Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-14-2014, 03:43 PM
 
14,292 posts, read 9,676,201 times
Reputation: 4254

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by texan2yankee View Post
Someone doesn’t like Utah’s law banning gay marriage, goes to court and gets it declared unconstitutional. Supporters of the law appeal to the Supreme Court justice with jurisdiction over the 10th Circuit, Sotomayor, and she issues a stay of the lower court’s order validating gay marriages until the full 10th Circuit court of Appeals can hear the case.

Obama, a politician who just two years ago was still on record as opposing gay marriage, now feels that the matter has since “evolved” to a point where there’s a fierce moral urgency to marry off the gays immediately, orders his DOJ to ignore Justice Sotomayor’s ruling and grant federal recognition to Utah gay marriage.

Liberals see nothing wrong here and scratch their heads when it’s pointed out that that same abuse of executive authority can be used against them when power changes hands.

None so blind ….
The thing liberals agree on is the ends justify the means. They'll be in favor of any level of fraud, deceit and lawlessness, if it got them to their end goal. However, let anyone else, any president, any judge, or Congress to try anything remotely close on something libs are opposed to, and they will squeal like stuck pigs, demanding impeachment and or prison.

The debt is a perfect example. Bush adding $4 trillion over eight years was irresponsible and unpatriotic but Obama can add $6 trillion in just four years and it's perfectly acceptable.

Sibelius declaring birth control pills and sterilization procedures are good for the nation and forces all insurance companies to include free distribution of these in all health insurance policies is perfectly acceptable. But let the next HHS secretary decide these are harmful to the nation's health, and bans all insurance providers from covering the distribution of them in all but a few cases, and the libs will squeal like stuck pigs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-14-2014, 03:52 PM
Status: "119 N/A" (set 23 days ago)
 
12,956 posts, read 13,671,429 times
Reputation: 9693
But its okay for the Anti-Abortion law makers to make up laws as they go.
State by State, Chipping Away at Reproductive Rights | National Women's Health Network
[i]"Since 1995, states have enacted 335 anti-choice measures, creating a patchwork of restrictions affecting women..... ["/I]


"if they don't agree with a law, or wish there was an existing law that defined something a certain way, they just create new law, modify laws, refuse to defend laws, delay laws, waive laws so a lucky select few groups and individuals don't have to obey them, or single out people and groups they do not like and use laws to target them."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-14-2014, 04:15 PM
 
Location: South Bay
1,404 posts, read 1,031,720 times
Reputation: 525
Quote:
Originally Posted by thriftylefty View Post
But its okay for the Anti-Abortion law makers to make up laws as they go.
State by State, Chipping Away at Reproductive Rights | National Women's Health Network
[i]"Since 1995, states have enacted 335 anti-choice measures, creating a patchwork of restrictions affecting women..... ["/I]
There is a HUGE difference between a state and the Federal government. No comparison. If the residents in a state make a bad decision, it only affects the residents of that sate. If the President makes up his own laws if affects EVERYONE!

As for:
Quote:
"if they don't agree with a law, or wish there was an existing law that defined something a certain way, they just create new law, modify laws, refuse to defend laws, delay laws, waive laws so a lucky select few groups and individuals don't have to obey them, or single out people and groups they do not like and use laws to target them."


This applies to both parties equally. Bush created Homeland Security, The Patriot Act, the NDAA, the TSA, and Obama has perpetuated all of it, only in more vile incarnations.

No politician has the constitutional authority to do many of the things they do. To ignore one party because the other does it, or to complain about the "other party" doing something, when your own party does it, is the definition of hypocrisy.

I'll never be a Republican or Democrat again. They've both become progressive shills used as fronts for special interests and multinational companies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:50 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top