2016 Election
Quote: GandlerWell I challenge anyone to find a politicIan who has not had a few tongue slips, when you constantly give speeches you are going to make a few verbal typos, it's simply probability.
As for the rapists comment. That is not what he said, for one thing he was specifically talking about illegal immigrants, not regular immigrants. For another he used a plethora of words to describe the various criminals that constitute illegal immigrants, rapists being one of many (I am assuming you did not watch his complete speech, and only saw out of context cuts by progressive pundits). But his point was very valid. People who come here illegally do so for very clear reasons, usually because they cannot come here legally, which means they are likley either sick with a dangerous disease, have a criminal history, or associations which would make the application process difficult. It's a very true and valid point.
I did watch the entire speech, live, and no, I don't believe he was taken out of context. He said what he meant to say and it was quite clear. I also do not believe you are correct about why people come here illegally. While there are cases like you reference, that is not why the great majority come here. They come for a better life, and the current immigration numbers are too low, so they take the chance to come illegally.
Back to Trump as a candidate. He is nearly everything to be despised about American excess and greed. How many creditors did he leave screwed with 5 bankruptcies on the level of commerce he operates? How many people lost their jobs while he played Monopoly with their lives? It has to be many billions of dollars and hundreds or more people and/or companies who trusted him, along with thousands who were put out of work. Hysterical hypocrisy from him on any family values blather with all the divorces and adultery. Ego beyond even that of V. Putin would take us to WW III before the end of his first year in office.
Let him burn his billions on his vanity campaign; I don't care. But he's not electable or representative of more than a small minority of America, and I would not want to see him in office. Anywhere. Ever.
Quote: beachbumbabsThey come for a better life, and the current immigration numbers are too low, so they take the chance to come illegally.
So low? We have like 10% of Mexico's population into the USA. Please stop excusing criminal behavior in the name of PC. When a person comes here illegally and is eligible for a drivers license and welfare, a rational person must ask what is wrong with the USA.
Quote: beachbumbabsThey come for a better life, and the current immigration numbers are too low, so they take the chance to come illegally.
Quote: AZDuffmanSo low? We have like 10% of Mexico's population into the USA. Please stop excusing criminal behavior in the name of PC. When a person comes here illegally and is eligible for a drivers license and welfare, a rational person must ask what is wrong with the USA.
They come for a better life and steal a better life from others. They don't care about the fact that they may be reducing someone's chance of getting here legally, taking a job from another person by keeping wages artificially low, or taking services that could be used on people here legally. They get in state tuition when they are not even legally in the country or the state.
I'm a compassionate person, but I also feel that we need to call things what they are as we have compassion for those (like kids who are brought here illegally) who have no choice in the matter. As a country, we should discourage and work to prevent illegal immigration--many would rather encourage it.
The math is simple. The ability of the United States and the working, legal citizens and legal immigrants to support illegal immigrants and work to reduce poverty among our legal citizens/immigrants is limited. You can't tax the ones who make money enough to support anyone and everyone who wants to come here.
Quote: RonC
I'm a compassionate person, but I also feel that we need to call things what they are as we have compassion for those (like kids who are brought here illegally) who have no choice in the matter. As a country, we should discourage and work to prevent illegal immigration--many would rather encourage it.
This is an example about how over-concern about appearing "racist" is killing the USA. Illegal immigration is not just doing what Ron said, but is also killing the quality of life for millions of Americans. In some places, Americans have become "foreigners in their own country." When they rightly complain, they are called racist and told to have compassion or whatever. Of course the people saying this do not have kids in a school that has been flooded with kids who cannot even speak english; been told not to wear an American flag lest Mexicans get "offended," been panhandled getting food or going to The Home Depot; on and on.
Many of the people who say "we can't build a fence" live in their nice little gated communities. Do as I tell, not as I do I guess.
Quote: AZDuffmanSo low? We have like 10% of Mexico's population into the USA. Please stop excusing criminal behavior in the name of PC. When a person comes here illegally and is eligible for a drivers license and welfare, a rational person must ask what is wrong with the USA.
Make no mistake progressives are NOT "rational people".
Clinton, as with Reagan, presided over an economy bolstered by $17-a-barrel crude oil. Bypassing what led to that, one has to say that you, I and anyone else here would look like economic geniuses with that key support.Quote: TwirdmanAnd yet he precided over one of the longest periods of economic growth in the nations history and had some of the lowest unemployment rates in decades.
Quote: RonCThey come for a better life and steal a better life from others. They don't care about the fact that they may be reducing someone's chance of getting here legally, taking a job from another person by keeping wages artificially low, or taking services that could be used on people here legally. They get in state tuition when they are not even legally in the country or the state.
I'm a compassionate person, but I also feel that we need to call things what they are as we have compassion for those (like kids who are brought here illegally) who have no choice in the matter. As a country, we should discourage and work to prevent illegal immigration--many would rather encourage it.
The math is simple. The ability of the United States and the working, legal citizens and legal immigrants to support illegal immigrants and work poverty among our legal citizens/immigrants is limited. You can't tax the ones who make money enough to support anyone and everyone who wants to come here.
I am starting to get really concerned that I find myself agreeing more and more with RonC's positions. LOL.
I too am a very compassionate person. How can you not feel for people and families doing whatever necessary to create a better life for their children and even themselves. I always go back to the fact that when my people came from Ireland, back whenever and others came from Poland and Italy and other parts of Europe, we didn't have these issues. I am not going to say everyone was 'welcomed with open arms' but they were all allowed in to try to create a better life.
I wish we (the US) were in a better position and could continue to accommodate everyone that wants to come here seeking a better life, but we no longer are. I clearly see that, since my move to Vegas, which has an extremely large population flowing over the boarder and there just isn't sufficient work, housing or resources for them. I have never seen such poverty as Vegas has.
Quote: kewlj
I wish we (the US) were in a better position and could continue to accommodate everyone that wants to come here seeking a better life, but we no longer are. I clearly see that, since my move to Vegas, which has an extremely large population flowing over the boarder and there just isn't sufficient work, housing or resources for them. I have never seen such poverty as Vegas has.
I have heard things but is it seriously that bad out there?
Quote: GandlerWell I challenge anyone to find a politicIan who has not had a few tongue slips, when you constantly give speeches you are going to make a few verbal typos, it's simply probability.
People who come here illegally do so for very clear reasons, usually because they cannot come here legally, which means they are likley either sick with a dangerous disease, have a criminal history, or associations which would make the application process difficult. It's a very true and valid point.
And I grant it was probably a tongue slip and he meant GDP growth I mean no one is stupid enough to believe the US has negative GDP that is totally farcical. The problem is even in giving him the benefit of the doubt and saying it was a slip of the tongue and he meant GDP growth the statement was ridiculously wrong. I mean there is no way to interpret what he said as making any sense. We often have periods of negative GDP growth its not good but it is a thing that happens. He claimed that this was some unimaginable thing even though he himself has lived through several recessions which means two quarters of negative GDP growth. I mean it is one thing to misspeak it is quite another to make a completely nonsensical statement during your prepared remarks and every reading of his even the most generous makes his statement completely nonsensical.
Also people who come here illegally do do it because they cannot come here legally but not for the reasons you think. It is almost impossible to come here legally if you do not already have a member of your family in the country, lots of money, or an advanced degree. There are 5000 visas granted for low skilled labors a year. 5000 and that is if they have an employee sponsoring them already. There are 55000 handed out in a lotto system but that doesn't help those who are from countries with high immigration to the US like Mexico or the Philippines also even if they could apply millions of people apply each year so the chance of being picked is astonishingly low. Coming here legally is almost impossible for the vast majority of people who would want to come here even if they are healthy, willing to work, and have no criminal history or associates with criminal history. Given what you said it is clear you have no idea how the immigration process works if you think the only people who would come here illegally are people with previous criminal history or diseases. What you said might have held truth in the 1880s when quota systems were put in place.
Quote: AZDuffmanI have heard things but is it seriously that bad out there?
It is. Nature of the beast when nearly the entire local economy revolves around a predatory and destructive industry as well as national economy and there are no natural resources.
Quote: AZDuffmanI have heard things but is it seriously that bad out there?
Yes. Huge homeless population. All cities have homeless situations. Philly where I came from did, but nothing like Vegas. Clark county school system states that there are more than 8000 children (edit: make that 9000 as of June 16, 2015) that attend school every day that are homeless. :( Now that doesn't mean that all are sleeping on the streets or in cars somewhere. CCSD counts families in the many, many weekly type motels (siegel suites, budget) as homeless.
But there are huge numbers of actual homeless people sleeping on the streets, in cars, behind building throughout the city and even in the extensive storm drain system under the city. In addition to the actual homeless, there are just HUGE pockets of extremely depressed, impoverished areas. Basically like third world conditions.
Is this not the case of the bigger cities in AZ? I would think even closer to the border, you would have at least the same, if not worse situation.
Quote: kewljYes. Huge homeless population. All cities have homeless situations. Philly where I came from did, but nothing like Vegas. .
I'm in Tampa, huge homeless population.
Florida and Vegas have similar weather temp wise.
Most homeless are living in tents and cars.
They generally migrate to warm weather cities such as Vegas and Florida.
Without good shelter, tough to make it through in the cold weather.
Quote: kewlj
Is this not the case of the bigger cities in AZ? I would think even closer to the border, you would have at least the same, if not worse situation.
I am not sure how many Phoenix had. When I was there things were boom-booming right until I left, at which time it was starting to really fall apart. I once had 19 job interviews in one week, and that was just from a few major job boards (to be fair back then it made sense to look on careerbuilder.com et al but today not so much.) Basically if you were not making it then it was because you were a worthless slug.
A flip side was that housing was sick expensive. I have no idea how anyone making less than six figures could live alone. To be fair again, I did not go into the crappy areas much if at all. A roommate said he could barely drive his Harley without some Mexicans approaching him to sell him dope at any stoplight. I am guessing there were pockets of really bad places and I was always told Tuscon was a bad place for homeless/poverty.
want to be that way. John Stossel has many
times done pieces on homeless people. He's
gone around a neighborhood and found job
after low paying job, with nobody applying
for them. He's asks able bodied homeless in
the area why they don't take those jobs.
Most of them say it's because they are 'trained'
to do something else. What they really mean
is they are lazy turds living off of society.
These people have always been around in
every time period. There are more of them
now because it's easier to scam now. I
knew a lot of these guys in the late 70's
when I had the bar. Scamming is their life,
they have no pride or ambition. They feel
they are too good to work.
Quote: EvenBob
These people have always been around in
every time period. There are more of them
now because it's easier to scam now. I
knew a lot of these guys in the late 70's
when I had the bar. Scamming is their life,
they have no pride or ambition. They feel
they are too good to work.
Limbaugh called it right years ago, the media and liberals mostly act like they care about the homeless when there is a GOP POTUS. If a liberal is in office, they are forgotten. Some people get transient homeless but work to get out of it. Some homeless belong in a mental ward. The rest just don't want to help themselves.
Quote: AZDuffmanLimbaugh called it right years ago, the media and liberals mostly act like they care about the homeless when there is a GOP POTUS. If a liberal is in office, they are forgotten. Some people get transient homeless but work to get out of it. Some homeless belong in a mental ward. The rest just don't want to help themselves.
+1
Quote: AZDuffmanLimbaugh called it right years ago, the media and liberals mostly act like they care about the homeless when there is a GOP POTUS. If a liberal is in office, they are forgotten. Some people get transient homeless but work to get out of it. Some homeless belong in a mental ward. The rest just don't want to help themselves.
I think the mental aspect is bigger than just 'some'. There is also a lot of substance abuse, both drug and alcohol, but there is a ton of mental health issues.
Whether you choose to judge them and put them down or not, just seriously think about things like sleep deprivation, lacking good quality sleep, food, medical attention, not to mention people stealing what little belongings you have, while you sleep. That's enough to make anyone a little goofy.
Quote: EvenBobGuys, Trump has no intention of running,
it's free publicity. Donald is a media whore,
anything to keep his franchise in the news.
Very savvy, I think.
Good call EB. NBC has now completely cut ties with Donald Trump announcing that he will not be back on the show. That is some good publicity he created. Very savvy. lol.
Quote: kewljWhether you choose to judge them and put them down or not, just seriously think about things like sleep deprivation, lacking good quality sleep, food, medical attention, not to mention people stealing what little belongings you have, while you sleep. That's enough to make anyone a little goofy.
I see them broken into three groups:
1. Mental health and substance abuse. Since the 1960s we really stopped locking people in institutions. While some were able to be mainstreamed, many were classical lunatics and unable to fend for themselves. I see it in my research when there are "lunacy" cases in the court records. "Lunatic" covered a lot of things I am sure, but bottom line is they all kept the person from taking care of their own affairs. Easier to say, "you are cured, lots of luck" than to pay for what amounts to a low-security prison. Of course, some of these folks end up in real prison where they are exploited even worse.
2. Down on their luck types. These are folks that lost a job or/and had some big setbacks. They get to where they cannot afford a place to stay on a regular basis. Danny Bonaduce and Holly Hallstrom were two celebrities who ended up living out of their cars when things went bad. This type wants to work and probably does work erratically. What they really need is a few good months in their financial life and a warm bed during that time and they will get things back on track. If this kind is around the other groups, they will become "leaders" because the other groups can see they are a cut above.
3. Bums. They do not work, they do not want to work. They will panhandle long enough to get whatever food, booze, and drugs they need. They know every soup kitchen and other free meal in town. They probably have interim crash pads where someone lets them flop or else are expert at getting someone else to pay for their way for a night. No amount of anything will get them off the street because they have no ambition but to get loaded and chill out. Their drug and alcohol abuse differs from the first group in that they are not addicted, they just like getting high. They may be in a bad mood sober, but will not get DTs and other withdraw symptoms, thought they could move to the first group in time. They are sharks who will prey on the other groups.
Quote: TwoFeathersATLAZD, and ams, and others that have posted 'a lot' on this and similar political type threads. I wonder if you volunteer for, or even work as a job for, political candidates or parties. You seem extremely dedicated to the dialog, which is great by the way don't mis-understand. I like to see passionate debate, love the exchange of ideas, the more the better. That's kind-of who we are, and quite possibly 'why we still are'. We are still here, we debate, we encourage debate (well most of the best of us do). I just wondered about being so politically active on what is essentially a gambling forum. Anyone want to speak a little about what you do besides post on the issues here? I assume you vote, if in Chicago - early, often, repeatedly ;-)
What else?
Haha my job has nothing to do with politics whatsoever. I have my Masters in Accounting but I'm not really an accountant. I work for a software company. I live in Ann Arbor, which I believe was voted one of the 10 best cities for liberals to live in in America, so I've got that going for me.
The vast majority of my family are conservative Republicans. The majority of the friends I made in college were Republicans as well. (But what I like to call "sane Republicans" - not zealots). We used to enjoy getting into heated late night drunken arguments. It really helped to sharpen my debate skills. I was a junior in college during the 2008 election. Man, was that a fun time. That was the first Presidential election I was able to vote in as well.
Anyway, I'm socially very liberal. I'm gay and about a 60/40 atheist/agnostic, so obviously the Republican Party doesn't have much to offer me. I was in high school during the 2004 election and seeing the way the right threw gays under the bus is really what turned me off from them for good. In other areas I could be tempted by some conservative arguments, but it always comes back to the social issues for me. I could never support a party that treats people like Cruz, Huckabee, Bachmann, Santorum, etc. as anything other than nutbags. And there are certain issues I just really don't care all that much about and usually refrain from (immigration is one that comes to mind).
Quote: TwirdmanAnd I grant it was probably a tongue slip and he meant GDP growth I mean no one is stupid enough to believe the US has negative GDP that is totally farcical. The problem is even in giving him the benefit of the doubt and saying it was a slip of the tongue and he meant GDP growth the statement was ridiculously wrong. I mean there is no way to interpret what he said as making any sense. We often have periods of negative GDP growth its not good but it is a thing that happens. He claimed that this was some unimaginable thing even though he himself has lived through several recessions which means two quarters of negative GDP growth. I mean it is one thing to misspeak it is quite another to make a completely nonsensical statement during your prepared remarks and every reading of his even the most generous makes his statement completely nonsensical.
Also people who come here illegally do do it because they cannot come here legally but not for the reasons you think. It is almost impossible to come here legally if you do not already have a member of your family in the country, lots of money, or an advanced degree. There are 5000 visas granted for low skilled labors a year. 5000 and that is if they have an employee sponsoring them already. There are 55000 handed out in a lotto system but that doesn't help those who are from countries with high immigration to the US like Mexico or the Philippines also even if they could apply millions of people apply each year so the chance of being picked is astonishingly low. Coming here legally is almost impossible for the vast majority of people who would want to come here even if they are healthy, willing to work, and have no criminal history or associates with criminal history. Given what you said it is clear you have no idea how the immigration process works if you think the only people who would come here illegally are people with previous criminal history or diseases. What you said might have held truth in the 1880s when quota systems were put in place.
Well that's good, we don't need endless amounts of low skilled workers.
We do need scientists, engineers, computer scientists, skilled tradesmen etc...
But people who come here illegally are an inherent risk, not just for taking entry level jobs, but because we have no record of them, medically, criminally, etc... They may have diseases Americans have not experienced for decades, they may be members of various south of the border gangs that are rapidly taking over.
Whenever millions of undocumented people come here, many will not find jobs, even if they were "good" when they came, they often turn to crime because they are not allowed to work.
And, the Southern border is the most penetrated entry point, increased security will solve a lot of problems.
Quote: GandlerAnd, the Southern border is the most penetrated entry point, increased security will solve a lot of problems.
How many thousands of miles of border?
And the TSA can't successfully guard a narrow gated entry way? That's what I hear.
Quote: ams288Haha my job has nothing to do with politics whatsoever. I have my Masters in Accounting but I'm not really an accountant. I work for a software company. I live in Ann Arbor, which I believe was voted one of the 10 best cities for liberals to live in in America, so I've got that going for me.
The vast majority of my family are conservative Republicans. The majority of the friends I made in college were Republicans as well. (But what I like to call "sane Republicans" - not zealots). We used to enjoy getting into heated late night drunken arguments. It really helped to sharpen my debate skills. I was a junior in college during the 2008 election. Man, was that a fun time. That was the first Presidential election I was able to vote in as well.
Anyway, I'm socially very liberal. I'm gay and about a 60/40 atheist/agnostic, so obviously the Republican Party doesn't have much to offer me. I was in high school during the 2004 election and seeing the way the right threw gays under the bus is really what turned me off from them for good. In other areas I could be tempted by some conservative arguments, but it always comes back to the social issues for me. I could never support a party that treats people like Cruz, Huckabee, Bachmann, Santorum, etc. as anything other than nutbags. And there are certain issues I just really don't care all that much about and usually refrain from (immigration is one that comes to mind).
Thanks for the response ams, a big response, so a big thanks!
More later, got to feed the kids, but didn't want your response to get buried too deep for me to find it easily. Thx again.
Are the conservatives on the Supreme Court so pissed off at the liberals that they voted against clean air just for spite.
The supreme Court ruled that EPA can only regulate air pollution when it’s cost-effective to do so.
Huh, company profits trumps the health of the community of people.
I get it, companies are people too and their economic health is more important then a actual living human being's health.
Simply due to mismanagment at a company struggling to make a profit, they have the right to spew garbage chemicals into the air we breathe and the EPA cant do anything because in the end, its all about the money.
Whats next, if Beijing can deal with it, so can we? LOL
I find their decision pretty startling, but spite would explain it.
Quote: terapinedI am just speculating here.
Are the conservatives on the Supreme Court so pissed off at the liberals that they voted against clean air just for spite.
The supreme Court ruled that EPA can only regulate air pollution when it’s cost-effective to do so.
Huh, company profits trumps the health of the community of people.
I get it, companies are people too and their economic health is more important then a actual living human being's health.
Simply due to mismanagment at a company struggling to make a profit, they have the right to spew garbage chemicals into the air we breathe and the EPA cant do anything because in the end, its all about the money.
Whats next, if Beijing can deal with it, so can we? LOL
I find their decision pretty startling, but spite would explain it.
Might be a 'turf war'. Exactly who is running the asylum anyway?
Scotus ain't about to stand second fiddle to the silly little EPA.
At least companies do have people (up until the robotic masses arrive). The liberals and far left have begun anthropomorphizing animals of many sorts in the wake of the decision on same-sex marriage:Quote: terapinedI get it, companies are people too and their economic health is more important then a actual living human being's health.
"Yet the more we learn about dolphins in general, and killer whales in particular, the more that our assumption of innate superiority looks like a presumption. Orcas, with their big brains, complex social structures, mysterious communications, and mind-boggling sixth sense, by their very existence, challenge the long-standing belief that human beings are the planet’s only intelligent occupants. Social life for killer whales, as we have seen, is deeper and more omnipresent than it is for humans; their identities are defined by their families and tribal connections; and their empathy is powerful enough to extend to other species. If orcas have established empathy as a distinctive evolutionary advantage, it might behoove a human race awash in war and psychopathy to pay attention.
"We’ve also learned that these creatures have rich emotional lives. Their brains are extremely developed in the areas associated with emotional learning, and their tight social arrangement, in which family bonds remain for life, is complex and sophisticated. They also have a demonstrated capacity for empathy. Nor, for that matter, is this only true of dolphins and cetaceans generally. The more we learn about a number of creatures that have always been deemed non-persons by dint of their nonhuman status, the more their emotional lives are being revealed: chimpanzees and all the great apes, elephants, even cats and dogs and pigs and cattle, all have more developed emotional centers than we had previously supposed." salon
Quote: terapinedI am just speculating here.
Are the conservatives on the Supreme Court so pissed off at the liberals that they voted against clean air just for spite.
The supreme Court ruled that EPA can only regulate air pollution when it’s cost-effective to do so.
Huh, company profits trumps the health of the community of people.
I get it, companies are people too and their economic health is more important then a actual living human being's health.
Simply due to mismanagment at a company struggling to make a profit, they have the right to spew garbage chemicals into the air we breathe and the EPA cant do anything because in the end, its all about the money.
Whats next, if Beijing can deal with it, so can we? LOL
I find their decision pretty startling, but spite would explain it.
I think that this ruling is not broad enough to be as horrid as you describe it. They imposed a rule that causes billions in dollars in costs for millions in savings essentially. They will be able to rewrite the rule considering costs and get past this particular issue.
I don't think "spite" came into play; it is just a case of an agency not knowing their own governing legislation and rules well enough to write a proper rule for the situation. There is nowhere near the stretch that was made in other rulings to think it was spite...
Quote: terapinedI am just speculating here.
Are the conservatives on the Supreme Court so pissed off at the liberals that they voted against clean air just for spite.
The supreme Court ruled that EPA can only regulate air pollution when it’s cost-effective to do so.
Huh, company profits trumps the health of the community of people.
I get it, companies are people too and their economic health is more important then a actual living human being's health.
Simply due to mismanagment at a company struggling to make a profit, they have the right to spew garbage chemicals into the air we breathe and the EPA cant do anything because in the end, its all about the money.
Whats next, if Beijing can deal with it, so can we? LOL
I find their decision pretty startling, but spite would explain it.
It has nothing to do with "spite." When a regulation is passed. cost/benefit needs to be taken into consideration. You cannot simply pass regulations without considering the cost to the people and corporations being regulated. I know liberals think corporations are "a piece of paper" and that somehow they magically can pay the cost of a regulation. But in the real world corporations are people. Someone has to pay for those costs. It can be the profit in your 401(k) or a bump in your monthly electric bill, or probably both.
All that happened is SCOUTS gave considerations to everyone's rights and didn't discriminate against the rights of a minority.
Ya know, I was actually impressed with his interview. He did an excellent job of appearing reasoned and calm and actually answered the questions that were asked.
Now, a lot of his answers were still batsh** crazy, but he did a great job of selling them. His performance as a candidate is improving.
Quote: ams288Ted Cruz was just on Morning Joe.
Ya know, I was actually impressed with his interview. He did an excellent job of appearing reasoned and calm and actually answered the questions that were asked.
Now, a lot of his answers were still batsh** crazy, but he did a great job of selling them. His performance as a candidate is improving.
The great thing about Presidential elections is that ALL the candidates have ideas that are batsh*** crazy, are deeply flawed individuals, or have zero experience running anything of substance...we just have to chose our poison through the process. We look for perfection in imperfect people and our "system" weeds out many who have some skeletons in their closet but might be better leaders than what makes it through the system.
The Republicans have lots of candidates who aren't fantastic; the Democrats are pretty much down to one (realistically) who isn't that good, either. We'll see how it all sorts out.
Like I said, he really sold his answers even though they were kind of insane. He talked a lot about how the SCOTUS ignored the Constitution last week, and now he wants to drastically change the Constitution because a couple rulings didn't go his way. Irony.
Quote: ams288^^^^ That was as close to a compliment as I'll ever give Cruz.
Like I said, he really sold his answers even though they were kind of insane. He talked a lot about how the SCOTUS ignored the Constitution last week, and now he wants to drastically change the Constitution because a couple rulings didn't go his way. Irony.
Well, to be fair SCOTUS did ignore the Constitution, invented a few things to fit public opinion, which is how the liberals seem to think you are supposed to rule. I mean, when a law mentions the states and it clearly means the states then you are supposed to read what is there and what was the intent.
I assume you think Obama is crazy because he and other liberals want to change the 1st Amendment because the Citizens United ruling didn't go his way??
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/30/jon-stewart-antonin-scalia-gay-marriage_n_7694090.html
Quote: ams288Jon Stewart did an excellent job highlighting the blatant hypocrisy of Justice Scalia's various opinions last night:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/30/jon-stewart-antonin-scalia-gay-marriage_n_7694090.html
I love how Scalia drives liberals crazy what with him actually reading the Constitution and actually doing what it says and all.
Quote: AZDuffmanI love how Scalia drives liberals crazy what with him actually reading the Constitution and actually doing what it says and all.
And constantly contradicting himself.
Quote: ams288And constantly contradicting himself.
Not really, constantly following law, not feelings.
Quote: AZDuffmanNot really, constantly following law, not feelings.
Clearly you didn't watch the Jon Stewart video. lol
Quote: ams288Clearly you didn't watch the Jon Stewart video. lol
I read the article with it.
Stewart makes no sense. Passing a law is the will of the people yet somehow not passing a law is not the will of the people? It is not Scalia's fault that Obamacare is a disaster that the people of most states wanted no part of. All he did was read the law as it was written.
Like I said, Scalia makes liberals go crazy, gotta love the guy! Need 8 more like him on the court. The current court shows the danger of liberal POTUS with SCOTUS nominees.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/06/30/jon-stewart-antonin-scalia-gay-marriage_n_7694090.html
I didn't watch the video; I am not interested in any comedian's opinion on the issues; they are trying to be funny and they are usually firmly entrenched on one side or the other (think of Lewis Black and Dennis Miller)...their targets always seem to be more often one side than on both sides equally (and that is fine...they are comedians)
"Jonathan "Jon" Stewart (born Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz; November 28, 1962)[10] is an American comedian..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Stewart
Justice Scalia described both instances of ignoring the Constitution pretty accurately. Though Obamacare in itself may have been the will of the people, the way it is written (that means people that put it forward wrote what they wanted it to say or they made a mistake that needs fixing in Congress and signed by the President) is pretty clear about "States"...the Supreme Court decided to fix it themselves, which is not a good thing.
The other issue should have been settled state by state across the country. They decided to shortcut that process and the changing will of the people.
I don't really care about the whole gay marriage thing; they can screw up marriages now just like we straights can. Way too much time was going to be invested discussing a fringe issue impacting 1%-5% of the population (<4% is a widely seen figure; I have no idea how many LBGT folks are really out there) in the coming election; now it will be less of an issue overall because it is "settled law"...the issue can be used to discuss what type of justices we want nominated instead of whether or not their should be marriages within the same sex.
Of course, the LGBT population can't have unequal rights. Domestic partnerships and other things previously given to people who couldn't marry need to be removed as soon as prudently possible, since they can now get married. No need for "domestic partner" benefits of any kind unless they apply to ALL couples and not just LGBT ones. The stage is set; marriage is now what should trigger marital benefits.
Quote: bobsimsFew realize that we are exactly one SC appointment away from the country becoming a mini-Soviet state. The 3 Jews and the Puerto Rican are robotic Communists, pure and simple. A Venezuela style quasi-Marxist country is a lot closer than we would like to think.
We are pretty much already there. 47% there anyways. Too many people in the USA can't handle freedom and prefer to be told what to do.
Quote: AZDuffmanWe are pretty much already there. 47% there anyways. Too many people in the USA can't handle freedom and prefer to be told what to do.
Hands out (or up) and lazy always wins over hard work, personal responsibility and sacrifice with many. Too late to put that Genie back in the bottle. Can only sit back and hope enough hard working middle class people on both sides start paying attention instead of just believing the GOP is out to screw them and Hillary is for them.
Of course we all know this was the fault of the NRA and GOP!
It echoes the divisions between Sunni and Shiia that have kept Israel alive.Quote: AZDuffman#Blacklivesmatter attack gay pride marchers! Of course we all know this was the fault of the NRA and GOP!
Quote: EvenBobMississippi is considering doing away with
marriage licenses altogether. No more
marriage in MS, go somewhere else and
do it and come back here to live. It would
prevent churches from ever having to perform
Gay ceremonies.
http://www.newsweek.com/following-supreme-court-decision-mississippi-may-stop-issuing-any-marriage-347740
Incredibly bad move by Mississippi.
Its totally Unconstitutional. It means you can only to get married in a church.
It means only religious people are able to reap state and federal benefits from being married.
If you are an male female athiest couple, you cannot get married. Unconstitutional
Quote: SanchoPanzaIt echoes the divisions between Sunni and Shiia that have kept Israel alive.Quote: AZDuffman#Blacklivesmatter attack gay pride marchers! Of course we all know this was the fault of the NRA and GOP!
It is an early sign that the liberal coalition is not as tight as many think and that "demographics" is not the lock they think it will be. Expect more of this as time goes by. Blacks vs Hispanics and unions vs greens are other very potential fault lines.
