The Independent State Legislature Doctrine

The odds are excellent that you will leave this forum hating someone.
a fan
Posts: 18158
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:05 pm

Re: FARM BILL 4 AFAN

Post by a fan »

runrussellrun wrote:When it comes to the USA, TAATS rule the day.

This is the vote for the FARM bill that AFAN loves so much.

https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/ ... =00143#top

No one D voted NO (11 R's did though) 86 US Senators voted YES for the 2018 farmbill.

Unless, his point all along is he agrees with me that TAATS rules the day, its just the hypocrites in the R camp that lie. Kinda like all the D's voting for funding the killing machine, unless THAT part of the Democratic platform is a lie
You're still acting like you don't get what my point is.

Democrats believe in socialism, remember? So calling them out for signing a socialist bill is silly. OF COURSE the Democrats are for socialism, protecting workers, and things like protectionist tariffs.

The Republicans ENTIRE platform is: small government, and free market is always chosen over socialism and government controlled markets. Get rid of that platform, and what's left?
User avatar
youthathletics
Posts: 14960
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by youthathletics »

ohh me-me -me. This is a lose=lose for whomever answers your question. It simply has evolved to be a term that can be loosely used as a very hard left turn to capitalism or a nice slow turn to labourism. BUT if you add in Marxist remarks......watch out, b/c the gloves are coming off. :D
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
User avatar
dislaxxic
Posts: 4570
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 11:00 am
Location: Moving to Montana Soon...

Re: SCOTUS

Post by dislaxxic »

youthathletics wrote:ohh me-me -me. This is a lose=lose for whomever answers your question. It simply has evolved to be a term that can be loosely used as a very hard left turn to capitalism or a nice slow turn to labourism. BUT if you add in Marxist remarks......watch out, b/c the gloves are coming off. :D
That sounds like Humpty Trumpty's answer to the question we got the other day regarding the new CC treatise. Which is to say...GOBBLE-DE-GOOK.'

What the fork you saying, ya? OF COURSE conservatives will mangle any attempt to answer that question, because THEY CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH.

The truth, as A Fan has been plointing out relentlessly for eons here and at LP, is that we have socialism ALL OVER us here in the Dear Ol' USofA in 2018.

It's only "evolved...as a term" because you (GOPers) WANT it to "evolve" as a term.



...and the truth shall set you free!...

..
Last edited by dislaxxic on Wed Oct 10, 2018 10:42 pm, edited 3 times in total.
"The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity. With a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and impenetrable fog." - Calvin, to Hobbes
User avatar
dislaxxic
Posts: 4570
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 11:00 am
Location: Moving to Montana Soon...

Re: SCOTUS

Post by dislaxxic »

But now...back to our regular programming.

Got and answer for AF, Frito??

..
"The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity. With a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and impenetrable fog." - Calvin, to Hobbes
User avatar
youthathletics
Posts: 14960
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by youthathletics »

jeezus H diss. Just google it and see what Merriam has to say about. Why don't you or afan tell us exactly what it means, that way everyone in the world will understand it. ;)

I would like to hear what Bandito's answer is, because I love reading his posts?
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
User avatar
MDlaxfan76
Posts: 26184
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by MDlaxfan76 »

dislaxxic wrote:But now...back to our regular programming.

Got an answer for AF, Frito??

..
Maybe the google machine could help him?
a fan
Posts: 18158
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:05 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by a fan »

youthathletics wrote:ohh me-me -me. This is a lose=lose for whomever answers your question.
Of course it's a lose-lose question.

Dis is right. The definition of socialism---where the people own and manage the means of production or service provider----hasn't changed. Republicans just don't want to hear it.

So they make fun of Ocascio Cortez for being a socialist, right before they send in their taxes to pay for all those public schools and roads, and libraries, and parks, and on and on and on.

We can have 100% private roads. We chose not to. We chose socialism instead.

We can have 100% private schools. We chose not to. We chose socialism instead. Hello UVa!

We can have our farmers operate in the free market with zero assistance from the Federal government. Nope. We chose socialism. And the checks we send to them get bigger with each passing year.

Why do we have public parks if socialism is so bad?

Or why is everyone in my facebook feed that rails against socialism a freaking State University graduate? I desperately want to demand that they give me my tax dollars back if they think socialism is so bad. Go to a private school if you think socialism sucks. Or give me my tax money back. Pick one! I don't care which!
Bandito
Posts: 1116
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 12:31 pm
Location: Hanging out with Elon Musk

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Bandito »

CNN calls Kanye West a "Token Negro". Told you Democrats are the party of Racism

https://www.thewrap.com/don-lemon-laugh ... gro-video/

Socialism is an economic system where the ways of making a living (factories, offices, etc.) are owned by a society as a whole, meaning the value made belongs to everyone in that society, instead of a group of private owners.
Farfromgeneva is a sissy soy boy
ggait
Posts: 4118
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2018 1:23 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ggait »

Meanwhile, has dr. Ford gone to any of the Montgomery County police stations and formally filed a criminal complaint?
While I'm sure the FBI could have done a lot more (you always can), I personally think that the review of Dr. Ford's claims was pretty reasonable. Ford identified five people at the party; the FBI had information/testimony from all of them (including Judge). None of them could confirm her story. Plenty of possible and understandable reasons why those people couldn't confirm. While that lack of confirmation doesn't disprove Ford's claims, it doesn't prove them either. As is often the case, you really can't prove it one way or the other.

Seems like the FBI (under WH instructions) did a much less reasonable job running down the Ramirez claims. The truth will probably eventually come out on that one.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/ ... 575930002/
Last edited by ggait on Wed Oct 10, 2018 7:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Boycott stupid. If you ignore the gator troll, eventually he'll just go back under his bridge.
Bandito
Posts: 1116
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 12:31 pm
Location: Hanging out with Elon Musk

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Bandito »

Now for your daily dose of the truth about leftists:

Truth means nothing to leftists. The ends justify the means, and they will literally say or do anything to achieve their aims. They'll use violence – Antifa, BLM, rioting, and attacking Trump supporters – and intimidation (doxxing public officials and confronting them in various public places) while calling conservatives fascists and blaming them for the unrest. They'll rail against "racism" one moment and then excoriate a race (whites) the next. They'll preach equality while practicing inequality and discrimination, as with quotas and affirmative action. They'll claim to care about female victims (Kavanaugh-Ford affair) and then smear female victims (Rep. Keith Ellison case). They'll say, "Do it for the children," using kids as human props, while abetting the brutal killing of children in the womb. They'll preach tolerance but then insist this means "safe spaces" excluding conservatives and whites and that opposing views must be squelched. They'll say it's un-American to question election outcomes – as H. Clinton did prior to Nov. 8, 2016 – but upon losing scream how an election was "stolen," as leftists did after Nov. 8, 2016. Theirs is the ideology of Anything Goes.

In fact, leftists will swear that Truth (properly understood as objective) itself doesn't even exist, that everything is shades of gray – but then turn about and sing blatant black-white tunes portraying their political opponents as evil. This is similar to Satan, who knows that God's rules exist but doesn't believe they should be considered "Truth." Leftists will superciliously scoff at traditionalists' moral positions and insist everything is relative. But they really want to play God and have everything be relative to themselves – like the Devil.

Leftists hate the Constitution, though they'll use and misuse (twist) it to serve their ends. Like Leon Trotsky, the Kronstadt sailors, and so many other useful idiots, it will be discarded once leftists have enough power and its utility is no more. (Christine Blasey Ford, take note.) In fact, they would destroy civilization itself – and are currently doing so – to achieve power. They'd rather reign in Hell than serve in Heaven.

While leftists will usually deny the above, at certain times, they obliquely acknowledge it. Consider how Democrat operative Scott Foval, caught in a 2016 sting operation stealing votes and inciting violence at Trump rallies, essentially admitted that Republicans are more honest. "There is a level of adherence to rules on the other side that only when you're at the very highest level, do you get over," he said. Many leftists know they're scum – and they're content being scum.
Farfromgeneva is a sissy soy boy
User avatar
ChairmanOfTheBoard
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:40 pm
Location: Having a beer with CWBJ in Helsinki, Finland

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ChairmanOfTheBoard »

ggait wrote:
you do realize 3 and 4 fundamentally and entirely run counter to the compromise founding the constitution
The electoral college (#3) today bears zero resemblance to why it was adopted to start.

First, the EC functions today the way it does only because the states (the states not the Constitution) have largely adopted the winner-take-all delegate allocation. Madison and Hamilton thought WTA was completely contrary to constitutional intent. After WTA emerged, Madison proposed a constitutional amendment to abolish the practice. Failing to nail down how EC votes would be allocated was a huge oversight and blunder by Madison and Hamilton.

Second, the EC really was not intended to help small states. In fact, it was adopted as an accommodation to certain large population states. Specifically, those large states (like VA and SC) that had a big part of their populations in the form of non-voting slaves. Those southern states would have been significantly diluted in direct election by the voters. But due to the 3/5ths clause, the congressional representation and EC votes of those states were inflated. Which explains why so many of the early presidents were from...Virginia.

You may like how the EC functions today or not. But in no way was it designed to work this way. It is evidence of the FUBAR of the Founders, not their wisdom.
doesnt change the fact that the compromise balanced the power between the people and the states.
There are 29,413,039 corporations in America; but only one Chairman of the Board.
User avatar
ChairmanOfTheBoard
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:40 pm
Location: Having a beer with CWBJ in Helsinki, Finland

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ChairmanOfTheBoard »

foreverlax wrote:
ChairmanOfTheBoard wrote:you do realize 3 and 4 fundamentally and entirely run counter to the compromise founding the constitution
Regarding the EC - the idea of winner takes all is what bugs me. I could support you eat what your kill, you get 60% of the vote, you get 60% of the EC.

true- but those are state decisions, right?

nebraska and maine choose to do it differently...
There are 29,413,039 corporations in America; but only one Chairman of the Board.
User avatar
ChairmanOfTheBoard
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:40 pm
Location: Having a beer with CWBJ in Helsinki, Finland

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ChairmanOfTheBoard »

a fan wrote:
ChairmanOfTheBoard wrote:so then we scrap it and then what- the 95 corridor elects your candidate, and the rest of america gets no representation?
What does the rest of the nation need representation for? I thought all those States were self sufficient, and neither needed nor wanted a large Federal government?

You know doggone well what flyover America wants: it wants to call all the shots, and it wants Urban America to pick up the tab for their choices.

So the last Farm Bill, they penned in $4 Billion (yeah, that's with a B) in rural utility subsidies.

What we will see in the coming decades is a battle over money. The cities have it, rural America does not. All the rest of this crap is sound and fury.
they dont. the bicoastal elites have vowed to take their interests into account and make decisions for them. ya know, because they know better. have a look at some of the posts around here or LP and it should be evident.

this isnt about taking control; it's about balance.
There are 29,413,039 corporations in America; but only one Chairman of the Board.
a fan
Posts: 18158
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:05 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by a fan »

It's not about balance.

Here's what balance would look like: flyover States would stop taking all that money from the DoE, or FEMA, or the Farm Bill, or any of the hundreds of Federal programs there are, and send in $1.10 for every $1.00 they got from the Federal government. Each individual State would start their own Farm Bill, FEMA, DoE, etc., and they'd pay their own wan. Then the Federal government would leave them alone so long as they follow the Constitution.

That's balance. What they want is Federal tax dollars from guys like me, add in even more money, borrow trillions more on top of that, cut their own State taxes, and then get mad when the Federal government says that there are strings attached to their money. And the strings are all there because guys like you and I want to make sure the money isn't wasted.

Stop taking money from the Federal government. Or stop complaining about how they "tell you what to do" with that money. Pick one. I don't care which one.

Notice how much bigger the Federal government is----yet again----under Republican rule? That's an awful funny way to behave if you want the Federal government out of State's business'. Shouldn't the Federal government be, oh, 20% smaller than it was under them mean-o libs?

In short, I totally disagree. ;)
User avatar
ChairmanOfTheBoard
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:40 pm
Location: Having a beer with CWBJ in Helsinki, Finland

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ChairmanOfTheBoard »

Bandito wrote:CNN calls Kanye West a "Token Negro". Told you Democrats are the party of Racism

https://www.thewrap.com/don-lemon-laugh ... gro-video/

Socialism is an economic system where the ways of making a living (factories, offices, etc.) are owned by a society as a whole, meaning the value made belongs to everyone in that society, instead of a group of private owners.

chris rock uses the N word, not racist, he's black.

chris rock says he hates _______. not racist, he's joking.

former congressman sellers says negroes dont read, but he didnt really mean it, because he just was quoting a comedian that was joking. not racist.

tara setmayer says: "what's funny to me is to watch all of these white people behind donald trump"; not racist, because white MAGA supporters arent a protected class.

no one made these rules; it's just the way it is.
There are 29,413,039 corporations in America; but only one Chairman of the Board.
ggait
Posts: 4118
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2018 1:23 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ggait »

chris rock uses the N word, not racist, he's black.
This is literally the stupidest argument in the history of the world.

Everyone knows the rules. Which are quite simple. If you yourself belong to the denigrated group, then you can use derogatory terms about your own group. So...

Irish people can call each other Micks -- but other people cannot. And Irish people are not allowed to use slurs that apply to Italians, Jews, etc.

Your wife is allowed to use the B word -- but you are not.

Black folks can use the N word -- but white folks cannot.

If you (as a white male) get burned for using the N word or the B word and try to justify that using this argument, you are just an idiot. And you deserve the derisive scorn you get as a racist and/or misogynist.

So simple...
Boycott stupid. If you ignore the gator troll, eventually he'll just go back under his bridge.
User avatar
ChairmanOfTheBoard
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:40 pm
Location: Having a beer with CWBJ in Helsinki, Finland

Re: SCOTUS

Post by ChairmanOfTheBoard »

ggait wrote:
chris rock uses the N word, not racist, he's black.
This is literally the stupidest argument in the history of the world.
agreed.
There are 29,413,039 corporations in America; but only one Chairman of the Board.
User avatar
dislaxxic
Posts: 4570
Joined: Thu May 10, 2018 11:00 am
Location: Moving to Montana Soon...

Re: SCOTUS

Post by dislaxxic »

Wait...WHAT?? Didn’t you create the Chris Rock postulation, cotb? And you also agree with gg?

I’m confused...

,,
"The purpose of writing is to inflate weak ideas, obscure poor reasoning, and inhibit clarity. With a little practice, writing can be an intimidating and impenetrable fog." - Calvin, to Hobbes
seacoaster
Posts: 8866
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm

Re: SCOTUS

Post by seacoaster »

OK, so, back to the Court:

Pretty interesting little history lesson:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/11/opin ... esson.html

"It’s obvious why the parallel between the battle over Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination and that of Clarence Thomas 27 years earlier grabbed the public’s attention. In both cases, late-breaking allegations threatened but failed to derail the confirmation process, and both nominees defended themselves with impassioned denials of wrongdoing.

But history offers another, older parallel that in its way is even more compelling. The issue was not sex but racism. The bombshell burst not just before a confirmation vote, but just afterward, forcing a newly confirmed Supreme Court justice to take to the airwaves to defend himself against mounting calls for his resignation. I’m referring to the experience of Hugo L. Black, the first Supreme Court nominee of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. In the wake of the Kavanaugh confirmation, this nearly forgotten episode is worth resurrecting after 81 years.

Black was a Democratic senator from Alabama, a populist and ardent supporter of the New Deal who had backed the president’s failed plan to add additional justices to the Supreme Court who could outvote the conservatives who were invalidating major New Deal programs. The retirement of one of those conservatives, Willis Van Devanter, gave Roosevelt his first chance to make a dent in the Supreme Court.

Black’s nomination in the summer of 1937 was controversial, not only because it was a sharp stick in the eyes of the president’s many political enemies, but because of Black’s limited judicial experience — he was briefly a police court magistrate — and an education viewed as marginal for a Supreme Court justice. Although a graduate of the University of Alabama Law School, Black had never gone to college."

"Shortly after the president announced the nomination, rumors circulated that as a young lawyer in Alabama, Black had been a member of the Ku Klux Klan. The N.A.A.C.P. asked for an investigation, but a Senate Judiciary subcommittee rammed the nomination through to the full committee after two hours of consideration. One Democratic senator, William Dieterich of Illinois, accused other senators of trying to “besmirch” Black’s reputation. As the historian William E. Leuchtenberg described the scene in a fascinating 1973 article, “Dieterich’s tirade nearly resulted in a fist fight” as another Democratic senator charged at him.

Supreme Court nominees did not ordinarily appear at their confirmation hearings in those days, but Black’s supporters said he had assured them that he had never joined the Klan. The full committee moved the nomination to the Senate floor. Black was confirmed by a vote of 63 to 16, and the new justice and his wife set sail for a European vacation...."
Bandito
Posts: 1116
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2018 12:31 pm
Location: Hanging out with Elon Musk

Re: SCOTUS

Post by Bandito »

ggait wrote:
chris rock uses the N word, not racist, he's black.
This is literally the stupidest argument in the history of the world.

Everyone knows the rules. Which are quite simple. If you yourself belong to the denigrated group, then you can use derogatory terms about your own group. So...

Irish people can call each other Micks -- but other people cannot. And Irish people are not allowed to use slurs that apply to Italians, Jews, etc.

Your wife is allowed to use the B word -- but you are not.

Black folks can use the N word -- but white folks cannot.

If you (as a white male) get burned for using the N word or the B word and try to justify that using this argument, you are just an idiot. And you deserve the derisive scorn you get as a racist and/or misogynist.

So simple...
You are a racist plain and simple. Sad to see Democrats defend racism tension among Americans. Democrats again proving they are the racists plain and simple today and throughout our history.
Farfromgeneva is a sissy soy boy
Post Reply

Return to “POLITICS”