One LARGE order of S-HOLE coming right up!

[Tombs]

And all because the guy whose name begins with "T" doesn't understand the Constitution. Lol.

Hilarious, a constitutional scholar who's name began with "O" didn't seem to know anything about it either.

Wiretapping congress, running guns to mexican cartel, using government institutions to suppress political opponents... Amazing really.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Hilarious, a constitutional scholar who's name began with "O" didn't seem to know anything about it either.

Wiretapping congress, running guns to mexican cartel, using government institutions to suppress political opponents... Amazing really.

Lol. I have absolutely no idea who you are talking about. Here, I'll say it plainly. Obviously, you are talking about Barack Obama. His name begins with a "B," not an "O." When I stated that someone whose name began with "T" didn't understand the Constitution, I wasn't speaking of Donald Trump, because his name begins with a "D," not a "T." The "T" reference, was related to you, whose name begins with a "T," Tombs, and Timjoebillybob, whose name also begins with a "T." One understands the Constitution, one does not. I was silent as to which was correct, and left to whomever felt the need to go back and look to the respective arguments.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

No. That aside this has been happening for a long time. Under "O" the SC found it constitutional to press us into a contract. Remember that. That is a load of HHS if there ever was any. "T" might be somewhat buffoonish but "O" and his ilk used the system to get what the wanted. Across the board.
Not going to start a diff. discussion here but the courts and alphabet agency's are the lefts go to when the legislative branch fails them.

Yep. After prohibition, they discovered progressive ideals are too difficult to install through the ballot box. Instead, and FDR sort of laid the ground work for it, they found if they could pack the courts, they could amend the constitution through a court decision. It's much easier to get 5/9 judges to rule in your favor than 3/4 of the states.

 

[churchmouse]

Lol. I have absolutely no idea who you are talking about. Here, I'll say it plainly. Obviously, you are talking about Barack Obama. His name begins with a "B," not an "O." When I stated that someone whose name began with "T" didn't understand the Constitution, I wasn't speaking of Donald Trump, because his name begins with a "D," not a "T." The "T" reference, was related to you, whose name begins with a "T," Tombs, and Timjoebillybob, whose name also begins with a "T." One understands the Constitution, one does not. I was silent as to which was correct, and left to whomever felt the need to go back and look to the respective arguments.

Come on Kut......We have referred to him as "O" for a while.
But I did miss the correlation you mentioned. Thought you were dissing DJT. My bad.

 

[jamil]

The court is a check and balance on legislation, it is not supposed to legislate from the bench, and I have no idea how they get away with doing as such.

The government has voted to restrict their own power before, 21st amendment immediately springs to mind. So yes, it can protect you from its self through legislation. It's just absurdly rare that it ever actually happens.

They get away with it because of the inherent weakness in Republics. We elect people to represent us, and in a sense we're powerless to make them mind. As long as there isn't significant public pressure to keep with the program, the government can incrementally claim more power that it wasn't granted. Obama pushed the envelope even further with overreaching EOs, making law through regulation. And it's clear enough that this president isn't all that bothered by silly things like the constitution, so if he gets his way, he'll push it even further.

 

[wagyu52]

[video=youtube_share;_dnNOFCDSF8]https://youtu.be/_dnNOFCDSF8[/video]


Looks like at least one country has been willing to take some SA farmers.

 

[jamil]

Lol. I have absolutely no idea who you are talking about. Here, I'll say it plainly. Obviously, you are talking about Barack Obama. His name begins with a "B," not an "O." When I stated that someone whose name began with "T" didn't understand the Constitution, I wasn't speaking of Donald Trump, because his name begins with a "D," not a "T." The "T" reference, was related to you, whose name begins with a "T," Tombs, and Timjoebillybob, whose name also begins with a "T." One understands the Constitution, one does not. I was silent as to which was correct, and left to whomever felt the need to go back and look to the respective arguments.

So you're on a first name basis?

I spell "Obama" with a 0, btw.

 

[Kutnupe14]

So you're on a first name basis?

I spell "Obama" with a 0, btw.

That's classified

 

[BugI02]

Yep. After prohibition, they discovered progressive ideals are too difficult to install through the ballot box. Instead, and FDR sort of laid the ground work for it, they found if they could pack the courts, they could amend the constitution through a court decision. It's much easier to get 5/9 judges to rule in your favor than 3/4 of the states.

Yep, and if Trump and McConnell got nothing else done besides the confirmation of Gorsuch and not Garland IMO it will have been worth it

 

[KLB]

Yep, and if Trump and McConnell got nothing else done besides the confirmation of Gorsuch and not Garland IMO it will have been worth it

Agreed. Gorsuch was worth his silliness.

 

[bobzilla]

Come on Kut......We have referred to him as "O" for a while.
But I did miss the correlation you mentioned. Thought you were dissing DJT. My bad.

Typical kut deflection. He changed the subject did he not? It’s much easier to deflect than admit something.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Typical kut deflection. He changed the subject did he not? It’s much easier to deflect than admit something.

No, "he" did not change nor deflect the subject. If you were following with this most recent point that was brought up, you'd know that. But it appears you simply want get into it for some reason. This is the second time in recent days you've decided the interject yourself into a conversation that you have not participated in, nor understand, just to throw some shade my way. My personal preference, is that you at least participate rather than simply taking the opportunity to attack me out of the blue.

 

[bobzilla]

I stopped caring about your opinion when you decided to tell me that you’re here merely arguing to argue. I’ve read every post in these threads and merely pointed out the obvious. Apparently it gives you some butthurt but that’s on you.

 

[churchmouse]

Take a break boys.

 

[churchmouse]

OK fellas. We all good now.

Hope so.

Last chance.

 

[Dead Duck]

BUT HE STARTED IT!

 

[Tombs]

Lol. I have absolutely no idea who you are talking about. Here, I'll say it plainly. Obviously, you are talking about Barack Obama. His name begins with a "B," not an "O." When I stated that someone whose name began with "T" didn't understand the Constitution, I wasn't speaking of Donald Trump, because his name begins with a "D," not a "T." The "T" reference, was related to you, whose name begins with a "T," Tombs, and Timjoebillybob, whose name also begins with a "T." One understands the Constitution, one does not. I was silent as to which was correct, and left to whomever felt the need to go back and look to the respective arguments.

"O" is more polite than "BS."

 

[Kutnupe14]

"O" is more polite than "BS."

If you say so. But now you are clear that the way the Constitution was written, it could potentially allow for the creation of any form of government... and that there is a process in place remove things from it. Or do you still believe neither of those are correct?

 

[Tombs]

If you say so. But now you are clear that the way the Constitution was written, it could potentially allow for the creation of any form of government... and that there is a process in place remove things from it. Or do you still believe neither of those are correct?

Just so we're clear, you realize that "living document" means that it may be interpreted any which way someone wishes to, which allows them to do what ever they want without any real checks and balances?

And no there is no process for removing things. Only for adding things, which may negate something else.

 

[Itchytriggerfinger]

If both of you fellas have a DD214 we can settle this the INGO way.