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 03-15-2010, 01:10 AM
 
3,284 posts, read 3,517,690 times
Reputation: 1832

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArtinChicago View Post
You mean like the childish insults that the ObaMao/Puglosi/gReid cabal is playing on the American people trying to force an unwanted, generational-debt-bomb DeathCare Bill on U.S.? You mean ignorant and infantile like that?

Let me break it down for you, lady in La la land.

Kenyan- (his father's nationality)

unAmerican (a play on peoples nationality like German-American) except I used the prefix un because of his coercive and divisive manner of governing.

Hussein Barack (his frickin given name... duuh!)

ObaMao (a cunning way of making the point that Obama is Mao like in his associations, appointments, admiration of, thinking, governing style)

HATES (He sure as hell doesn't love the Constitution by what he said and by they way he interprets it)

So next time you go around with that pea-shooter posting of yours and throw around terms like childish, insults, ignorant and infantile get a clue first. And if you can't get one - (Cavuto fans) BUY ONE.

Apologies not accepted! Think before you post.
Is this your finger in the pie for world change?

Ladies and gentlemen, I got dibs on this guy's team!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-15-2010, 01:40 AM
 
805 posts, read 773,234 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
You left out the first bit somehow, but not to worry, here it is:
"[You know, if you look at the victories and failures of the civil-rights movement, and its litigation strategy in the court, I think where it succeeded was to vest formal rights in previously dispossessed peoples. So that I would now have the right to vote, I would now be able to sit at a lunch counter and order and as long as I could pay for it, I’d be okay, but]

the Supreme Court never entered into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and sort of more basic issues of political and economic justice in this society.”
Is that frightening to you?

You highlighted the last bit; I added the left-out part of its sentence:
["And uh, to that extent, as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution — at least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way, that]

generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [It] says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.”
Do you disagree with this?
You read ???(surprised) but you don't understand!(not so surprised)

You just made my point by posting this... Redistribution of Wealth is unconstitutional and Communistic in practice.
political and economic justice in this society Communistic lingo and thinking... most definitely not in our Constitution. It's there in the Soviet Constitution but not in the U.S.Constitution.

Frightened? Not in the least bit. PO'd absolutely, that a Harvard scholar graduated in Constitutional Law thinks he knows more than the Framers of the Constitution.

""as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution ""
Speaks for itself... radical .... Warren Court ... and didn't take it where ObaMao intends to go and where he would have liked it to go.

I agree with what Laura Hollis said in the paragraphs following ObaMao's stupid "negative liberties" comment and his unConstitutional thinking of expanding the Federal Government beyond its clearly defined role.

Now if only you'd be able to grasp it! That is why I say he HATES the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2010, 02:04 AM
 
805 posts, read 773,234 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by hothulamaui View Post
you really follow a rational line of thinking there. if the childhood makes the man I would ask what was your childhood like that would make you even consider this line of outrageous falsehoods to be even slightly worth consideration as truth
a mean and controlling mother with an absent or just whipped dad? hmmmmm
I deserve that for trying to sympathize with this little waif ObaMao, recently arrived from the Madrass's in Indonesia, abandoned by his Kenyan father and his momma takes off to parts unknown leaving him in the care of his maternal grandfather who takes little 9 year-old Obommy for visits to a self-proclaimed child abuser, drug user and communist idealogue, Frank Marshall Davis. Who then proceeded to fill that boy's mind full of commie/racist mush for the next 9 years! and God knows what else!

Hothula, I sense by your striking out at me, that you are trying to cover-up being abused by your mother.
Did you have a dog at home or in your neighborhood?
Hothula, does everyone know ???

Thanks for visiting, come again... real soon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2010, 02:11 AM
 
805 posts, read 773,234 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
Nice one! See what you can achieve when you try?

As for the rest, here's a thought: people who study the Constitution will at times comment on it. Sometimes even unfavorably. (Not that I'm seeing much beyond a factual comment. The US Constitution is a negative list.) You cannot properly study something that you're emotionally convinced is beyond reproach.

Perhaps some day Laura Hollis (or should I say Lalala Colitis, to stay with the tone set for the thread) will herself manage to approach the Constitution from a slightly more detached perspective. Until then she'll be forced to pick through other people's writings and pounce on any word that isn't unbarred praise. Which is rather sad.
So you're saying eF' your Principles and just go along to get along.

So if you see judges like.... ??Sotomayor??... legislating from the federal appeals court bench just have a more detached perspective?
Damn those SCJustices who overturned her rulings, damn them!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2010, 02:43 AM
 
805 posts, read 773,234 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayland Woman View Post
It might be nice if Laura and you would learn to provide the entire quote. Since you didn't here is what Obama said:

"................Cut&Paste as radical as I think people tried to characterize the Warren Court,Cut&Paste it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution — Cut&Paste at least as it’s been interpreted, and Warren Court interpreted it in the same way,Cut&Paste that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties: [It] says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf."

What you and Laura have done here is deliberately edit the quote to distort the fact that Obama was talking about the Warren Court interpretation. You can disagree with the supreme court ruling but you can't condemn a president whose own opinion agrees or disagrees with a ruling that you obviously don't understand. Helloooo! that was ObaMao's opinion and he disagreed with the Warren Court in not going far enough!
Is that a full-time or part-time hobby of yours? Cutting and Pasting?
go and re-read the article again.
Jeesh!

Last edited by ArtinChicago; 03-15-2010 at 02:46 AM.. Reason: fix quote marks
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2010, 02:48 AM
 
805 posts, read 773,234 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dane_in_LA View Post
Right-wingers caught quote-mining? I never thought I'd see the day!
Guess you didn't read the quoted article. Bright, real bight.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2010, 02:54 AM
 
805 posts, read 773,234 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
It'd be funny/sad, what sheep they are, if it werent so damn destructive.
Gosh, it's so hard to stay on topic... and I mean you'd have to go back to the very first post... ohhhh noooo!
So do what you do the best b itch & moan & groan.... waaaaaaa

Tell your lemming friends not to fall off a cliff..... waaaaaaa
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2010, 03:01 AM
 
805 posts, read 773,234 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wayland Woman View Post
Please read post #64. It rebuts your post #68. Laura is making up a controversy out of misinformation as you are.
Read my rebut #135 to her Cut & Paste, Cut & Paste #64 rebut.
Go read the article.... duuuh! and then rebut with intelligence or just rebut your way outta here
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2010, 03:03 AM
 
805 posts, read 773,234 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiamiRob View Post
this is a hilarious thread! So A President (Obama) who happens to be a Constitutional scholar hates the Constitution?
Hard to believe ain't it. And he doesn't know his damn case law either which he proved when he critisized the SCOTUS in his State of the Union.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-15-2010, 03:12 AM
 
805 posts, read 773,234 times
Reputation: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by delusianne View Post
Oh man, what is it with the really nutty ones and the bold - and the red - and the underlining?

Before the days of the internet I used to see that on handwritten signs clutched by -- very intense folks on street corners.
Still CAN'T stay ON topic!
Are YOU suffering FROM attention DEFICIT disorder?? HMMMMM?
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 07:55 AM.

© 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