McCain's imploding campaign.

[Damnsammit]

Originally Posted by xian

the vast number of people who shouldn't be allowed to vote is truly baffling

Well initially they had it right..

21+... check.
Male... check.
White/English... check.
Land owner... check.

We just kicked the majority of DDM out of the voting loop.

[St. Stalin the Apathetic]

Originally Posted by Damnsammit

Well initially they had it right..

21+... check.
Male... check.
White/English... check.
Land owner... check.

We just kicked the majority of DDM out of the voting loop.

See I'd have one criterion or bar


stupid v not stupid

[Damnsammit]

Originally Posted by xian

See I'd have one criterion or bar


stupid v not stupid

So literacy tests at the polls?

Racist!

[Man Nub]

SO let me take a dump:

Ya'll are debating a(n) (non)issue raised by CNN in an effort to get ratings, and to put SOMETHING/ANYTHING to fill up the time.

Because this nitpicking of *grammatica profundus is stupid. Especially when you consider ALL the campaigning they've been doing. I'd flub up a couple of times too if I had to spout of my beliefs constantly and under the threat of the YOUTUBE generation.


*not an actual latin phrase, so don't even bring it up: i meant "the language they use"

[St. Stalin the Apathetic]

Originally Posted by Damnsammit

So literacy tests at the polls?

Racist!

ffs dickhead.... I would be emperor and decied who was stupid and who was smart by who agreed or disagreed with me.... geesh

[Damnsammit]

Originally Posted by xian

ffs dickhead.... I would be emperor and decied who was stupid and who was smart by who agreed or disagreed with me.... geesh

Well, then voting wouldn't even need to take place.

Durrrrr

Stop being a racist vag-hole and cater to the needs of ignorance in Democracy.

[St. Stalin the Apathetic]

Originally Posted by Damnsammit

Well, then voting wouldn't even need to take place.

Durrrrr

Stop being a racist vag-hole and cater to the needs of ignorance in Democracy.

ah, vote Obama then I guess

[Damnsammit]

I'm voting for Ru Paul.

[St. Stalin the Apathetic]

dude... talk to brandon... there gotta be plenny menny asian tranny better than that fanny

[Damnsammit]

sorry... that was sort of an inside thing between me and myself.

I told my brother I was gonna vote for Ron Paul and he was like "isnt that a black dragqueen?"

It made me laugh... oh hello work...

[tricky]

Originally Posted by xian

ok... let's go Aaron

why is the legal theory that underlies the opinions of Breyer and Ginsberg (which has adopted the "evolving standards of decency" standard) superior to those (insert striong og commiekos slanderous adjectives here) supierior to the Roberts, Thomas, Alito and Scalia strict adherence to strict constructionsism?

I'd posit that when one relies on the text of the constitution one is doing one's job as a Justice. I'd posit further that when one relies on their standard of decency they've usurped a legislative role and abandonded a duty to interpret and apply law.

What do you think?


btw - do you think this drivel has any merit? If so lwet me know so I can point out how stupid the comment is.... sentence by sentence. It doesn't even rise to the level of decent satire Aaron... it rises to the level of pubescent propaganda and i know you're smarter than that.

[/i]

So strict constructionism equals taking a shit on the constitution...hmm...That's probably why i don't like it.

Ps, their legal decisions are flawed too...

[St. Stalin the Apathetic]

Originally Posted by tricky

So strict constructionism equals taking a shit on the constitution...hmm...That's probably why i don't like it.

Ps, their legal decisions are flawed too...

No, strict constructionism means reading the constitution and using that as the guide rather than one's internal sense of right and wrong... which is RBG's method. If you prefer judicial fiat because you generally approve of the outcome then you're fine for now... but what happens when the same principle applies (judicial fiat) and the judges are more politically akin to me? Then you'll be wanting some constructionists


oh, and stick your "ps" up your ass and wiggle on it homo

[tricky]

Originally Posted by xian

No, strict constructionism means reading the constitution and using that as the guide rather than one's internal sense of right and wrong... which is RBG's method. If you prefer judicial fiat because you generally approve of the outcome then you're fine for now... but what happens when the same principle applies (judicial fiat) and the judges are more politically akin to me? Then you'll be wanting some constructionists


oh, and stick your "ps" up your ass and wiggle on it homo

\

Some people understand the 4th amendment...some don't

ps

st louis is wierd

[St. Stalin the Apathetic]

Originally Posted by tricky

\

Some people understand the 4th amendment...some don't

ps

st louis is wierd

indeed....

and.... yes.... but are you talking about StL or E StL?