“Liberals separate people by race, a more subtle, but just as destructive, form of racism.”
Luna C666 on Nov 11, 2010 at 19:01:41
“'Separating people by race' is the ONLY kind of racism there is!
What are you going on about!?
How does wanting to force integration, desegregation, and (the most heinous liberal crime of them all) forcing racist white employers to hire black people equate in your mind to 'separating people by race'?
You guys can't get your talking points straight- to one right-winger liberals want a 'racially neutral' society, where they are 'forcing integration down our throats' with 'reverse racism like affirmative action' but at the same time liberals are 'separating people on the basis of race'?
You need to get with your affinity group and get your lies straight before airing them to the public prematurely..”
“There are only three other options I can think of.
1. The 2nd Amendment. 2. The states openly protect their citizens from bad government law and refuse to comply as well. 3. Secession.
But, of course, the Constitution is simply law that applies to the government and -
"The interpretation of the laws is the proper and peculiar province of the courts. A constitution, is, in fact, and must be regarded by the judges, as a fundamental law. It therefore belongs to them to ascertain its meaning, as well as the meaning of any particular act proceeding from the legislative body. If there should happen to be an irreconcilable variance between two, that which has the superior obligation and validity ought, of course, to be preferred; or, in other words, the constitution ought to be preferred to the statute, the intention of the people to the intention of their agents"
What you're suggesting is that the courts have no jurisdiction over suits regarding the Federal government and that the Congress has every authority to break the Constitution at will. If that is the case, there is absolutely NO point to the Constitution. It is simply a suggestion, not law and the government can ignore, for instance, the Bill of Rights at will.
If that is the case, be nice to the jack-booted thugs, that's all I can recommend.”
“Maybe not, but TV, more than any government institution, has given people role models and likable characters of all types. And that helps get rid of old school racism. Now we have to figure out how to get rid of liberal racism.”
Luna C666 on Nov 11, 2010 at 15:32:36
“Was with you up to the last sentence..because you obviously don't remember or realize that liberals have been 'pushing their social agenda' through television for decades, according to the right wing..remember, gays like Pokie of Pinky inky or tiddly winks, whatever it was, that Jerry Falwell identified as the 'gay teletubbie', even as early has the show Ellen there was uproar that liberals and gays were pushing their social agenda through television shows. When two men kissed on screen for the first time, it wasn't the liberals who protested. In fact, the conservatives are almost entirely responsible for the existence of the FCC and rules for what can and cannot be portrayed on television. Ergo, you can thank all that 'liberal racism' for the existence of shows like Modern Family, which would not exist without it.”
“I like Modern Family. But it's hard to claim Republicans are all anti-gay and anti-immigrant when they watch a show about a gay couple and a Colombian immigrant.”
Luna C666 on Nov 11, 2010 at 15:10:06
“Not really...just because someone watches a show about black people doesn't mean they can't possibly be racists..to be sure no one in their right mind would claim that ALL republicans are ANYTHING, broad generalities like that are a bad idea..
BUT simply having a *hot* *legal* immigrant and quirky fun gay men on a show doesn't necessarily mean that you're going to have any immigrant or gay friends when you go out..”
“The Supreme Court has an extremely broad authority to rule on any matter of law, including whether something is Constitutional. Unlike Congress, it was not intended to have limits in dealing with the law. The Congress has to be empowered to make a law. The Supreme Court, by nature, is empowered to rule on it.
Of course, many of the Founding Fathers couldn't really conceive of Congress brazenly disobeying the Constitution in public. Thanks to our education system, that is possible.”
marco01 on Nov 11, 2010 at 15:48:21
You have difficultly facing facts. I say again, the Constitution does not grant the SC the power to nullify laws passed by Congress, yet it does. This completely contradicts your literalist interpretation of the Constitution.
But it turns out your literalist interpretation is very self serving, as the Bush years demonstrated many brazen violations of the Constitution. Torture, violating treaties, and illegal wiretapping, all clear violations of the Constitution. But it was to get the "other" so you on the right didn't care. Just be glad a president who just wanted to look forward came into office.”
“Really. It's just a ripoff of Psych which is 10 times better.”
grayforester on Nov 12, 2010 at 11:13:16
“Tim the Wizard, if you think Psych and The Mentalist are trying to have the same show you are not paying attention. Psych is a spoof, a romp, a show business dessert that winks and tap dances with a protagonist who is pretending to have ESP; The Mentalist is a straight-faced crime show with a gimmick about a guy who can use conversation to undermine a person's will to decieve.”
“I know what I said was cheap, but I dont know why you would assume that i meant that...
I will point out that when america was founded women,blacks, and natives all had rights that were not given to them by the declaration of american independance, and in fact had rights taken away when the bill of rights was written. The american revolution lead to a power grab by land owning white men, and when they declared their vision through our constitution they left out any one who wasnt. To assume that, from its founding, the american dream of equal opportunity, and a bill of rights, was meant to include those I mentioned earlier, is just as wrong as to assume that it is meant for those people now. I can point out on a map where the rich white man is living their american dream on the land that was stolen from my family. It is because people have wrestled some amout of control back from the rich white man that we all can maintain the illusion of rights. It is not a dream though, I would call it a mirrage. You see what you want in front of you, but it doesnt quench any thirst you have. If people follow this false salvation, they will forget the direction they have to take to get to a place they can drink freely.
.........pretty racially charged isnt it?”