Should we give up on the Constitution?

[BeetTheBoxer]

libtards are so ignorant

[SiriusDawg]

libtards are so ignorant

[Goo For You]

Serious comments:

I'm with Scalia et al. on a number of issues (like takings). However, that's invariably because the originalist position happens to make great economic (or utilitarian) sense. The amazing thing here is that while I'm praising their conclusions on consequentialist grounds, they're wasting time writing pages upon pages of elegant prose on how they've managed to read the minds of some pre-Adam Smith era politicians. Their opponents obviously couldn't give a shit, so why bother? Why not put 100% effort into looking for ways to reason with them?

(Who knows, that way they might have actually won the Kelo case...)

I think Seidman is right in that it's time to put a stop to this farce.


On a lighter note:

It's pretty unseemly for Republicans to start that Chicken Little shit without even bothering to read the article. There's not a single thing there that threatens Republican policies!

[Bro]

The supreme court always favors corporate interests over public interests. IE Citizens United. This is where the supreme court fails us and the constitution.

[BeetTheBoxer]

why do libtards hate america?

[RH Goatcabin]

no. let's drop the bomb!

[HeinousMark]

no. let's drop the bomb!

[SiriusDawg]

why do libtards hate america?

[MatthewT]

I won't deal with the rest of your bullshit, but this one I must.

ASSHOLE.....

GEORGE BUSH FUCKING SAID THIS.

"You don't get everything you want. A dictatorship would be a lot easier." Describing what it's like to be governor of Texas.
(Governing Magazine 7/98)

-- From Paul Begala's "Is Our Children Learning?"

"I told all four that there are going to be some times where we don't agree with each other, but that's OK. If this were a dictatorship, it would be a heck of a lot easier, just so long as I'm the dictator," Bush joked.

-- CNN.com, December 18, 2000

"A dictatorship would be a heck of a lot easier, there's no question about it, " [Bush] said.

-- Business Week, July 30, 2001

YOU ARE A FUCKING MORON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

yes, george bush also said it. it was wrong for him too. you may want to work on your blood pressure dude

[MatthewT]

Serious comments:

I'm with Scalia et al. on a number of issues (like takings). However, that's invariably because the originalist position happens to make great economic (or utilitarian) sense. The amazing thing here is that while I'm praising their conclusions on consequentialist grounds, they're wasting time writing pages upon pages of elegant prose on how they've managed to read the minds of some pre-Adam Smith era politicians. Their opponents obviously couldn't give a shit, so why bother? Why not put 100% effort into looking for ways to reason with them?

(Who knows, that way they might have actually won the Kelo case...)

I think Seidman is right in that it's time to put a stop to this farce.


On a lighter note:

It's pretty unseemly for Republicans to start that Chicken Little shit without even bothering to read the article. There's not a single thing there that threatens Republican policies!

what are republican policies?

also, scalia has scary thoughts about the right to wire-tap people's homes and phones and shit; he's not God

[SiriusDawg]

what are republican policies?

Usually Republican Policies entail telling their sheep one thing and doing the other....or as we saw in the last few weeks, Republican policies seemed to involve forcing Democrats to tell the Republicans what their Republican policies were

[Bosch76]

yes, george bush also said it. it was wrong for him too. you may want to work on your blood pressure dude

When did Obama say it?

So you now admit that George Bush was as much of a dictator as Obama?

hahahaha. Idiot.

[Bro]

Why does someone so afraid of a dictatorship relish the idea of spending an eternity in the "kingdom" of heaven under a monarch?

[Bosch76]

Why does someone so afraid of a dictatorship relish the idea of spending an eternity in the "kingdom" of heaven under a monarch?

"under"

There you go.

[Goo For You]

what are republican policies?

Nice attempt at feigning non-partisanship.

also, scalia has scary thoughts about the right to wire-tap people's homes and phones and shit; he's not God

I'm pretty sure he thinks he's Moses.

(And the scariest part is, the system is giving him the powers necessary to maintain that illusion.)

[TelegramSam]

Why does someone so afraid of a dictatorship relish the idea of spending an eternity in the "kingdom" of heaven under a monarch?

I don't want to start a whole fight or get off topic, but for what it's worth, that language dates to the somewhat incorrect King James translation and more generally to medieval language. The entire concept of society, governance, and life in general in the middle ages related to kings. This wasn't just true in Christian countries, whose rulers had a supposed divine right, but in Islam with the early Caliphs and then the Ottoman Emperor who called himself caliph. It's not the way that early Christians, or the Catholic Church today, consider the afterlife and the role of God to humans.

[MatthewT]

Usually Republican Policies entail telling their sheep one thing and doing the other....or as we saw in the last few weeks, Republican policies seemed to involve forcing Democrats to tell the Republicans what their Republican policies were

exactly. they lost their principals

[MatthewT]

Why does someone so afraid of a dictatorship relish the idea of spending an eternity in the "kingdom" of heaven under a monarch?

because of who the King of Kings is

you'd love Him too, if you knew Him

[Bosch76]

because of who the King of Kings is

you'd love Him too, if you knew Him

My point exactly. He can't wait to get under Jesus in heaven so Jesus can spread his love all over him.

[HeinousMark]

because of who the King of Kings is

you'd love Him too, if you knew Him