| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14890
Location: on earth
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2016 11:07 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
this is interesting.... I had never read this before... and look at my quote below...
| Quote: |
When people think of Thomas Jefferson's most famous words, they think of his more prominent quotes -
All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. |
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
KGB-NP
Joined: 25 Jul 2001
Posts: 2856
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| baja-human wrote: | | NP wrote: | | Hey, if you want to make accusations, then knock yourself out any time now, and feel free to quote me to prove your delusional paranoid plots. When you do, then I'll jump right in again and prove that your nuts, just like last time. |
why would I need to make up accusations, you prove me correct everytime you go off in your delusional trollings (ie derailing threads so severly, well mild who cares but always tolling that is against the rules you agreed to when you signed up). again why else would you be such an a whore posting. Again why else would you go off and track me down and gather information, because you think what again... you friggen intellectual flunkie.... again you claim to be on some religious bandwagon, but you are just a whore/troll pathetic example of a fake..
again seems if you were in the right you would not troll like a bottom feeder. That is logic which you are a flunkie of is the issue.
again every time you start you wacko off topic starting it cry baby routines which are in the what 100s. Well you prove you are a worthless low life troll, which is a mental illness by all accounts.
you still going to load that van up with fertilizer to come to USA to get at me? |
That sure is a long winded way of saying you can't support your accusations.
Can you get it straight though? I believe is said, in jest, that I was coming to Baja in my fertilizer van. I changed my mind when I saw that your diatribe is probably keeping the area fertile enough. The drones are still circling over head though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
real-human
Joined: 02 Jul 2011
Posts: 14890
Location: on earth
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| NP wrote: | | baja-human wrote: | | NP wrote: | | Hey, if you want to make accusations, then knock yourself out any time now, and feel free to quote me to prove your delusional paranoid plots. When you do, then I'll jump right in again and prove that your nuts, just like last time. |
why would I need to make up accusations, you prove me correct everytime you go off in your delusional trollings (ie derailing threads so severly, well mild who cares but always tolling that is against the rules you agreed to when you signed up). again why else would you be such an a whore posting. Again why else would you go off and track me down and gather information, because you think what again... you friggen intellectual flunkie.... again you claim to be on some religious bandwagon, but you are just a whore/troll pathetic example of a fake..
again seems if you were in the right you would not troll like a bottom feeder. That is logic which you are a flunkie of is the issue.
again every time you start you wacko off topic starting it cry baby routines which are in the what 100s. Well you prove you are a worthless low life troll, which is a mental illness by all accounts.
you still going to load that van up with fertilizer to come to USA to get at me? |
That sure is a long winded way of saying you can't support your accusations.
Can you get it straight though? I believe is said, in jest, that I was coming to Baja in my fertilizer van. I changed my mind when I saw that your diatribe is probably keeping the area fertile enough. The drones are still circling over head though. |
yes your so called jokes are sick.
again you are saying you troll , are a hater, stalker, because you do not like my american right first amendment right to voice my political opinion. That you believe you can stalk, harass, and disclose personal information on me to harm me, certainly was not sought to be a friend.
who can not show the posts that in your demented mind makes make him think he has the right to be so hateful and start it basically all the time. I know many Canadians and know it is not a canadian trait. From my life experiences Canadians are probably my most respected culture as a whole.
But you were not born in Canada in the first place, maybe it is because you do not really have any real home base in your mind. You mentioned how as a kid you were hated or not accepted by the neighbors. It appears there is a reason why....
_________________
when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LHDR
Joined: 22 Jun 2007
Posts: 528
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 9:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
From the NYTimes.
"[T]here is no precedent for leaving a Supreme Court seat open because it is an election year, as Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, vowed to do hours after Justice Scalia’s death was announced".
“The president can nominate whoever he wants, but the Senate is not going to act, and that’s pretty clear,” Mr. Rubio said on “Fox News Sunday.” “So, we can keep debating it but we’re not moving forward on it, period.”
In an interview on ABC’s “This Week,” Mr. Cruz, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said: “Let the election decide it. If the Democrats want to replace this nominee, they need to win the election.”
---
Is there any other line of work where refusing to do your job doesn't get you fired? I wonder what they plan to do when Clinton gets elected. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
techno900
Joined: 28 Mar 2001
Posts: 4161
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 9:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| How many bills did Harry Reid sit on, and not allow a vote? He didn't get fired for that (well, actually he did, during the midterm elections). What's good for the goose is good for the gander. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 12:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Chuck Schumer once again proving what kind of a hypocrite he is by calling for a new Super right away, when in 2007 he was recommending not approving any new Supers for GWB when GWB still had 18 months left in his term.
You can't make this stuff up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnpjs45D7OY |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 12:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| what do you think NW, should we go a year and a half with 8 Supreme Court justices? Who will be the tie breaker? Sheriff Joe? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 12:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nw30 wrote: | Chuck Schumer once again proving what kind of a hypocrite he is by calling for a new Super right away, when in 2007 he was recommending not approving any new Supers for GWB when GWB still had 18 months left in his term.
You can't make this stuff up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qnpjs45D7OY |
dude...did you watch the video?
"except in extraordinary circumstances"....I would say being dead qualifies ...
doh! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nw30
Joined: 21 Dec 2008
Posts: 6485
Location: The eye of the universe, Cen. Cal. coast
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| boggsman1 wrote: | | what do you think NW, should we go a year and a half with 8 Supreme Court justices? Who will be the tie breaker? Sheriff Joe? |
In case of a tie, they have the choice to either shelve it until the 9th judge is affirmed, or the judgment of the lower court will stand. There is basically nothing from preventing the Supers to continue as an 8 judge court in the meantime.
And yes I saw the vid, and it is all up to what is considered "extraordinary circumstances", some would consider the possibility of getting rid the 2nd amendment an "extraordinary circumstance".
Last edited by nw30 on Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:21 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
boggsman1
Joined: 24 Jun 2002
Posts: 9120
Location: at a computer
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nw30 wrote: | | boggsman1 wrote: | | what do you think NW, should we go a year and a half with 8 Supreme Court justices? Who will be the tie breaker? Sheriff Joe? |
In case of a tie, they have the choice to either shelve it until the 9th judge is affirmed, or the judgment of the lower court will stand. There is basically nothing from preventing the Supers to continue as an 8 judge court in the meantime.
And yes I saw the vid, and it is all up to what is considered "extraordinary circumstances", some would consider the possibility of getting rid the 2nd amendment an "extraordinary circumstance". |
Who wants to get rid of the 2nd amendment?
So, the new standard is to deny a president his constitutional duty, because you may disagree with him? That's quite a new world order there Mr NW!
Last edited by boggsman1 on Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:24 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|
Search
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Register
