|
|
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 2,954
Campfire Regular
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 2,954 |
Her greatest wrong: Applying her views, opinions, and SJW beliefs to the COTUS and legislating from the bench.
Last edited by Gun_Geezer; 01/22/19.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 29,632
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 29,632 |
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,321
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,321 |
Look, I can see why Ruth has trouble with our constitution. I see her gripes. There are a few rough edges in it, and there are things that got put in the South African constitution that build and improve on the verbiage of ours.
If memory serves me, the biggest problems from a contemporary view are
1) A lot of things that ended up being amendments should have been in the main body of the document
2) Everything about slavery and voting rights, and who constitutes a citizen need to be reworked.
3) The 2A is far too open to interpretation
I'm sure there is a much bigger, more inclusive list out there. I don't disagree with those faults. HOWEVER. . .
The problem with tinkering with our constitution is that once you get in there and start debating it, the debaters themselves become the problem. The Founding Fathers were uniquely blessed individuals. They had their faults, but they did a bang-up job. The trailer trash that would desire to rewrite the document are petty political hacks.
Compromise? What would you give up to keep the 2nd Amendment? What happens if the 1A gets rewritten to define Hate Speech? How are you going to defend the Electoral College?
Right now, we've got our political version of King James Bible. There are scholars on all sides that want to do this and that to it-- spruce it up, do some quick editing and produce a Revised Standard Edition. Waiting in the wings are a bunch of editorial jackals that want to write in verses that has Jesus mary Mary, make bestiality okay, and turn the Trinity into the Holy Trio. What possible reason would we have for licensing that charade?
Ruth? Inviting RBG to sit on the Supreme Court made about as much sense as asking Leon Trotsky to be the Chairman of the Better Business Bureau. I won't say she was the worst appointment ever made, but she's right up there. To be the absolute worst, she'd have to top being either a schizophrenic or a drug addict. Yes, kiddies, we have had worse.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 2,954
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 2,954 |
Look, I can see why Ruth has trouble with our constitution. I see her gripes. There are a few rough edges in it, and there are things that got put in the South African constitution that build and improve on the verbiage of ours.
If memory serves me, the biggest problems from a contemporary view are
1) A lot of things that ended up being amendments should have been in the main body of the document
2) Everything about slavery and voting rights, and who constitutes a citizen need to be reworked.
3) The 2A is far too open to interpretation
I'm sure there is a much bigger, more inclusive list out there. I don't disagree with those faults. HOWEVER. . .
The problem with tinkering with our constitution is that once you get in there and start debating it, the debaters themselves become the problem. The Founding Fathers were uniquely blessed individuals. They had their faults, but they did a bang-up job. The trailer trash that would desire to rewrite the document are petty political hacks.
Compromise? What would you give up to keep the 2nd Amendment? What happens if the 1A gets rewritten to define Hate Speech? How are you going to defend the Electoral College?
Right now, we've got our political version of King James Bible. There are scholars on all sides that want to do this and that to it-- spruce it up, do some quick editing and produce a Revised Standard Edition. Waiting in the wings are a bunch of editorial jackals that want to write in verses that has Jesus mary Mary, make bestiality okay, and turn the Trinity into the Holy Trio. What possible reason would we have for licensing that charade?
Ruth? Inviting RBG to sit on the Supreme Court made about as much sense as asking Leon Trotsky to be the Chairman of the Better Business Bureau. I won't say she was the worst appointment ever made, but she's right up there. To be the absolute worst, she'd have to top being either a schizophrenic or a drug addict. Yes, kiddies, we have had worse.
"Shall not be infringed" is fairly well written and not open to interpretation. It is, however, open to being ingnored.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,321
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,321 |
"Shall not be infringed" is fairly well written and not open to interpretation. It is, however, open to being ingnored. Remember, I'm with you in this. However, my conversion came as an adult. I was 23 before I really thought about the 2nd Amendment. In my one American Government class, the prof blew off the 2A by saying:" This just guarantees the states the right to have a state militia-- the National Guard." The 2nd Amendment is only flawed in that the meanings of words have somewhat changed over time. Today, we think of "militia" as a state-run thing. Back then, it was different. Virginia's BIll of Rights actually defines it better:
13. That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state; that standing armies, in time of peace, should be avoided, as dangerous to liberty; and that, in all cases, the military should be under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.
Sam Adams wrote this in the original Constitution of Massachusets
Article XVII.
The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.
Back in the 1780's, it was basically understood that private ownership of arms was a basic right. The confusion came later.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 67,706
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 67,706 |
You guys crack me up. So far her greatest wrongs are she does not agree with you. laughing, so that means you agree with her, and not us?
Sam......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424
Campfire Sage
|
|
Campfire Sage
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 115,424 |
Apparently none of you dumb schits know why you oppose Ginsburg.
JFC.
Trump being classless,tasteless and clueless as usual. Sorry, trump is a no tax payin pile of shiit. My young wife decided to play the field and had moved several dudes into my house
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 11,994
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jan 2016
Posts: 11,994 |
Bill Clinton nominated her because of her radical beliefs. She refused to give the judiciary committee even a "peek" of her beliefs. She was a radical board member of the civil liberties union and has never been shy about her radical agenda. Apparently Scalia was friends with her but in my eyes it doesn't qualify her to be a justice. She, like all other liberals, doesn't believe in the constitution ad it was written. They believe they are duty bound to rewrite it to their own liking and therein lies the rub. They all should be removed.
The problem with both Bush's and Reagan nominating people that will 'keep the balance" is playing Russian Roulette with our constitution. The same reasoning applies to those that keep re-electing nefarious politicians to office from their home states that either work openly or behind the scenes to codify the radical liberal agenda. Sooner or later you're going to end up getting burnt.
We need to purge the court of the liberals including Chief Justice Roberts and replace them with people willing and able to unabashedly rule on the actual merits of the original document.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 16,076
Campfire Ranger
|
|
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 16,076 |
You guys crack me up. So far her greatest wrongs are she does not agree with you. No. Her greatest wrongs are not upholding the constitution she swore to uphold. Disagreeing with me is often fruitful. I'm wrong a lot. The constitution is not.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 9,192
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 9,192 |
Okay, here's a (partial) list:
Abortion - She advocates liberal abortion laws in general, and has supported court rulings in favor of partial birth abortions
Sexual Discrimination - She supported the court ruling against VMI's male only enrollment policy
Affirmative Action - She has supported court rulings to maintain affirmative action admission policies in public universities
International Law - She has advocated the use of foreign law and norms to shape U.S. law
=====================
Boots were made for walking
Winds were blowing change
Boys fall in the jungle
As I Came of Age
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,329
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 69,329 |
Maybe spawning that new movie about her would rank right up there. The wife dragged me off to watch that one last week and at least I had popcorn. Thankfully I get to pick our next one. She must be drop dead gorgeous. When young I wouldn't call her movie star gorgeous but she wasn't homely. ![[Linked Image]](https://dynaimage.cdn.cnn.com/cnn/w_768,h_1024,c_scale/https%3A%2F%2Fdynaimage.cdn.cnn.com%2Fcnn%2Fx_30%2Cy_604%2Cw_1808%2Ch_2411%2Cc_crop%2Fhttps%253A%252F%252Fstamp.static.cnn.io%252F5b7f224b4db3d70020c01c1a%252FRBG_SC_1954__8013.jpg)
“In a time of deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act.”
― George Orwell
It's not over when you lose. It's over when you quit.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,321
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 12,321 |
International Law - She has advocated the use of foreign law and norms to shape U.S. law
This is her biggest transgression as far as I'm concerned. Basically, once you assume that foreign law and foreign jurists have a valid say in American consitutional law it opens up the door to anything. If you don't like what the Constitution says, just shop around for a law, an opinion, a decision you like and use that as justification. Bestiality? Sure bring it on! The high court of Lower Slobivia finds this is a basic human right. Confiscation of Property based on Party Affiliation: Great stuff! Idi Amin's Supreme Court upheld that right of the state in a landmark 1971 decision. I believe in original intent. Figure out what the original intent and meaning of the law is and rule on the basis of that. Don't try to make the Constitution a "living document." This is a highway to hell.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321
Campfire Oracle
|
|
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 79,321 |
Only one thing worse than a Communist on the SCOTUS,...a female Communist.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,632
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,632 |
So, citing the South African Constitution as superior... Superior in what sense? The Soviet constitution guaranteed more personal rights than ours and superior in that sense but we don't ignore our constitution. Also ours is poorly written in the sense it is ambiguous as hell with all the compromising in getting it to pass. Why Ruth has her job. Superior maybe but preferable to live under? No. How about superior in what it says versus one allowing total reallocation of personal and private property based only on race. Ours may be vague, but that is mostly due to bad intent on the part of would-be manipulators. The concept suggesting livibility of the Constitution is not every bit as important as its mandate is laughable.
Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 821
Campfire Regular
|
|
Campfire Regular
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 821 |
"She's a tough old bird"
She will probably have to be cremated twice as long as the average witch errr person
Bill
Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,688
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,688 |
An intellect used for evil purposes deserves no respect. WTF is wrong with you? Now given her point of view she could say the same thing about Scalia. If you are a nihilist.
Politics is War by Other Means
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,688
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Jul 2015
Posts: 14,688 |
She does not believe in the human right of freedom of association.
Oh, I can just hear your marxist "acquaintances" now shrieking "DATS RACISS!!!"
Politics is War by Other Means
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 56,114
Campfire Kahuna
|
|
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 56,114 |
She is breathing and by extension contributes to global warming.
I am..........disturbed.
Concerning the difference between man and the jackass: some observers hold that there isn't any. But this wrongs the jackass. -Twain
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,404
Campfire Outfitter
|
|
OP
Campfire Outfitter
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 13,404 |
Just as I thought, tearing babies apart as they are being born didn't phase them. How can people be so cold?
Dog I rescued in January ![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/yYDjsxrQ/IMG-0124.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 4,371
Campfire Tracker
|
|
Campfire Tracker
Joined: Sep 2017
Posts: 4,371 |
Come on guys, I never said that I went off to that RBG movie willingly. Any one of us here would sit on a cold deer stand watching an empty woods for hours on end and you wouldn't appease the wife for an hour and a half from a soft seat with popcorn? I sure as heck wasn't about to let her go by herself. I'm not ever going to let this one get away and will avoid a Gail warning at all cost. Maybe I just put a higher priority of getting laid once in a while than some of you do.
The movie "On The Basis of Sex" was mostly about her being one of the first females admitted into Harvard Law School and her struggles in a man's world getting a decent paying job even though she was head of her class at Harvard and Columbia. Putting her cancer stricken husband through law school as well as herself while raising two kids. Then her break out case defending a bachelor taking care of his sick mother in Colorado because he was discriminated against in tax court because he was never married and a man. Nothing at all about being on the Supreme Court. A woman's rights movie for sure, but you might score some points with the wife. And about that scoring part...
My other auto is a .45
The bitterness of poor quality is remembered long after the sweetness of low price has faded from memory
|
|
|
|
Forums81
Topics1,191,623
Posts18,474,053
Members73,941
| |
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023
|
|
|
|
