Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 106

Thread: Constitutional Scholar? Really?

  1. #41
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3,638
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;4425562]Wow, are you trying to replace Warfish as the resident drama queen?[/QUOTE]

    that isn't it at all, th translation is, "I've got a championship game to watch!"

  2. #42
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,776
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=piney;4425579]that isn't it at all, th translation is, "I've got a championship game to watch!"[/QUOTE]

    He's the all knowing Libertarian.

  3. #43
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,779
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4425154]Standard Issue Party Politics.

    When the SC overturns/supports a law theri way, they're all about the power of the SC as arbiters of truth and justice protecting the people from the wrongs of mob rule, last line defenders of the rights we all cherish.

    When the SC turns over something they support, the SC is a bunch of unelected tyrants ruling by fiat against the will of the people, performing "unprecidented" overrulings they have no right to make int he first place.

    (D), (R), they both do it, regularly.[/QUOTE]


    I really don't like agreeing with you.


    +1

  4. #44
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    East of the Jordan, West of the Rock of Gibraltar
    Posts
    4,779
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Bonhomme Richard;4425337]I'd be interested to see an example of a recent Republican president scoffing at the concept of checks and balances.[/QUOTE]


    How about a recent Republican President who ignored Habeas corpus?

    And thus neutered the judicial branch of government

    This IMHO is far worse

  5. #45
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    1,710
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JetPotato;4425377]BUSH BUSH BUSH BUSH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH

    SHUT THE FUKC UP ABOUT BUSH

    We're talking about Obama. This is so so old. Every time this guy does something stupid it's right to the waaaaaaaaaaBushwaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

    Have some fukin balls and address THIS azzhole for a fukin minute. Christ almighty.[/QUOTE]

    [IMG]http://oi41.tinypic.com/34o7m86.jpg[/IMG]
    Last edited by Sharrow; 04-03-2012 at 04:35 PM.

  6. #46
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7,953
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Buster;4425598]How about a recent Republican President who ignored Habeas corpus?

    And thus neutered the judicial branch of government

    This IMHO is far worse[/QUOTE]

    Obama?

    I know... That fargin guy...

  7. #47
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,903
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JetPotato;4425557]It really is pointless. No one here even attempts to stay on topic.

    Go on continuing to live with blinders on. But keep your collective mouths shut and don't utter a single complaint when it all comes crumbling down.[/QUOTE]

    I just pray the dumbasses in Ohio, Florida, NC, MI, PA, VA don't outnumber the other voters on election day, because if this idiot gets a second term, there will be a bloodbath. That's not hyperbole, I'm dead serious. This guy is as rotten as yesterdays fish in a trash can on an August afternoon. He's an evil, destructive, hideous man.

  8. #48
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,552
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Frequent Flyer;4425772]I just pray the dumbasses in Ohio, Florida, NC, MI, PA, VA don't outnumber the other voters on election day, because if this idiot gets a second term, there will be a bloodbath. That's not hyperbole, I'm dead serious. This guy is as rotten as yesterdays fish in a trash can on an August afternoon. He's an evil, destructive, hideous man.[/QUOTE]

    Pray all you want, but Obama is going to win. Ever see the movie Idiocracy? That's what's happening in this country. It's getting dumber by the minute. We're a country that is so collectively weak mentally that things like this are shrugged off all the time. Brainwashed masses of people still actually support this fuk. And they're using George W. Bush as the precedent example to justify his behaviors. George W. Bush. The same guy they wanted imprisoned.

    We're in an cycle of terrible (GOP) and even more horrendous (Dems). It's a cycle that at this point can only end one way. And we're getting close.
    Last edited by JetPotato; 04-03-2012 at 08:47 AM.

  9. #49
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,903
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JetPotato;4425787]Pray all you want, but Obama is going to win. Ever see the movie Idiocracy? That's what's happening in this country. It's getting dumber by the minute. We're a country that is so collectively weak mentally that things like this are shrugged off all the time. Brainwashed masses of people still actually support this fuk. And they're using George W. Bush as the precedent example to justify his behaviors. George W. Bush. The same guy they wanted imprisoned.

    We're in an cycle of terrible (GOP) and even more horrendous (Dems). It's a cycle that at this point can only end one way. And we're getting close.[/QUOTE]

    Well then, it's all over. Make sure you have at least one reliable firearm and plenty of ammo.

  10. #50
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,873
    Post Thanks / Like
    He may win the election but he will lose this case. If you want mandated healthcare let the individual states do it. But be ready to pay the State Taxes!

  11. #51
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,459
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Buster;4425598]How about a recent Republican President who ignored Habeas corpus?

    And thus neutered the judicial branch of government

    This IMHO is far worse[/QUOTE]

    FDR wasn't a Republican...

  12. #52
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,776
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JetPotato;4425787]Pray all you want, but Obama is going to win. Ever see the movie Idiocracy? That's what's happening in this country. It's getting dumber by the minute. We're a country that is so collectively weak mentally that things like this are shrugged off all the time. Brainwashed masses of people still actually support this fuk. And they're using George W. Bush as the precedent example to justify his behaviors. George W. Bush. The same guy they wanted imprisoned.

    We're in an cycle of terrible (GOP) and even more horrendous (Dems). It's a cycle that at this point can only end one way. And we're getting close.[/QUOTE]

    LOL

  13. #53
    All League
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,565
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JetPotato;4425787]Pray all you want, but Obama is going to win. Ever see the movie Idiocracy? That's what's happening in this country. It's getting dumber by the minute. We're a country that is so collectively weak mentally that things like this are shrugged off all the time. Brainwashed masses of people still actually support this fuk. And they're using George W. Bush as the precedent example to justify his behaviors. George W. Bush. The same guy they wanted imprisoned.

    We're in an cycle of terrible (GOP) and even more horrendous (Dems). It's a cycle that at this point can only end one way. And we're getting close.[/QUOTE]

    Did you see the Stossel Show stupid in America? The African American kids in New Orleans are FINALLY getting educated thanks to the strangle hold of the teachers unions being broken and charter schools opening after Karina, The parents are ecstatic and and wonder "why this hasn't been done before" But, I'll bet the morons WILL vote for Obama, the Union strangle hold lover. Because "he's black and for them".

  14. #54
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,552
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=acepepe;4425897]Did you see the Stossel Show stupid in America? The African American kids in New Orleans are FINALLY getting educated thanks to the strangle hold of the teachers unions being broken and charter schools opening after Karina, The parents are ecstatic and and wonder "why this hasn't been done before" But, I'll bet the morons WILL vote for Obama, the Union strangle hold lover. Because "he's black and for them".[/QUOTE]

    You're not helping anything with this. In fact, you're helping to make it worse. Stupid comes in all colors.

  15. #55
    All League
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Farmingdale, NY
    Posts
    2,520
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=acepepe;4425897]Did you see the Stossel Show stupid in America? The African American kids in New Orleans are FINALLY getting educated thanks to the strangle hold of the teachers unions being broken and charter schools opening after Karina, The parents are ecstatic and and wonder "why this hasn't been done before" But, I'll bet the morons WILL vote for Obama, the Union strangle hold lover. Because "he's black and for them".[/QUOTE]

    Every post of yours is about African Americans.

    I think you should take one month, lets say April 2012, and not post anything about the problems you see in the African American community or your disdain for Michelle Obama.

    Just try it. I'll make the deal with you, I won't bring up George Walker Bush once for that same month. Deal?

  16. #56
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,903
    Post Thanks / Like
    Oh my God, this guy just served B.O. up a nice, warm cup of S T F U:

    [B][U]An Open Letter to President Barack H. Obama, Constitutional Scholar
    [/U][/B]April 2, 2012 by Jeff Schreiber

    Dear Mr. President,

    Supposedly, you are some sort of constitutional scholar. At the very least, you can read, you can write, and despite being merely some sort of guest lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School, you once famously referred to yourself as a “Constitutional Law professor.”

    Ringing a bell so far, Mr. President? Great.

    While my Juris Doctor is from the Rutgers School of Law in Camden, New Jersey, and while Rutgers-Camden is a fine school but is hardly Harvard Law School, within the first three days of Constitutional Law class those who did not already know of and understand Marbury v. Madison, perhaps the single most important decision in the history of the United States Supreme Court, were nonetheless introduced to it ad nauseum.

    In Marbury, the United States Supreme Court held that federal courts across our nation not only have the authority, but also the duty, to review the constitutionality of acts of Congress–including statutes and treaties–and to designate as void those acts of Congress which countermand the United States Constitution.

    The term you’re searching for between those ears of yours, Mr. President, is “judicial review.” And, while it has been nearly two years since I opened up a Constitutional Law book and can now debate divorce and family law in South Carolina better than I can the Constitution, I recall enough from law school and bar exam study to know that the doctrine of “judicial review” is now settled law.

    In other words, since the landmark Marbury decision came down from the very Court you belittle and smear as “unelected” and “activist” in 1803, and because of “judicial review,” federal courts in the United States of America have the power–and duty–to review laws passed by Congress, decide whether or not those laws either comport with our Constitution or countermand it, and either uphold those laws that pass constitutional muster or declare void those laws that do not.

    Not a difficult concept, Mr. President. Not a difficult concept for a first-year law student at Rutgers-Camden, and certainly not a difficult concept for a Harvard Law grad who lectured on Constitutional Law at University of Chicago Law School and later went on to deceive a nation into crowning him president of the United States. This ain’t race-baiting or class warfare, Mr. President, but Marbury and judicial review should nonetheless certainly be in your wheelhouse.

    So, what’s the problem?

    Earlier today, according to Fox News and other sources, this apparently happened:

    President Obama, employing his strongest language to date on the Supreme Court review of the federal health care overhaul, cautioned the court Monday against overturning the law — while repeatedly saying he’s “confident” it will be upheld.

    The president spoke at length about the case at a joint press conference with the leaders of Mexico and Canada. The president, adopting what he described as the language of conservatives who fret about judicial activism, questioned how an “unelected group of people” could overturn a law approved by Congress.

    “I’m confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an [B]unprecedented[/B], extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress,” Obama said.

    Those statements are so indicative of ignorance of not only Constitutional Law but also basic civics that I don’t even know where to begin. :rotfl:

    First, even a second-grader understands that the the United States Government is split into three separate branches in order to insulate one from another and provide checks and balances for each.

    Of course, it is easy to comprehend how a totalitarian like yourself would have trouble distinguishing the lines between the various branches; after all, you have an established penchant for making illegitimate recess appointments and facilitating regulatory and other extra-legislative mechanisms designed to eschew and usurp the traditional role of the Legislative Branch — is should come as no surprise that you are utterly incapable of understanding why Justices of the United States Supreme Court are indeed unelected.

    The Justices of the United States Supreme Court are unelected, Mr. President, to insulate and protect them from the influence and derision of lawmakers and chief executives like you.

    Second, that you would preemptively describe as “unprecedented” and “extraordinary” the prospective decision by the Supreme Court that your signature piece of legislation is unconstitutional and therefore void shows that your ignorance is surpassed only by your myopic inability to see past your political ideology and progressive goals. According to the Congressional Research Service’s The Constitution of the United States, Analysis and Interpretation (the 2008 supplement, pages 163-164, in case you’re looking), [B]as of 2010 the United States Supreme Court has declared unconstitutional and therefore void a whopping 163 acts of Congress.[/B]

    You do know what “unprecedented” means, right? The Supreme Court overturning ObamaCare would hardly be “unprecedented” — perhaps it could be “unprecedented, unless you count those previous 163 precedents.” Of course, you and your administration has never been particularly good at counting or math.

    Want to know what is “unprecedented,” Mr. President? Congress forcing free Americans into private contracts and penalizing those who disobey.

    That’s unprecedented. Want to know what else is “unprecedented,” Mr. President? A sitting president of the United States calling out the Justices of the United States Supreme Court during a State of the Union address.

    That, too, is unprecedented; I can only pray to God that, come Election Day, you have been enjoined from having the chance to do so again.

    At this point, Mr. President, just give up. Please. Every time you denigrate the Court and its Justices, who have more legal knowledge in their smallest toenail than you have in your entire body, you look more and more like the dullard that you apparently truly are. No wonder you don’t want to release your school transcripts — any undergraduate student who fails to understand the most basic concept of Separation of Powers and any law student that fails to understand the settled doctrine of judicial review probably did not have marks worthy of tacking on the refrigerator door.

    I understand that, ideologically, your signature piece of health care legislation is the perfect progressive fix. I understand how it works. I understand how it slowly but surely interferes with insurers’ ability to assess risk and thus slowly but surely facilitates an increase in premium costs, therefore driving more and more people to clamor for a government fix. It’s a brilliant political maneuver.

    But it’s also unconstitutional. In other words, it tramples upon the ideas enshrined in that old document that you swore an oath to uphold and defend.

    And when the Justices of the United States Supreme Court tell you as much mere weeks before November’s election, it will not be because they are “unelected,” nor will it be because they somehow don’t understand the legislation. The law simply runs afoul of the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, and no amount of “strong majority of a democratically elected Congress” will change that.

    Wave the white flag, Mr. President. Or, preferably, you can continue to make a fool of yourself. In my Trial Advocacy class at Rutgers-Camden, after all, we were taught how do deal with opposing counsel who was floundering in front of a judge or jury: sit tight, smile, and just let the other side self-destruct.

    Now, Rutgers-Camden is a fine school, but it sure ain’t Harvard. Nevertheless, I’m the one who is sitting tight and smiling.

    Good luck with your re-election.

    Sincerely,
    Jeffrey M. Schreiber, Esq.

    [url]http://americasright.com/2012/04/02/...ional-scholar/[/url]

  17. #57
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,479
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Bonhomme Richard;4425553]I really don't understand what you're driving at. I'm not split on the decisions at all, I'm actually quite consistent: enforce the power of state governments. In Roe v Wade, the court took power away from state governments, just as Obamacare took power away from state governments. That's why I don't agree with the Roe v Wade ruling, and why I think Obamacare should be struck down.[/QUOTE]

    State governments, like the federal government, are limited by the constitution. The only relevant question in all of this is "did the legislative enactment violate the constitution?"

    If the answer to that question is yes, it should be struck down. Regardless of whether it is good policy or not. Regardless of whether it is a state or federal law. Regardless of whether it passed by unanimous vote of our elected representatives or by a single vote from a congressman later found to have been taking orders from foreign intelligence services. Regardless of what party is in office.

    If it's constitutional, it survives until changed by the legislature. If not, it falls. Period.

  18. #58
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,479
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726;4425559]That was a very poor question and it is no way relevant. Healthcare insurance is a 2 trillion dollar per year business.[/QUOTE]

    You missed the point. The conduct the government is regulating is "not buying health insurance"; the argument that the mandate is constitutional rests (in part) on whether inactivity is commerce clause activity

  19. #59
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    14,479
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Frequent Flyer;4425772]I just pray the dumbasses in Ohio, Florida, NC, MI, PA, VA don't outnumber the other voters on election day, because if this idiot gets a second term, there will be a [B]bloodbath[/B]. [B]That's not hyperbole[/B], I'm dead serious. [B]This guy is as rotten as yesterdays fish in a trash can on an August afternoon. He's an evil, destructive, hideous man[/B].[/QUOTE]


    You keep using that word, hyperbole. I do not think it means what you think it means

  20. #60
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,903
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=doggin94it;4426311]You keep using that word, hyperbole. I do not think it means what you think it means[/QUOTE]


    hy·per·bo·le
       [hahy-pur-buh-lee] Show IPA

    noun Rhetoric .
    1.
    obvious and intentional exaggeration.

    :dunno:

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us