The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: bkg on June 17, 2010, 07:50:15 PM
-
Good-bye 10th.
Good-bye State governments
Good-bye freedom.
Clinton: Obama Administration To Sue Arizona Over Immigration Law
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/17/clinton_obama_administration_to_sue_arizona_over_immigration_law.html
If I had kids, I'd be able to look froward to saying "Back in my day, we used to have a Constitution... to my grandkids..."...
-
Good-bye 10th.
Good-bye State governments
Good-bye freedom.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/17/clinton_obama_administration_to_sue_arizona_over_immigration_law.html
If I had kids, I'd be able to look froward to saying "Back in my day, we used to have a Constitution... to my grandkids..."...
You have forgotten one step in the process... The step were Americans fight to get this country back..I am fighting for her.. November!
-
Me too!!! Not gonna sit back and let all of this happen laying down.
-
You have forgotten one step in the process... The step were Americans fight to get this country back..I am fighting for her.. November!
What exactly do you think will change in December?
Seriously?
Will we all of a sudden protect our boarders?
Will we all of a sudden cut gov't 40%?
Will we all of a sudden remove fascism?
We will all of a sudden repeal all COTUS violating laws, including Social Security and ObamaCare?
Is Voting all you are going to do?
Will you really "fight" if it comes to that?
Everyone needs to vote in November... and everyone needs to be REALISTIC about what will happen. December will not bring kittens and puffy clouds... It will just slow the ride.
-
What exactly do you think will change in December?
Seriously?
Will we all of a sudden protect our boarders?
Will we all of a sudden cut gov't 40%?
Will we all of a sudden remove fascism?
We will all of a sudden repeal all COTUS violating laws, including Social Security and ObamaCare?
Is Voting all you are going to do?
Will you really "fight" if it comes to that?
Everyone needs to vote in November... and everyone needs to be REALISTIC about what will happen. December will not bring kittens and puffy clouds... It will just slow the ride.
Yes it will. I am not fooling myself.. I don't even know how November will be.. I am saying that enough is enough and should the time come I will defend her!
They left is a violent greedy bunch. They want a dictatorship, no more America. That is what I am willing to fight for. November first. Then go from there. If they lose in November they will use the lame duck session to pass cap and trade and whatever else they can... From there protect boarders. cut govt . Never will remove all fascism it is like Shariah Law. it will be a fight always. Obama care do not fund.
-
Yes it will. I am not fooling myself.. I don't even know how November will be.. I am saying that enough is enough and should the time come I will defend her!
They left is a violent greedy bunch. They want a dictatorship, no more America. That is what I am willing to fight for. November first. Then go from there. If they lose in November they will use the lame duck session to pass cap and trade and whatever else they can... From there protect boarders. cut govt . Never will remove all fascism it is like Shariah Law. it will be a fight always. Obama care do not fund.
A good point.
-
We'll start with November and work our way from there. When push comes to shove, I'll do what's necessary to keep America as it should be, if at all possible.
Who was it that said, "I regret that I have but one life to give for my country"??
-
<--- Vichy France is that way
-
We'll start with November and work our way from there. When push comes to shove, I'll do what's necessary to keep America as it should be, if at all possible.
Who was it that said, "I regret that I have but one life to give for my country"??
That would have been Capt. Nathan Hale, Continental Army.
(https://www.cia.gov/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/books-and-monographs/intelligence/photo-15.gif)
-
The news of the sky falling has been greatly exaggerated.
Obama sues, loses and the sun rises tomorrow.
-
The news of the sky falling has been greatly exaggerated.
Obama sues, loses and the sun rises tomorrow.
Don't take for granted that he will lose. And don't take it for granted that this is no big deal... He's already taken over a massive amount of the private sector, so why would he not attempt the same with the states?
But that's really not the point. The fact that the federal government is stepping in to sue a state for maintaining a rule of law is above the pale... It's beyond fascism at that point; it's a clear window into the future of America where the Fed gov't rules with an iron fist (as BP) while state goverments become nothing more than symbolic representations of the past.
I should have said "Good-by Republic"
-
How about we don't count battles lost until after they've been fought?
FFS it took 30 years to overturn the DC gun ban. It took nearly a hundred years to overturn Jim Crowe/so-called "black laws". These were laws that laws that were not only passed but fought all the way to the Supreme Court and unheld. Yet, they were defeated in turn.
The COTUS doesn't presume every law passed is just, fair or constiututional. On the contrary the COTUS assumes bad laws are passed and establishes the means of remedy.
Movements like the Tea Party would never have happened 30 years ago. Thanks to technology we no longer have just 3 networks singing in harmony. People are better informed and more involved than ever in human history (thank-you Al Gore!).
Quit being so *******ed French and sack-the-****-up already. Quit making excuses for why we can't prevail because all you're really doing is making excuses for why you won't fight.
-
Quit being so *******ed French and sack-the-****-up already. Quit making excuses for why we can't prevail because all you're really doing is making excuses for why you won't fight.
That's the SPIRIT! :hi5:
-
How about we don't count battles lost until after they've been fought?
Sometimes the fact that we have to fight the battle is, in and of itself, a loss.
Quit being so *******ed French and sack-the-****-up already. Quit making excuses for why we can't prevail because all you're really doing is making excuses for why you won't fight.
Find one excuse that I have made, please. I'm simply pointing out what some people here refuse to acknowledge - that the GOP is not going to change shit in November. Some of you seem to think that if they win in November, everything is rosy. Be realistic about the battle you are fighting - many of you are not. The battle is larger than some of you give credit for, and the past 4-5 administrations have provided momentum towards what every DC policy maker seems to want - Control. You do not stop a freightrain on a dime, folks.
-
If the GOP kicks ass in November, as some predictions would indicate, it will have a startling effect on the mood of the nation AND the politicians that survive November's fight.
While perhaps not quite as dramatic as Newt's 1994 "Contract With America" stuff, the result will be profound. Why? Because it lends credence to the Tea Party movement in all its shapes, forms, and sizes. It sends a very clear message to the American political system that mainstream Americans are pissed off and that efforts taken by the alphabet-soup media to sugarcoat and brushstroke the issues will not fool clear-thinking Americans.
That said, Lord Zero's minions will have already developed strategies for dealing with all that.
And let's not forget Rule #1:
- Politicians' first objective is to get reelected.
Rule #1 will not change, regardless what happens in November.
-
Sometimes the fact that we have to fight the battle is, in and of itself, a loss.
What?
Dude, seriously.
A fight is a fight and there will always be fights. Humanity will never stop fighting.
Ever. Having to fight only means you wound-up on planet Earth. Nothing more, nothing less.
Find one excuse that I have made, please. I'm simply pointing out what some people here refuse to acknowledge - that the GOP is not going to change shit in November. Some of you seem to think that if they win in November, everything is rosy.
Find one person that has said everything will be rosy. Last time I checked this thread everyone sees November as the ebginning of the fight.
Be realistic about the battle you are fighting - many of you are not. The battle is larger than some of you give credit for, and the past 4-5 administrations have provided momentum towards what every DC policy maker seems to want - Control. You do not stop a freightrain on a dime, folks.
And yet you seem too timid to even put your hand on the brake lever.
You just sit there and cry while real men and women will carry your freedom for you because apparently its too heavy for you to hold up on your own.
-
November is just the start. What happens then will show me and others what is possible?
-
I understand how you feel BKG and that's why I take at least a weekly dose of "fighter"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sMflgpD-xfw
-
What?
Dude, seriously.
A fight is a fight and there will always be fights. Humanity will never stop fighting.
Ever. Having to fight only means you wound-up on planet Earth. Nothing more, nothing less.
Find one person that has said everything will be rosy. Last time I checked this thread everyone sees November as the ebginning of the fight.
And yet you seem too timid to even put your hand on the brake lever.
You just sit there and cry while real men and women will carry your freedom for you because apparently its too heavy for you to hold up on your own.
Damn MSB -- that is going to leave a permanent mark.
-
Damn MSB -- that is going to leave a permanent mark.
It still won`t phase the one trick pony "the GOP sucks" gig though.
-
It still won`t phase the one trick pony "the GOP sucks" gig though.
Are you claiming it doesn't?
-
If the GOP doesn't do a heavy shift to the right...they will suck, even more.
-
Are you claiming it doesn't?
sometimes that's all that people have as a response, Rich... Hence my point about November. People soo excited to see a change, thinking that's going to start the big salvation. It will not do anything. It's only a point in time that may slow the train. People don't like to hear the truth about that, so they attack. Which I find ironic and entertaining all at the same time.
And MSB - you made me laugh. Seriously. :rotf: :rotf:
-
Is cyberspace about to get censored?
the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
The bill would grant President Obama the power to declare a “national cyber-emergency” at his discretion and force private companies tied to the Web, including Internet service providers and search engines, to take action in response—moves that could include limiting or even cutting off their connections to the World Wide Web for up to 30 days.While the bill’s sponsors say it is intended to create a shield to defend the United States and its largest companies from the growing threat of cyberattacks, civil-liberties activists tell The Daily Beast they fear the bill could give the White House the ability to effectively shut down portions of the Internet for reasons that could prove to be politically inspired.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-06-18/new-bill-would-let-obama-police-internet-for-national-security-reasons/?cid=hp:exc
I POST HERE BECAUSE IF THEY GET THE INTERNET. THEN ALL CARDS OFF TABLE... THEY RULE NOW!
-
Is cyberspace about to get censored?
I POST HERE BECAUSE IF THEY GET THE INTERNET. THEN ALL CARDS OFF TABLE... They will rule then!
"it's for your safety."
Not there yet, but it's not far away.
-
What?
Dude, seriously.
A fight is a fight and there will always be fights. Humanity will never stop fighting.
Ever. Having to fight only means you wound-up on planet Earth. Nothing more, nothing less.
Find one person that has said everything will be rosy. Last time I checked this thread everyone sees November as the ebginning of the fight.
And yet you seem too timid to even put your hand on the brake lever.
You just sit there and cry while real men and women will carry your freedom for you because apparently its too heavy for you to hold up on your own.
OUCH!!! MSB, I'd like you to know, Minnesota is a strange place. It's a place where people CLAIM to be "Conservative", but they are loathe to enlist in the military and often chase military recruiters away.(Been there, received THAT) bkg is from there, so this is no surprise to me. Mothers Against Military Madness is HQ'ed in St Paul, MN, if that gives you any clue.
And cavegal, I just read where Bill Gates allegedly "turned over the keys" to the internet to the 0bamao Administration. If "Dear Leader" can silence the opposition, we are lost as far as "peaceful means". It's time to turn to steganography and other encryption methods.
-
sometimes that's all that people have as a response, Rich... Hence my point about November. People soo excited to see a change, thinking that's going to start the big salvation. It will not do anything. It's only a point in time that may slow the train. People don't like to hear the truth about that, so they attack. Which I find ironic and entertaining all at the same time.
And MSB - you made me laugh. Seriously. :rotf: :rotf:
"People"....... I honestly don't know who is worse -- you or the Obama-latte-sipping-elitist-theorists he surrounds himself with.
You keep dabbling in theory. I will keep dabbling in practice.
:whatever:
-
(http://fondosdisney.com.es/images/wallpapers/Chicken%20Little-962608.jpeg)
Official mascot of the libertarian "real conservative" party.
-
sometimes that's all that people have as a response, Rich... Hence my point about November. People soo excited to see a change, thinking that's going to start the big salvation. It will not do anything. It's only a point in time that may slow the train. People don't like to hear the truth about that, so they attack. Which I find ironic and entertaining all at the same time.
And MSB - you made me laugh. Seriously. :rotf: :rotf:
I don't agree that it (GOP) will do nothing. I concur that they might NOT do what some of us desire.
But at the end of the day:
"The America of today is a laboratory example if what can happen to democracies, what has eventually happened to all perfect democracies throughout history. A perfect democracy, a 'warm body' democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction. It depends solely on the wisdom and self-restaint of citizens... which is opposed by the folly and lack of self-restraint of other citizens. What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each soveriegn citizen will always vote in public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it... which for the majority translates as 'Bread and Circuses'.
Bread and Circuses is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure. Democracy often works beautifully at first. But once the state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in it's weakened condition the state succums to an invader - the barbarians enter Rome."
.
We now have 47% of the population that has zero tax liability and many actually get a refund check back for more than they paid into the system.
We are 4 percent away from total destruction as a republic. It WILL happen, and probably within MY lifetime.
-
And cavegal, I just read where Bill Gates allegedly "turned over the keys" to the internet to the 0bamao Administration. If "Dear Leader" can silence the opposition, we are lost as far as "peaceful means". It's time to turn to steganography and other encryption methods.
I am thinking how they talked to each other back in the day before all this...??/I also agree as far as "peaceful means" How about ham radios and cb radios ...we have to get info to each other.. Of course the biggest baddest government in the world is going to do all they can to stop that.
-
"People"....... I honestly don't know who is worse -- you or the Obama-latte-sipping-elitist-theorists he surrounds himself with.
You keep dabbling in theory. I will keep dabbling in practice.
:whatever:
Have you learned NOTHING concerning the last 6 decades of DC politics?
BKG is correct in his scepticism IMO. Historically speaking the GOP has done very little to retard or stop progressive tendancies in recent decades.
-
sometimes that's all that people have as a response, Rich... Hence my point about November. People soo excited to see a change, thinking that's going to start the big salvation. It will not do anything. It's only a point in time that may slow the train. People don't like to hear the truth about that, so they attack. Which I find ironic and entertaining all at the same time.
And MSB - you made me laugh. Seriously. :rotf: :rotf:
Dude,you have spent a week here desperately taunting and trying to get into an argument where you can go off on your Libertarian,I hate Republicans obsession.
Up until today you have been basically ignored with it because everyone at this point considers it to be trollish and juvenile yet you still have convinced yourself it is because you are so enlightened.
Catch a clue,no one is interested in stopping you from believing what you wish to but at the same time few here consider your opinion worth much because of the antics.
Deal with it.
-
BKG is correct in his scepticism IMO. Historically speaking the GOP has done very little to retard or stop progressive tendancies in recent decades.
You have a valid point, but the constant crybabying about it is getting old.
-
Have you learned NOTHING concerning the last 6 decades of DC politics?
BKG is correct in his scepticism IMO. Historically speaking the GOP has done very little to retard or stop progressive tendancies in recent decades.
Hence, one of the MANY reasons I left the GOP. There are still some true conservative GOP members out there such as Michelle Bachmann. They are few and far between, though.
-
:popcorn:
-
You have a valid point, but the constant crybabying about it is getting old.
The irony of this statement, given the threads you have started (i.e. nothing exactly positive) make me giggle like a school girl.
-
Dude,you have spent a week here desperately taunting and trying to get into an argument where you can go off on your Libertarian,I hate Republicans obsession.
Up until today you have been basically ignored with it because everyone at this point considers it to be trollish and juvenile yet you still have convinced yourself it is because you are so enlightened.
Catch a clue,no one is interested in stopping you from believing what you wish to but at the same time few here consider your opinion worth much because of the antics.
Deal with it.
Some of you have such thin skin that if you don't like the message, you attack the messanger (Some dude named Alinsky comes to mind). I don't really care too much if you don't like me. But please point out where I've at all incorrect and we can engage in a conversation... Or put me on ignore. Easy enough.
I'm interested in exactly what is Theory about my statemets... I may be an opinionated a-hole, but I'm not idiotic enough to think that this train will turn around anytime soon.
-
I just put it out there. Do you see me constantly downing the Republican party? You are so ****ing predictable, it's a joke. Oh hey, Brian made a post... let's see what it is.
A) Complaining about the GOP
B) Whining about the GOP
C) Bitching about the GOP
D) All of the above
-
Hence, one of the MANY reasons I left the GOP. There are still some true conservative GOP members out there such as Michelle Bachmann. They are few and far between, though.
she's under major attack up here right now, btw...
-
I just put it out there. Do you see me constantly downing the Republican party? You are so ****ing predictable, it's a joke. Oh hey, Brian made a post... let's see what it is.
A) Complaining about the GOP
B) Whining about the GOP
C) Bitching about the GOP
D) All of the above
Gotcha... Don't complain about the shit job the GOP (or anyone else) has done in the last few decades... Only complain about the DNC. Got it. :rotf: :rotf:
-
Some of you have such thin skin that if you don't like the message, you attack the messanger (Some dude named Alinsky comes to mind). I don't really care too much if you don't like me. But please point out where I've at all incorrect and we can engage in a conversation... Or put me on ignore. Easy enough.
I'm interested in exactly what is Theory about my statemets... SI may be an opinionated a-hole, but I'm not idiotic enough to think that this train will turn around anytime soon.
Catch a clue,no one is interested in stopping you from believing what you wish to but at the same time few here consider your opinion worth much because of the antics.
-
Gotcha... Don't complain about the shit job the GOP (or anyone else) has done in the last few decades... Only complain about the DNC. Got it. :rotf: :rotf:
Good-bye USA...
Seriously?
-
Good-bye USA...
Seriously?
Seriously - did you read my post where I stated I should have re-worded it?
IMHO - if this lawsuit happens, it's a direct afront to the entire premise that the USA was founded upon... same model that lead to the civil war. If this happens, and they WIN (or even dliberate), then the 10th is likely DEAD... and if the 10th is dead, the Republic is dead... That the Feds even contimplate this is scary and shoul dbe a massive wake up call to the states and citizens alike. It's a very dangerous precident with a massively dangerous potential result.
If they win - or even get 4 votes (assuming SCOTUS), are you saying it's not going to have massive effecting on the Republic, and therefore the USA as we know it?
And what does that title have to do with the GOP?
-
Some of you have such thin skin that if you don't like the message, you attack the messanger (Some dude named Alinsky comes to mind). I don't really care too much if you don't like me. But please point out where I've at all incorrect and we can engage in a conversation... Or put me on ignore. Easy enough.
I'm interested in exactly what is Theory about my statemets... SI may be an opinionated a-hole, but I'm not idiotic enough to think that this train will turn around anytime soon.
You make the post or thread you answer the challenge,that is how it works.
You never do but always try to make a distraction or diversion and "you make me fawking laugh" is not a debate point.
Tell us all then since it is your thread how we get 218 representatives and 51 senators that are solid conservatives no matter what letter follows their names and also what exactly you are doing to make that happen.
I doubt you will because you never do and if the pattern holds you will go away for a while until you think everyone has forgotten and then come back and start the trolling again.
It is your thread so step up to the plate for once.
-
Seriously - did you read my post where I stated I should have re-worded it?
IMHO - if this lawsuit happens, it's a direct afront to the entire premise that the USA was founded upon... same model that lead to the civil war. If this happens, and they WIN (or even dliberate), then the 10th is likely DEAD... and if the 10th is dead, the Republic is dead... That the Feds even contimplate this is scary and shoul dbe a massive wake up call to the states and citizens alike. It's a very dangerous precident with a massively dangerous potential result.
If they win - or even get 4 votes (assuming SCOTUS), are you saying it's not going to have massive effecting on the Republic, and therefore the USA as we know it?
And what does that title have to do with the GOP?
Newsflash, genius--the 10th has been dead since 1900. You just now figuring that out?
-
You make the post or thread you answer the challenge,that is how it works.
You never do but always try to make a distraction or diversion and "you make me fawking laugh" is not a debate point.
Tell us all then since it is your thread how we get 218 representatives and 51 senators that are solid conservatives no matter what letter follows their names and also what exactly you are doing to make that happen.
I doubt you will because you never do and if the pattern holds you will go away for a while until you think everyone has forgotten and then come back and start the trolling again.
It is your thread so step up to the plate for once.
Okay - let's play. What do you want to know? We will NOT get 218/51 conservatives, which is exactly why I stated November is but a point in time and nothing that will stop this barge.
Next questoin. This time try w/o an insult.
-
Newsflash, genius--the 10th has been dead since 1900. You just now figuring that out?
An erosion of the COTUS that few elected officials have done anything to stop, especailly at the Fed layer. Makes no difference the letter behind their name, they are few and far between. Allowing erosion to continue, or simply refusing to talk about it, is not a tactic we can allow w/o massive consequence.
-
Okay - let's play. What do you want to know? We will NOT get 218/51 conservatives, which is exactly why I stated November is but a point in time and nothing that will stop this barge.
Next questoin. This time try w/o an insult.
So what is your point then...you imply you understand the reality of the political world but do nothing but whine about it here.
You also did not answer the question as to what we all can do to try to make it so and what YOU are doing where you are.
No more trying to change the subject.
-
Seriously - did you read my post where I stated I should have re-worded it?
IMHO - if this lawsuit happens, it's a direct afront to the entire premise that the USA was founded upon... same model that lead to the civil war. If this happens, and they WIN (or even dliberate), then the 10th is likely DEAD... and if the 10th is dead, the Republic is dead... That the Feds even contimplate this is scary and shoul dbe a massive wake up call to the states and citizens alike. It's a very dangerous precident with a massively dangerous potential result.
If they win - or even get 4 votes (assuming SCOTUS), are you saying it's not going to have massive effecting on the Republic, and therefore the USA as we know it?
And what does that title have to do with the GOP?
WTF? the ability to file the lawsuit itself is the safeguard the authors of the Constitution put in place. What on earth is the position of SCOTUS in your world?
The judicial power shall extend to all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution, the laws of the United States, and treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority;--to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls;--to all cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction;--to controversies to which the United States shall be a party;--to controversies between two or more states;--between a state and citizens of another state;--between citizens of different states;--between citizens of the same state claiming lands under grants of different states, and between a state, or the citizens thereof, and foreign states, citizens or subjects.
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii
To recap. The Obama Administration believes it is the position of federal government to police illegal immigration and not that of states. He is wrong of course, but will play it out through the federal court system AS COTUS ALLOWS.
Just because you don't like the cause of action doesn't freakin mean they can't do it.
-
Btw...I do think it is important to elect people that oppose the lib agenda even if it means that they are not always on the same page.
Immigration reform was a doa issue just a few years ago...now it is swinging our way.
The mushy middle thought they could have a free lunch with O and have discovered it is a sh!t sandwich.
Fairly criticize the GOP for spending too much when in power but also admit that they have held socialism as the left wants it at bay and have had a pro growth economic agenda with a serious effort to end radical islamist terrorism.
The nonsense that there is no difference with dems is just that...nonsense and deliberately dishonest.
-
An erosion of the COTUS that few elected officials have done anything to stop, especailly at the Fed layer. Makes no difference the letter behind their name, they are few and far between. Allowing erosion to continue, or simply refusing to talk about it, is not a tactic we can allow w/o massive consequence.
yeah Congress should make a law forbidding presidential administrations from challenging laws...... that's right, that's the ticket.......
-
So what is your point then...you imply you understand the reality of the political world but do nothing but whine about it here.
You also did not answer the question as to what we all can do to try to make it so and what YOU are doing where you are.
No more trying to change the subject.
What exactly would you like me to do about it here? A majority of the threads outside of the lounge are nothing but talking about the negative shit that's happening, not to even touch on DU.
Having said that, your second questoin is a good one, and frankly a valid one that everyone should be able to answer. I'm no different than anyone else - letters, emails, phone calls and local gov't involvement as my work (travel) schedule enables. Profound, hell no. What are you doing? Or more importantly, what have you seen that is WORKING (non internet related)? May make a interesting topic, frankly.
-
WTF? the ability to file the lawsuit itself is the safeguard the authors of the Constitution put in place. What on earth is the position of SCOTUS in your world?
http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii
To recap. The Obama Administration believes it is the position of federal government to police illegal immigration and not that of states. He is wrong of course, but will play it out through the federal court system AS COTUS ALLOWS.
Just because you don't like the cause of action doesn't freakin mean they can't do it.
You missed my point completely. Not once did I say it can't happen, did I? That representatives ALLOW the Feds to sue a state for enforcing the fed law is a scary proposition. Just because it's "legal" doesn't make it right. But your point is taken and noted.
-
While perhaps not quite as dramatic as Newt's 1994 "Contract With America" stuff, the result will be profound.
Actually, if the GOP performs like I think it will, this election will DWARF 1994. First, the timeline from 1994 through the rest of the decade:
1. The election in 1994 was based upon an ATTEMPT by Clinton to foist "HillaryCare" on the American public. There were other factors, but this was the one event that led to Newt Gingrich's "Contract on America". Actually, Haley Barbour probably had a greater impact on the election itself, but Gingrich happened to be better positioned. I can elaborate more on that later.
2. Bill Clinton was a masterful politician, but he had the help of a relatively sycophant media, a lack of Internet accountability (rapid response), and once the election was over, he maneuvered his political apparatus. In addition, he took charge of the Democratic minority, and played the budget deficit card brilliantly, with the republicans flinching. Once this happened, the media jumped on this like a shark on a bloody prey, cementing the idea that the republicans were toothless in their majority.
3. With that failure, the conservative movement stalled and failed, Bob Dole, a WWII RINO, lost big. After this election, the left shifted to the left again. In fact, the Left became the first group to dominate the Internet (more on that later as well).
So yes, the GOP definitely has a negative track record, and has proven they can't govern effectively as a majority. Why should this time be different?
1. Obama has essentially done everything up front. He has fundamentally (and, hopefully, temporarily) changed the car companies, the financial instutions. He's passed ObamaCare, which is HillaryCare on steroids, and is now in the process of changing the energy industry. In short, he's played out every leftist orgasmic fantasy in only a year and a half.
2. The Tea Party movement is not just about anti-Obama, or pro-republican. It is about a FUNDAMENTAL REAWAKENING by many people about how the government is SUPPOSED to work. The Contract With America turned out to be more of a slogan and an election gimmick, as the crappy style of governance showed.
3. EVERY republican candidate that I've talked to has not only expressed a disdain to "politics as usual", many of them are also working to ensure that they take their Constitutional duties seriously. In short, they have a far more greater understanding about how the government is supposed to work. THIS IS KEY. In short, the feeling is that there is far less of individual desires to succeed politically, but to collectively work toward migrating controls from the federal level to the state level (other than for international and defense departments), and simultaneously, at the state levels, for controlling the finances at their levels that they will now have greater control for their constituents.
Yet, I believe this to be the most important election in my lifetime, surpassed perhaps only by the election of Ronald Reagan (who accelerated the end of the Cold War). This election will be about reestablishing the Constitutional framework of the legislative branch of government. Note that the dems are shifting to the left; so once we win, we will dominate the political scape for at least two years.
And one more point: President Obama is NO Bill Clinton. He doesn't control the political apparatus; the apparatus controls HIM. Obama is nothing more than a pouty, PR-type bureaucrat who, without the apparatus, is going to be floundering like a trout on a flat rock. He won't have the mainstream media to help him nearly as much as the '95 media helped Clinton. Even Clinton was a governor, so he had executive experience in dealing with opposition parties.
And this comes to what I said before: His new best friends will be Olympia Snowe and Scott Brown, and that's if they don't align themselves with the conservative majority. We should be able to deal with them if they don't.
Yes, this election will dwarf any Congressional election we've had since, perhaps, the New Deal era.
-
What exactly would you like me to do about it here? A majority of the threads outside of the lounge are nothing but talking about the negative shit that's happening, not to even touch on DU.
Having said that, your second questoin is a good one, and frankly a valid one that everyone should be able to answer. I'm no different than anyone else - letters, emails, phone calls and local gov't involvement as my work (travel) schedule enables. Profound, hell no. What are you doing? Or more importantly, what have you seen that is WORKING (non internet related)? May make a interesting topic, frankly.
Run for local office. Be involved in local campaigns. Move your ass from the sidelines to the line of fire. Then talk about RINOs and such AFTER you have been out on the street, pounding the pavement for candidates.
-
Btw...I do think it is important to elect people that oppose the lib agenda even if it means that they are not always on the same page.
Immigration reform was a doa issue just a few years ago...now it is swinging our way.
The mushy middle thought they could have a free lunch with O and have discovered it is a sh!t sandwich.
Fairly criticize the GOP for spending too much when in power but also admit that they have held socialism as the left wants it at bay and have had a pro growth economic agenda with a serious effort to end radical islamist terrorism.
The nonsense that there is no difference with dems is just that...nonsense and deliberately dishonest.
Hell, I agree with you! In the absense of a candidate that meets your individual needs, you (effectively) have to vote for the next best.
But we disagree on your last sentence. The difference has become very minor in many (not all) aspects. The major difference isn't agenda anymore, but the tactics used to implement the agenda. Differences? Definitely. Major? I don't think so anymore.
-
You missed my point completely. Not once did I say it can't happen, did I? That representatives ALLOW the Feds to sue a state for enforcing the fed law is a scary proposition. Just because it's "legal" doesn't make it right. But your point is taken and noted.
My late uncle's girlfriend (a pretty decent lawyer) had an expression: Justice is a process, not a result. Just because you didn't get the result you wanted doesn't mean justice wasn't served.
Conversely, those with whom you disagree ALSO have a right to justice, even if you think they're wrong.
-
Run for local office. Be involved in local campaigns. Move your ass from the sidelines to the line of fire. Then talk about RINOs and such AFTER you have been out on the street, pounding the pavement for candidates.
Your assumption is that I don't do shit. I answered the question, you please do the same.
-
My late uncle's girlfriend (a pretty decent lawyer) had an expression: Justice is a process, not a result. Just because you didn't get the result you wanted doesn't mean justice wasn't served.
Conversely, those with whom you disagree ALSO have a right to justice, even if you think they're wrong.
Never once disagreed with last statement... The expression is an interesting one... I'll have to noodle that.
-
Actually, if the GOP performs like I think it will, this election will DWARF 1994. First, the timeline from 1994 through the rest of the decade:
1. The election in 1994 was based upon an ATTEMPT by Clinton to foist "HillaryCare" on the American public. There were other factors, but this was the one event that led to Newt Gingrich's "Contract on America". Actually, Haley Barbour probably had a greater impact on the election itself, but Gingrich happened to be better positioned. I can elaborate more on that later.
2. Bill Clinton was a masterful politician, but he had the help of a relatively sycophant media, a lack of Internet accountability (rapid response), and once the election was over, he maneuvered his political apparatus. In addition, he took charge of the Democratic minority, and played the budget deficit card brilliantly, with the republicans flinching. Once this happened, the media jumped on this like a shark on a bloody prey, cementing the idea that the republicans were toothless in their majority.
3. With that failure, the conservative movement stalled and failed, Bob Dole, a WWII RINO, lost big. After this election, the left shifted to the left again. In fact, the Left became the first group to dominate the Internet (more on that later as well).
So yes, the GOP definitely has a negative track record, and has proven they can't govern effectively as a majority. Why should this time be different?
1. Obama has essentially done everything up front. He has fundamentally (and, hopefully, temporarily) changed the car companies, the financial instutions. He's passed ObamaCare, which is HillaryCare on steroids, and is now in the process of changing the energy industry. In short, he's played out every leftist orgasmic fantasy in only a year and a half.
2. The Tea Party movement is not just about anti-Obama, or pro-republican. It is about a FUNDAMENTAL REAWAKENING by many people about how the government is SUPPOSED to work. The Contract With America turned out to be more of a slogan and an election gimmick, as the crappy style of governance showed.
3. EVERY republican candidate that I've talked to has not only expressed a disdain to "politics as usual", many of them are also working to ensure that they take their Constitutional duties seriously. In short, they have a far more greater understanding about how the government is supposed to work. THIS IS KEY. In short, the feeling is that there is far less of individual desires to succeed politically, but to collectively work toward migrating controls from the federal level to the state level (other than for international and defense departments), and simultaneously, at the state levels, for controlling the finances at their levels that they will now have greater control for their constituents.
Yet, I believe this to be the most important election in my lifetime, surpassed perhaps only by the election of Ronald Reagan (who accelerated the end of the Cold War). This election will be about reestablishing the Constitutional framework of the legislative branch of government. Note that the dems are shifting to the left; so once we win, we will dominate the political scape for at least two years.
And one more point: President Obama is NO Bill Clinton. He doesn't control the political apparatus; the apparatus controls HIM. Obama is nothing more than a pouty, PR-type bureaucrat who, without the apparatus, is going to be floundering like a trout on a flat rock. He won't have the mainstream media to help him nearly as much as the '95 media helped Clinton. Even Clinton was a governor, so he had executive experience in dealing with opposition parties.
And this comes to what I said before: His new best friends will be Olympia Snowe and Scott Brown, and that's if they don't align themselves with the conservative majority. We should be able to deal with them if they don't.
Yes, this election will dwarf any Congressional election we've had since, perhaps, the New Deal era.
Very interesting points.
-
What exactly would you like me to do about it here? A majority of the threads outside of the lounge are nothing but talking about the negative shit that's happening, not to even touch on DU.
Having said that, your second questoin is a good one, and frankly a valid one that everyone should be able to answer. I'm no different than anyone else - letters, emails, phone calls and local gov't involvement as my work (travel) schedule enables. Profound, hell no. What are you doing? Or more importantly, what have you seen that is WORKING (non internet related)? May make a interesting topic, frankly.
Thank you for the answer. :cheersmate:
As for here I attended a meeting this week with the candidate for our Congressional district... http://www.chrisgibsonforcongress.com/home.html
Talked with him a bit and am pleased.
Have donated and volunteered to work for the campaign and even though it is anecdotal I already see many lawn signs for him and none for the incumbent.
Have offered to serve on the local county committee and will do everything I can to see him elected and reclaim the seat once held by Gerald Solomon.
We can and will win this one back and while it won`t make NY a conservative state it will help push things to the right.
-
Actually, if the GOP performs like I think it will, this election will DWARF 1994. First, the timeline from 1994 through the rest of the decade:
1. The election in 1994 was based upon an ATTEMPT by Clinton to foist "HillaryCare" on the American public. There were other factors, but this was the one event that led to Newt Gingrich's "Contract on America". Actually, Haley Barbour probably had a greater impact on the election itself, but Gingrich happened to be better positioned. I can elaborate more on that later.
2. Bill Clinton was a masterful politician, but he had the help of a relatively sycophant media, a lack of Internet accountability (rapid response), and once the election was over, he maneuvered his political apparatus. In addition, he took charge of the Democratic minority, and played the budget deficit card brilliantly, with the republicans flinching. Once this happened, the media jumped on this like a shark on a bloody prey, cementing the idea that the republicans were toothless in their majority.
3. With that failure, the conservative movement stalled and failed, Bob Dole, a WWII RINO, lost big. After this election, the left shifted to the left again. In fact, the Left became the first group to dominate the Internet (more on that later as well).
So yes, the GOP definitely has a negative track record, and has proven they can't govern effectively as a majority. Why should this time be different?
1. Obama has essentially done everything up front. He has fundamentally (and, hopefully, temporarily) changed the car companies, the financial instutions. He's passed ObamaCare, which is HillaryCare on steroids, and is now in the process of changing the energy industry. In short, he's played out every leftist orgasmic fantasy in only a year and a half.
2. The Tea Party movement is not just about anti-Obama, or pro-republican. It is about a FUNDAMENTAL REAWAKENING by many people about how the government is SUPPOSED to work. The Contract With America turned out to be more of a slogan and an election gimmick, as the crappy style of governance showed.
3. EVERY republican candidate that I've talked to has not only expressed a disdain to "politics as usual", many of them are also working to ensure that they take their Constitutional duties seriously. In short, they have a far more greater understanding about how the government is supposed to work. THIS IS KEY. In short, the feeling is that there is far less of individual desires to succeed politically, but to collectively work toward migrating controls from the federal level to the state level (other than for international and defense departments), and simultaneously, at the state levels, for controlling the finances at their levels that they will now have greater control for their constituents.
Yet, I believe this to be the most important election in my lifetime, surpassed perhaps only by the election of Ronald Reagan (who accelerated the end of the Cold War). This election will be about reestablishing the Constitutional framework of the legislative branch of government. Note that the dems are shifting to the left; so once we win, we will dominate the political scape for at least two years.
And one more point: President Obama is NO Bill Clinton. He doesn't control the political apparatus; the apparatus controls HIM. Obama is nothing more than a pouty, PR-type bureaucrat who, without the apparatus, is going to be floundering like a trout on a flat rock. He won't have the mainstream media to help him nearly as much as the '95 media helped Clinton. Even Clinton was a governor, so he had executive experience in dealing with opposition parties.
And this comes to what I said before: His new best friends will be Olympia Snowe and Scott Brown, and that's if they don't align themselves with the conservative majority. We should be able to deal with them if they don't.
Yes, this election will dwarf any Congressional election we've had since, perhaps, the New Deal era.
A very good point and O is a street thug...he comes at you when things are not his way...that I think has turned people off.
As for the RINOS that are inevitable one must consider them as one does any other contractor...get out of them what one can and understand that the alternative is getting nothing.
Let the tide pull them along and as long as the electorate is still basically running in the same direction count them as useful but understand what reality is.
Now though...if a solid conservative can win in a district or state and the local party is opting for a favorite son who isn`t then raise holy hell and I do think this year may be the year a few of those outside a party can and will be elected.
-
Historically speaking the GOP has done very little to retard...
You take that back!
The GOP has done tons of stuff that's retarded!!!
-
Thank you for the answer. :cheersmate:
As for here I attended a meeting this week with the candidate for our Congressional district... http://www.chrisgibsonforcongress.com/home.html
Talked with him a bit and am pleased.
Have donated and volunteered to work for the campaign and even though it is anecdotal I already see many lawn signs for him and none for the incumbent.
Have offered to serve on the local county committee and will do everything I can to see him elected and reclaim the seat once held by Gerald Solomon.
We can and will win this one back and while it won`t make NY a conservative state it will help push things to the right.
All ya had to do was ask. :tongue:
Local elections are going to be key to slowing this train in the next 20 years, IMHO... They've been written off by many due to lack of fan-fair and media attention. I think that's going to change in the next two cycles.
-
All ya had to do was ask. :tongue:
Local elections are going to be key to slowing this train in the next 20 years, IMHO... They've been written off by many due to lack of fan-fair and media attention. I think that's going to change in the next two cycles.
Here's a little something I got from the local Republicans in my e-mail:
Dear Strafford County Republicans:
I'm pleased to inform you that we have had thirty-five (35)
candidates for the House file to run from Strafford County. This may
be a record but at any rate, it's an excellent turnout. We have
thirty-seven (37) seats in the county but we have more than two slots
vacant because we do have primaries in some districts. There are a
lot of first-time candidates and a lot of enthusiastic young people.
Additionally, we have forty-eight (48) people who signed up in
Strafford County to run as delegates to the convention which is a
great number.
We have Senate candidates in Strafford Senate District 4 who will be
in a primary: Rep. Dave Bickford of New Durham, George Hurt of
Gilford, and Jim Forsythe of Strafford.
We have Fenton Groen of Rochester running for Senate District 6 and
another new candidate running for Senate District 21, Peter
Angerhofer from Durham.
We also have Wayne Estes running for Sheriff and Catherine Cheney
running for County Commissioner.
We should be extremely grateful for all of these folks for stepping
up to the plate and making the decision to run, some at great
personal sacrifice. I have told each one as I speak to them that we,
in the county, are standing ready, willing, and able to help and
support them in any way possible.
Please be sure to go to the polls to vote in the primary election on
September 14th and in the general election on November 2nd. Those
winning their primary race and/or running for delegates to the
convention will meet in Concord on Saturday, 25th for the Republican
State Convention to vote on the platform.
Phyllis Woods
National Committeewoman for NH
When you couple that with the fact that the deadline to file was last week, and the number of Republican candidates to file exceeded the Democrat candidates by nearly a 2-1 margin, the Democrats would have to have damned near every candidate win to retain their (brief) majority in Concord. That ain't gonna happen, friend. New Hampshire is going back to their CONSERVATIVE roots by first booting out the Democrats, then making sure that the Republicans who replaced them are damned well aware that if they don't get their shit in one sock, they'll be out the door just as quickly.
Carol "Che" Shea-Porter is as good as gone. Hodes gave up his House seat to run for Senate, which he won't get. And while Charlie Bass thinks he can just waltz back in and take his old seat back, there are a lot of good, solid, conservative candidates to pick from in the 2nd District.
Now was that thanks to the RNC, RNCC, or even the state GOP? Nope--it was due to PEOPLE getting involved at the local level and letting the state party system know in no uncertain terms that the days of the mushy Republicans under Fergus "mouthbreather" Cullen are OVER.
-
interesting...
Arizona Attorney General Says He Won't Defend State's Immigration Law
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/18/arizona-attorney-general-says-wont-defend-states-immigration-law/
-
interesting...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/18/arizona-attorney-general-says-wont-defend-states-immigration-law/
Guess he likes the idea of being an ambulance chaser in Winslow for the rest of his life.
-
Your assumption is that I don't do shit. I answered the question, you please do the same.
I just did.
-
Guess he likes the idea of being an ambulance chaser in Winslow for the rest of his life.
Maybe he'll get run over by the ambulance.
-
Maybe he'll get run over by the ambulance.BUS
FIFY........
-
The news of the sky falling has been greatly exaggerated.
Obama sues, loses and the sun rises tomorrow.
Then he signs an EO negating the AZ law.
-
You take that back!
The GOP has done tons of stuff that's retarded!!!
:cheersmate: :rotf: :cheersmate:
-
Then he signs an EO negating the AZ law.
Go ahead and try it. It'd be like the Executive Branch trying to void laws which have already been passed and upheld by the Judicial Branch. He'd get his crank stomped on so fast it wouldn't be funny.
-
Go ahead and try it. It'd be like the Executive Branch trying to void laws which have already been passed and upheld by the Judicial Branch. He'd get his crank stomped on so fast it wouldn't be funny.
Hasn't he done that already with EO's?
-
:popcorn:
-
Hasn't he done that already with EO's?
Which ones are you referring to?
-
Go ahead and try it. It'd be like the Executive Branch trying to void laws which have already been passed and upheld by the Judicial Branch. He'd get his crank stomped on so fast it wouldn't be funny.
doubtful....
the MSM will never report the action, sweeping it under the rug.
-
Hasn't he done that already with EO's?
Please state where this has happened.
The executive can take an adversarial position to a state law and challenge it in the judicial system.
They can attempt to strong arm a state with the usual means,denying funding for XYZ but I am not familiar with any President ever attempting to negate a state law by fiat.
If I am wrong will admit so.
-
doubtful....
the MSM will never report the action, sweeping it under the rug.
The state isn't exactly going to sit idle while it happens.
-
Now that would depend on how the state is bribed.
-
Now that would depend on how the state is bribed.
Give me examples of EO that superseded state law, and then the bribe that silenced the state.
-
I have no data to back my assertion. BUT, how many things have happened with this admin that are new ground.
-
I have no data to back my assertion. BUT, how many things have happened with this admin that are new ground.
Did I log onto the DU by mistake??
:whatever:
-
Quiter :(
-
Quiter :(
I get really annoyed by the chicken little assertions made that are just parroting of other listservs/forums. No one fact checks or does any due diligence to formulate their own opinions. They just wash, rinse and repeat others' nonsense.
If there is an EO that supersedes state law, I honestly would like to see it. I have not heard of any such thing being done, but that doesn't mean it hasn't been attempted. I just want proof.
-
I'm going to throw my pitiful .02 cents in here. I agree that it all starts this November. All Obammy is doing right now is knocking the moss off the stone because Baby it's starting to roll.
Like Sparky hit on briefly the GOP is going to win in November and they are going to win big. Even the Dims know they had their chance and have royally screwed the pooch, the smarter ones are running away or laying low by not running at all. A large D after your name on TV has become toxic
The way I see it there is a huge mandate of the people this year coming down the pike and it is going to be a demand for REAL change and the GOP better hear that loud and clear.
The people got snowed on what happened with Bush I and didn't like what they thought happened and as a result we got another attempt at another Jimmy Carter. They didn't like the shit Clinton pulled so we got Bush Lite. His lack of personality and testicular fortitude towards the dims got him in trouble. Bush beget Barry and Barry, in record time has beget the Tea Party Movement. The Tea Partiers began to mobilize to give the GOP one more chance but the Wun has done a beautiful job on his own of slitting his throat so they haven't had to be overly in-your-face vocal so far. BUT if the GOP blows it before '12 then the Tea Party will get all antsy and take back this country before the decade ends.
-
Please state where this has happened.
The executive can take an adversarial position to a state law and challenge it in the judicial system.
They can attempt to strong arm a state with the usual means,denying funding for XYZ but I am not familiar with any President ever attempting to negate a state law by fiat.
If I am wrong will admit so.
I was asking... He's done a ton of them, many reversing actions of the last admin. I would not be surprised if there was potential overlap w/ a state law, whether this President or any. Honest question.
If the answer is "no," I'm cool with it.
-
I was asking... He's done a ton of them, many reversing actions of the last admin. I would not be surprised if there was potential overlap w/ a state law, whether this President or any. Honest question.
If the answer is "no," I'm cool with it.
Well, holy shit--a President who let's a previous administrations Executive Orders lapse, particularly when parties are changed.
Whoda ****in thunk it?
-
Well, holy shit--a President who let's a previous administrations Executive Orders lapse, particularly when parties are changed.
Whoda ****in thunk it?
Wow, aren't you just the profound one today. :whatever: :whatever:
-
Wow, aren't you just the profound one today. :whatever: :whatever:
Better to be profound than a half-assed drama queen.
-
Ok ladies...simma' down now...catfight:
-
Better to be profound than a half-assed drama queen.
When discussions turn into nothing but name calling, then the discussion is over.
-
When discussions turn into nothing but name calling, then the discussion is over.
Bring something to the discussion besides hysterical hyperbole, and I might give a shit what you think.
-
Bring something to the discussion besides hysterical hyperbole, and I might give a shit what you think.
You need to go re-read the entire thread.
-
Sorry, I read it once. I don't need to punch myself in the balls again.
-
Sorry, I read it once. I don't need to punch myself in the balls again.
Tell ya what, and I'll end with this.
Engage in conversation, or put me on ignore. You'll be happier either way.
-
Tell ya what, and I'll end with this.
Engage in conversation, or put me on ignore. You'll be happier either way.
I've seen your idea of "conversation". But I can't put you on ignore. Watching you twist yourself into hysterical knots is like seeing a train wreck--you want to look away, but you just can't.
-
Bring something to the discussion besides hysterical hyperbole, and I might give a shit what you think.
Actually Sparky, he has brought up some very valid concerns IMO.
He does go off the deep end on occassion as I have been known to do myself. He is very harsh in his assessment of the political realities of the last several decades of both parties and I share his assessment on a lot of it. I just word it a tad less bluntly.
Instead of calling him a drama queen, why don't you merely address the content of his posts? Resorting to name calling or insults adds nothing to any discussion. And yeah.... I've done my share of that too.
-
Sorry, but I've little use for the "Chicken Little" reactions from either side of the political spectrum.
COULD some of these decisions or proposals have far-reaching consequences? In extreme cases, yes. In most situations, minimal to non-existent.
The whole 100-percenter mentality pisses me off.
-
Fair Nuff then....
Personally, I often think of things in "worse possible" scenarios when it comes to the idiots in DC. I try to read between the lines so to speak.
I don't trust any of them to any major degree, nor have I ever, and I doubt that is going to change. History is full of examples where folks didn't "get it" until it was too late. I try to NOT be one of them.
And for the record, I am not saying that you are one that doesn't "get it".
-
Sorry, but I've little use for the "Chicken Little" reactions from either side of the political spectrum.
COULD some of these decisions or proposals have far-reaching consequences? In extreme cases, yes. In most situations, minimal to non-existent.
The whole 100-percenter mentality pisses me off.
Again, feel free to put me on ignore. Your choice to insult rather than talk about the issues is diverting the conversation.
Am I black and white? Yes. Am I harsh? Yes. Does "shades of gray" work? Not in my mind - not anymore. Do we need a change? Yes. Do I see the temp being turned up on the water? Yes. Do I get tired of the "eh, don't worry, it's no big deal" response from people? Yes.
At some point, the small steps that take away our freedoms take us a long way down the path. And we can either take a look at the past and see the direction we are heading, draw a conclusion on that and react... or take each of the individual steps, evaluate them individually in a vaccuum and say "that isn't a big deal"??? I think the latter has not served us well and helped the pace increase, rather than decrease.
So again, you're welcome to engage or ignore me. It's up to you. But I do please ask that if you choose to not engage in the topic, that you be the bigger man and drop the insults...
-
Here it comes...
Supremecy clause... if they win, the feds can claim this for anything...
linky here (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_immigration_enforcement_lawsuit;_ylt=AkEU.eZWUdpbHLKWrhXxOEqs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTQydmJjcTViBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNzA2L3VzX2ltbWlncmF0aW9uX2VuZm9yY2VtZW50X2xhd3N1aXQEY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3BvcwMxBHBvcwMyBHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNmZWRzc3VldG9ibG8-)
Feds sue to block Arizona illegal immigrant law
The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Phoenix argues that Arizona's law requiring state and local police to question and possibly arrest illegal immigrants during the enforcement of other laws such as traffic violations usurps federal authority.
"In our constitutional system, the federal government has pre-eminent authority to regulate immigration matters," the lawsuit says. "This authority derives from the United States Constitution and numerous acts of Congress. The nation's immigration laws reflect a careful and considered balance of national law enforcement, foreign relations, and humanitarian interests."
The government is seeking an injunction to delay the July 29 implementation of the law until the case is resolved. It ultimately wants the law declared invalid.
The government contends that the Arizona law violates the supremacy clause of the Constitution, a legal theory that says federal laws override state laws. It is already illegal under federal law to be in the country illegally, but Arizona is the first state to make it a state crime and add its own punishment and enforcement tactics.
-
I've heard more than one constitutional scholars on TV argue that the supremacy clause is a moot argument. The AZ law does not supersede the federal law, it just gives the local police authority to enforce the federal laws.
-
I've heard more than one constitutional scholars on TV argue that the supremacy clause is a moot argument. The AZ law does not supersede the federal law, it just gives the local police authority to enforce the federal laws.
AKA
Complete waste of taxpayer's money.
-
I've heard more than one constitutional scholars on TV argue that the supremacy clause is a moot argument. The AZ law does not supersede the federal law, it just gives the local police authority to enforce the federal laws.
I've heard similar. The supremecy clause, however, in and of itself, when misapplied, allows the Feds to say FU to the states, overrighting the 10th. Why this is important is because if the Feds win this case, it will ensure that the states cannot even maintain a rule of law unless allowed to do so by the Feds. The cases that will build on top of this will use it as a precedent to erode what is left of states rights, and further grow the fed.
Hence my (corrected) statement - Good-bye Republic. If this stands, we will lose the border, lose the ability to enforce laws, and lose the autonomy that the founders strived hard to maintain for the states.
Sure - people will say that I'm crying the sky is falling. But those same people need to take a step back and see what this COULD do if it is decided for the Feds... The additional power it would remove from the states... and that power would not be used for good by the feds... never is.
Even if AZ wins, but the ruling makes note of the supremecy clause, ALL that the feds have to do is nix all immigration laws and AZ will, once again, be fawked..
-
There is a clear case of violation of the supremacy clause going on in respect to immigration law. In fact there are quite a few of them. Every city that has designated itself as a "sanctuary city" is violating federal law, IMO.
-
I've heard more than one constitutional scholars on TV argue that the supremacy clause is a moot argument. The AZ law does not supersede the federal law, it just gives the local police authority to enforce the federal laws.
Correct me if I'm wrong here - but doesn't state law supersede federal law in all circumstances not directly specified in the US Constitution as per the 10th amendment.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong here - but doesn't state law supersede federal law in all circumstances not directly specified in the US Constitution as per the 10th amendment.
According to COTUS, yes. According to SCOTUS, no.
-
I have started to believe that Obama is not the bumbling idiot we think he is,
this is so bazaar as to be a plot in a end of the world movie.
There has to be a master plan to all these incomprehensible non actions of his.
Look at the laws that are changing ----Drugs that will become legal, changes in the gun laws that encourage people to open or closed carry.---cutting off unemployment to millions of people-----of all racists and nationality's.
Now the oil spill that will if it continues is wrecking havoc on the southern part of the country.
The end result of all this will be what and how can this be a benefit to Obama.?
They are just waiting to plant quite a few rebel raiser to stir up the people. Has to be people who we as American trust and respect.
Now comes the Riots, easy to see how this can happen, the idea of not allowing electric or gas service to illegals is sure to cause a storm of protest, no refrigeration, no lights, no cooking, water or sewer service--- Insane if you ask me but this is seriously being considered in some States.
What happens next, Obama will have no choice but to declare martial law and put the state under Federal rule. No problem as all the newly armed will be out there defending their property as they did in the Watts riots.
State by State will have to be placed under Federal rule, curfews implemented,
censorship of the TV news, the internet and complete fear of what the children may say in school that leads to BIG problems for the family.
Obama will make sure that the people are constantly divided against themselves,
it will become impossible for any kind of united front to gain any strength.
Some raciest groups will be given preferential treatment, the Panthers and the Muslim elements. The white raciest will be jailed and punished for holding the same mind think as the preferred ones.
Can he do all this in the next 2-6 years, just look at what he has done so far in 2 years.
No one in the government be it TSC or the military do anything for no reason.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong here - but doesn't state law supersede federal law in all circumstances not directly specified in the US Constitution as per the 10th amendment.
No. State law cannot supersede federal law if that state law takes away from federal law in anyway.
That's law 101.
-
Here it comes...
Supremecy clause... if they win, the feds can claim this for anything...
linky here (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_immigration_enforcement_lawsuit;_ylt=AkEU.eZWUdpbHLKWrhXxOEqs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTQydmJjcTViBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwNzA2L3VzX2ltbWlncmF0aW9uX2VuZm9yY2VtZW50X2xhd3N1aXQEY2NvZGUDbW9zdHBvcHVsYXIEY3BvcwMxBHBvcwMyBHB0A2hvbWVfY29rZQRzZWMDeW5fdG9wX3N0b3J5BHNsawNmZWRzc3VldG9ibG8-)
A very weak argument from the lofty Obama White House. Pathetic actually.
-
No. State law cannot supersede federal law if that state law takes away from federal law in anyway.
That's law 101.
As taught by today's liberal law professors.
:evillaugh:
-
This is an extremely interesting case to follow. The question surrounding the order of appearance of the chicken or the egg is going to SCOTUS. Stay tuned kids.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/34073588/Decision-in-Gill-v-OPM
-
No. State law cannot supersede federal law if that state law takes away from federal law in anyway.
That's law 101.
As taught by today's liberal law professors.
:evillaugh:
I honestly don't even want to take the time to respond to that. It is hardly new law.
-
I have started to believe that Obama is not the bumbling idiot we think he is,
this is so bazaar as to be a plot in a end of the world movie.
There has to be a master plan to all these incomprehensible non actions of his.
Look at the laws that are changing ----Drugs that will become legal, changes in the gun laws that encourage people to open or closed carry.---cutting off unemployment to millions of people-----of all racists and nationality's.
Now the oil spill that will if it continues is wrecking havoc on the southern part of the country.
The end result of all this will be what and how can this be a benefit to Obama.?
They are just waiting to plant quite a few rebel raiser to stir up the people. Has to be people who we as American trust and respect.
Now comes the Riots, easy to see how this can happen, the idea of not allowing electric or gas service to illegals is sure to cause a storm of protest, no refrigeration, no lights, no cooking, water or sewer service--- Insane if you ask me but this is seriously being considered in some States.
What happens next, Obama will have no choice but to declare martial law and put the state under Federal rule. No problem as all the newly armed will be out there defending their property as they did in the Watts riots.
State by State will have to be placed under Federal rule, curfews implemented,
censorship of the TV news, the internet and complete fear of what the children may say in school that leads to BIG problems for the family.
Obama will make sure that the people are constantly divided against themselves,
it will become impossible for any kind of united front to gain any strength.
Some raciest groups will be given preferential treatment, the Panthers and the Muslim elements. The white raciest will be jailed and punished for holding the same mind think as the preferred ones.
Can he do all this in the next 2-6 years, just look at what he has done so far in 2 years.
No one in the government be it TSC or the military do anything for no reason.
Were you sitting on my back porch a couple of weeks ago listening to a similar conversation? :-)
-
I honestly don't even want to take the time to respond to that. It is hardly new law.
Gee... I'm crushed. I really am.
Seems you don't know what the :evillaugh: was for.
-
Good-bye 10th.
Good-bye State governments
Good-bye freedom.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/06/17/clinton_obama_administration_to_sue_arizona_over_immigration_law.html
If I had kids, I'd be able to look froward to saying "Back in my day, we used to have a Constitution... to my grandkids..."...
(http://www.lolblog.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/facepalm.jpg)
-
Are you claiming it doesn't?
No it doesn't.
Pull your dress down Sally and quit with the pollyanna BS. On this topic you're in the same "one trick pony" crowd and your hysterical whining is tiresome.
-
The irony of this statement, given the threads you have started (i.e. nothing exactly positive) make me giggle like a school girl.
Well you whine like one so it only makes sense...
-
interesting...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/06/18/arizona-attorney-general-says-wont-defend-states-immigration-law/
Old news. Most of us here already knew the Democrat AG wasn't going to do this. He'd had secret meetings with Holders gang prior to the lawsuit and without Gov. Brewers consent.
Hence the legal fund set up to help her fight the lawsuit.
-
No it doesn't.
Pull your dress down Sally and quit with the pollyanna BS. On this topic you're in the same "one trick pony" crowd and your hysterical whining is tiresome.
I beg to differ. You have your opinion; I have mine.
Based on their previous actions, I happen to think that leadership in both major political parties suck, it is merely a matter of degree.
That is not to imply that all of the members of either party suck. Some do, some don't.
-
I beg to differ. You have your opinion I have mine.
Based on their previous actions, I happen to think that leadership in both major political parties suck, it is merely a matter of degree.
That is not to imply that all of the members of either party suck. Some do, some don't.
I think we need to keep the GOP leadership in their offices.
Then lock the door.
Then torch the building.
Then bulldoze it.
Then sow the ground with salt.
But that's probably just me.
-
I think we need to keep the GOP leadership in their offices.
Then lock the door.
Then torch the building.
Then bulldoze it.
Then sow the ground with salt.
But that's probably just me.
I second the motion.
That goes double for the DEM leasdership.
-
I beg to differ. You have your opinion; I have mine.
Based on their previous actions, I happen to think that leadership in both major political parties suck, it is merely a matter of degree.
That is not to imply that all of the members of either party suck. Some do, some don't.
No your "opinion" is based on Chicken Little Pollyannaism and a hatred of everything having to do with the two party system that our Republic functions under.
If it sucks sooooooooooooo badly and you think you've got the cure...quit whining on a ****ing website and go DO something about it.
Either that or just continue doing what you do so well an support the DNC every two and four years by not voting or throwing your vote away on some nobody 3rd party candidate.
Just quit pissing and moaning about it to the rest of us...it's old.
-
Were you sitting on my back porch a couple of weeks ago listening to a similar conversation? :-)
There are some of us who have thought up hundreds of scenarios for what the heck the agenda for Obama is on his actions or non actions on each and every one of the crises he is suppose to be fixing.
What on earth is he doing with our space agency and why, what benefit will this be to him.?
-
No your "opinion" is based on Chicken Little Pollyannaism and a hatred of everything having to do with the two party system that our Republic functions under.
If it sucks sooooooooooooo badly and you think you've got the cure...quit whining on a ****ing website and go DO something about it.
Either that or just continue doing what you do so well an support the DNC every two and four years by not voting or throwing your vote away on some nobody 3rd party candidate.
Just quit pissing and moaning about it to the rest of us...it's old.
If you don't like my opinions or posts, the solution is pretty simple. Stop reading them.
You seem to think that the GOP is the greatest thing since sliced bread. I don't. Whom I might choose to vote for, is quite frankly none of your ****ing business. But you keep on voting for the RINOs cuz they have the right letter behind their name on a ballot if you want.
Oh and BTW..... GFY you arrogant prick.
-
Fight club. Table for two. No waiting.
-
No your "opinion" is based on Chicken Little Pollyannaism and a hatred of everything having to do with the two party system that our Republic functions under.
If it sucks sooooooooooooo badly and you think you've got the cure...quit whining on a ****ing website and go DO something about it.
Either that or just continue doing what you do so well an support the DNC every two and four years by not voting or throwing your vote away on some nobody 3rd party candidate.
Just quit pissing and moaning about it to the rest of us...it's old.
when someone has nothing more than insults.. someone has nothing... People like you simply cannot stand anyone who disagrees with them - yet you offer nothing to counter their opinion but hurling insults. The Saul Alinsky model is old... Grow up and discuss an issue, or take the guidance and stop reading...
-
If you don't like my opinions or posts, the solution is pretty simple. Stop reading them.
You seem to think that the GOP is the greatest thing since sliced bread. I don't. Whom I might choose to vote for, is quite frankly none of your ****ing business. But you keep on voting for the RINOs cuz they have the right letter behind their name on a ballot if you want.
Oh and BTW..... GFY you arrogant prick.
Don't insult the GOP - it upsets people... I wonder if this gentleman is still bowing at the alter of Scott Brown... GOP #3 to support the new "financial reform" bill...
-
Chill out or take this to fight club folks.
-
when someone has nothing more than insults.. someone has nothing... People like you simply cannot stand anyone who disagrees with them - yet you offer nothing to counter their opinion but hurling insults. The Saul Alinsky model is old... Grow up and discuss an issue, or take the guidance and stop reading...
I give your idiotic diatribes and whining just the proper response they deserve and nothing more.
Come to the table with something intelligent...and you'll get an intelligent response in return.
-
Fight club. Table for two. No waiting.
****ing works for me.
http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,46323.0.html
-
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why, if they win on Supremecy, that COTUS will be relevant... in practice, not theory... Supremecy was the worst - the WORST - interpretation/agreement in the history of COTUS, and has done nothing but set the states up for this exact fight... same type of fight that led to a pretty big war.
-
I think we need to keep the GOP leadership in their offices.
Then lock the door.
Then torch the building.
Then bulldoze it.
Then sow the ground with salt.
But that's probably just me.
Then sow the ground with salt...now that's where we differ....I say drill more oil wells, drive down the price of energy, rev up the economy, melt the polar ice caps and let rising salty water sea levels do the job.
-
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why, if they win on Supremecy, that COTUS will be relevant... in practice, not theory... Supremecy was the worst - the WORST - interpretation/agreement in the history of COTUS, and has done nothing but set the states up for this exact fight... same type of fight that led to a pretty big war.
Here's an idea smart guy...how about telling us why the Constitution will NOT be relevant.
And since you are such a defender of all things FOunding Fathers...how about showing a little respect for that document and calling it what it is...instead of some stupid acronym.
-
Then sow the ground with salt...now that's where we differ....I say drill more oil wells, drive down the price of energy, rev up the economy, melt the polar ice caps and let rising salty water sea levels do the job.
Nuke it from orbit.
It's the only way to be sure.
-
Here's an idea smart guy...how about telling us why the Constitution will NOT be relevant.
If the FEDS can use the Supremecy clause to dictate that state's laws are improper, they, by definition, have removed the value of many of the amendments.
All they (the feds) have to do is make a law to fit their liking, and any state that doesn't fall in line is, let's say, "forced" to capitulate to the feds via supremecy.
Could be drugs, could be intra-state commerce, could be healthcare, could be anything... Frankly, I'm surprised it hasn't been used more. Does that make sense?
-
If the FEDS can use the Supremecy clause to dictate that state's laws are improper, they, by definition, have removed the value of many of the amendments.
All they (the feds) have to do is make a law to fit their liking, and any state that doesn't fall in line is, let's say, "forced" to capitulate to the feds via supremecy.
Could be drugs, could be intra-state commerce, could be healthcare, could be anything... Frankly, I'm surprised it hasn't been used more. Does that make sense?
You're doing nothing more than speculating...guessing and flat out hoping the Feds use Article VI this way. That way you can look at all of us and go "I told you so".
How about using some actual instances where the Feds did use Article VI.
And you can't use the current Arizona Immigration law because a) that's a states rights battle the Feds are gonna lose and two...the papers have only recently been filed and it hasn't played out in court yet.
You're just too eager to throw up your hands and surrender before the fight has begun.
No wonder you still think we have bases in France. You give up just as easily as they do.