// Required code

Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Why I Voted For Trump...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by JimL View Post
    Don't care to hear about your excuses for voting for a lying, theiving, white nationalist, undemocratic, treasonous con man, wannabe dictator, seer. One way or another, impeachment by Congress or ousting by election, Trump is going down, and then you won't have to make excuses for yourselves anymore. Won't that be nice?
    At this rate, I figure Trump will "go down" just as Obama did - peacefully leaving office after 8 years. I can only hope he'll be replaced by someone less divisive.
    Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

    Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
    sigpic
    I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
      At this rate, I figure Trump will "go down" just as Obama did - peacefully leaving office after 8 years. I can only hope he'll be replaced by someone less divisive.
      I think 4 looks likely at this point in time, given that he's hanging his hat on the economy and the trade war isn't going so well (to say nothing of the possibility of a recession, which I hope is staved off as long as possible). I'm not going to predict anything with a high degree of confidence 14 months away though (and I can't believe we're already that close).

      I really don't think he's going to try to stay in office if voted out, though. It's not like any attempt to do so would succeed anyway.
      "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Roy View Post
        So instead of making a case against abortion etc that would persuade existing judges to adopt your views and change the laws, ...
        I'm going to stop you right there. Judges do not have power to "change the laws". They can only uphold a law, or strike it down. It is up to the legislature to make changes.
        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
        Than a fool in the eyes of God


        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          You're talking just like your version of him, Jimmy! You're becoming Trump! He OWNS you.
          You're the one who supports and defends the treasonous con man, CP, not me.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
            I'm going to stop you right there. Judges do not have power to "change the laws". They can only uphold a law, or strike it down. It is up to the legislature to make changes.
            Striking down a law is changing the laws. So is setting or changing an interpretation, setting a precedent or reversing a previous strike-down.

            Getting rid of legalised abortion requires changing the laws. If judges couldn't change the laws, directly or indirectly, there'd be no point in voting in conservative judges.
            Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

            mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

            Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
            Mountain Man: … this is how liberals argue these days, with labels instead of ideas.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Roy View Post
              Striking down a law is changing the laws. So is setting or changing an interpretation, setting a precedent or reversing a previous strike-down.

              Getting rid of legalised abortion requires changing the laws. If judges couldn't change the laws, directly or indirectly, there'd be no point in voting in conservative judges.
              Striking down a law is striking down a law; it does not change the law in question but simply removes it from the books. And as for interpreting the law is concerned, the whole point is to decide how a law applies to a case being heard, and not to "interpret" the law to mean something other than what is written, or create new applications for a law that were never intended by the legislature. Appointing conservative judges is to ensure that the former happens and not the latter.
              Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
              But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
              Than a fool in the eyes of God


              From "Fools Gold" by Petra

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by JimL View Post
                You're the one who supports and defends the treasonous con man, CP, not me.
                By treasonous con man do you mean beat the person that the left wing elites selected for us because it was "her turn"? The guy that caused the left to unhinge to such a degree that they had to cobble together a bunch of fake rumors and unsubstantiated slurs in an attempt to overturn an election and kick out a duly elected president? THAT sort of treasonous conman?

                I'm always still in trouble again

                "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                Comment


                • #38
                  And to add to my previous post, if the legislature's intent can not be reasonably discerned then the law needs to be struck down and sent back to the legislature for clarification. It is not a judge's place to add their own "clarification".
                  Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                  But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                  Than a fool in the eyes of God


                  From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                    By treasonous con man do you mean beat the person that the left wing elites selected for us because it was "her turn"? The guy that caused the left to unhinge to such a degree that they had to cobble together a bunch of fake rumors and unsubstantiated slurs in an attempt to overturn an election and kick out a duly elected president? THAT sort of treasonous conman?
                    No, I don't mean that kind, rogue, I mean Trump. That you and your ilk can't recognize a lying con man who is doing his best to undermine democratic institutions while weakening the NATO alliance in the service of his boss Vlad and Russia says a whole lot about you. That's what Trump meant when he said about you that , and I paraphrase, "I could shoot someone on 5th ave in broad daylight and my supporters wouldn't leave me." yep, that was you he was talking about, rogue.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by JimL View Post
                      No, I don't mean that kind, rogue, I mean Trump. That you and your ilk can't recognize a lying con man who is doing his best to undermine democratic institutions while weakening the NATO alliance in the service of his boss Vlad and Russia says a whole lot about you. That's what Trump meant when he said about you that , and I paraphrase, "I could shoot someone on 5th ave in broad daylight and my supporters wouldn't leave me." yep, that was you he was talking about, rogue.
                      Still desperately clinging to the thoroughly debunked fantasy that Trump colluded with the Russians I see. I guess it is the like the glue that is needed to hold the rest of your deranged idiotic blathering together.

                      If he can succeed in getting the other NATO members to start pulling their own weight rather than waiting for Uncle Sugar to do everything then NATO will be the stronger for it. If not NATO has turned into little more than a burdensome relic.

                      And maybe you should look up the word hyperbole.

                      The fact that you cannot avoid is that your entire belief that Trump is a traitorous conman hinges on something that was completely fabricated. Something that was cobbled together out of a bunch of fake rumors and unsubstantiated slurs in an attempt to overturn an election and kick out a duly elected president. And the irony is that you can't comprehend that this was the treasonous con that was foisted onto this country.

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        By treasonous con man do you mean beat the person that the left wing elites selected for us because it was "her turn"? The guy that caused the left to unhinge to such a degree that they had to cobble together a bunch of fake rumors and unsubstantiated slurs in an attempt to overturn an election and kick out a duly elected president? THAT sort of treasonous conman?
                        I'd call your comments here 'unhinged' in terms of their relation to reality. There is a good bit of that going around. And a good bit of the general trend towards unhingedness comes from each side not being willing to address the truth that is owned on the other.

                        This president pushes against very real and necessary boundaries that must be maintained if we are to maintain even a minimum level of integrity and if we are to keep the principle of the separation of powers intact. Boundaries agreed to long ago due to the same tendency to excess and abuse he revels in and seen historically in leaders across the word. Elements of excess like Trumps flaunting of his outright mockery of the emoluments clause and the basis for its existence. His refusal to yield to legal supenas. His acceptance of help from foreign power - however small you may have been convinced it was.

                        These are bad things. And they put us on a dark path away from the rule of law, and toward the potential for too much power in the hands of the president and too much corruption in the office of the president and an undoing of one of the primary founding principles of our government.

                        That no man or woman is capable of resisting the temptations of and inevitable and abuse of power. Therefore power is distributed across three orthoganal elements with different goals and sources that keep each other in check and that have the power to stop and push back against those that would go too far in the others.

                        Going too far

                        You see, there is a real reason that some violations of these priciples can exist and be tolerated. Because they don't go too far. So many times the argument to ignore or excuse trump on these issues is that others have done things that fit the same category, or that taken in isolation could be said to be 'the same'

                        The difference here is the total lack of respect and understanding of why they exist. And the brazen unwillingness to practice any level of self-control in their abuse. Trump goes too far. And in doing so endangers the constiution and the republic he has been elected to govern.

                        Jim
                        He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                        "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                          I'd call your comments here 'unhinged' in terms of their relation to reality.
                          If someone is still clinging to the terminally discredited claim that Trump colluded with Putin then ipso facto they are unhinged or at the very least purposefully deluded.

                          The actual "treasonous conman" were those engaged in an attempt to overthrow a duly elected president through deliberate, duplicitous fraud and deceit.

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                            Striking down a law is striking down a law; it does not change the law in question but simply removes it from the books.
                            Thereby changing the laws (plural) by removing a law (singular).

                            It's not so hard to understand.
                            And as for interpreting the law is concerned, the whole point is to decide how a law applies to a case being heard, and not to "interpret" the law to mean something other than what is written, or create new applications for a law that were never intended by the legislature. Appointing conservative judges is to ensure that the former happens and not the latter.
                            Scalia and Rehnquist's decisions, particularly the ones relating to establishment of religion, refute that.
                            Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                            mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

                            Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                            Mountain Man: … this is how liberals argue these days, with labels instead of ideas.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                              If someone is still clinging to the terminally discredited claim that Trump colluded with Putin then ipso facto they are unhinged or at the very least purposefully deluded.

                              The actual "treasonous conman" were those engaged in an attempt to overthrow a duly elected president through deliberate, duplicitous fraud and deceit.
                              I see you ignored the rest of the post. That trump asked for help is a simple fact. He did it publicly. That Russia tried to help Trump win is also well documented and well known. I did not use the term collusion nor was there anything in my post that implied overt collusion. Neither did I use the term 'conman'. Those are all your words rogue use in response to my post (though originally used in response to JimL), and that context (my post) they do sound a bit unhinged as they have nothing to do with my response.

                              Perhaps you could take the time to actually address the content of my post more in keeping with your demonstrated capacity for reasoned thought?

                              Jim
                              Last edited by oxmixmudd; 09-15-2019, 09:32 AM.
                              He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                              "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Roy View Post
                                Thereby changing the laws (plural) by removing a law (singular).

                                It's not so hard to understand.Scalia and Rehnquist's decisions, particularly the ones relating to establishment of religion, refute that.
                                Sorry, but playing semantics won't save you from your ignorant flub.
                                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Sparko, Today, 02:32 PM
                                36 responses
                                141 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post LiconaFan97  
                                Started by Juvenal, Today, 09:54 AM
                                13 responses
                                94 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post mossrose  
                                Started by seer, Today, 09:50 AM
                                6 responses
                                56 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by seer, Yesterday, 05:35 PM
                                31 responses
                                234 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post mikewhitney  
                                Started by shunyadragon, 09-27-2020, 07:37 PM
                                32 responses
                                218 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post CivilDiscourse  
                                Working...
                                X