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.

Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

Some fun times from past elections.

My favorite:

President John Adams was a ... "hideous hermaphroditical character which has neither the force and firmness of a man, nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman."
Click to expand...

Now, that's an attack ad.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

joecct said:
5. Courts did this - few legislatures passed SSM. Scalia made a great point that 5 lawyers disenfranchised 300 million people.
Click to expand...

You consistently seem to have trouble with this. We don't get to vote other peoples' rights. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

joecct said:
5. Courts did this - few legislatures passed SSM. Scalia made a great point that 5 lawyers disenfranchised 300 million people.
Click to expand...

LOL.

No.


“No leader, especially a religious leader, should have the right to question another man’s religion or faith."

- Donald J. Trump
Click to expand...

Donald makes me laugh.
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

Linda Greenhouse has a lengthy article on Scalia today in the NYT. I don't agree with several of her points, but find it interesting that Scalia apparently became more insular in his news and commentary over the last decade. He stopped his practice of hiring one liberal law clerk every year, solely read the WSJ and Washington Times and never the WaPo, and listened to talk radio in his car.

It makes sense that he began parroting more right wing talking points in his oral arguments, then, if that's all he was ever exposed to.

And I'll be honest, I don't know how anyone, conservative or not, could read the Washington Times. Even beyond its political bent, it's only slightly better written than the Enquirer
 
Last edited:
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

GrinCDXX said:
You consistently seem to have trouble with this. We don't get to vote other peoples' rights. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?
Click to expand...

"When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

unofan said:
Linda Greenhouse has a lengthy article on Scalia today in the NYT. I don't agree with several of her points, but find it interesting that Scalia apparently became more insular in his news and commentary over the last decade. He stopped hiring one liberal law clerk every year, solely read the WSJ and Washington Times and never the WaPo, and listened to talk radio in his car.

It makes sense that he began parroting more right wing talking points in his oral arguments, then, if that's all he was ever exposed to.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. If that's true that's very depressing. A lot of what I like about the man appears to be things he stopped doing long ago. Oh, well.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

GrinCDXX said:
You consistently seem to have trouble with this. We don't get to vote other peoples' rights. Why is that so hard for you to grasp?
Click to expand...

Really? I can vote for legislators who can vote to disenfranchise convicted felons. I can vote for legislators who restrict the right to vote to citizens only. I can vote for legislators who restrict who I may marry.

Granted, it does not matter anymore as a judge can do what he wants regardless of the other 2 branches of government.
 
joecct said:
Really? I can vote for legislators who can vote to disenfranchise convicted felons. I can vote for legislators who restrict the right to vote to citizens only. I can vote for legislators who restrict who I may marry.

Granted, it does not matter anymore as a judge can do what he wants regardless of the other 2 branches of government.
Click to expand...

Twas ever thus. If congress doesn't like it, they can amend the constitution to abolish the 14th amendment. Good luck with that.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

joecct said:
Really? I can vote for legislators who can vote to disenfranchise convicted felons. I can vote for legislators who restrict the right to vote to citizens only. I can vote for legislators who restrict who I may marry.

Granted, it does not matter anymore as a judge can do what he wants regardless of the other 2 branches of government.
Click to expand...

What school did you go to? I want to make sure none of my descendants go anywhere near it.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

joecct said:
Really? I can vote for legislators who can vote to disenfranchise convicted felons. I can vote for legislators who restrict the right to vote to citizens only. I can vote for legislators who restrict who I may marry.

Granted, it does not matter anymore as a judge can do what he wants regardless of the other 2 branches of government.
Click to expand...

You're right, I shouldn't have phrased that to be in the absolute. Let me rephrase. We don't get to have unfettered influence over other peoples' rights. The only reason you want to call that decision "disenfranchising" is because you don't like the ruling.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

The abridgment of rights is not a political determination. But what constitutes those rights is a political determination. Just one of those fun paradoxes.

It wasn't an abridgment of rights to own slaves... until it was. It wasn't an abridgment of rights to deny gays the right to marry... until it was. The only difference is the first change occurred so long ago that everybody who was butt hurt by it is dead.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

To be fair though, the current Pope has nothing to do with how Vatican City is and was built while The Donald would be responsible for the crap he wants to create. Not exactly apples and oranges.
 
Re: Campaign 2016 - Primary season! Duck (questions) season!

Handyman said:
To be fair though, the current Pope has nothing to do with how Vatican City is and was built while The Donald would be responsible for the crap he wants to create. Not exactly apples and oranges.
Click to expand...

the current pope can do anything he wants to (try and) make it right. nobody has veto power.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top