They hate the constitution?

[docyabut2]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mark-levin-rips-democrats-supreme-court-clash-they-hate-the-constitution

Edited September 20, 2020 by docyabut2

[ChrLzs]

Trump & Fox love to stir up division.

 

Back in Feb 2016, when the situation was reversed, Mitch McConnell said this:

"remember that the Senate has not filled a vacancy arising in an election year when there was divided government since 1888, almost 130 years ago" and the Senate refused to allow it.  That was MUCH FARTHER out from the election date, than we are now.

 

What a bunch of stinking sewer rats and hypocrites.

Edited September 21, 2020 by ChrLzs

[+and-then]

2 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mark-levin-rips-democrats-supreme-court-clash-they-hate-the-constitution

The Constitution has been an obstacle for Progressives since Wilson's time.  The Democrats need to have more "flexibility" to accomplish their goals.  I saw this today and while it IS from an organization that used to be run by an Alex Jones type of intellect, the piece makes sense and could easily be true:

 

[Aroundthecorner]

If the mobs are fed lies and then act out via destruction and stupid violence, then yes they do hate the country.

A small group are being funded to then create hate fuel the fires of hate causing more division and violence, most of these looters and fire starting statue topplers are confused easily led idiots.

Its all come to a head very quickly, within weeks of a murder by a bad cop of a known felon, thats not defending the bad cop thats stating a fact. Anything mentioned as pro cop is seen as racist, any word of history your racist. The Democrats are using this as a convenient foil to stir hatred and hopefully win at the voting stations, this combined with mail in ballot fraudsters lies and pure hatred of the Trump administration only shows how low they will go.

People talk about Fox being one sided with the news, especially here in Oz, any local radio station here or major news group which are one and the same all talk down Trump as does the BBC and Sky news UK.

Trump will win all the poles are saying Joes ahead by twelve points, 2016 sounded like that for Clinton...

 

[ian hacktorp]

What's going on in Seattle?

Lol...

[docyabut2]

I know the democrats want to destroy Trump and the Republicans in a bunch of  lies. Control the Supreme Court  to change the constitution. They want to take out the right to bear arms. And they support the violence mobs to take away law ,order and make our country go into socialism communism

Edited September 21, 2020 by docyabut2

[Robotic Jew]

4 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

I know the democrats want to destroy Trump and the Republicans in a bunch of  lies. Control the Supreme Court  to change the constitution. They want to take out the right to bear arms. And they support the violence mobs to take away law ,order and make our country go into socialism communism

Turn off Fox news.....please.

[docyabut2]

3 hours ago, Robotic Jew said:

Turn off Fox news.....please.

The fox news gives the best facts on the political battle.  The most other channels are democrats and are against Trump  that make up a bunch of lies. See it though my 78 years of my life

Edited September 21, 2020 by docyabut2

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

15 hours ago, docyabut2 said:

I know the democrats want to destroy Trump and the Republicans in a bunch of  lies. Control the Supreme Court  to change the constitution. They want to take out the right to bear arms. And they support the violence mobs to take away law ,order and make our country go into socialism communism

What about the right to arm bears? Are they going to keep that?

[ChrLzs]

Well, it looks a lot like Biden is going to win, so you'll get to say I told you so.  Or apologise / admit error when it doesn't happen.

Interesting times ahead, no matter which side wins.

[Tatetopa]

 

1 hour ago, Sir Wearer of Hats said:

What about the right to arm bears? Are they going to keep that?

I don't know man, bears can get pretty grumpy

[docyabut2]

https://constitutioncenter.org/interactive-constitution/amendment/amendment-ii

 

Second Amendment

Right to Bear Arms

Passed by Congress September 25, 1789. Ratified December 15, 1791. The first 10 amendments form the Bill of Rights

[RoofGardener]

 

Edited September 22, 2020 by RoofGardener

[RoofGardener]

< gets popcorn out > 

[+OverSword]

On 9/20/2020 at 6:06 PM, ChrLzs said:

Trump & Fox love to stir up division.

 

Back in Feb 2016, when the situation was reversed, Mitch McConnell said this:

"remember that the Senate has not filled a vacancy arising in an election year when there was divided government since 1888, almost 130 years ago" and the Senate refused to allow it.  That was MUCH FARTHER out from the election date, than we are now.

 

What a bunch of stinking sewer rats and hypocrites.

Perhaps the whole quote would help: quote from 2016/02/22

Quote

“Of course it’s within the president’s authority to nominate a successor even in this very rare circumstance — remember that the Senate has not filled a vacancy arising in an election year when there was divided government since 1888, almost 130 years ago"

Very convenient for your point of view to paraphrase though, I'm quite sure.  Doesn't quite make you a liar just dishonest.

Edited September 22, 2020 by OverSword

[Gromdor]

53 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Perhaps the whole quote would help: quote from 2016/02/22

Very convenient for your point of view to paraphrase though, I'm quite sure.  Doesn't quite make you a liar just dishonest.

I like Romney's quote.  It's at least honest.

"The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party's nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own."

[+OverSword]

51 minutes ago, Gromdor said:

I like Romney's quote.  It's at least honest.

"The historical precedent of election year nominations is that the Senate generally does not confirm an opposing party's nominee but does confirm a nominee of its own."

Constitutionally an nominee can be presented now because there is an empty seat. 

The senate does not nominate justices the president does.  The senate appoints the nominees (or not).

[Gromdor]

3 hours ago, OverSword said:

Constitutionally an nominee can be presented now because there is an empty seat. 

The senate does not nominate justices the president does.  The senate appoints the nominees (or not).

Yeah, no argument at that.  I just remember this: https://www.npr.org/2016/03/16/470664561/mcconnell-blocking-supreme-court-nomination-about-a-principle-not-a-person

Constitutionally the position should be filled.  The only sad thing is that the lesson we learned from this is that lies, deceit, and lack of integrity are rewarded whereas those that follow the spirit of the Constitution lose out.  It does make me wonder, however.   If the principle from the article that McConnell abandoned so easily was a false one,  what other principles that Republican leadership claim to value so highly are also false?

[docyabut2]

https://www.foxnews.com/us/convicted-nypd-cop-killer-anthony-bottom-scheduled-to-be-released-on-parole

let him out to kill more cops?

[+DieChecker]

On 9/20/2020 at 6:06 PM, ChrLzs said:

Trump & Fox love to stir up division.

 

Back in Feb 2016, when the situation was reversed, Mitch McConnell said this:

"remember that the Senate has not filled a vacancy arising in an election year when there was divided government since 1888, almost 130 years ago" and the Senate refused to allow it.  That was MUCH FARTHER out from the election date, than we are now.

 

What a bunch of stinking sewer rats and hypocrites.

You are right... He should have simply had it go to the Senate, float it around for a month, and then Vote to not approve. Repeat as needed. Making excuses just makes him a hypocrit like you said.

[RavenHawk]

How can someone who decries that we need fundamental change, love the Constitution?

 

How can someone who wishes to either do away with or rewrite the Bill of Rights, love the Constitution?

 

How can someone that wishes to stack the court with activist, liberal judges, love the Constitution?

 

All of these views are held by Biden and the Left.  Fundamental change began with Obama.  There are two reasons to study Constitutional law, the Constitution, and its history.  One is to preserve it and the other is finding a way to nullify it.  Obama was so intent on trying to replace it with a Socialist version so that he would be looked upon as the father of a new nation.  The titles of his books are appropriate, "Dreams of my Father" and "Audacity of Hope".  They tell us exactly what is on his mind.

 

The Left sees the Constitution as some antique relic that needs to be done away with.  But the Constitution is not archaic.  It is as relevant today as it was then because it dealt more with human nature than it did with strictly governance.  If the Constitution is a near perfect document, why is ‘fundamental change’ needed?  The Left wants to fall into the depravity that the Constitution was designed to keep us away from.  The Constitution was designed (used the wisdom of the ages) to control the depravity of human nature.

 

The Left want to rewrite the 1A so that any speech that goes against the state as hate speech.  And they want to control those with different ideas from them from wide consumption.  They want to do away with the 2A because it is the only thing between the people and tyranny.  Even the 3A prevents the government from housing an agent of the state in each and every home.  Half of the Bill or Rights (4A to 8A) deal with the individual’s legal rights.  Under a single party, police state, such Amendments are not needed.  The 9A and 10A will just disappear.  Any power of the state will be taken over by the feds.  Centralized power will override local sensibilities.

 

The means that they want to use to achieve this, is getting rid of the Electoral College, which will make voting unnecessary as only NY and CA will need to rubber stamp the next President.  But the Left doesn’t realize that these two states are hemorrhaging population.  But then they will compensate by filling these states with illegals and pay them to vote the way they want.  Two of the more prosperous states will become shitholes surrounding small enclaves of power and wealth. 

 

By giving statehood to Washington, DC and Puerto Rico, will give a Socialist edge in the Senate.  On a side note, I think if DC gains statehood (which doesn’t make sense), then there should be a restriction that one Senator be Republican and the other Socialist.  And I think that as soon as Puerto Rico becomes a state, they will become more Conservative in time. 

 

Things change.  The Left hasn’t figured it out that the rules they put in place to shutout Republicans always comes back to bite them in the butt.  And packing the court is another thing that will snowball.  Yes, the Left may be able to turn the court into a second legislative body that they can control, but sooner or later, the other side will gain control and add more of their judges.

 

The filibuster was used by the Left under Bush to ‘Bork’ his court justices and then removed it when they gained control in the Senate so that they could ram through their judges at every level.  Now McConnell is bashing them over the head with it.  The Left cannot play by the rules, they have to manipulate them.  And when they witness the other side playing by the same rules, then they promise to punish the American people.

 

The ACA will be used as a means to restrict gun ownership.  By making guns a health issue with broad guidelines as to who cannot own a gun, will devastate our 2A rights.  They will use the AFFH to utterly destroy the American dream (having a single-family home and raising a family with two parents).  The Left has been doing it in the inner cities for decades keeping the Black down on the Plantation with all of these urban reforms that destroy the nuclear family.  Now, they want to take it on the road for everybody else, including the White middle class.

 

To the Left, the Constitution is a mere inconvenience that they want to get rid of so that they can make this nation into their image.  The thing is, is that they aren’t hiding it anymore.  They are telling us that they want to do these things.  As was stated in the op, dictators always tell you what they want to do.  The American people had better wake up and don’t let smooth talking snake oil salesmen steal your natural rights.  Listen to all of those refugees that have escaped tyranny elsewhere and have come here because “there is no other place to go”.  Yes, boys and girls, the Left hates the Constitution and those of us that love her need to assure that Socialism is run out of power.  I think that if they are run out of power, a new pro-American Democrat party will come back in its place.  The American duality is still there, Socialism hasn’t destroyed it.  It just poisoned it, and the Constitution is the antidote.  We need more Presidents like Trump to periodical apply the Constitution to the Left until Socialism is all gone.

 

[Autochthon1990]

On 9/22/2020 at 2:39 PM, Gromdor said:

Yeah, no argument at that.  I just remember this: https://www.npr.org/2016/03/16/470664561/mcconnell-blocking-supreme-court-nomination-about-a-principle-not-a-person

Constitutionally the position should be filled.  The only sad thing is that the lesson we learned from this is that lies, deceit, and lack of integrity are rewarded whereas those that follow the spirit of the Constitution lose out.  It does make me wonder, however.   If the principle from the article that McConnell abandoned so easily was a false one,  what other principles that Republican leadership claim to value so highly are also false?

Pretty much all of them, they have no principles other than wanting power and money. They've gone full fascist, and the fact they could of stopped Trump at any time, but didn't, means they're on par with every other fascist toady ever to come out of the woodwork and latch onto an authoritarian backside for some goodies.

[Buzz_Light_Year]

20 minutes ago, Autochthon1990 said:

Pretty much all of them, they have no principles other than wanting power and money. They've gone full fascist, and the fact they could of stopped Trump at any time, but didn't, means they're on par with every other fascist toady ever to come out of the woodwork and latch onto an authoritarian backside for some goodies.

Do you even know what fascism is?

Homework for today:

Study the rise of Fascism in Europe prior to WWII and then compare it with what is going on today by the left's tactics that are being used today.

Also research what is AntiFa.

https://www.** Blocked **/16104/antifa-history

Now that comes as no surprise blocking the site.

Well here's the linked article from newsweek.

https://www.newsweek.com/antifa-fascists-anti-opinion-867748

Quote

 

In an essay, "What Antifa and the Original Fascists Have In Common," Antony Mueller, a German professor of economics who currently teaches in Brazil, described how Antifa's militant anti-capitalism masquerading as anti-fascism reveals its own fascism:

"After the left has pocketed the concept of liberalism and turned the word into the opposite of its original meaning, the Antifa-movement uses a false terminology to hide its true agenda. While calling themselves 'antifascist' and declaring fascism the enemy, the Antifa itself is a foremost fascist movement.

"The members of Antifa are not opponents to fascism but themselves its genuine representatives. Communism, Socialism and Fascism are united by the common band of anti-capitalism and anti-liberalism.

"The Antifa movement is a fascist movement. The enemy of this movement is not fascism but liberty, peace and prosperity."

 

 

Quote

 

The modern Antifa movement derives its name from a group called Antifaschistische Aktion, founded in May 1932 by Stalinist leaders of the Communist Party of Germany. The group was established to fight fascists, a term the party used to describe all of the other pro-capitalist political parties in Germany. The primary objective of Antifaschistische Aktion was to abolish capitalism, according to a detailed history of the group. The group, which had more than 1,500 founding members, went underground after Nazis seized power in 1933.

A German-language pamphlet — "80 Years of Anti-Fascist Actions" (80 Jahre Antifaschistische Aktion)" — describes in minute detail the continuous historical thread of the Antifa movement from its ideological origins in the 1920s to the present day. The document states:

"Antifascism has always fundamentally been an anti-capitalist strategy. This is why the symbol of the Antifaschistische Aktion has never lost its inspirational power.... Anti-fascism is more of a strategy than an ideology."

 

 

Edited September 27, 2020 by Buzz_Light_Year

[Vorg]

The problem with Trump is he said he would be the "Law and order" President, but the ways he goes about it looks like something out of Hitler's playbook.

 

https://alphahistory.com/nazigermany/nazi-law-and-order/#:~:text=Initially%2C Nazi law and order policies were focused,opposition and to deal with dissidents and resistors.

Initially, Nazi law and order policies were focused on minimizing and eradicating opposition. On coming to power, Hitler was acutely aware that most Germans had not voted for him or the National Socialists (NSDAP). He wanted strict laws to prohibit political opposition and to deal with dissidents and resistors.

He said protesters out in Seattle weren't his voters.

 

He fires or forces out those who don't submit to him.    https://www.brookings.edu/research/tracking-turnover-in-the-trump-administration/

 

He speaks of things that aren't lawful such as wanting to put the military in Seattle to crush the protesters.  Protesting is lawful. It only takes 3 people to turn a protest of any size, into a riot. There have been many peaceful protest all over this country and the world. Not all protest are BLM Marxist, and such, and I get tired of hearing the same old mantra from some who remain clueless by listening to biased reporting instead of informing themselves.

https://www.bing.com/search?q=Trump+told+Police+to+crush+protesters&cvid=2a63d45c78ee4d34be4e8e7e05bb6b94&FORM=ANAB01&PC=DCTS

 

No, Trump sees no problem with the Police. I see a problem with lack of Police uniformity throughout the United States. Total Police reform is needed from the DOJ to all states and we know it is not coming from Trump, the DOJ, the Police unions, or the Police themselves. They will not changes themselves. Only a few cities have taken the initiative to change laws for smarter Policing. 

Edited September 27, 2020 by South Alabam

[+and-then]

On 9/21/2020 at 1:52 AM, ian hacktorp said:

What's going on in Seattle?

Lol...

So true, and the Left can't seem to pull out of their suicidal nose dive.  

https://www.theepochtimes.com/feds-reject-portland-mayors-request-to-end-deputization-of-police-officers_3521300.html

For being an "Orange Idiot", Trump seems to find ways to rattle their concentration.  Amazing how quickly those riots tamed down once the participants realized they WOULD be spending time in prison