California Governor Urged to Arrest Mayor of San Francisco

Agape Press ^ | 1/16/04 | Fred Jackson, Allie Martin, and Jody Brown

[templar]

Ultimately, every man is his own judge of what law he follows.

OK, tpaine, where is that in the Cosntitution? The Constitutioin specifically addresses this issue. To me, it is starting to look like you believe in some part of the Constitution but not others. What is any different between you and any other person that finds some part fo the Constitution objectionable and decides to ignore it?

BTW, "booze prohibiton" ended because Congress and the States went through the Constitutional process of repealing the ammendment, not because people disobeyed the law.

[cupcakes]

You've got that right. Perhaps those opposed to the high taxes in the state of CA should refuse to pay state taxes. On what authority, if he lets the gay marriage thing slide, will he say that CA residents are breaking the law? This liberal tyranny has got to stop.

[Flashman_at_the_charge]

I'll tell you what fella, instead of throwing mud at Tom, why don't you tell me what's so great about Arnold?

McClintock concession speech is here. http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0310/07/se.04.html

[ClintonBeGone]

I'll tell you what fella, instead of throwing mud at Tom, why don't you tell me what's so great about Arnold?

Let's start with two words: HE WON

[Flashman_at_the_charge]

So did Clinton, twice. Now tell me what's so great about Arnold?

[ClintonBeGone]

So did Clinton, twice.

Nice try. Clinton didn't run as a republican.

[jeremiah]

Usage of testosterone, causes the gonads to shrink.

[tpaine]

templar wrote:

Well, OK, so ... according to the Constituiton: Who is given the authority to determine what is and is not repugnant to the Constitution?

Ultimately, every man is his own judge of what law he follows.
For instance, booze prohibition failed because millions of Americans refused to obey its repugnant 'law'..

OK, tpaine, where is that in the Cosntitution?

Our free will is self-evident. It didn't need to be enumerated.

The Constitution specifically addresses this issue. To me, it is starting to look like you believe in some part of the Constitution but not others.

Yep, you have a lot of strange ideas, imo.

What is any different between you and any other person that finds some part of the Constitution objectionable and decides to ignore it?

'Ignoring it' is your straw man. I don't ignore it.

BTW, "booze prohibition" ended because Congress and the States went through the Constitutional process of repealing the ammendment, not because people disobeyed the law.

Civil disobedience sparked repeal.. It's happening again, now, - in the drug war.. --- And in the prohibitions on guns.. People are disobeying drug & gun laws by the millions

[kjam22]

I know there are freepers in S.F...... and I'm sorry for that. But in a perfect world the big quake would happen today out there, and S.F. would fall into the ocean.

[BillyBoy]

>> If you followed McClintock for some time you would KNOW that he is a Conservative. Heck, I wanted Bustamonte to win too. Better to finish off the state and start over, than this slow death with liberal Republicans.

Are you kidding? If they refused MClintock, I WANTED the RINO freepers to SUCCESSFULLY elect Arnie so they have only THEMSELVES to blame when CA continues the downward spiral. If Bustamente had gotten in, all you'd here from them is incessant whining about how much "better" things would be with ARINOLD as governor and how the evil "kool-aid drinking death-before electablity" Republicans who had a coincidence "sabotaged" the recall.

Well, THE RINOS GOT THEIR GUY IN. California is soooooooooo much better with a socialist "R" in charge, isn't it?

Hey Arniebots, enjoying your higher park fees, crushing defeat of Prop. 54, and gay activists running amuck? How about your state voting to "celebrate" abortion on demand? You ain't seen nothin' yet. Just wait until the "fiscal conservative"'s borrowing scheme is defeated and he hikes all your taxes up sky high. Please see IL and TN if you'd like a sneak preview on how your state will look after a lying "fiscally conservative" RINO has completed his full term in office and betrayed all his campaign promises.

Have fun! And remember...

YOU VOTED FOR THIS!

[templar]

tpaine, I've pretty much come to consider you a lunatic fringe type. You either have not read the constitution or you don't even begin to understand what you read. And you never answer any question about where something is in the constitution unless it suits your (anti-constitutional) Purposes, because much of what you claim is constitutional is not, and the constitution addresses very specific issues that you seem to ignore in favor of your own (unconstitutionjal) assertions. IN short, you seem to equate anarchy with constitutional government. It is not. Constitutional government is quite the opposite of anarchy.

[inquest]

Take a look at what judges are doing to the Constitution today and tell me that's not anarchy.

[templar]

Take a look at what judges are doing to the Constitution today and tell me that's not anarchy.

That's what I'm discussing. The Constituion has specific authority given for the determination of what is and is not Constitutional. Do you know what it is? There are also also several Constituional provisions to keep this authorty in check (from getting out of control). Do you know what they are?

[inquest]

The Constituion has specific authority given for the determination of what is and is not Constitutional.

It most certainly does not.

[Bernard Marx]

Just boycott San Francisco like I've been doing for the past 20 years. If everyone who despises the filth and contagion (physical and mental) emanating from that putrid place did the same (including conventions, etc.) a big part of the problem would be solved.

Actually the entire San Francisco Peninsula-Oakland-Berkeley-Emeryville region is on my "don't visit, don't patronize" list. I won't even buy mail order goods from those places.

[Conservative Iowan]

IOW, you have nothing to say about why Arnold is so great, besides "He won." Well, many of us are waiting for Arnold to be a Republican. Speaking out against this crap in SF would be a nice start. But, perhaps, he is just a "Kennedy Republican."

[tpaine]

templar wrote: tpaine, I've pretty much come to consider you a lunatic fringe type. You either have not read the constitution or you don't even begin to understand what you read. And you never answer any question about where something is in the constitution unless it suits your (anti-constitutional) Purposes, because much of what you claim is constitutional is not, and the constitution addresses very specific issues that you seem to ignore in favor of your own (unconstitutionjal) assertions. IN short, you seem to equate anarchy with constitutional government. It is not. Constitutional government is quite the opposite of anarchy.


______________________________________


Typical.. - You can't answer my comments here: --

Replies
Address:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1079289/replies?comment=128

-- So you call me nasty names and make declarations of your own constitutional correctness.

Take it to the backroom, and I'll answer your slurs. Otherwise, you can shove it.

[tpaine]

The Constituion has specific authority given for the determination of what is and is not Constitutional. Do you know what it is?
133 -temp-


______________________________________


You tell us "what it is", and where it is, hotshot.. And include reasoning to back up your interpretation.

Put your credibility where your big mouth is.

[Flashman_at_the_charge]

So when will you tell me what's so great about Arnold?

[templar]

-- So you call me nasty names and make declarations of your own constitutional correctness.

I didn't call you any nasty names, I let you know what crowd I think you belong to. Calling you a name would be done quite differently than expressing my opinion. Since you don't (won't) address the Constitutional issue I have brought up in the form of a simple question, it's hard for me to show any "constitutional correctness" in my posts to you. Skipping the usual veiled terroristic threats, what do you find in the Constitution that decides who determines Constitutionality of any issue? Either quit pretending to be a Constitutionalist and drop the dialog or answer the question. It's very clear and readily available to anyone that wants to take a little time and read the Constitution.