What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

Status
Not open for further replies.
unofan said:
Yeah, but if you had your way, the Courts wouldn't decide anything. So your opinion on what should be decided by the courts deserves minimal weight.
Click to expand...

No. I want the courts to rule on the constitutionality (not fairness) of laws. SCOTUS can arbitrate between states.

In this case, the court has told the NC legislature that partisanship when drawing districts is not fair to the Dems (is it unconstitutional?). If I'm NC, I'd go to SCOTUS and attach it to the 2 current cases.

If the judge decides to arbitrarily redraw the districts to overwhelmingly favor Dems (Obama appointee), that would be a gross misuse of judicial power.
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

Kepler said:
I'm sure it does.



This is similar to the extension of the Bill of Rights to the states via the 14th amendment. Too many people erroneously think the Constitution is permission for the states to f-ck electoral minorities and deny them their rights. We fought a war over how wrong that is and the baddies lost. They're going to lose again, here, eventually, though it may take a while because they've managed to stack SCOTUS for 40 years. But it'll come, and the longer you guys hold the shift back the more disruptive an earthquake it will be.
Click to expand...

And they have no concept whatsoever of SCOTUS' countermajoritarian function.
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

joecct said:
No. I want the courts to rule on the constitutionality (not fairness) of laws.
Click to expand...

And you know this court didn't do this...how?


SCOTUS can arbitrate between states.
Click to expand...

They already do. they're called original jurisdiction cases. They just had 2 this week.

In this case, the court has told the NC legislature that partisanship when drawing districts is not fair to the Dems (is it unconstitutional?).
Click to expand...

No, they said overly partisan gerrymandering is unconstitutional. You're inferring a fairness argument based on your preconceived perceptions. From the actual ruling: "partisan gerrymandering runs contrary to numerous fundamental democratic principles and individual rights enshrined in the Constitution."

If I'm NC, I'd go to SCOTUS and attach it to the 2 current cases.
Click to expand...

the same SCOTUS that just slapped you down a year or two ago for gerrymandering based on race? And you responded with even more gerrymandering in an effort to thumb your nose at the Court? Good luck with that.

If the judge decides to arbitrarily redraw the districts to overwhelmingly favor Dems (Obama appointee), that would be a gross misuse of judicial power.
Click to expand...

Good thing that hasn't happened anywhere in this entire country, then. But by all means, let's keep worrying about non-existent possibilities over actual harms that currently exist, Mr. "Obama will force me to enter into a polygamous marriage and get 10 abortions."
 
Last edited:
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

mookie1995 said:
tpiwwp
Click to expand...

<img src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0d/Rep_Kyrsten_Sinema%2C_Official_Portrait.jpg/1200px-Rep_Kyrsten_Sinema%2C_Official_Portrait.jpg" height="300" />
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

joecct said:
No. I want the courts to rule on the constitutionality (not fairness) of laws. SCOTUS can arbitrate between states.

In this case, the court has told the NC legislature that partisanship when drawing districts is not fair to the Dems (is it unconstitutional?). If I'm NC, I'd go to SCOTUS and attach it to the 2 current cases.

If the judge decides to arbitrarily redraw the districts to overwhelmingly favor Dems (Obama appointee), that would be a gross misuse of judicial power.
Click to expand...

So basically what you're saying is that it should be left to the people who are entrenching themselves in power to pass laws making it illegal for themselves to entrench themselves in power?
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

GrinCDXX said:
So basically what you're saying is that it should be left to the people who are entrenching themselves in power to pass laws making it illegal for themselves to entrench themselves in power?
Click to expand...

Yes that is what he is saying...especially when it benefits people who he supports.
 
Handyman said:
Yes that is what he is saying...especially when it benefits people who he supports.
Click to expand...

No no no. You see, where he lives it's the Democrats who've gerrymandered the districts--so it hurts him. His opinion on this issue is purely principled.
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

Kepler said:
I think mookie might be behind the cute bi atheist chick. I know I am.
Click to expand...

Evidence says she's something of a conserva-Dem.

I no longer assume LGBTQ people aren't conservative on other issues. My best friend at Tech was a gay big-L Libertarian who coached the rifle club, and is still #2A with no exceptions. *ugh*
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

FadeToBlack&Gold said:
Evidence says she's something of a conserva-Dem.

I no longer assume LGBTQ people aren't conservative on other issues. My best friend at Tech was a gay big-L Libertarian who coached the rifle club, and is still #2A with no exceptions. *ugh*
Click to expand...

Understood, but we're trying to pick up seats. Politics is the art of the possible, and AZ is still mostly red. Better a bluedog than a Flake.
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

Kepler said:
Understood, but we're trying to pick up seats. Politics is the art of the possible, and AZ is still mostly red. Better a bluedog than a Flake.
Click to expand...

Whoever kidnapped Kepler and replaced him with this reasonable poster....please make sure he has enough food and water but otherwise keep him locked up for as long as you'd like. ;)
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

Rover said:
Whoever kidnapped Kepler and replaced him with this reasonable poster....please make sure he has enough food and water but otherwise keep him locked up for as long as you'd like. ;)
Click to expand...

I have never objected to running conservative Dems in red states. My objection is the terrified wailing against running far left Dems in blue states because we'll hurt the plutes' feewies.
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

Add known toolbag Darrell Issa to the list of retiring piles of crap.
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

bronconick said:
Add known toolbag Darrell Issa to the list of retiring piles of crap.
Click to expand...

<img src="https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-aKo1pd5K3SQ/UEAyaPV5KXI/AAAAAAAAJoI/HsVWiGH9jlE/w1200-h630-p-k-no-nu/rats2.JPG" height="300" />
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

bronconick said:
Add known toolbag Darrell Issa to the list of retiring piles of crap.
Click to expand...

So, ultimately it was all about the tax cut that passed. That was their sole mission. I'm starting to wonder what hasn't been reported about the tax cut that I don't know that is helping all these ****wads retire?
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

ScoobyDoo said:
So, ultimately it was all about the tax cut that passed. That was their sole mission. I'm starting to wonder what hasn't been reported about the tax cut that I don't know that is helping all these ****wads retire?
Click to expand...

Two things:

1) Yes it was always about passing a massive tax cut for billionaire GOP campaign donors even though its the most unpopular legislation to pass apparently in the history of polling! Then if the political climate remained toxic they'd all retire and get jobs at the same corporations and think tanks that benefited from their vote. Except...

2) Its a bigger deal that Issa is ditching because he's like the wealthiest member of Congress and doesn't need a post congressional soft landing. He's also the 2nd Gooper in CA in a tough seat hitting the door. Given his status as a world class a-hole, he must be seeing some horrific #'s that even a massive ad campaign that he can easily self fund would not be enough to save him. There's 14 Republicans IIRC in the CA delegation. They can't all be in safe seats, so I'm curious if more of them throw in the towel now.
 
Re: 115th Congress - Still 100% Roy Moore Free

Rover said:
Two things:

1) Yes it was always about passing a massive tax cut for billionaire GOP campaign donors even though its the most unpopular legislation to pass apparently in the history of polling! Then if the political climate remained toxic they'd all retire and get jobs at the same corporations and think tanks that benefited from their vote. Except...

2) Its a bigger deal that Issa is ditching because he's like the wealthiest member of Congress and doesn't need a post congressional soft landing. He's also the 2nd Gooper in CA in a tough seat hitting the door. Given his status as a world class a-hole, he must be seeing some horrific #'s that even a massive ad campaign that he can easily self fund would not be enough to save him. There's 14 Republicans IIRC in the CA delegation. They can't all be in safe seats, so I'm curious if more of them throw in the towel now.
Click to expand...

One wonders why they just didn't pass this tax cut in W's first term? It's been a problem since then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top