I hope not. It would be horrible thing if the court can no longer overturn a law deemed unconstitutional.
So then you think the democratic process of the people should be dropped for the AUTOCRACY of a few judges?
No, they are both integral parts of a representative democracy. The latter is part of the checks and balances needed to guard against the majority from unjustly oppressing the minority.
Any minority or specific minorities?
What constitutes "oppressing"?
What constitutes "injustly"?
What are the specific "checks and balances" and where are they set forth?
Hay-sus Christos, Myron. What do you need”? How many Black men were killed from 1869 to 2003, when one was dragged behind a car. How many Muslims are being slowly exterminated by the present administration—and pleazzze, don’t give me the “Present Administration’s “ own statistics. All republicans are liars, as America now knows. It starts in approximately 1650 and goes to the present day. You want specifics…you’re like the proverbial dog that won’t hunt that you are always talking about. What’s the matter with you that you won’t hunt…never took American History?
I hope not. It would be horrible thing if the court can no longer overturn a law deemed unconstitutional.
So then you think the democratic process of the people should be dropped for the AUTOCRACY of a few judges?
No, they are both integral parts of a representative democracy. The latter is part of the checks and balances needed to guard against the majority from unjustly oppressing the minority.
Any minority or specific minorities?
What constitutes "oppressing"?
What constitutes "injustly"?
What are the specific "checks and balances" and where are they set forth?
Hay-sus Christos, Myron. What do you need”? How many Black men were killed from 1869 to 2003, when one was dragged behind a car. How many Muslims are being slowly exterminated by the present administration—and pleazzze, don’t give me the “Present Administration’s “ own statistics. All republicans are liars, as America now knows. It starts in approximately 1650 and goes to the present day. You want specifics…you’re like the proverbial dog that won’t hunt that you are always talking about. What’s the matter with you that you won’t hunt…never took American History?
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
I hope not. It would be horrible thing if the court can no longer overturn a law deemed unconstitutional.
So then you think the democratic process of the people should be dropped for the AUTOCRACY of a few judges?
No, they are both integral parts of a representative democracy. The latter is part of the checks and balances needed to guard against the majority from unjustly oppressing the minority.
Any minority or specific minorities?
What constitutes "oppressing"?
What constitutes "injustly"?
What are the specific "checks and balances" and where are they set forth?
Hay-sus Christos, Myron. What do you need”? How many Black men were killed from 1869 to 2003, when one was dragged behind a car. How many Muslims are being slowly exterminated by the present administration—and pleazzze, don’t give me the “Present Administration’s “ own statistics. All republicans are liars, as America now knows. It starts in approximately 1650 and goes to the present day. You want specifics…you’re like the proverbial dog that won’t hunt that you are always talking about. What’s the matter with you that you won’t hunt…never took American History?
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
What a piss-ant excuse. You can't answer an honest question, can you? Moreover, you know nothing about American history cause you never gave a S*** in school. You're whole life is wrapped up in your Turkish birth and your Greek heritage...which is fine with me if those things are not exclusive as they are with you...I'm interested in those things too. But I wonder how you passed the American history component of the the citizenship examination if you didn't know about the American history of hate toward African Americans. Musta been grade inflation that year.
I hope not. It would be horrible thing if the court can no longer overturn a law deemed unconstitutional.
So then you think the democratic process of the people should be dropped for the AUTOCRACY of a few judges?
No, they are both integral parts of a representative democracy. The latter is part of the checks and balances needed to guard against the majority from unjustly oppressing the minority.
Any minority or specific minorities?
What constitutes "oppressing"?
What constitutes "injustly"?
What are the specific "checks and balances" and where are they set forth?
Hay-sus Christos, Myron. What do you need”? How many Black men were killed from 1869 to 2003, when one was dragged behind a car. How many Muslims are being slowly exterminated by the present administration—and pleazzze, don’t give me the “Present Administration’s “ own statistics. All republicans are liars, as America now knows. It starts in approximately 1650 and goes to the present day. You want specifics…you’re like the proverbial dog that won’t hunt that you are always talking about. What’s the matter with you that you won’t hunt…never took American History?
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
What a piss-ant excuse. You can't answer an honest question, can you? Moreover, you know nothing about American history cause you never gave a S*** in school. You're whole life is wrapped up in your Turkish birth and your Greek heritage...which is fine with me if those things are not exclusive as they are with you...I'm interested in those things too. But I wonder how you passed the American history component of the the citizenship examination if you didn't know about the American history of hate toward African Americans. Musta been grade inflation that year.
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your second gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
I hope not. It would be horrible thing if the court can no longer overturn a law deemed unconstitutional.
So then you think the democratic process of the people should be dropped for the AUTOCRACY of a few judges?
No, they are both integral parts of a representative democracy. The latter is part of the checks and balances needed to guard against the majority from unjustly oppressing the minority.
Any minority or specific minorities?
What constitutes "oppressing"?
What constitutes "injustly"?
What are the specific "checks and balances" and where are they set forth?
Hay-sus Christos, Myron. What do you need”? How many Black men were killed from 1869 to 2003, when one was dragged behind a car. How many Muslims are being slowly exterminated by the present administration—and pleazzze, don’t give me the “Present Administration’s “ own statistics. All republicans are liars, as America now knows. It starts in approximately 1650 and goes to the present day. You want specifics…you’re like the proverbial dog that won’t hunt that you are always talking about. What’s the matter with you that you won’t hunt…never took American History?
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
What a piss-ant excuse. You can't answer an honest question, can you? Moreover, you know nothing about American history cause you never gave a S*** in school. You're whole life is wrapped up in your Turkish birth and your Greek heritage...which is fine with me if those things are not exclusive as they are with you...I'm interested in those things too. But I wonder how you passed the American history component of the the citizenship examination if you didn't know about the American history of hate toward African Americans. Musta been grade inflation that year.
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your second gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
Jesus, what big words for such a little boy, ferretlegs. Who cares where your questions were directed, you posted them on a public forum...live with it.
I hope not. It would be horrible thing if the court can no longer overturn a law deemed unconstitutional.
So then you think the democratic process of the people should be dropped for the AUTOCRACY of a few judges?
No, they are both integral parts of a representative democracy. The latter is part of the checks and balances needed to guard against the majority from unjustly oppressing the minority.
Any minority or specific minorities?
What constitutes "oppressing"?
What constitutes "injustly"?
What are the specific "checks and balances" and where are they set forth?
Hay-sus Christos, Myron. What do you need”? How many Black men were killed from 1869 to 2003, when one was dragged behind a car. How many Muslims are being slowly exterminated by the present administration—and pleazzze, don’t give me the “Present Administration’s “ own statistics. All republicans are liars, as America now knows. It starts in approximately 1650 and goes to the present day. You want specifics…you’re like the proverbial dog that won’t hunt that you are always talking about. What’s the matter with you that you won’t hunt…never took American History?
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
What a piss-ant excuse. You can't answer an honest question, can you? Moreover, you know nothing about American history cause you never gave a S*** in school. You're whole life is wrapped up in your Turkish birth and your Greek heritage...which is fine with me if those things are not exclusive as they are with you...I'm interested in those things too. But I wonder how you passed the American history component of the the citizenship examination if you didn't know about the American history of hate toward African Americans. Musta been grade inflation that year.
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your second gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
Jesus, what big words for such a little boy, ferretlegs. Who cares where your questions were directed, you posted them on a public forum...live with it.
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your third gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
Did you run out of your meds again, lying psycho stalker?
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your third gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
Did you run out of your meds again, lying psycho stalker?
You seem to be the rant king. You want others to keep quiet while you rant and rave about your fabricated ideas. It’s obvious the reason why you imperiously do not want me in the debate is because you are afraid of me. Well, live with it ferretlegs…it ain’t gonna go away.
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your third gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
Did you run out of your meds again, lying psycho stalker?
You seem to be the rant king. You want others to keep quiet while you rant and rave about your fabricated ideas. It’s obvious the reason why you imperiously do not want me in the debate is because you are afraid of me. Well, live with it ferretlegs…it ain’t gonna go away.
I'm shaking and quaking with fear at your schizophrenic lies and infantile digs.
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your third gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
Did you run out of your meds again, lying psycho stalker?
You seem to be the rant king. You want others to keep quiet while you rant and rave about your fabricated ideas. It’s obvious the reason why you imperiously do not want me in the debate is because you are afraid of me. Well, live with it ferretlegs…it ain’t gonna go away.
I'm shaking and quaking with fear at your schizophrenic lies and infantile digs.
Yet you never seem to be able to equal my arguments and substantiation. That is the real fear you have. You live in a world of easy quips and shallow logic. I don't mean to suggest that you are physically afraid of me...tho you would need more than those ferretlegs. You are an expert on avoidance. And you avoid so as to evade real answers. How many times have I challenged you to a genuine debate on some intricate legal question? And you come back with sticks and stones. Do you really wonder why I claim you are not a lawyer (I mean, besides the fact that you never went to a law school)? It is in this sense that you are afraid of me...you are afraid of being exposed as a fraud.
Leaving aside that my questions were not directed to you, your third gratuitous rant is unresponsive and inapposite.
Did you run out of your meds again, lying psycho stalker?
You seem to be the rant king. You want others to keep quiet while you rant and rave about your fabricated ideas. It’s obvious the reason why you imperiously do not want me in the debate is because you are afraid of me. Well, live with it ferretlegs…it ain’t gonna go away.
I'm shaking and quaking with fear at your schizophrenic lies and infantile digs.
Yet you never seem to be able to equal my arguments and substantiation. That is the real fear you have. You live in a world of easy quips and shallow logic. I don't mean to suggest that you are physically afraid of me...tho you would need more than those ferretlegs. You are an expert on avoidance. And you avoid so as to evade real answers. How many times have I challenged you to a genuine debate on some intricate legal question? And you come back with sticks and stones. Do you really wonder why I claim you are not a lawyer (I mean, besides the fact that you never went to a law school)? It is in this sense that you are afraid of me...you are afraid of being exposed as a fraud.
An autobiographical post that defines Cambridge/walker:
walker wrote:
Bullshit or lying?
Okay, here’s my question: Is there a difference between bullshit and lying, and if so, which is worse?
I’ll start it off with a paraphrase from a recent article in The New Yorker: Bullshit is an utter disregard for the truth, for whatever reason, whereas a lie is very aware of the truth, and wants to maneuver you away from it. Which is more deceitful? Is bullshit worse because of its utter rejection of truth? Or is lying worse because of its focused attempt at manipulation?
Or, maybe only one, or neither, is really bad. What do you think? What are your experiences with one or the other, or both?
A pathological liar and bullshitter enthralled with semantic moral distinctions between bullshit and lying.
How many Black men were killed from 1869 to 2003, when one was dragged behind a car. How many Muslims are being slowly exterminated by the present administration—and pleazzze, don’t give me the “Present Administration’s “ own statistics. All republicans are liars, as America now knows. It starts in approximately 1650 and goes to the present day. You want specifics…
Here are the “specifics.”
The Republican Party did not even exist until 1854 (204 years after 1650), when it was created for the specific purpose of opposing slavery, which the Democratic Party supported.
The first Republican President, Abraham Lincoln, led the anti-slavery Union to victory in the Civil War against the slave-owning secessionist Confederacy supported by Democrats. Republican President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation freeing the slaves and abolished slavery.
The Democratic Party is the party of slavery before and during the Civil War, the party of the Ku Klux Klan and virulent racism against blacks after the Civil War, the party of racist Southern Senators who filibustered for 52 days against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 introduced by their own Democrat President John F. Kennedy.
Republicans were the minority party when the House and Senate finally voted on the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In the House vote, a higher proportion of Republicans supported the bill (138 in favor, 34 opposed) than Democrats (152 in favor, 96 opposed). After the 52 day filibuster led by Southern Democrats in the U.S. Senate, the bill passed in the Senate by a 73 to 27 roll call vote with 21 Democrats and only 6 Republicans voting against passage.
Following is an excerpt from the 1963 Inauguration speech of Alabama's Democrat Governor George Wallace:
Quote:
It is very appropriate then that from this Cradle of the Confederacy, this very Heart of the Great Anglo-Saxon Southland, that today we sound the drum for freedom as have our generations of forebears before us done, time and time again through history . . . In the name of the greatest people that have ever trod this earth, I draw the line in the dust and toss the gauntlet before the feet of tyranny . . . and I say . . . segregation today . . . segregation tomorrow . . . segregation forever.
Racist Democrat Wallace was Governor during the 1960s when peaceful black civil rights demonstrators were attacked by police with high-powered water hoses and beaten like animals in the streets of Selma and Birmingham, Alabama. Democrat Governor Wallace personally stood at the entrance of the University of Alabama to prevent black students from entering. Racist Wallace was disabused of his defiant, illegal refusal to enforce the Civil Rights Act of 1964 only after National Guard troops were deployed in Alabama.
Following are the words of the current Democrat U.S. Senator from West Virginia, Robert Byrd, who previously served as a recruiter (his title was "Kleagle") and officer (his title was "Exalted Cyclops") in the Ku Klux Klan:
Quote:
"Rather I should die a thousand times, and see Old Glory trampled in the dirt never to rise again, than to see this beloved land of ours become degraded by race mongrels, a throwback to the blackest specimen from the wilds."
"I shall never fight in the armed forces with a Negro by my side."
Democrat Byrd, who was re-elected for a ninth consecutive U.S. Senate term running through 2011 (he assumed office in 1959), filibustered the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Byrd opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965. Notwithstanding his Ku Klux Klan past and racist voting record in the House and Senate, today Democrats revere Byrd as "the dean of the Senate."
Throughout American history, the party of racism has been the Democratic Party.
On re-reading, I will admit my post was a little bit confusing, causing you to divert the subject to republican and democratic parties in the US.
My point was that the injustice to African-Americans has been going on since 1650. I digressed and said that the same sort of thing is still going on what with the prejudice shown by the present administration toward Muslims, another, more contemporary targeted group. The latter prejudice is a problem that belongs to the republican party, hence my comments overlapped with my criticism of America’s historica treatment of African-Americans.
I didn’t mean to suggest that the republicans were responsible for the American prejudice toward the African-American, although in the modern day republicans seem to have accepted the baton quite well.
Site Map
FAQ
Usergroups
Search
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Register
My Profile Space
Jesus, what big words for such a little boy, ferretlegs. Who cares where your questions were directed, you posted them on a public forum...live with it.
