Main Menu |
|
Most Favorited Images |
|
Recently Uploaded Images |
|
Most Liked Images |
|
Top Reviewers |
| cockalatte |
650 |
| MoneyManMatt |
490 |
| Jon Bon |
408 |
| Still Looking |
399 |
| samcruz |
399 |
| Harley Diablo |
377 |
| honest_abe |
362 |
| George Spelvin |
328 |
| DFW_Ladies_Man |
313 |
| Starscream66 |
309 |
| Chung Tran |
288 |
| lupegarland |
287 |
| nicemusic |
285 |
| You&Me |
281 |
| sharkman29 |
263 |
|
|
Top Posters |
| DallasRain | 71488 | | biomed1 | 69569 | | Yssup Rider | 63018 | | gman44 | 55472 | | LexusLover | 51038 | | offshoredrilling | 49923 | | WTF | 48272 | | pyramider | 46452 | | bambino | 45600 | | The_Waco_Kid | 41068 | | CryptKicker | 37436 | | Dr-epg | 36548 | | Mokoa | 36516 | | Chung Tran | 36100 | | Still Looking | 35944 |
|
|
02-21-2013, 11:23 AM
|
#76
|
|
Account Disabled
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Here.
Posts: 13,781
|
You mean to stretch and twist the constitution to find some language that says that a man who was growing wheat for his own consumption could be prohibited from doing so ?
Wickard.........
|
|
Quote
 | 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 12:07 PM
|
#77
|
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,350
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whirlaway
You mean to stretch and twist the constitution to find some language that says that a man who was growing wheat for his own consumption could be prohibited from doing so ?
Wickard.........
|
I was thinking more of the 2nd Amendment. Let's not forget that SCOTUS is there to interpret the Constitution and currently has a Conservative majority. I'm sure you would be less happy if there was a Liberal majority.
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 12:29 PM
|
#78
|
|
Account Disabled
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Here.
Posts: 13,781
|
Surprisingly, the 2nd is where the SCOTUS has been more favorable to states rights and gun owners....
It is the areas of commerce (interstate trade) that the SCOTUS has been more corrosive of individual liberty, freedoms and states rights !
But I am not a lawyer...so just my 2-cents.
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 12:53 PM
|
#79
|
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,350
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whirlaway
Surprisingly, the 2nd is where the SCOTUS has been more favorable to states rights and gun owners....
It is the areas of commerce (interstate trade) that the SCOTUS has been more corrosive of individual liberty, freedoms and states rights !
But I am not a lawyer...so just my 2-cents.
|
You could very well be 100% correct.
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 01:22 PM
|
#80
|
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 63,018
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whirlaway
Surprisingly, the 2nd is where the SCOTUS has been more favorable to states rights and gun owners....
It is the areas of commerce (interstate trade) that the SCOTUS has been more corrosive of individual liberty, freedoms and states rights !
But I am not a lawyer...so just my 2-cents.
|
Your every post is a negative spin. Have you ever noticed that Twirlyword?
I never knew the antonym of "favorable" was "corrosive".
Hoky doky!
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 01:40 PM
|
#81
|
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,272
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whirlaway
YOU do not know that the Senate can confirm or NOT the SCOTUS nominee............if more like minded Cruz Senators were elected, liberal judges wouldn't get past the nomination process.......................
Of course it is best to win the Presidency - the ONLY NATIONAL ELECTION - but holding the presidency isn't the only path to controlling the SCOTUS nomination process !
Just holding the Senate Judicial Chairman gavel has significant weight on who does/doesn't make it to the SC.
Obviously, you don't know the Constitution, or the workings of the Legislative branch
Simple FACT JACK !
|
Yes it is a simple fact but right now the Dem's control the Senate.
There is no way a liberal president will nominate a conserative judge, so even if the GOP wins the majority how many times do you think the senate could turn down a nomination before the public turned on them? How many are going to be like Cruz? You are not looking a real politics.
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 01:42 PM
|
#82
|
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Sep 30, 2011
Location: I can see FTW from here
Posts: 5,611
|
Yeah, ever notice how the Libtards have a special hatred
for any minority leader that goes against their Libtard ideas.
They look at them like they are a full blown trader of the cause.
Libtards believe that any minority person ought to be groveling
at their feet in thanks for whatever crumbs fall from their Libtard table.
I say give the Libtards hell Cruz.
Libtards
ha ha ha ha
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 01:43 PM
|
#83
|
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,272
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yssup Rider
Not possible without a Constitutional amendment.
|
God the Dems ought to support one...Cruz would get crushed in the general.
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 01:46 PM
|
#84
|
|
Lifetime Premium Access
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,272
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by bojulay
Yeah, ever notice how the Libtards have a special hatred
for any minority leader that goes against their Libtard ideas.
They look at them like they are a full blown trader of the cause.
Libtards believe that any minority person ought to be groveling
at their feet in thanks for whatever crumbs fall from their Libtard table.
I say give the Libtards hell Cruz.
Libtards
ha ha ha ha
|
Those dang blacks...never understood why they hate those Uncle Toms! They should be ashamed. 
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 09:36 PM
|
#85
|
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: May 20, 2010
Location: Wichita
Posts: 28,730
|
SCOTUS has become a political football. There should be no liberal or conservative view of the Constitution. It says what it says. We know what they meant. They provided a means of changing the Constitution that didn't include skillful words from disingenuous lawyers.
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 09:57 PM
|
#86
|
|
Account Disabled
Join Date: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 15,047
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
SCOTUS has become a political football. There should be no liberal or conservative view of the Constitution. It says what it says. We know what they meant. They provided a means of changing the Constitution that didn't include skillful words from disingenuous StupidOldLyingFarts.
|
No charge!
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 10:03 PM
|
#87
|
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 4, 2010
Location: Stillwater, OK
Posts: 3,631
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whirlaway
Surprisingly, the 2nd is where the SCOTUS has been more favorable to states rights and gun owners....
It is the areas of commerce (interstate trade) that the SCOTUS has been more corrosive of individual liberty, freedoms and states rights !
But I am not a lawyer...so just my 2-cents.
|
but I stayed in a Holiday Inn.....
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 10:05 PM
|
#88
|
|
Account Disabled
Join Date: Jun 19, 2011
Location: Dixie Land
Posts: 22,098
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
SCOTUS has become a political football. There should be no liberal or conservative view of the Constitution. It says what it says. We know what they meant. They provided a means of changing the Constitution that didn't include skillful words from disingenuous lawyers.
|
Why do you bother? They are trash, scum...
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
02-21-2013, 10:54 PM
|
#89
|
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 63,018
|
I suppose when your ass gets locked up in the next streetwalker sting, you'll call a pimp!
|
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post |
|
|
AMPReviews.net |
|
Find Ladies |
|
Hot Women |
|
