10-09-2003, 02:55 PM | #46 |
Resident President
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Very, very, rural Mississippi
Posts: 83
|
If Arnie hasn't gotten over his groping problem, I will personally volunteer to be his designated groppee
__________________
Why kill them when you can make them live and suffer? |
10-09-2003, 03:34 PM | #47 | |
Hand-of-Kindness Extender
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Where am I?
Posts: 139
|
Quote:
|
|
10-09-2003, 03:38 PM | #48 | |
Hand-of-Kindness Extender
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Where am I?
Posts: 139
|
Quote:
|
|
10-09-2003, 03:44 PM | #49 | |
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
Quote:
(If you didn't understand that, I'll write it how you will: "Your an idiot JeepNGeorge you cant even use punctuation good.") |
|
10-09-2003, 04:06 PM | #50 | |
Constitutional Scholar
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Ocala, FL
Posts: 4,006
|
Quote:
There doesn't need to be a court case to determine whether or not his actions were Constitutional and the Supreme Court doesn't define the Constitution or "interpret" it. George Bush's actions were unconstitutional in their face. If I were to take a platoon of soldiers into a town and force people at gunpoint to allow soldiers to stay in their homes it would be unconstitutional. It wouldn't magically become unconstitutional when the Supreme Court's determination said it was. It would be unconstitutional the moment I did it. It would be unconstitutional even if the Supreme Court refused to hear the case. It would be unconstitutional even if it never went to any court anywhere and it wouldn't take a judge to determine it. The best way to describe the job of the Supreme Court for someone like you is to describe it like a factory job. Imagine someone had a job where differently shaped blocks came down a conveyer belt toward them all day. And that person would pick up a block, look at the shape and see if there were a hole in a board where it would fit. If there were a round block, it would go into a round hole, a star shaped block would go into the star shaped hole, and so on. This is the job of the Supreme Court justices. They get a law, hold it up to the Constitution and see whether or not it will fit. They don't figure out if they can make a new hole for the block to fit in. They don't make a new block to fit into a hole that hasn't been used. They don't try to grease up a block and hammer it into a hole where it doesn't fit. And they don't dictate which holes or blocks will be used or come down the conveyer belt. They are also not the only people with a conveyer belt or blocks so they aren't the only ones who get to compare the blocks and the holes. I hope I've broken it down to shapes and blocks (an elementary level even you should be able to understand) |
|
10-09-2003, 04:25 PM | #51 |
no one of consequence
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 2,839
|
Sorry, that's wrong.
|
10-09-2003, 04:58 PM | #52 | |
Hand-of-Kindness Extender
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Where am I?
Posts: 139
|
Quote:
You are by far the superior intellect. I'll concede the victory to you. I hope you have a good wank for a doing such a good job. "Arguing on the message board is like the Special Olympics.....Even if you win, you are still a retard." |
|
10-09-2003, 05:14 PM | #53 | |
lurkin old school
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 2,796
|
Quote:
|
|
10-09-2003, 05:40 PM | #54 | |
Constitutional Scholar
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Ocala, FL
Posts: 4,006
|
Quote:
Last edited by Radar; 10-09-2003 at 05:44 PM. |
|
10-09-2003, 06:08 PM | #55 | |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 12,486
|
Quote:
|
|
10-09-2003, 06:18 PM | #56 | |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 12,486
|
Quote:
I'm not saying I agree with that necessarily...just making it plausible. |
|
10-09-2003, 06:30 PM | #57 | |
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 12,486
|
Quote:
*watching The Running Man* |
|
10-09-2003, 08:50 PM | #58 | |||||
Person who doesn't update the user title
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 12,486
|
Quote:
Quote:
Folks have been relatively unhappy with Davis for some time now--I believe it started around the time of the power problems. If there was so much discontent with Davis before the '02 election (and there seemed to be a lot of it), why would you even bother putting him back in office for (presumably) another 4 years? I understand what Radar said about the choices, and I understand the whole "party unity" concept too. But as I see it, if Californians really wanted to stick it to Davis, they should have done so prior to last year. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Maybe this is a one-time thing that won't happen again for many years. But I see way too many people hanging on to Florida (dems) and Clinton (GOP), and now that Californians really know what it takes to remove their governor, I sense it will happen again sooner rather than later. I know I'm playing pessimist here, but if this sort of thing were to happen more frequently (more states and/or more often), I don't think anything would ever get done...not to mention it would cost a lot. And is Davis taking too much of the fall here? Sorta like the way the president gets credit/blame for the economy. I don't know how much power the governor has out there, but that's still only one branch of government. And the Dems control the state legislature. Maybe they'll get thrown out later on...*shrugs* At the very least, both parties should keep these concerns in mind. But like Steve said, if this is what California wants, so be it. That's the beauty of having 50 different states and a handful of territories. Maybe good will come of this. Schwarzenegger will lead California back to true prosperity. People will do more outside-of-the-box thinking. A third party or independent candidate will have a real chance. Israel and the Palestinians will achieve peace. Life will be good. |
|||||
10-09-2003, 10:03 PM | #59 |
The future is unwritten
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 71,105
|
Hello, Secret Service? Yes, it's Cellar.org, thread "The best thing about Arnold's victory" and the name is Radar, that's R_A_D_A_R. Yes, threatened the President's life. Yes. Very unstable.
I fear this recall thing could become so regular, the incumbent would have to pander to those that could afford to recall him. Bad business to not have a definate term to implement plans.
__________________
The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump. |
10-10-2003, 12:35 AM | #60 | |
no one of consequence
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 2,839
|
Quote:
|
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|