US US Politics General - Discussion of President Biden and other politicians

Status
Not open for further replies.
BidenGIF.gif
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Informative
Reactions: ThisIsGonnaBeGood, The Shredder, ActualCracker and 120 others
Click to expand...
Jonah Hill poster said:
Oprah just endorsed John Fetterman over her once TV doctor friend Dr. Oz in the Pennsylvania race, and this is proof that celebrity endorsements mean nothing in this country.
Click to expand...
She's a hag. If you aren't a retarded fat woman you probably haven't cared what Oprah has done for the past decade. The last time I heard about her was when someone robocalled Georgians before the last Stacey Abrams election pretending to be Oprah.
 
  • Agree
  • Semper Fidelis
  • Like
Reactions: Rome's rightful successor, Lodoss Warrior, like_shutup_&_drive_scoob and 9 others
Matt Damon said:
So it's always been un-American and unlawful to question the integrity of elections, but if Republicans win this election, that will suddenly, magically, a priori not be the case anymore.

I can't believe how disingenuous these people are. Even by political standards, this is sickening.
Click to expand...
I know it's to be expected but I really got a kick out of his recent tweets about "you can't support muh insurrection and call yourself American"

Nigger our country was founded by a fucking rebellion. It is, L I T E R A L L Y, in the founding documents of our nation that we not only have a right but a duty to drive out governments that do not reflect our interests. Like I get that any leader is going to take the stance of "trying to overthrow leadership is like super bad guys" but how hilariously disingenuous to pretend that America doesn't have rebellion stamped into it's DNA.
 
  • Like
  • Winner
  • Semper Fidelis
Reactions: Lizard Pope, Rome's rightful successor, Pig Cups and 26 others
Tucker Carlson was on point with what the Democrats really mean with "our democracy" and even included a history lesson to prove said point.

rumble.com

Tucker Carlson Tonight 11/3/22 🆕 Fox News November 3, 2022

Tucker Carlson Tonight (Re-Upload) 11/3/22 Fox News November 3, 2022. The Tucker Carlson Show on Fox News. Thanks for watching FOX mulder NEWS ! Stay safe and have a great day ! 😁👍
rumble.com rumble.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yamma Damma, Vyse Inglebard, Naes and 3 others
Matt Damon said:
Is the lifetime appointment not specified in Article 3? I thought it was, but maybe I'm wrong
Click to expand...
Article 3 specifies judges shall "hold their office during good behavior" which is very confusing, but has been accepted to mean lifetime unless impeached or other nebulous means of removal.

The shitty 18th century language of the Constitution has always been a pain in the ass for laypersons.
 
  • Informative
  • Disagree
  • Feels
Reactions: verissimus, Naes, Kane Lives and 5 others
Your Girlfriend's Dad said:
Article 3 specifies judges shall "hold their office during good behavior" which is very confusing, but has been accepted to mean lifetime unless impeached or other nebulous means of removal.

The shitty 18th century language of the Constitution has always been a pain in the ass for laypersons.
Click to expand...
18th century English is only hard if you're ESL or a product of urban government schools. The law faggot trips you up by interpreting what he thinks the author of the document was thinking when writing the shit instead of what the words mean though a bunch of faggots these days are redefining what words mean instead of adding a secondary or third definition
 
  • Like
  • Agree
  • Winner
Reactions: wopirish, make_it_so, The Enchanter and 10 others
Feline Supremacist said:
18th century English is perfectly fine, progressives are just being deliberately obtuse when they claim it has a meaning other than the intended one.

Elizabethan English is considered modern English so the Founder's writings should be understood easily today.
Click to expand...
While I generally agree with the sentiment in what you're saying, I would argue that some turns of phrase and even some syntax and punctuation have opened the door to a lot of "living constitution" type arguments.

I mean, a fairly large amount of debate has occurred around a single comma in the 2nd Ammendment and whether it represents a separate statement about the right to bear arms or if it refers to that right pertaining to use in an organized militia. That's just a singular example among others.

I would say that the founding fathers couldn't have possibly predicted the ways in which the initial texts would have been undermined by bad actors. Additionally, they lacked the highly specific legalese used today in order to prevent fuckery by willful misunderstanding.
 
Your Girlfriend's Dad said:
I mean, a fairly large amount of debate has occurred around a single comma in the 2nd Ammendment and whether it represents a separate statement about the right to bear arms or if it refers to that right pertaining to use in an organized militia. That's just a singular example among others.
misunderstanding.
Click to expand...
Yeah and that's a disingenuous argument and those making it know it. Writing it better would not have solved this issue.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
  • Like
  • Winner
Reactions: Netizennameless, wopirish, The Enchanter and 6 others
Your Girlfriend's Dad said:
While I generally agree with the sentiment in what you're saying, I would argue that some turns of phrase and even some syntax and punctuation have opened the door to a lot of "living constitution" type arguments.

I mean, a fairly large amount of debate has occurred around a single comma in the 2nd Ammendment and whether it represents a separate statement about the right to bear arms or if it refers to that right pertaining to use in an organized militia. That's just a singular example among others.

I would say that the founding fathers couldn't have possibly predicted the ways in which the initial texts would have been undermined by bad actors. Additionally, they lacked the highly specific legalese used today in order to prevent fuckery by willful misunderstanding.
Click to expand...

No, the 2nd means exactly what it means in plain English, but that's a good example how anti-gun liberals try to muddy the waters. I've researched and written briefs and the only time it can get dicey is when reading very old English Common Law decisions written before the 1200s; that's when you have to look into meaning and usage of the era.

That's why SCOTUS won't muck with the 2nd very much, its crystal clear to a lawyer-turned-justice who has read 18th century decisions for decades.

And thanks @Jet Fuel Johnny for pointing out what a retard Biden's SCOTUS diversity hire is; Obongo's is just as bad, as she proves over and over again (does not know the difference between de jure and de facto because she bases her definition on feels, not English).
 
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Optimistic
Reactions: Confused Doggo, make_it_so, Some Badger and 8 others
Your Girlfriend's Dad said:
While I generally agree with the sentiment in what you're saying, I would argue that some turns of phrase and even some syntax and punctuation have opened the door to a lot of "living constitution" type arguments.

I mean, a fairly large amount of debate has occurred around a single comma in the 2nd Ammendment and whether it represents a separate statement about the right to bear arms or if it refers to that right pertaining to use in an organized militia. That's just a singular example among others.

I would say that the founding fathers couldn't have possibly predicted the ways in which the initial texts would have been undermined by bad actors. Additionally, they lacked the highly specific legalese used today in order to prevent fuckery by willful misunderstanding.
Click to expand...
It's as simple as looking at precedent in this case, all other evidence notwithstanding. The first justices served for life. If that wasn't the intention, the Constitution would have been amended very quickly.
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: part time friend, Vyse Inglebard, JustSomeDong and 3 others
  • Like
  • Informative
  • Winner
Reactions: Confused Doggo, Fatboi Gus, Pig Cups and 15 others
George Lucas said:
Five days to go fellas. I got tickets for the cheap seats as I refuse to pay for cable. What streams are you guys going to watch results come in?
Click to expand...
Personally, I'm going to vote, go home, and forget it's even happening for a few days. If they pull the endless vote finding bullshit again it'll be drug out for a week anyhow.
 
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: naaaaiiiiillllll!!!, make_it_so, Yamma Damma and 3 others
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back