Conservative Justice Antonius Scalia Dies; Conservatives Will Try To Obstruct

[Lune]

Current Supreme Court:

Antonin Scalia | appointed by Ronald Reagan | died at age: 79 - CONSERVATIVE
John Roberts | appointed by George W. Bush | current age: 61 - CONSERVATIVE
Anthony Kennedy | appointed by Ronald Reagan | current age: 79 - CONSERVATIVE / MODERATE
Clarence Thomas | appointed by George H. W. Bush | current age: 67 - CONSERVATIVE
Ruth Bader Ginsburg | appointed by Bill Clinton | current age: 82 - LIBERAL
Stephen Breyer | appointed by Bill Clinton | current age: 77 - LIBERAL
Samuel Alito | appointed by George W. Bush | current age: 65 - CONSERVATIVE
Sonia Sotomayor | appointed by Barack Obama | current age: 61 - LIBERAL
Elena Kagan | appointed by Barack Obama | current age: 55 - LIBERAL

Standings now after Scalia has died:
Conservative: 4
Liberal: 4

Congress would need to completely obstruct appointment for nearly a year. The average time for appointment in modern times is roughly 2-3 months. Obama has 342 days left in office.

Even if Republicans in Congress manage to obstruct democracy for that long, their chance of winning the White House this November is bleak.

Conclusion: Conservatives are about to eat shit and die, and we're finally going to start seeing some decent Supreme Court decisions.

[Pokesan]

and here I was wondering what Obama's legacy would end up being

rot in hell you bastard

[Daywolf]

start seeing some decent Supreme Court decisions.
Hah yeah like forced vaccinations tainted with mercury. Oh heck, soylent green distribution. Not sure how this spells kaput for a conservative election win, only libs would be outraged by it, and well they stick to party lines most times. Oh noz! This means conservative ticket won't be voted on by libs!!! aaaahh!! :rolleyes:

Obstruction sounds good to me, awesome when gov cant function and does nothing, that's a win win for any freedom loving citizen.

[Pokesan]

christ I just realized I might have a good reason to vote for hillary now

e:http://isantoninscaliadead.tumblr.com/

[Lurikeen]

Conclusion: Conservatives are about to eat shit and die, and we're finally going to start seeing some decent Supreme Court decisions.

Your hyper-secularist socialist state just might come into being.

[Daywolf]

christ I just realized I might have a good reason to vote for hillary now
Nah, DNC is demoralizing the base right now with all that superdelegate BS. People waking up to just how corrupt they are. Not even counting the damage 0bama has done to the party. Gonna take a lot of free cellphones to bring out enough voters to fend against the hoards of pissed off conservatives, moderates and independents flooding the polling sites. Dems didn't lose the house and senate for no reason... and Reps standing up to resist even to obstruct is what is wanted by most supporters.

[George_Costanza]

https://i.imgur.com/SPKfgrR.png

[Pokesan]

This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent.

[quido]

Scalia was disingenuous and rude to his fellow Justices - I'm glad he's off the court. Later nerd.

[iruinedyourday]

Current Supreme Court:

Antonin Scalia | appointed by Ronald Reagan | died at age: 79 - CONSERVATIVE
John Roberts | appointed by George W. Bush | current age: 61 - CONSERVATIVE
Anthony Kennedy | appointed by Ronald Reagan | current age: 79 - CONSERVATIVE / MODERATE
Clarence Thomas | appointed by George H. W. Bush | current age: 67 - CONSERVATIVE
Ruth Bader Ginsburg | appointed by Bill Clinton | current age: 82 - LIBERAL
Stephen Breyer | appointed by Bill Clinton | current age: 77 - LIBERAL
Samuel Alito | appointed by George W. Bush | current age: 65 - CONSERVATIVE
Sonia Sotomayor | appointed by Barack Obama | current age: 61 - LIBERAL
Elena Kagan | appointed by Barack Obama | current age: 55 - LIBERAL

Standings now after Scalia has died:
Conservative: 4
Liberal: 4

Congress would need to completely obstruct appointment for nearly a year. The average time for appointment in modern times is roughly 2-3 months. Obama has 342 days left in office.

Even if Republicans in Congress manage to obstruct democracy for that long, their chance of winning the White House this November is bleak.

Conclusion: Conservatives are about to eat shit and die, and we're finally going to start seeing some decent Supreme Court decisions.

Sounds good 2 me!

[Xaanka]

LIEberals

[Psionide]

Can't wait to see republicans try to obstruct this and once more show their hypocrisy. Republicans are all about the constitution and limited government until it goes against what they want.

[Lune]

Can't wait to see republicans try to obstruct this and once more show their hypocrisy. Republicans are all about the constitution and limited government until it goes against what they want.

Yea it's just too good.

Scalia himself was a strict constructionist and likely would have disapproved of the Senate impeding the President's appointment of a Supreme Court Justice for political reasons.

Appointments clause:

[The President] shall nominate, and, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

It would take a real shitbag, like a Clarence Thomas type, to interpret Advice and Consent of the Senate as "We get to completely ignore your nominations, whether they are qualified or not, so that we can stall for the next President".

[AzzarTheGod]

Hah yeah like forced vaccinations tainted with mercury. Oh heck, soylent green distribution. Not sure how this spells kaput for a conservative election win, only libs would be outraged by it, and well they stick to party lines most times. Oh noz! This means conservative ticket won't be voted on by libs!!! aaaahh!! :rolleyes:

Obstruction sounds good to me, awesome when gov cant function and does nothing, that's a win win for any freedom loving citizen.

Sounds good to me as well.

Obama already appointed two hacks Kagan and Sotomayor.

Both of whom are under qualified and an embarrassment to the Supreme Justice bench who rely on clerks to do their thinking for them.

Why should Obama get to appoint another under qualified weirdo Justice to the bench? The people deserve better, conservative or liberal, it matters not. The fact is, the Obama appointments tread on the ridiculous.

Obstruction is the natural course of action based on his two previous appointments. Again, the people deserve better. Liberal or conservative, they deserve better.

[Pokesan]

there's no way either of them are worse than Thomas the Silent Scalia Puppet

[iruinedyourday]

Sounds good to me as well.

Obama already appointed two hacks Kagan and Sotomayor.

Both of whom are under qualified and an embarrassment to the Supreme Justice bench who rely on clerks to do their thinking for them.

Why should Obama get to appoint another under qualified weirdo Justice to the bench? The people deserve better, conservative or liberal, it matters not. The fact is, the Obama appointments tread on the ridiculous.

Obstruction is the natural course of action based on his two previous appointments. Again, the people deserve better. Liberal or conservative, they deserve better.

"i heard they were under qualified"

gettin real tired of this, "I heard" being all you need to have an opinion about someone or something :(

[Daywolf]

Sounds good to me as well.

Obama already appointed two hacks Kagan and Sotomayor.

Both of whom are under qualified and an embarrassment to the Supreme Justice bench who rely on clerks to do their thinking for them.

Why should Obama get to appoint another under qualified weirdo Justice to the bench? The people deserve better, conservative or liberal, it matters not. The fact is, the Obama appointments tread on the ridiculous.

Obstruction is the natural course of action based on his two previous appointments. Again, the people deserve better. Liberal or conservative, they deserve better.Not just that but he is a lame duck with an almost negative approval rating. The guy should sit down and shut his trap for any hope of making some lasting legacy for himself. I don't care if they then build some library/monument/100ft messianic statue reaching for the stars for him - if he just shuts up! He makes Carter look almost like a total success case.

[Lune]

Not just that but he is a lame duck with an almost negative approval rating. The guy should sit down and shut his trap for any hope of making some lasting legacy for himself. I don't care if they then build some library/monument/100ft messianic statue reaching for the stars for him - if he just shuts up! He makes Carter look almost like a total success case.

Higher approval rating than Congress.

[iruinedyourday]

Elizabith warren tells GOP to shove it up thier asses. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/elizabeth-warren-scalia-supreme-court-seat_us_56c0a82be4b0c3c55051c5e1?section=politics)

[Daywolf]

Higher approval rating than Congress.
Would only send them lower. Watch, they obstruct this, approval rating will shoot up. They do what has got them into that mess by letting it fly by once again, it'll go lower. You're really that out of touch with why their approval rating is low, aren't you. Their own constituents have been screaming bloody murder at them for not showing backbone. Don't run for office.

[Pokesan]

pass the peyote please

[maskedmelon]

John Roberts is the only Justice who deserves to be on the court. The rest are partisan tools. Scalia was far too angry about everything, chasing emotion instead of reason. Kinda like Lune.

[Daywolf]

"During a Sunday morning appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer decried the intent of many Senate Republicans to prevent President Barack Obama from appointing the successor to deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

But less than a decade ago, Schumer advocated doing the same exact thing if any additional Supreme Court vacancies opened under former President George W. Bush.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/14/flashback-in-2007-schumer-called-for-blocking-all-bush-supreme-court-nominations/#ixzz40GpnbC9A


heheheheheheheheeehhhh
k..

[iruinedyourday]

"During a Sunday morning appearance on ABC’s “This Week,” Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer decried the intent of many Senate Republicans to prevent President Barack Obama from appointing the successor to deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

But less than a decade ago, Schumer advocated doing the same exact thing if any additional Supreme Court vacancies opened under former President George W. Bush.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/14/flashback-in-2007-schumer-called-for-blocking-all-bush-supreme-court-nominations/#ixzz40GpnbC9A


heheheheheheheheeehhhh
k..

Well Obama is s good president and bush was a puppet for a secret board of criminal warmongering businessmen.

[KagatobLuvsAnimu]

Its ok when we do it.

[Daywolf]

Well Obama is s good president and bush was a puppet for a secret board of criminal warmongering businessmen.
http://i.imgur.com/wKBg6TE.jpg

[Lurikeen]

http://i.imgur.com/wKBg6TE.jpg

Hahaha! An oldie but goodie!

[Lurikeen]

http://i.imgur.com/OyIMTuR.jpg

[Aesop]

Scalia wasn't all that bad.

[AzzarTheGod]

Scalia was a boss.

[iruinedyourday]

http://i.imgur.com/pjhiYmd.jpg

[Pokesan]

http://i.imgur.com/pjhiYmd.jpg

Conservative policies always end in failure.

[Lurikeen]

There was a day when people had respect for the dead and wouldn't speak ill of them after they passed, even if they had strongly held differing points of view with the deceased.

[Pokesan]

it's not about point of view he was an actual garbage person

hope this helps

[Daywolf]

hope this helps

http://i.imgur.com/bQeH6ry.gif

[maskedmelon]

Yea it's just too good.

Scalia himself was a strict constructionist and likely would have disapproved of the Senate impeding the President's appointment of a Supreme Court Justice for political reasons.

Appointments clause:


It would take a real shitbag, like a Clarence Thomas type, to interpret Advice and Consent of the Senate as "We get to completely ignore your nominations, whether they are qualified or not, so that we can stall for the next President".

advice
[ad-vahys]
Spell Syllables
Synonyms Examples Word Origin
noun
1.
an opinion or recommendation offered as a guide to action, conduct, etc.:
I shall act on your advice.


consent
[kuh n-sent]
Spell Syllables
Synonyms Examples Word Origin
verb (used without object)
1.
to permit, approve, or agree; comply or yield (often followed by to or an infinitive):
He consented to the proposal. We asked her permission, and she consented.



ESL?

[iruinedyourday]

There was a day when people had respect for the dead and wouldn't speak ill of them after they passed, even if they had strongly held differing points of view with the deceased.

As usual right wingers pick the wrong things to get judgy about.

[Raev]

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/45ujlo/justice_scalia_died_with_a_pillow_over_his_head/

Scalia was obviously murdered by the CIA; as a strict constitutionalist he would have objected to the coming takeover of the country the Rothschilds via the destruction of the dollar and their puppet Bernie Sanders.

[iruinedyourday]

I see Reav has lost of time on his hands to flesh out conspiracy theories now that the coattails he was riding quit p99.

[Pokesan]

I see Reav has lost of time on his hands to flesh out conspiracy theories now that the coattails he was riding quit p99.

yiiiiiiikes.

http://i.imgur.com/DYkbOTh.gif

poor raev

[Lurikeen]

As usual right wingers pick the wrong things to get judgy about.

We'll no. We just have souls. You lefties just have hate.

[Pokesan]

We'll no. We just have souls. You lefties just have hate.

you realize it doesn't count if the soul is that of a small child and not your own soul, right?

[iruinedyourday]

We'll no. We just have souls. You lefties just have hate.

All you want to do is hurt people gimi a break you don't care how many have to die so long as the world fits in you're vision. Just look at the bright side, it's ok to laugh.

http://www.theonion.com/article/obama-compiles-shortlist-gay-transsexual-abortion--52361?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=LinkPreview:1:Default

Lark trying to act like he's more human but we know the truth.

[Raev]

I see Reav has lost of time on his hands to flesh out conspiracy theories now that the coattails he was riding quit p99.

2/10 on creativity. My day was not ruined. Try harder.

[Pokesan]

2/10 on creativity. My day was not ruined. Try harder.

http://i.imgur.com/QEaqmQH.gif

[Raev]

It seems it doesn't take much to upset you, Kekephee

[iruinedyourday]

If only the community knew there were only 7 posters total

[Lune]

March 16th: Merrich Garland nominated for Supreme Court.

Garland is universally considered a moderate.

Republican Senate is still pledging to defile the spirit of the US constitution and obstruct democracy.

The country's top constitutional law scholars unanimously agree (http://www.acslaw.org/sites/default/files/Con%20Law%20Scholars%20on%20Scotus%20Vacancy.pdf) the Senate has no standing to obstruct nomination simply because they dislike Obama.

It's time to clean Republicans out of the House and Senate, and replace them with true Eisenhower fiscal conservatives who aren't out to sabotage the government and plunder the country for corporations.

http://i.imgur.com/8oLbmX4.jpg

[Blitzers]

Can't wait to see republicans try to obstruct this and once more show their hypocrisy. Republicans are all about the constitution and limited government until it goes against what they want.

Constitution

President shall Nominate. - not appoint

Senate shall advise and consent. - no timeline

I would like you all to google "The Biden Rule"

Game, set, match.

[Blitzers]

March 16th: Merrich Garland nominated for Supreme Court.

Garland is universally considered a moderate.

Republican Senate is still pledging to defile the spirit of the US constitution and obstruct democracy.

The country's top constitutional law scholars unanimously agree (http://www.acslaw.org/sites/default/files/Con%20Law%20Scholars%20on%20Scotus%20Vacancy.pdf) the Senate has no standing to obstruct nomination simply because they dislike Obama.

It's time to clean Republicans out of the House and Senate, and replace them with true Eisenhower fiscal conservatives who aren't out to sabotage the government and plunder the country for corporations.

http://i.imgur.com/8oLbmX4.jpg

Garland is far from moderate, he sides with big government in every case before him, he wanted to relitigate the Heller decision in an attempt to reverse the 2nd amendment, and he's an Enviro-Nazi.

[Pokesan]

is Orrin Hatch a RHINO?

[Blitzers]

is Orrin Hatch a RHINO?

Orrin Hatch is a Big Government Progressive piece of shit!

[Lune]

Believe it or not, the majority of those positions of his are centrist. They only look otherwise to you because you're a radical wacko. This dude was roundly praised by the majority of Republicans during appointments to lower courts, and he's only being blocked now because of gamesmanship.

It's fun to hear you pretend him being blocked has anything to do with him personally, though.

Constitution

President shall Nominate. - not appoint

Senate shall advise and consent. - no timeline

I would like you all to google "The Biden Rule"

Game, set, match.

Your interpretation is contrary to the consensus of American legal scholars.

And yea, we should totally ignore the spirit of the US constitution and sabotage our own high court for an entire year because the King of Gaffes said something stupid in 1992 (and you conveniently ignore the fact that he said he was willing to compromise on a moderate candidate, something the current Senate won't even consider with Garland)

As long as the SCOTUS is a 4-4 split it can't do its job. If a Senate gets to completely deny SCOTUS appointments to a lame duck presidency, then our form of government simply does not work, and we have an error in our Constitution that requires amendment. Say Hillary gets elected, why not deny appointment for another 4-8 years if you think the Senate has that power? Because it harms the country, just like it does for the 1 year we're looking at now. But Republicans in Congress don't give a shit about that. They were willing to hold the country hostage over their budget and debt ceiling brinkmanship.

Trump's not going to win anyway. They are just delaying for an even worse nomination from Hillary. And since it's a presidential election year, Republicans will possibly get washed out of Congress anyway.

[AzzarTheGod]

Garland is far from moderate, he sides with big government in every case before him, he wanted to relitigate the Heller decision in an attempt to reverse the 2nd amendment, and he's an Enviro-Nazi.

This. He is an extremist.

Block him. Block him good.

[Daywolf]

0bama knows it won't happen, this is just a political move to stir trouble and enrage the libs to the voting polls... or to civil unrest again. There should be no time wasted on this, time would be better spent to censure this leftist lame duck president. Well, obviously not, but I can dream, which is nicer than the constant nightmares out of the oval office we endure.

[Pokesan]

who are these libs you're always yelling at or about? i want names

[Raev]

I just don't see Hillary winning against Trump. Trump's whole campaign revolves around him standing up for the American people against the corrupt/incompetent elites in Washington. And what better punching bag for him than Hillary Clinton? All we will hear about for the next 6 months is about how Clinton is fomenting wars in the Middle East, how she can be bought (because he did in fact pay her off to attend his wedding!), how she is owned by Wall Street, how she is incompetent (email scandals), how her primary claim to the Presidency is her vagina, how she 'sometimes tries to tell the truth', and so on. Meanwhile the economy will continue to get worse (we're already in a recession) and the average voter will get more and more frustrated and therefore receptive to Trump's 'Make America Great Again' pitch. I think there is a 75% chance Trump is elected President, a 20% chance he's assassinated by the FBI, and a 5% chance the economy miraculously recovers and Hillary wins with the help of rampant election fraud.

Ironically, Bernie probably would have had a better shot vs Trump, but the Democrats have spent the past 50 years demonizing white males, so none of their minority stooges will vote for him.

[maskedmelon]

This whole thing is utterly retarded. The language of the constitution is very simple. The constitution outlines a collaborative process for appointing justices to the SCOTUS.

"he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... Judges of the supreme Court..."

The Executive branch is subordinate to the Legislature in this situation.

Should the President nominate justices? Yes.

Should the Senate evaluate them? Yes.

Unfortunately the role of the SCOTUS has been perverted. It now exists as a means of subverting the power of the Legislature.

The simple fact that we openly recognize Justices as liberal/conservative is testament of the corruption.

If the court, the justices and judges of lower courts actually did their fucking jobs and interpreted law in a non-partisan fashion there wouldn't be an issue.

[Daywolf]

who are these libs you're always yelling at or about? i want names
"lib"? When I use it, it's usually anyone not a classic liberal or Reagan Democrat, though I usually don't mention classic liberals and just lump them in with Reagan democrats (American neoliberals), though sometimes there I just say "liberal" for them. Anyway, Progressive liberals, progressive left, degressive left, leftist, libtard, pretty much what ever is left. Would be a long list. Yelling? WHO'S YELLING?
Oh but imo most of those neoliberals went off to the libertarian party, so I might just refer to them as libertarians as they are. A few use libtard for libertarian, but I never use it that way and most don't.

[Pokesan]

that's neat that you've invented so many words to amuse yourself with, but all electable candidates are neocons so I'm left thinking you're an idiot, again.

[Lune]

The Executive branch is subordinate to the Legislature in this situation.

No it is not. That's not what subordinate means. You were right when you called it collaborative. The Senate gets input. If anything the Senate is subordinate because they cannot nominate, only approve or disapprove the President's nomination.

If it becomes precedent that the Senate can just choose to never accept a nomination for partisan reasons, then our system is broken. It's clearly not the way it was meant to work. Senates have been forced to accept nominations from the opposite party for the entirety of our country's history. The only reason it's not happening now is because we have some of the most criminal, obstructionist political representatives in our history; people who have been sent by corporations, special interests, and their redneck serfs to plunder and destroy the government from the inside.

Unfortunately the role of the SCOTUS has been perverted. It now exists as a means of subverting the power of the Legislature.

The simple fact that we openly recognize Justices as liberal/conservative is testament of the corruption.

If the court, the justices and judges of lower courts actually did their fucking jobs and interpreted law in a non-partisan fashion there wouldn't be an issue.

It's a nice thought. Making partisan decisions as a member of the high court should be considered taboo. Unfortunately, it's the reality of human nature, and the reality of our system, to have ideological division institutionalized into a system of checks and balances.

Breaking the Supreme Court by refusing to appoint judges doesn't solve the problem. Don't forget one of the jobs of the Supreme Court is precisely to counter the power of the legislature by striking down laws that violate the constitution. When the SCOTUS can't perform that role, our system is broken. We'd lose a lot more by breaking the SCOTUS than we'd gain by solving whatever silly grievance you have with the way they've behaved.

I just don't see Hillary winning against Trump. Trump's whole campaign revolves around him standing up for the American people against the corrupt/incompetent elites in Washington. And what better punching bag for him than Hillary Clinton? All we will hear about for the next 6 months is about how Clinton is fomenting wars in the Middle East, how she can be bought (because he did in fact pay her off to attend his wedding!), how she is owned by Wall Street, how she is incompetent (email scandals), how her primary claim to the Presidency is her vagina, how she 'sometimes tries to tell the truth', and so on. Meanwhile the economy will continue to get worse (we're already in a recession) and the average voter will get more and more frustrated and therefore receptive to Trump's 'Make America Great Again' pitch. I think there is a 75% chance Trump is elected President, a 20% chance he's assassinated by the FBI, and a 5% chance the economy miraculously recovers and Hillary wins with the help of rampant election fraud.

Ironically, Bernie probably would have had a better shot vs Trump, but the Democrats have spent the past 50 years demonizing white males, so none of their minority stooges will vote for him.

He has to be careful though. Him bashing Carly Fiorina and that one Fox News bimbo about menstruation and their looks may play well with his base, but that kind of shit might sink him in the general election.

There's just too many in the silent majority who view Trump and his shenanigans with contempt. Trump may be on track to win the Republican nomination, but look who he had to run against... as I said at the beginning of this election, it was a veritable clown car. Nobody even half as electable as Romney. Trump would get decimated among Hispanics and blacks, which are huge minorities... including in Florida, an important swing state.

Sanders literally just ran against Clinton with the same kind of anti-establishment campaign message you assign to Trump, and he was handily defeated. I don't think Trump's willingness to take it further and call Clinton names is going to go over well in the general election. She's too manipulative, too great at spin. Trump would also have to swing left in the general election too, losing even more of the far-right Republicans who hate him already.

The economy has been in the shitter since 2007 in every way except GDP growth. I don't think it's going to become noticeably bad enough in time to swing this election.

[Daywolf]

Yeah, for SCOTUS I just want a constitutionalist in there. At least someone that is not going to put themselves above the plainly written constitution. I want them to defend the constitution as it is written, to uphold it, not rewrite it. Any SCOTUS that can't do that, shouldn't be there. 0bama is incapable of nominating any such person, the guy should just check out the rest of the year from politics and go play golf, we would be all better off.

that's neat that you've invented so many words to amuse yourself with, but all electable candidates are neocons so I'm left thinking you're an idiot, again. You're tuned out. This is common lingo outside of your leftist media outlets feeding you what to think.

[AzzarTheGod]

The rhetoric Obama speakin leaves yes-men guestimate.

[Blitzers]

Someone show where the FUCK in the Constitution is says the Judiciary is to INTERPRET LAW. It DOES NOT EXIST. THEY ARE TO APPLY THE LAW. IF A FUCKING LAW NEEDS TO BE INTERPRETTED THE JUDICIARY ARE TO RULE IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND SEND IT BACK TO THE LEGISLATURE TO BE REWRITTEN AND THEN A RE-VOTE TAKEN. STOP BEING FUCKTARDS AND GIVING JUDGES MORE AUTHORITY THEN AUTHORIZED BY THE CONSTITUTION.

[Pokesan]

Someone show where the FUCK in the Constitution is says the Judiciary is to INTERPRET LAW. It DOES NOT EXIST. THEY ARE TO APPLY THE LAW. IF A FUCKING LAW NEEDS TO BE INTERPRETTED THE JUDICIARY ARE TO RULE IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND SEND IT BACK TO THE LEGISLATURE TO BE REWRITTEN AND THEN A RE-VOTE TAKEN. STOP BEING FUCKTARDS AND GIVING JUDGES MORE AUTHORITY THEN AUTHORIZED BY THE CONSTITUTION.

nice meltdown!!

[AzzarTheGod]

Someone show where the FUCK in the Constitution is says the Judiciary is to INTERPRET LAW. It DOES NOT EXIST. THEY ARE TO APPLY THE LAW. IF A FUCKING LAW NEEDS TO BE INTERPRETTED THE JUDICIARY ARE TO RULE IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND SEND IT BACK TO THE LEGISLATURE TO BE REWRITTEN AND THEN A RE-VOTE TAKEN. STOP BEING FUCKTARDS AND GIVING JUDGES MORE AUTHORITY THEN AUTHORIZED BY THE CONSTITUTION.

this is real talk tho

[Pokesan]

real crazy talk

[Lune]

Someone show where the FUCK in the Constitution is says the Judiciary is to INTERPRET LAW. It DOES NOT EXIST. THEY ARE TO APPLY THE LAW. IF A FUCKING LAW NEEDS TO BE INTERPRETTED THE JUDICIARY ARE TO RULE IT UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND SEND IT BACK TO THE LEGISLATURE TO BE REWRITTEN AND THEN A RE-VOTE TAKEN.

Judicial review as to whether something is unconstitutional actually isn't in the constitution, it was established in Marbury vs. Madison (1803). But you were probably shooting spitballs at some nerd when you learned about it.

STOP BEING FUCKTARDS AND GIVING JUDGES MORE AUTHORITY THEN AUTHORIZED BY THE CONSTITUTION.

Thus, the authority you're bitching about isn't even in the Constitution.

What kind of power the Supreme Court should have has been debated since our country was founded. It's an interesting and complicated argument, and almost completely unrelated to whether or not we should replace an open seat on the court or leave the court dysfunctional because of petty partisanship.

[Blitzers]

Judicial review as to whether something is unconstitutional actually isn't in the constitution, it was established in Marbury vs. Madison (1803). But you were probably shooting spitballs at some nerd when you learned about it.



Thus, the authority you're bitching about isn't even in the Constitution.

What kind of power the Supreme Court should have has been debated since our country was founded. It's an interesting and complicated argument, and almost completely unrelated to whether or not we should replace an open seat on the court or leave the court dysfunctional because of petty partisanship.

Usurping power from the legislature is unconstitutional in and of itself. Interpreting laws and deeming laws unconstitutional are 2 different things. The former carries definition and meaning that can and has changed the intent of said law thus making new law and has been highly abused by judicial activists on the courts. The latter kicks the law back to the Lawmakers who hold the sole power to correct, clarify, and rewrite said law.

Marbury vs Madison

Basically said hey assholes in the Supreme Court do you want legislative powers?

Assholes response; Fuck yeah

I know it's a bit more complicated then that, but the facts are NO WHERE in the constitution does it give the judiciary the power to interpret law. How the fuck the SCOTUS pulled that shit off is damn shame.

[Blitzers]

Furthermore it is the duty of the Legislature to define law as it is written not interpreted. The reason why you libtards want activist judges is so that the progressives can pass 2000 page bills that no one can even read or comprehend so activist judges can make law mean whatever they want it to mean.

[Pokesan]

TIL the Supreme Court has been ruining our democracy for over 200 years

never change, Blitzers. stay golden

[maskedmelon]

No it is not. That's not what subordinate means. You were right when you called it collaborative. The Senate gets input. If anything the Senate is subordinate because they cannot nominate, only approve or disapprove the President's nomination.


If you are required to obtain consent from an entity before acting then that entity holds authority over you and you are therefore subordinate to it. That is why the Supreme Court is supreme. It's actions are not subject to the approval of any other power.

Most processes do not originate at the top of power structures. They originate at the bottom and are passed up the change.

Does the president hold power because he can initiate the process? Sure, but he must submit to the will of the senate and that makes his power subordinate. The senate has no need to submit to him.

The opposite is true with respect to law. The legislature is subordinate to the president in the creation of law.

What you are arguing is akin to saying children are not subordinate to their parents because they can formulate a particular plan on their own, whether they need to obtain their parents' permission or not.

[Lune]

If you are required to obtain consent from an entity before acting then that entity holds authority over you and you are therefore subordinate to it. That is why the Supreme Court is supreme. It's actions are not subject to the approval of any other power.

Most processes do not originate at the top of power structures. They originate at the bottom and are passed up the change.

Does the president hold power because he can initiate the process? Sure, but he must submit to the will of the senate and that makes his power subordinate. The senate has no need to submit to him.

The opposite is true with respect to law. The legislature is subordinate to the president in the creation of law.

What you are arguing is akin to saying children are not subordinate to their parents because they can formulate a particular plan on their own, whether they need to obtain their parents' permission or not.

Subordinate does not mean "they must both act to accomplish x".

Subordinate means "lower in rank or position" or "under authority or control".

Neither the executive or legislative are under each other's authority, but each get a say in the appointment. They both hold power over the process, but that power is clearly unequal. Being able to select the nominee is a position of slightly greater power than simply being able to approve that selection.

A child is subordinate to a parent because the parent has authority over the child, and no matter what plan they formulate, the parent can veto it. The child only has as much control over shit as the parent gives them.

The Supreme Court has various checks; it must rely on enforcement, it can only rule on what is presented to it, and the constitution can be amended to overpower judicial decisions.

But this semantic bullshit is beside the point.

Delaying appointment for petty partisan reasons, even if it is allowed by the Constitution, harms the country, and is contrary to the spirit of the Constitution and the spirit of compromise that is essential to democracy.

[Daywolf]

Delaying appointment for petty partisan reasons, even if it is allowed by the Constitution, harms the country, and is contrary to the spirit of the Constitution and the spirit of compromise that is essential to democracy.
uh-huh... if you feel that way, why the hell did you guys elect 0bama?
Or is it only wrong when the Republicans do it?
0bama 2006: https://youtu.be/oss4niVEyVw
Look at em' 'uh um it's not my fault! it's everyone's fault.. um uh um' :D

And how does this in any way effect the constitution in regards to how many SCOTUS are active? I mean since there was no set amount of appointments in the constitution as it was left open for congress to decide. It could be 1 it could be 100.

Now add those two points together and for reasoning sake what do you get?
Maybe this? https://youtu.be/MpQ6X4ojHws :D

Conclusion: it's a lot of hot air, if they want to put it off for after the elections, they have every right to do so. It would seem disingenuous to state otherwise.

[AzzarTheGod]

Furthermore it is the duty of the Legislature to define law as it is written not interpreted. The reason why you libtards want activist judges is so that the progressives can pass 2000 page bills that no one can even read or comprehend so activist judges can make law mean whatever they want it to mean.

man this is reeel talk.

this ***** blitzer is spittin fiya

[Blitzers]

Delaying appointment for petty partisan reasons, even if it is allowed by the Constitution, harms the country, and is contrary to the spirit of the Constitution and the spirit of compromise that is essential to democracy.

This made me laugh so hard. You bastard Liberals don't give 2 shits about harming this country, infact your goal is to cede this country some sort of global "cuckold" status. Lune Fuck you and all you retarded progressive buddies. You bastards have made a sport out of harming this country.

[Blitzers]

If anything the Senate is superior in the SCOTUS nomination procedure. Advise and consent. The Senate can and has in the past gotten the appointee they wanted. This happened when they refused Robert Bork. They can refuse any nominee the President makes for an unlimited time, they also can inform/advise the President on the only judges they would approve. So really, all the power for this is held by the Senate if they decide to exercise it. The president duty is more ceremonial then anything else.

[Barkingturtle]

The GOP decides another year of obstructionism is the best course -- after the past seven years of inaction have for all intents and purposes cost them their party. Well shit, have at it, bitches! Just wait till you get a load of Hillary's nominee when she enters office with a reshuffled congress and a mandate. This is the last nail in the Republican coffin, and you're driving it for us.

[Blitzers]

The GOP decides another year of obstructionism is the best course -- after the past seven years of inaction have for all intents and purposes cost them their party. Well shit, have at it, bitches! Just wait till you get a load of Hillary's nominee when she enters office with a reshuffled congress and a mandate. This is the last nail in the Republican coffin, and you're driving it for us.

Too funny, even Obama knows the DEMS are going to lose in November, that's why he's pushing for this to happen now.

[Barkingturtle]

Too funny, even Obama knows the DEMS are going to lose in November, that's why he's pushing for this to happen now.

You're being trolled, son.

Obama is way smarter than you. It is arguable that he is genetically superior.

[Blitzers]

You're being trolled, son.

Obama is way smarter than you. It is arguable that he is genetically superior.

Yeah those ears definately got me on sonar.

[sOurDieSel]

Merrich Garland is a Jew.

If he gets the nomination then the SCOTUS will be 45 percent Jewish.

I thought this was the Supreme Court of the United States not the Supreme Court of Israel.

He also hates the 2nd Amendment.

[AzzarTheGod]

Merrich Garland is a Jew.

If he gets the nomination then the SCOTUS will be 45 percent Jewish.

I thought this was the Supreme Court of the United States not the Supreme Court of Israel.

He also hates the 2nd Amendment.

[Pokesan]

ahem

this may be a controversial opinion around here but i need to get this one off my chest

jews are sometimes good

[AzzarTheGod]

ahem

this may be a controversial opinion around here but i need to get this one off my chest

jews are sometimes good

My problem lies in the lack of awareness in how Judaism is taught. Sure not every jew is a practicing jew. Nor do all jews believe in being observant.

Its not a matter of if jews are good or bad at all. Its more about raising awareness of the ethnocentricity of the jewish people and pointing out anti-social flaws in their belief system.

Ethnocentic culture and behavior has no place in multicultural globalist 2016.

Think of it like Islam. We are raising awareness about how some people choose to practice and interpret Islam. The same needs to be done for Judaism and the Zionist hierarchy.

Same rules apply, sorry no exception to being called out just because you are jewish. No one gets special treatment. If Christians had similar weird anti-social anti-everyone belief systems in certain parts of their dogma I would be calling them out just the same.

Christianity is up to date for 2016. Judaism and Islam, not so much. They have a lot of work to do, and they begin that healing process by being called out on their uncompromising anti-social ethnocentric rhetoric.

[Daywolf]

Think of it like Islam. We are raising awareness about how some people choose to practice and interpret Islam. The same needs to be done for Judaism and the Zionist hierarchy.Yeaaah totally right... so like when jews start strapping on explosive suicide vests and trying to blow me up, I'll definitely raise this point :rolleyes:

I don't care if Garland is a Jew, he's just another libtard trying to bend the constitution to the will of the leftists.

[Blitzers]

My problem lies in the lack of awareness in how Judaism is taught. Sure not every jew is a practicing jew. Nor do all jews believe in being observant.

Its not a matter of if jews are good or bad at all. Its more about raising awareness of the ethnocentricity of the jewish people and pointing out anti-social flaws in their belief system.

Ethnocentic culture and behavior has no place in multicultural globalist 2016.

Think of it like Islam. We are raising awareness about how some people choose to practice and interpret Islam. The same needs to be done for Judaism and the Zionist hierarchy.

Same rules apply, sorry no exception to being called out just because you are jewish. No one gets special treatment. If Christians had similar weird anti-social anti-everyone belief systems in certain parts of their dogma I would be calling them out just the same.

Christianity is up to date for 2016. Judaism and Islam, not so much. They have a lot of work to do, and they begin that healing process by being called out on their uncompromising anti-social ethnocentric rhetoric.

Let me translate...

Damn those anti-social jeeeeeeewwwwwwwzzzzzz...
We must force our global multicultural agenda, who's on the list next for genocide... Ahhhh, the Amish seem like a easy target those anti-social bastards.

[Pokesan]

Let me translate...

Damn those anti-social jeeeeeeewwwwwwwzzzzzz...
We must force our global multicultural agenda, who's on the list next for genocide... Ahhhh, the Amish seem like a easy target those anti-social bastards.

this makes perfect sense to me

sidenote: i just smoked a whole bunch of crack!

[barrettdc1]

ahem

this may be a controversial opinion around here but i need to get this one off my chest

jews are sometimes good

naw

[AzzarTheGod]

I'd cite specific illustrative examples of what my definition of anti-social ethnocentric rhetoric is but it looks like some people have already made the assumption for me and the thread has turned completely crazy.

Since nobody accused me of anti-Semitism I will assume people know what I'm talking about. Pretty simple when you examine those 3 major religions to see which ones have a little work to do to be socially acceptable in 2016.

[Pokesan]

I'd cite specific illustrative examples of what my definition of anti-social ethnocentric rhetoric is but it looks like some people have already made the assumption for me and the thread has turned completely crazy.

Since nobody accused me of anti-Semitism I will assume people know what I'm talking about. Pretty simple when you examine those 3 major religions to see which ones have a little work to do to be socially acceptable in 2016.

true. yours is a very nuanced and insightful argument. simply wonderful. (http://i.imgur.com/ILKNMeB.png)

[AzzarTheGod]

true. yours is a very nuanced and insightful argument. simply wonderful. (http://i.imgur.com/ILKNMeB.png)

Too far. I detect anti-Semitism in this post. Those examples are anti-Semitic and intellectually bankrupt.

I was speaking to the tenets of the religion itself.

[Pokesan]

i dont understand the difference

[AzzarTheGod]

daughter's argument isn't progressive. emotional meltdowns over why "whites" can't stick together is racist. that post suggests shutting people out.

did lol @ the hiring of illegals part. room temp IQ.

[Daywolf]

daughter's argument isn't progressive. emotional meltdowns over why "whites" can't stick together is racist. that post suggests shutting people out.

did lol @ the hiring of illegals part. room temp IQ.
He was contributing the link to you. As though you believe that.

I don't see the difference either. Jew or Judaism is a tribal identity. A jew is always a jew by birth. I know dictionaries disagree with my stance, but it's like calling "English" a religion. They have a religion, but it was a religion shared among the 12 tribes, and Jew was just one tribe among the tribes. Those were tribes of blood/family descendants, not ideology or separate religious beliefs. Derives from the Abrahamic religion, or the base religion of the Abrahamic religions.

[iruinedyourday]

why do conservitives think its good to give money to the 1% but not to poor people? serious question. Why do you guys think that?

[Blitzers]

why do conservitives think its good to give money to the 1% but not to poor people? serious question. Why do you guys think that?


^^^ This is why Trump loves the "poorly educated."

I would argue conservatives are far more generous to the poor then Progressive have ever been.

[Pokesan]

^^^ This is why Trump loves the "poorly educated."

I would argue conservatives are far more generous to the poor then Progressive have ever been.

I would argue that you have shit for brains!!

[Daywolf]

why do conservitives think its good to give money to the 1% but not to poor people? serious question. Why do you guys think that?
Because it's illegal to not pay taxes?

Why do libtards think they can take money from the poor through taxation without representation (eg 0namacare etc) and give it to themselves, "the 1%"? serious question. Why do you guys think that?

[Pokesan]

Because it's illegal to not pay taxes?

Why do libtards think they can take money from the poor through taxation without representation (eg 0namacare etc) and give it to themselves, "the 1%"? serious question. Why do you guys think that?

Obamacare was legislation passed by Congress. How in the world is this taxation without representation? a majority of representatives voted in favor of it!

[Daywolf]

Obamacare was legislation passed by Congress. How in the world is this taxation without representation? a majority of representatives voted in favor of it!It was a broken pile of some 20000 pages no one read before voting on... er more correctly that the libtards voted in without reading and shoved down the throats of the American citizen majority that didn't want it. Even notice how the dems lost majority seats over both the house and senate since that point in time. Which is also a big reason for all the fighting in the Rep party right now, as many of them lied and didn't do shit about it once they got in.

Additionally, it is constantly manipulated, revised and rewritten. It was classified as a tax by the supreme court, and since it's passage, it has evolved. It's a friggen power grab, and 0bamas giving loads of cash out to his buddies in industry. People complain about "the 1%", but you morons cant get it into your head 0bama IS the 1%.

[Pokesan]

a majority of representatives voted yes on the affordable care and patient protection act. these representatives were elected by voters in their respective districts. as you say, it has been ruled a tax. your delicious wordscramble aside, how is this not taxation WITH representation?

[AzzarTheGod]

He was contributing the link to you. As though you believe that.

I don't see the difference either. Jew or Judaism is a tribal identity. A jew is always a jew by birth. I know dictionaries disagree with my stance, but it's like calling "English" a religion. They have a religion, but it was a religion shared among the 12 tribes, and Jew was just one tribe among the tribes. Those were tribes of blood/family descendants, not ideology or separate religious beliefs. Derives from the Abrahamic religion, or the base religion of the Abrahamic religions.

Without Big J here there is absolutely no point in me going deeper into the topic and playing ping pong with anyone, pokesan included.

RIP

[AzzarTheGod]

why do conservitives think its good to give money to the 1% but not to poor people? serious question. Why do you guys think that?

Just ran into another conservative on a youtube section who was listening to liberal conspiracy rap music. And I was taken aback, yet again, by how many people are misinformed about socialism and Bernie.

I tried to explain that you don't need to like socialism to vote socialist and how much I personally hate socialism. But it fell on deaf ears. I went on to explain that if a few corporations get socialist help in bailouts that everyone should vote socialist on the MERE principle!

I'm still reeling from the experience. These people are very very mean. And they had nothing nice to say about Bernie.

[Daywolf]

Without Big J here there is absolutely no point in me going deeper into the topic and playing ping pong with anyone, pokesan included.

RIP
bah explain what? It's the crowning jewel of socialism. It need to go down in flames, period! There is nothing else to really say. It's borderline dictatorship, and these robots are marching to their inevitable destruction, mechanical sheep.

[sOurDieSel]

daughter's argument isn't progressive. emotional meltdowns over why "whites" can't stick together is racist. that post suggests shutting people out.

did lol @ the hiring of illegals part. room temp IQ.

So White Europeans sticking together is bad/racist, but Jews, Blacks, Mexicans, Asians and every other group doing so is good... got it.

He was contributing the link to you. As though you believe that.

I don't see the difference either. Jew or Judaism is a tribal identity. A jew is always a jew by birth. I know dictionaries disagree with my stance, but it's like calling "English" a religion. They have a religion, but it was a religion shared among the 12 tribes, and Jew was just one tribe among the tribes. Those were tribes of blood/family descendants, not ideology or separate religious beliefs. Derives from the Abrahamic religion, or the base religion of the Abrahamic religions.

There are two main types of Jews. Racial Jews and Religious Jews.

[Daywolf]

There are two main types of Jews. Racial Jews and Religious Jews.No, there isn't. One is born a jew, period. Just like some people are born English. And what's two? Is that what they told you? ...what ever website it's from. Why just two? Why not ten? Why not six? Why two? What about those that are jews but just don't know it yet? That would be three!

Lots of people taking the dna test and discovering they are jews, and they are let into Israel to live among their people. Not because they follow an Abrahamic religion, but because of blood. Proselytes can't, just people with the blood lineage. Those are jews. People that are descendants of Judah, Jacob and Leah's son. The tribe of Judah, not the tribe of Dan or the tribe of Benjamin, which had the same religion (not jewish), but just of Judah, a jew. There are few proselytes, no enough to make any impact and surely not of the discussion, very marginal group.

The whole thing about the racial and religious divisions is just that some libs see solidarity in liberal jews that have no religious ties but have progressive views. These are usually globalist libs much like the neocons, all stirring up war and strife. Yes, that includes 0bama, probably the worst destabilizing power in the middle-east since Carter... surpasses Carter with the instability he has laid on the region. All he did was pick up where Bush left off. At least Bush's 100yr war had direction, a purpose, 0bama took it and turned it into something much worse that we have not seen the ending to yet, nor will anytime soon.

Now all we need is another SCOTUS trying to destroy the constitution and usher in progressive libtard ideology to turn the US into fail 0bama x10 unleashed onto the world. If all we had now was 0bama, a lib democrat house and senate, and liberal SCOTUS judges, that wouldn't be peace on earth, it'd be smoldering nuke craters covering the Earth and the atmosphere full of chemical weaponized gas.
Obstructionism imo is considered a good thing. Nothing like a broken bloated government to just leave us alone!

[Ket]

Hah yeah like forced vaccinations tainted with mercury

You must be joking. Right? Is this cracked p99 humor?

-Ket

[nyclin]

You must be joking. Right? Is this cracked p99 humor?

-Ket

You must have come here expecting serious discussion. This is just the forum where trolls pad their post counts, since they can't in RnF.

[AzzarTheGod]

You must be joking. Right? Is this cracked p99 humor?

-Ket

The mercury is safer than the vaccine. must be a joke.

[Daywolf]

You must be joking. Right? Is this cracked p99 humor?

-Ket
Mercury (thimerosal 50% mercury) was never removed, only the wording was altered to conceal it. It's used as a preservative, and in every vaccine. They just smudged the numbers so to claim it's mercury free on packaging, but still really isn't. Government bureaucracy at work. This is nothing new out of the FDA, they have a history of deceit. This is admittedly so btw, not a hidden thing, just you never looked into it which is what they count on. Consider yourself the average American. Big gobernment really isn't here to protect you though, it's about power, money and a narrow ideology they are trying to foster.

You must have come here expecting serious discussion. This is just the forum where trolls pad their post counts, since they can't in RnF.
Yeah, I'm sure to some, insulting the federal government bureaucracy by using truth is a form of trolling here. The feds could never ever ever do anything wrong... :rolleyes:

[Ahldagor]

This whole thing is utterly retarded. The language of the constitution is very simple. The constitution outlines a collaborative process for appointing justices to the SCOTUS.

"he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... Judges of the supreme Court..."

The Executive branch is subordinate to the Legislature in this situation.

Should the President nominate justices? Yes.

Should the Senate evaluate them? Yes.

Unfortunately the role of the SCOTUS has been perverted. It now exists as a means of subverting the power of the Legislature.

The simple fact that we openly recognize Justices as liberal/conservative is testament of the corruption.

If the court, the justices and judges of lower courts actually did their fucking jobs and interpreted law in a non-partisan fashion there wouldn't be an issue.

You have obviously never read the SCOTUS ruling on Marbury v. Madison.

[Ket]

Mercury (thimerosal 50% mercury) was never removed, only the wording was altered to conceal it. It's used as a preservative, and in every vaccine. They just smudged the numbers so to claim it's mercury free on packaging, but still really isn't. Government bureaucracy at work. This is nothing new out of the FDA, they have a history of deceit. This is admittedly so btw, not a hidden thing, just you never looked into it which is what they count on. Consider yourself the average American. Big gobernment really isn't here to protect you though, it's about power, money and a narrow ideology they are trying to foster.:

Incorrect. The primary difference between methyl and ethyl mercury is that they are both chemically structured differently.


CH³ - Hg+X¯
CH³ - CH² - Hg+X¯

(Having trouble populating symbols in this thing. Weird)

The top belongs to methyl-mercury and the bottom to ethyl-mercury.

Methylmercury is found in natural environments and has been known to bioaccumulate (gradually gather into higher and higher amounts in an organic body), causing nervous damage in mammals. You can find higher amounts of this compound in marine life (i.e. fishes and dolphins) than in any vaccines you'll come across within your lifetime.

Ethyl-mercury, unlike methyl, is formed when the body breaks down thimerosal, an organic mercury compound used as a preservative in vaccines. Since ethyl has a shorter half-life than methyl, it can easily break down and be flushed out from the body because of its structure.

However, the fears that somehow any amount of mercury (be it thimerosal or any of the two aforementioned compounds) is linked to autism is rooted in the controversial decision by the CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) to remove thimerosal from vaccines for solely preventive measures. While many saw this is a link between vaccines and autism, ultimately there have been many more research studies proven to show no such link between the two.

Still, the damage has been done and the idea that mercury in general causes autism and a number of other imagine maladies still generates throughout many (uneducated) social circles today.

Educate yoself.

-Ket

[Daywolf]

http://vaxtruth.org/2014/09/dr-oz-flu-shots/

[Ket]

Clicked it. Saw "Dr Oz". Closed and lol'd.

-Ket

[maskedmelon]

You have obviously never read the SCOTUS ruling on Marbury v. Madison.

Obviously. On an equally germane note, your sig is broken.

[Daywolf]

Clicked it. Saw "Dr Oz". Closed and lol'd.

-Ket
Oh you're a funny guy. So you believe everythin a TV doc tells you then? The dude lays it out well with resource links why Oz is wrong. Well you can lead a horse to water...
Have fun shooting that shit into you, and having others forced into it.

[Ket]

Oh you're a funny guy. So you believe everythin a TV doc tells you then? The dude lays it out well with resource links why Oz is wrong. Well you can lead a horse to water...
Have fun shooting that shit into you, and having others forced into it.

Actually, no. Since I didn't read, I didn't get the meat of the message. As your argument is on the toxicity of the mercury in vaccines, and as you presented a link for your claims, and as that link specifically mentions Dr. Oz, I incorrectly assumed it was a link of Dr. Oz defending your claims. Given the chain of events I don't think that was too illogical a leap to make.

Dr. Oz is a joke. So much so that I refuse to read anything remotely connected to him, whether it refutes or affirms my position. If you'd like, we can present peer reviewed articles defending our respective positions.

-Ket

[Daywolf]

Actually, no. Since I didn't read, I didn't get the meat of the message. As your argument is on the toxicity of the mercury in vaccines, and as you presented a link for your claims, and as that link specifically mentions Dr. Oz, I incorrectly assumed it was a link of Dr. Oz defending your claims. Given the chain of events I don't think that was too illogical a leap to make.

Dr. Oz is a joke. So much so that I refuse to read anything remotely connected to him, whether it refutes or affirms my position. If you'd like, we can present peer reviewed articles defending our respective positions.

-Ketl2troll better.

[maskedmelon]

Dr. Oz is a joke. So much so that I refuse to read anything remotely connected to him, whether it refutes or affirms my position. If you'd like, we can present peer reviewed articles defending our respective positions.

-Ket

Yeah fuck skepticism and critical thought. We all have our own ideas and are entitled to be right so long as we agree not to call out others on their bullshit.

Keep your facts to yourself Daywolf and out of my safe space.

[Pokesan]

he's right though. Dr Oz is professionally and personally a garbage person. You'd be well served to ignore everything about him.

[maskedmelon]

he's right though. Dr Oz is professionally and personally a garbage person. You'd be well served to ignore everything about him.

So am I, but that doesn't prevent me from meaningfully contributing to discussion, whether my intent or not.

[Pokesan]

You WISH you were even half the piece of shit Dr Oz is.

[maskedmelon]

You do me great honor Pokes.

[Daywolf]

he's right though. Dr Oz is professionally and personally a garbage person. You'd be well served to ignore everything about him.
I didn't read your post, man, you mentioned "Dr Oz" :eek:
Stopped there and lolz. Obviously reading your post would be a complete waste of my time. How can you mention Dr Oz??!? You must really like him a lot. That doesn't make sense to me. But, then again, you are very small. Yet just another Oz minion, moving in pace with the rest of his minions. They come with fire, they come with axes... gnawing, biting, breaking, hacking, burning! Destroyers and usurpers, curse them! We Wolves cannot hold back this storm. We must weather such things as we have always done. Hroom, hm!

[AzzarTheGod]

You guys are fucking morons. I am not going to get into it, but mercury is the least of a vaccines problem. Its not even on anyones radar who is taken seriously.

They want you to focus on the mercury. You are buying into Big Pharm propaganda.

Vaccine injury has absolutely fuckall to do with mercury content or your precious thimerosal preservative. Again, it benefits big business if you believe this. It is a MAJOR distraction from the actual issues with many vaccinations and vaccine injury itself again has no scientific link to your precious thimerosal. I can't believe this disinformation produced by covert Big Pharm health schills like Dr. Blowjob (who only exist to help people get sicker and sicker) is still being passed off as the problem in 2016. LOL its 2016. Hi.

Try reading some peer-reviewed journals instead of Dr. Blowjob's website.

[Daywolf]

You guys are fucking morons. I am not going to get into it, but mercury is the least of a vaccines problem. Its not even on anyones radar who is taken seriously.Nah, you just have reading comprehension problems sometimes :o If you read that article I posted, which is a very well written article, it speaks of other things being done to vaccines as well.

Mercury is bad, and there are other things bad being added to them as well, but that doesn't discount mercury being bad too. And not only is mercury bad, but they really didn't remove it, as the article links to with proof.

Hopefully, when people finally decide to actually look into the issue for themselves, they will notice the other problems, which are soo off the wall they are about on the absurd side to mention, but really do exist. But mercury, most people can understand mercury, which too is very harmful.

And no, again, that is not Dr. Oz's website you doofus hah, the guy is totally pwning Oz just like you are feebly trying to do here. Really, dude, reading comprehension.

And what is this not on anyone's radar? dude you have never looked into this issue, have you, ever! Is the CDC no one? This is all hot debate stuff, with the CDC and FDA involvement. Where do you get your info from? This would be a far better issue for the Supreme court to get involved in rather than pro football players crying for more money to buy their diapers.

[AzzarTheGod]

You dodged.

Do you believe thimerosal is responsible for vaccine injury?

Surely, thimerosal is a neurotoxin. But isn't the bigger issue the safety of the vaccine itself rather than what it is preserved in? Assuming we are waiting until 2 years of age for vaccination. Thimerosal is an issue for a newborn (2mo-6mo) no argument there.

I can't help but feel you are doing a disservice to everyone by focusing on the preservative when the vaccine itself has official CDC-acknowledged contraindications of unknown proportions.

Shouldn't we be focusing on who is contraindicated, who is succeptible to vaccine injury, rather than a milley mouse neurotoxin like thimerosal which is probably safe in anyone over 2 years of age?

Before you post again calm down, because I absolutely recognize thimerosal injected into a newborn is a disgusting practice and has lowered the IQ of every single person on this forum and caused brain damage in some form or another. We can agree anyone thinking otherwise is the real fucking moron here, I think.

[Daywolf]

You dodged.

Do you believe thimerosal is responsible for vaccine injury?

Surely, thimerosal is a neurotoxin. But isn't the bigger issue the safety of the vaccine itself rather than what it is preserved in? Assuming we are waiting until 2 years of age for vaccination. Thimerosal is an issue for a newborn (2mo-6mo) no argument there.

I can't help but feel you are doing a disservice to everyone by focusing on the preservative when the vaccine itself has official CDC-acknowledged contraindications of unknown proportions.

Shouldn't we be focusing on who is contraindicated, who is succeptible to vaccine injury, rather than a milley mouse neurotoxin like thimerosal which is probably safe in anyone over 2 years of age?

Before you post again calm down, because I absolutely recognize thimerosal injected into a newborn is a disgusting practice and has lowered the IQ of every single person on this forum and caused brain damage in some form or another. We can agree anyone thinking otherwise is the real fucking moron here, I think.
Oh I know why you think this issue isn't on the radar, it's because Glenn Beck says it isn't hehe. Dude, quit listening to that retard. Him and Mitt can take a flying leap. And they have even turned me off from Cruz now. Well, Cruz is doing that to himself, but Mitt and Glenn just make it all the more worse.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2004/05/12/vaccination-dangers.aspx
A recent study by the world-renowned immunologist Dr. H. Hugh Fudenberg found that adults vaccinated yearly for five years in a row with the flu vaccine had a 10-fold increased risk of developing Alzheimer’s disease. He attributes this to the mercury and aluminum in the vaccine. Interestingly, both of these metals have been shown to activate microglia and increase excitotoxicity in the brain.
It's not just babies ...which I'll mention again, they did not remove the compounds from children's vaccinations, only removed the wording.

I'll repeat that again: "It's not just babies ...which I'll mention again, they did not remove the compounds from children's vaccinations, only removed the wording."

But not just Alzheimer's regarding adults, but consider gulf war syndrome and ALS as mentioned there too. Dude, just turn off the Beck TV.

[AzzarTheGod]

Oh I know why you think this issue isn't on the radar, it's because Glenn Beck says it isn't hehe. Dude, quit listening to that retard. Him and Mitt can take a flying leap. And they have even turned me off from Cruz now. Well, Cruz is doing that to himself, but Mitt and Glenn just make it all the more worse.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2004/05/12/vaccination-dangers.aspx

It's not just babies ...which I'll mention again, they did not remove the compounds from children's vaccinations, only removed the wording.

I'll repeat that again: "It's not just babies ...which I'll mention again, they did not remove the compounds from children's vaccinations, only removed the wording."

But not just Alzheimer's regarding adults, but consider gulf war syndrome and ALS as mentioned there too. Dude, just turn off the Beck TV.

Ok I looked at a study. Looks like it isn't just small children that are susceptible to the neurotoxicity of thimerosal. I stand corrected thanks.

I don't understand how dental amalgam fillings are safe but what I imagine is a tiny amount of mercury in thimerosal compared to mercury fillings yet capable of such alleged damages and disease?

Something is missing here I think...

[Pokesan]

http://i.imgur.com/Q86kIoZ.png

[Ahldagor]

Obviously. On an equally germane note, your sig is broken.

So? It was of Rafiki throwing Simba off of Pride Rock at the beginning of the movie. Got old, don't care. Brief, minor engagement that can be taken various ways of which the outcome generated may or may not validate any and all out standing, warranted outcomes, warrants of personal appeal. Ipso facto: SCOTUS ruling and power warranted through the constitution expelling arguments via opinions of rules.

[maskedmelon]

So? It was of Rafiki throwing Simba off of Pride Rock at the beginning of the movie. Got old, don't care. Brief, minor engagement that can be taken various ways of which the outcome generated may or may not validate any and all out standing, warranted outcomes, warrants of personal appeal.

Ohhhh, I remember that one. Can't imgur gifs?

Ipso facto: SCOTUS ruling and power warranted through the constitution expelling arguments via opinions of rules.

Again with oblique declarations of... What is the point you are trying to make here? Try sound it out for me please. I am dense.

In the mean time, here is my equally coherent and relevant counter-argument:

SCOTUS Is located at 1 First St NE, Washington, D.C.

[Ahldagor]

Ohhhh, I remember that one. Can't imgur gifs?


Have forgotten and not valued enough to learn.


Again with oblique declarations of... What is the point you are trying to make here? Try sound it out for me please. I am dense.


Nominative isn't dependent on a noun when allusions are present.

Not parmesan dense, but more like swiss:

Unfortunately the role of the SCOTUS has been perverted. It now exists as a means of subverting the power of the Legislature.

The simple fact that we openly recognize Justices as liberal/conservative is testament of the corruption.

If the court, the justices and judges of lower courts actually did their fucking jobs and interpreted law in a non-partisan fashion there wouldn't be an issue.

Marbury v. Madison is the case that established the power of judicial review for SCOTUS, self granting that the interpretation of law is the supreme power within the US GOV.


SCOTUS Is located at 1 First St NE, Washington, D.C.

That's post facto, historically. Besides, SCOTUS has had a police force since that date became residence. It's like nine, currently, popes sitting at a desk.

[Pokesan]

It's like nine, currently, popes sitting at a desk.

are you daywolf? are the popes all reptile jews?

of course they are, this is project1999 off topic. chaos reigns.

[Ahldagor]

are you daywolf? are the popes all reptile jews?

of course they are, this is project1999 off topic. chaos reigns.

No, they're humans.

[Daywolf]

are you daywolf? are the popes all reptile jews?
You asking me? They're certainly not jews, but are they reptile.... maybe..

http://i.imgur.com/fPZUBfr.jpg

[AzzarTheGod]

You asking me? They're certainly not a jews, but are they reptile.... maybe..

http://i.imgur.com/fPZUBfr.jpg

we contain some reptile DNA. pretty sure there is DNA similarities among 100's of species, you know, we are all evolved from the same foundation...go figure there is similarity. I've never bothered to look into it but I bet we have a genome or allele that can be compared to plants too.

Why do many humans have large adenoids? Immune function? but structurally the same as some lizards venom storage with muscular function to contract in the same way.

Pretend like you are going to hack something up, the adenoids also contract. Immune function or reptile similarity? Think.

[Daywolf]

we contain some reptile DNA. pretty sure there is DNA similarities among 100's of species, you know, we are all evolved from the same foundation...go figure there is similarity. I've never bothered to look into it but I bet we have a genome or allele that can be compared to plants too.

Why do many humans have large adenoids? Immune function? but structurally the same as some lizards venom storage with muscular function to contract in the same way.

Pretend like you are going to hack something up, the adenoids also contract. Immune function or reptile similarity? Think.
Hey Catholic boy, we are planted, ok? That shit is impossible if you follow actual modern science. Something put you here, for whatever reason, you figure it out. Long unproven theories turned into quasi-religions are stupid. And for the pope, he isn't even a pope, it was a bogus translation most any sane person with half a wit and 4th grade reading comprehension can rationalize.


edit: and I'm just joking about the reptile comment btw, just wanted to see what came of it, though honestly was waiting for like pok3$& to reply. Happy Easter weekend :)

[AzzarTheGod]

reptiles are serious I don't find any of your comments to have levity.

[maskedmelon]

Have forgotten and not valued enough to learn.



Nominative isn't dependent on a noun when allusions are present.

Not parmesan dense, but more like swiss:


Marbury v. Madison is the case that established the power of judicial review for SCOTUS, self granting that the interpretation of law is the supreme power within the US GOV.



That's post facto, historically. Besides, SCOTUS has had a police force since that date became residence. It's like nine, currently, popes sitting at a desk.

Ok, so you are arguing an entirely different point. Take a look back through my posts. Perhaps, more PBS will help you? In the mean time, here's a bread crumb:

A constitution, is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. -Alexander Hamilton in Federalist Paper 78, 1788

[sOurDieSel]

You know he lost right?

[Blitzers]

Ok, so you are arguing an entirely different point. Take a look back through my posts. Perhaps, more PBS will help you? In the mean time, here's a bread crumb:

Don't go quoting Alexander Hamilton that dude was a fucking joke and at the convention in Philadelphia he wanted to be King. Hamilton is the biggest Turd out of all the founding fathers. Hamilton has ZERO credibility in any historical sphere.

[Ahldagor]

Ok, so you are arguing an entirely different point. Take a look back through my posts. Perhaps, more PBS will help you? In the mean time, here's a bread crumb:

No, I'm not. The case came about because Madison would not go through with the nomination letter of Marbury. Marbury sued Madison in order to legally force Madison to proceed with Marbury's appointment. The advice and consent portion, in terms of the senate and nominees, doesn't give the senate the legal authority to not proceed with the processes of a presidential nominee to any federal position. PBS is small time. Read a law book of SCOTUS rulings since the beginning.

[Daywolf]

reptiles are serious I don't find any of your comments to have levity.Dude, Beck has you wrapped around his little finger. The guy is just a sick mofo.
(https://youtu.be/c-FBmXkkbGM)

[renordw]

Something just clicked. The guy died of a heart attack after Valentine's Day in a hotel. I bet you anything he had a hooker and some Viagra.

[AzzarTheGod]

Something just clicked. The guy died of a heart attack after Valentine's Day in a hotel. I bet you anything he had a hooker and some Viagra.

Obviously.

His death is classified as a matter of national security, so we'd never know.

Also the callgirl may have smothered him. No idea why a pillow would be over his face.