Bingo, Trump won because of Obama and the division. Love every minute of it. Loved watching the DC beltway lifers squirm.
We are a representative republic, damn it.
- Thread starter i am herdman
- Start date
You by far are the biggest liar on this board. You are a coward and being dumb is the cherry on top.
That's an interesting argument, Herdman.
Of course, there were other recent rulings from SCOTUS...and I have to chuckle at the incompatibility of one with another. That NY gun case....
I am as a big a 2A guy as anyone. But I believe the right to self defense is not an enumerated right; it is a natural right, there is no need to spell it out, and the 9th clearly explains that is kosher. The 2A is a political right, to defend the nation from enemies both foreign and domestic, even if those doing the protecting are not a standing army (which is some deep shit not in play in most of world at any time in history, you can fight the government if it is tyrannical, it's pretty cool!). We have 200+ years of history with states and cities regulating guns in some way, and the Courts generally being OK with that. If we are to respect the history and interpret the Constitution and its amendments at the time they are written (as Alito wrote with the abortion case), why not send that back to the individual states to decide?
Thomas' written opinion in the gun case goes as far as to twist facts of history. It's bizarre. Just issue a blanket ruling on the natural right of self defense, period. There's plenty in common law for that. But no, Thomas, and the other conservatives on the court, in this and past opinions twists THE FOURTEENTH for the right of self defense! They do the same thing they criticized Roe for! It's illogical.
And then that SOB has the balls in the abortion case to talk about reversing other cases (gay marriage, contraception, etc) that were based on the 14th. Funny he didn't mention Loving....before that case there was a long history of the 14th not applying to anti-miscegenation laws (see Pace v Alabama), why not apply that historical "what did it mean when written" bullshit to his own marriage? Jackass.
We have a court where even when I agree with the side they rule on, I disagree with what they write in the opinion. It's not new, of course; Herdman and some of you are right, Roe shouldn't have been a 14th Amendment decision, we do not need twisting to come up with a right to privacy, it's a natural right....same as carrying a pistol for self defense. But if not new, it is getting kinda worse.
Of course, there were other recent rulings from SCOTUS...and I have to chuckle at the incompatibility of one with another. That NY gun case....
I am as a big a 2A guy as anyone. But I believe the right to self defense is not an enumerated right; it is a natural right, there is no need to spell it out, and the 9th clearly explains that is kosher. The 2A is a political right, to defend the nation from enemies both foreign and domestic, even if those doing the protecting are not a standing army (which is some deep shit not in play in most of world at any time in history, you can fight the government if it is tyrannical, it's pretty cool!). We have 200+ years of history with states and cities regulating guns in some way, and the Courts generally being OK with that. If we are to respect the history and interpret the Constitution and its amendments at the time they are written (as Alito wrote with the abortion case), why not send that back to the individual states to decide?
Thomas' written opinion in the gun case goes as far as to twist facts of history. It's bizarre. Just issue a blanket ruling on the natural right of self defense, period. There's plenty in common law for that. But no, Thomas, and the other conservatives on the court, in this and past opinions twists THE FOURTEENTH for the right of self defense! They do the same thing they criticized Roe for! It's illogical.
And then that SOB has the balls in the abortion case to talk about reversing other cases (gay marriage, contraception, etc) that were based on the 14th. Funny he didn't mention Loving....before that case there was a long history of the 14th not applying to anti-miscegenation laws (see Pace v Alabama), why not apply that historical "what did it mean when written" bullshit to his own marriage? Jackass.
We have a court where even when I agree with the side they rule on, I disagree with what they write in the opinion. It's not new, of course; Herdman and some of you are right, Roe shouldn't have been a 14th Amendment decision, we do not need twisting to come up with a right to privacy, it's a natural right....same as carrying a pistol for self defense. But if not new, it is getting kinda worse.
LOL Desantis is worse than Trump...you might win in 2022 because mid terms generally have lower voter turnout and that favors Republicans...but 2024 will be an easy win for the democrats. So you can get over that.
wake up alice, wonderland is just over the hill. 75% of the nation which includes a massive number of old school democrats are tired of the far left ideals the new age democrats have embraced. i'm actually surprised old bastards like you and greed still defend the bullshit . . . hell, greed puts political party before his religions. just proves that it's political arty before common sense for many of the old inept idiots that could never think for themselves. i'd ask you to give that statement some thought, but you've already proven that's impossible, so i'll simply offer this: fvck off.
Greed has zero right to speak on matters relating to service in the US military. He's a little communist shit, twinkle-toe cocksucker who wouldn't last a day in peacetime training, let alone combat.
You're a lying idiot. You prove that you're a liar every time you post here. Ditto for the idiot part.
No he is telling the truth you have no right to speak on military matters. You are a coward.
