Posted on 05/07/2015 10:39:47 AM PDT by wagglebee
I doubt your predictive record is in danger with that one. Unfortunately.
Sherlock does indeed still suffer constipation ;)
: )
Refer to Huxley’s “Brave New World”. He called it years ago.
I respectfully disagree with everything that you said about the 17th Amendment. Low-information state lawmakers, lawmakers who evidently did not understand the federal government’s constitutionally powers, basically did not know what they were doing when they caved in to the Progressive Movement agenda when they unthinkingly ratified that amendment.
The way progressives on the court work to further their ideological agenda is to overturn or modify laws based on their assessment that voters wont backlash against the Dems in response, which could lead to changes in the courts that are against their agenda.
That is why they are creating new rights to gay marriage now, when 10 years ago were satisfied creating a right to same sex sodomy (that Texas case)
Then as gays get married and the media plays it up as a win-win for all(except you bigoted hate mongers) more and more accept it as harmless.
In the case of gays Kennedy has a soft spot for them and sides with the libs.
The court is just another tool for libs
So then why is it legal for homosexuals to promote anal sex to minors?
Why are they allowed in our schools to speak on behalf of homosexuality?
“The court is just another tool for libs “
People argue that point with all manner of flowery language but its all hot air. The actions of the courts prove the truth of it.
Reductionism works, it just PO’s liberals that all the words in creation cannot alter demonstrated reality. It may cloud it and give them breathing room which they hope will be enough to seal their deals, but reality never loses the bet. Ever.
Because in New Jersey, a closeted GOP liberal says so. And in Obamerica, all that matters is they tyranny of the minority.
We should consider an outhouse with a meerschaum pipe and the iconic Sherlock hat on it as a logo inside a red circle/slash.
We’re on the way to Cooperstown so I think it’s time to consider branding.
” Then as gays get married and the media plays it up as a win-win for all(except you bigoted hate mongers) more and more accept it as harmless. “
They also publish “made as instructed” (MAI) polls that are outright fraud.
I’m ready.
Maybe we could get some fanatical followers to off the people denying our gift of prophecy. Perhaps start a few wars. I’m sure Fox news would side with us.
That may be so, but that doesn't mean that state legislatures currently possess a level of purity that would result in any change.
Can you provide ACTUAL EVIDENCE of a SINGLE senator who would have be removed if his state legislature had the opportunity?
Can you cite a SINGLE INSTANCE in the past decade or so when a senate nominee hasn't gotten endorsements from most of his party members in the state legislature?
You see, for your theory to have any credibility you first need to provide compelling evidence that the senators appointed by state legislatures would be materially different from what we have now. Lamenting what happened a century ago doesn't actually solve anything.
Your ENTIRE plan is predicated on the notion that state legislatures would appoint senators who actually follow the Constitution and there's absolutely no reason to believe this will happen. First you would need to have state legislators who understand it and when you consider that a huge percentage of those currently in Congress previously served in their state legislatures, one would have to argue that they used to understand the Constitution but no longer do, and, if this were the case, having the state legislatures appoint senators wouldn't change anything.
My experience has been that maybe 10% of those who claim to understand and follow the Constitution actually do. Hell, most of them seem to think that the states have "rights" and fail to see how dangerous it would actually be if states had rights.
“That may be so, but that doesn’t mean that state legislatures currently possess a level of purity that would result in any change.”
Well considering the negative verbal reactions we see amongst ‘conservatives’ in America over purity, and those are in theory the types of people most likely to make take such actions, the outcome is obvious.
The opposite of purity is corruption. It logically follows that people opposed to purity embrace corruption.
The libs on the court only have to spit out a bunch of meaningless words that sound like legal jargon and the brain-dead Kardasian/Beyonce followers (Obama moters) don't know the difference.
Constitution? Wats dat? Is that an app?
You figured the agenda out very thoroughly.
FWIW, there is no scientific reason why this should not be a legitimate goal of therapy, properly carried out. It is about the same as treating addictions of various other types.
I believe Khrushchev said (paraphrased) “We won’t get you, but we’ll get your children”. They did. Hollywood and the American educational education system will go down as the greatest accomplishment the Soviet Union ever had. All thanks to the American Left in both political parties.
I’m actually shocked the DNC hasn’t run Hinkley for president yet.
Satan only has the power when it is given to him.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.