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.
It would not be so bad, if the federal government had not taken 10th amendment issues for themselves.
States don't have to take money from the federal government. You can preach all you want about an evil, tyrannical federal government, when historically, most official abuses of power and civil rights violations occurred and occurs at the state and local level but that's too inconvenient of a truth. If a state wants more say in how they run their government, then stop taking money from other states
So America is all about trashing the environment, drinking toxic water, breathing dirty air, and having corporations decide what's best for us? It's funny because a lot of these European things you like to bash, got their start HERE. Get a clue
Amend the constitution with documented words, instead of changing it by opinions of appointed guys and gals in black robes
The mob rule of the supreme court is how the constitution is so easily changed without amendment.
The high court should be as jurors. Any doubt and the liberty remains with the people.
Well, when the Convention of States happens (almost halfway there and with growing momentum the more the Federal Gov bullies the states) then the Court can be slapped down hard by the rights of the states.
I believe the first amendment they will adopt will make it much easier for States to withdraw from the union and do so without repercussions. This nation was meant to be a Republic of States with a Federal Gov for the common good. Not some tyrant like Hillary at the top issuing orders.
So America is all about trashing the environment, drinking toxic water, breathing dirty air, and having corporations decide what's best for us? It's funny because a lot of these European things you like to bash, got their start HERE. Get a clue
America has some of the strictest regulations for industry.
The air quality here in the Los Angeles area was much worse in the 1970s and 1980s than it is now.
Well, when the Convention of States happens (almost halfway there and with growing momentum the more the Federal Gov bullies the states) then the Court can be slapped down hard by the rights of the states.
I believe the first amendment they will adopt will make it much easier for States to withdraw from the union and do so without repercussions. This nation was meant to be a Republic of States with a Federal Gov for the common good. Not some tyrant like Hillary at the top issuing orders.
She should be taking her orders form the States.
Why haven't you complained about SCOTUS tyranny for the last 25 years when conservatives pretty much had it their way?
It, indeed, is going to be about the Supreme Court. It's not about Trump and it's not about Hillary. A conservative appointee will ensure our sovereignty, our unalienable rights, and our safety. A liberal will ensure a costly blow to this country and all it has stood for since its founding. We're talking as much as fifty years, this decision to come. You need to think about this, folks. It's that important!
It, indeed, is going to be about the Supreme Court. It's not about Trump and it's not about Hillary. A conservative appointee will ensure our sovereignty, our unalienable rights, and our safety. A liberal will ensure a costly blow to this country and all it has stood for since its founding. We're talking as much as fifty years, this decision to come. You need to think about this, folks. It's that important!
Then your guys should have voted for Garland since he is admired by both parties. But no your congressmen had to hold out hoping a republican would win to vote for a more conservative. Sorry, but you lose
It, indeed, is going to be about the Supreme Court. It's not about Trump and it's not about Hillary. A conservative appointee will ensure our sovereignty, our unalienable rights, and our safety. A liberal will ensure a costly blow to this country and all it has stood for since its founding. We're talking as much as fifty years, this decision to come. You need to think about this, folks. It's that important!
Apparently it ain't that important. Your boys declined to confirm Garland.
Big mistake. Now we libs no longer want Garland. He's too conservative. Republicans have to be punished for denying this president his constitutional right to nominate a judge on his watch. And a proper punishment ISN'T nominating a moderate judge. Only an extreme left wing judge will do in our eyes.
This is a very tricky issue for me, since I'm gay and I support same sex marriage. On the other hand, I do feel strongly that something has to be done about rampant immigration and terrorism. There is no perfect candidate for me.
I really don't think Republicans should get their hopes up that Trump would nominate conservative Supreme Court justices though, he is certainly NOT religious, nor is he socially conservative.
A bit before the Access Hollywood/Billy Bush tape surfaced, Trump said he was looking for justices in the mold of Scalia. Of course he could have, with that, just been proverbially blowing smoke up the arses of his supporters.
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.
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.
You want the government to have "practically unlimited power over the citizens" ?
