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.
Well, if you don't believe there is a double standard then I have to believe you are in denial. The left definately holds the republican party to a higher standard than they hold their own.
Why would they need to do that when there are all these perfectly low standards that so many Republicans have failed to meet?
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by tnbound2day
Gun control stance and abortion stance are not seperate issues when you are speaking about the constitution. Either the constitution is or isn't open to more debate and legislation.
There's also the third point of view that GWB holds, that the Constitution is merely suggestive.
Gun control stance and abortion stance are not seperate issues when you are speaking about the constitution. Either the constitution is or isn't open to more debate and legislation.
Hmm, you do realize that the interpretation of the Constitution has changed quite a bit since it was originally written, right? These days, corporations have more rights than you. That wasn't the case when it was written. Who do we have to thank? Right wing activist judges!
I never villified Clinton as an adulterer myself. Others may have. But what I do villify is him shaking his finger and saying "I did not have sexual relations with that woman". He also questioned the meaning of the word "is". That's just sad.
Unlike so many deceitful statements made by the current President, that one by Mr. Clinton was technically truthful. And if you read the transcripts of the 'definition of is' testimony, you'll see that the matter was entirely pertinent to a proper understanding of the question that had been asked. And if you go spend some time in a courtroom, you'll come to see that exactly such clarifications are not just a common, but an essential, part of due process and therefore of the American judicial system in general.
Unlike so many deceitful statements made by the current President,
Would you like to name the last president we had that wasn't deceitful?
Of course, you will probably avoid the question and turn it into a debate of which one was more deceitful than the other as if it justifies one and villifies the other.
See, that's a strawman tactic. You're arguing against a position I did not take.
Just as you did. We went from whether or not the constitution is open for debate to corporations have more rights than citizens and its the right wing judges fault.
Just as you did. We went from whether or not the constitution is open for debate to corporations have more rights than citizens and its the right wing judges fault.
No, you asked a question. I stated that the Constitution has always been open for interpretation. I gave an example, right wing activist judges granting corporate personhood. There are left wing activist judges doing the same, like the assault on property rights (the Connecticut eminent domain case) a couple years ago.
You really don't seem to be able to grasp the concept of a strawman argument. This isn't an insult, merely an observation.
No, you asked a question. I stated that the Constitution has always been open for interpretation. .
Which means that is hypocritical to argue that messing with abortion is not open for debate and that changing gun laws is. Which was my original point. You simply changed the topic to corporations.
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.