You called me left fringe I responded to that. Looks like it went over your head.
“Hey dope:” the ‘assault weapons’ ban fails to satisfy even the restrictive standards established by the Supreme Court in US v Miller - it’s blatantly unconstitutional.
It is the law of the land. I really don't care if it is unconstitutional in your opinion. I'm against abortion. I think it is unconstitutional but the SCOTUS doesn't care about my opinion either. The far right fringe always whines "it's unconstitutional"...it doesn't make a bit of difference...it is the law of the land. Unless you face reality you have no hope of changing reality.
ROTFLMAO! ‘You can’t expect the President to tell the truth! You can’t expect him to honor the Constitution! Your standards are too high for mere humans! TOOO HIIIGH!!!’ You’re nothing but a de facto Clinton apologist!
Deception is a tool for winning. Winning is not something a lot of far right fringers care about. I voted for Bush Sr and Dole. You are a Dean apologist.
Funny how your “enemy” supposedly includes both the “left” and the “right!”
Your not the right.
Looks like you consider him a ‘slave of Congress’...
He is a servant of the people
OUCH! Now you’re comparing Mr. Bush to - Howard Dean!?!
They are both men, and politicians. They both have 2 legs. They have many things in common. They have many differences. I can see those differences, you can not.
Actually, I asked a simple question – you responded with what looked like a page out of your diary. “Looks like [my question] went over your head.”
It is the law of the land. I really don't care if it is unconstitutional in your opinion... The far right fringe always whines "it's unconstitutional"...it doesn't make a bit of difference...it is the law of the land. Unless you face reality you have no hope of changing reality.
Your ignorance is absolutely amazing. There’s a freeper who could be your philosophical ‘twin brother,’ who claims that it would be entirely “constitutional” for a D@mocrat-controlled Congress to appoint Hillary Clinton ‘Queen for Life,’ simply by passing a law to that effect. Until the high court ruled otherwise, he insists, we would all have to accept Queen Hillary as the “constitutional” head of government - no matter what the Constitution actually said.
Allow me to introduce a little “reality” into your equation: the Constitution (and laws made ‘in pursuance thereof’) is the “supreme law of the land.” And any law not made in pursuance of the Constitution is void. An unconstitutional law is not "the law of the land" - it is void. You seem to have discarded the idea of a written Constitution, accepting in its place an undefined ‘living document’ interpreted by judges. (Funny - that's the same theory pushed by the 'fringe left' and their activist judges... ;>)
WIJG: ROTFLMAO! ‘You can’t expect the President to tell the truth! You can’t expect him to honor the Constitution! Your standards are too high for mere humans! TOOO HIIIGH!!!’ You’re nothing but a de facto Clinton apologist!
O-L: Deception is a tool for winning. Winning is not something a lot of far right fringers care about.
In other words, you would ‘deceive’ the electorate, and apparently do anything else it takes as well, so long as your candidate wins? Thanks for proving my point – “You’re nothing but a de facto Clinton apologist!”
People like you nauseate me.
I voted for Bush Sr and Dole.
If we are to believe you, they apparently didn’t ‘deceive’ enough voters to win...
You are a Dean apologist.
Sorry, “Einstein,” wrong again! Questioning the constitutionality of the ‘assault weapons’ ban & campaign finance ‘reform’ hardly makes me “a Dean apologist.” You’re confusing me with the “left” side of your ‘enemies list’...
;>)
WIJG: Looks like you consider [President Bush] a ‘slave of Congress’...
O-L: He is a servant of the people
LOL! You just exposed the ‘fringe left’ foundation of your political philosophy, my friend. Chairman Mao was “a servant of the people.” President Bush is not. We live under a different form of government than the communist Chinese. If you doubt it, answer a simple question: does the President swear an oath to 'serve the people?' Or does he swear to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States?
By the way, you were just suggesting a few lines above that the President should ‘deceive’ the people to win reelection. How exactly do you reconcile the idea of ‘deceiving’ the people with being a “servant of the people?” (Yet another schizophrenic aspect of your wild-@ss philosophy... ;>)
WIJG: OUCH! Now you’re comparing Mr. Bush to - Howard Dean!?!
O-L: They are both men, and politicians. They both have 2 legs. They have many things in common. They have many differences. I can see those differences, you can not.
Wrong again, “Madam Cleo.” You’re the one who lumps the two together – you’ve suggested, for example, that both Bush and Dean are liars. While Dean is quite obviously a liar, I have suggested that Mr. Bush is an honest man. (Maybe that’s how you define the “fringe right” – people who think Mr. Bush is an honest man? ;>)