, unless and until they are modified by legislation or constitutional ammendment.

Tell me, STY, when was the last time a jury had a chance to nullify a decision by the Supreme Court?
Click to expand...

a jury has the chance to nullify a USSC decision EVERY SINGLE TIME they serve on a jury, IF they were made aware of their rights as a juror. The courts and prosecutors do NOT want you proles to know about this right. that is why it is paramount that we teach our own about our rights, but it appears you don't want that.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
that is why it is paramount that we teach our own about our rights, but it appears you don't want that.
Click to expand...

Really? Why is it that you think I am opposed to jury nullification?

Also, tell me how often supreme court rulings are re-visited by lower courts? (the jury can only nullify the conviction of the individual on trial, NOT the decision of the Supremes, as you imply).
 
j-mac said:
It's not a hypothetical, this happened.
Obama not waiting for congress appointed the CFPB head even though congress was IN SESSION! This is a lawless administration.
Click to expand...

Wasn't this the time when a few Republicans poked their head in the chambers and left? FAIL!

If Congress would you know...VOTE...on presidential appointments we wouldn't have this problem, would we?

Rune said:
Tell me, j-mac, did they laugh you out of the last forum you were on, or are you truly an expert on chitlins and four wheel drive? You sure as shit have no idea what the fuck you are talking about here.
Click to expand...

His fellow teabaggers were probably embarrased by his stupidity and posting of too many three year old chain emails and banninated him. He'd never make it on my forum. ekg would eat him alive. Of course, she'll be doing that here too.

SmarterthanYou said:
a jury has the chance to nullify a USSC decision EVERY SINGLE TIME they serve on a jury, IF they were made aware of their rights as a juror. The courts and prosecutors do NOT want you proles to know about this right. that is why it is paramount that we teach our own about our rights, but it appears you don't want that.
Click to expand...

Dammit!



USSC - United States Sentencing Commission

SCOTUS - Supreme Court

And what's with this "proles" shit? Do you even know what the word means today? nah...you probably do...I can see Romney using it all the time. :)
 
Howey said:
I don't see us posting silly claims from chain emails that were debunked over two years ago. That's you guys.

Talking points, by definition, are backed by facts. Chain emails? Not so much. :)
Click to expand...

So you admit that the liberal e-mails you get your datribes from, have no facts in them. :shock:


Thanks for being honest, this one time Howard. :D
 
Howey said:
You have serious reading comprehension problems, don't you? (As well as spelling...)
Click to expand...

OH-LOOK; we have another hall monitor (spelling nazi).
I bet you used to sit in the front of the class room and tell on everyone, when the teacher returned; HUH!! :palm:
 
Howey said:
Wasn't this the time when a few Republicans poked their head in the chambers and left? FAIL!
Click to expand...

It's called a 'pro-forma' session.

"In the United States federal government, either house of the Congress (the House of Representatives or the Senate) can hold a pro forma session at which no formal business is expected to be conducted.[5] This is usually to fulfill the obligation under the Constitution "that neither chamber can adjourn for more than three days without the consent of the other."[6] Pro forma sessions can also be used to prevent the President pocket-vetoing bills, or calling the Congress into special session.[7] They have also been used to prevent presidents from making recess appointments. However, in 2012, President Barack Obama made four appointments during a pro forma session,[8] calling the practice of blocking recess appointments into question.[9]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro_forma

So Obama, surprise, surprise, seems to be the only President to ignore them.

If Congress would you know...VOTE...on presidential appointments we wouldn't have this problem, would we?
Click to expand...

Hmmmm...That never seems to be a problem when libs do it with a Republican in power...

His fellow teabaggers were probably embarrased by his stupidity and posting of too many three year old chain emails and banninated him. He'd never make it on my forum. ekg would eat him alive. Of course, she'll be doing that here too.
Click to expand...

Your forum? What is that? 'It's raining men.com'? (just kidding), anyway, nah I am still on the other forum, just like I said in the intro thread, just checkin' out some other sites...Not all of us lie like libs...heh, heh...Oh, and I don't know who ekg is but I look forward to meeting her. Hopefully she has more intellect than you rubes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top