Author Topic: A Right To Secede?  (Read 16622 times)

Offline AndyJackson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #30 on: August 05, 2013, 04:11:36 PM »
oh, how cute.....I  definitely don't know a legal term, because I'm not involved in the legal profession one iota, and am not even interested in it, lol.........and this is a big moment for you to say "hawhawhawhaw yer stewpiddd".

I tell ya, your juvenile antics and little digs are beginning to eat away at your carefully cultivated "grown up guy who rilly rilly knows a lot about a lot".

For you to suppose to tell Mark Levin anything about constitutional or legal constructs...is definitely a symptom of a fantasy-riddled teen.  The guy has only been doing it for several decades, at the highest levels of this country.

And you  ?  Internet gadfly, internet educated on the subject ?

Kinda like calling up Miggy Cabrera and telling him what's wrong with his swing.  I'm sure that's on your 'to do list' also, lol.

Offline AndyJackson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #31 on: August 05, 2013, 04:18:42 PM »
Back on topic, the "50 flavors of democracy" is probably the best description of the constitutional theory that I've read in a long, long time.

You can add that to the many highly accurate things that Romney said, like Obama's 47% LIV, or "binders" which were a staple in business for 100 years, or the Benghazi points prior to Candy's assist for Obama, and so on....that little pissants giggled at and tried to redefine as "wrong".

Well, actually they were quite successful in redefining those things as wrong, with MSM assistance, for the Obama voting base that doesn''t want to know what's right or true.

Trip

  • Guest
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #32 on: August 05, 2013, 05:10:12 PM »
oh, how cute.....I  definitely don't know a legal term, because I'm not involved in the legal profession one iota, and am not even interested in it, lol.........and this is a big moment for you to say "hawhawhawhaw yer stewpiddd".

I tell ya, your juvenile antics and little digs are beginning to eat away at your carefully cultivated "grown up guy who rilly rilly knows a lot about a lot".

For you to suppose to tell Mark Levin anything about constitutional or legal constructs...is definitely a symptom of a fantasy-riddled teen.  The guy has only been doing it for several decades, at the highest levels of this country.

And you  ?  Internet gadfly, internet educated on the subject ?

Kinda like calling up Miggy Cabrera and telling him what's wrong with his swing.  I'm sure that's on your 'to do list' also, lol.
'

FIrst off, since I'm quite certain you've not spent any time even proximal to a law school, Law schools don't teach you constititional theory.  They teach one the law, and how to manipulate the law.  They teach legal precedent, which is actually in gross conflict with the Constitution and its intent.  As example, no one from Law School can speak authoritatively on the meaning of "natural born citizen", because they don't teach it, and if they do reference it, it is going to be a leftist corruption.

As such, I'm quite certain that I might be able to teach Levin things that may have escaped his purview,  and certainly point to evidences of original intent, such as the idea that income from wages and trades, was deliberately included as being a "Direct Tax", even the most fundamental definition of that direct tax,  which was prohibited to the federal government, and not actually any sort of "excise",  as grossly distorted by the Supreme Court.   The evidence of this exists in the Ratification Convention notes from the state of Pennsylvania, and I'm sure elsewhere too.


Alright, slick, since you're so enlightened, why don't you start out a thread in this forum and share you legal expertise on what a "Bill of Attainder" is, and then explain how it does NOT apply to the individual mandate in health care legislation.

Oh, and those "little digs" you're whining about? They came about from your own foolish attempts at digs towards me, all while you fly your ignorance like an enormous flag.  You had them coming, and delivery won't cease until you yourself depersonalize your replies.  If you can't handle the heat, you shouldn't have cranked up the stove.



« Last Edit: August 05, 2013, 05:25:11 PM by Trip »

Trip

  • Guest
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #33 on: August 05, 2013, 05:17:07 PM »
Back on topic, the "50 flavors of democracy" is probably the best description of the constitutional theory that I've read in a long, long time.

You can add that to the many highly accurate things that Romney said, like Obama's 47% LIV, or "binders" which were a staple in business for 100 years, or the Benghazi points prior to Candy's assist for Obama, and so on....that little pissants giggled at and tried to redefine as "wrong".

Well, actually they were quite successful in redefining those things as wrong, with MSM assistance, for the Obama voting base that doesn''t want to know what's right or true.

Oh, Wise One,  the "Fifty Flavors" thread is over yonder, not this thread.

I have no idea what you're talking about with "LIV" or "Binders", and I'm not sure you do either, but I am certain they are not an effective argument about Romney's corruption of the 10th Amendment.

You are however showing yourself to be the Poster Child of what is wrong with the Republican party, and the halfwits there that actually imagine they're any sort of Conservative.  And for that, I do thank you.




Offline walkstall

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24646
  • Gender: Male
  • WYSIWYG
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #34 on: August 05, 2013, 06:27:02 PM »
Oh, Wise One,  the "Fifty Flavors" thread is over yonder, not this thread.

I have no idea what you're talking about with "LIV" or "Binders", and I'm not sure you do either, but I am certain they are not an effective argument about Romney's corruption of the 10th Amendment.

You are however showing yourself to be the Poster Child of what is wrong with the Republican party, and the halfwits there that actually imagine they're any sort of Conservative.  And for that, I do thank you.


LIV = Low-Information Voter.   :rolleyes:
A politician thinks of the next election. A statesman, of the next generation.- James Freeman Clarke

Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession.  I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.  ~ Ronald Reagan ~

Always remember "Feelings Aren't Facts."

Trip

  • Guest
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #35 on: August 05, 2013, 06:37:27 PM »
'Alright, slick, since you're so enlightened, why don't you start out a thread in this forum and share you legal expertise on what a "Bill of Attainder" is, and then explain how it does NOT apply to the individual mandate in health care legislation.


"AndyJackson"  you can relax. I've taken you off the hook, as I had no desire to wait for what would never be forthcoming.


I've enlightened you as to what a Bill of Attainder is, and why it is such an anathema to this country and individual freedoms, doing so in the ObamaCare: Why "Tax" or "Fine" is Irrelevant thread.

However you now can enlighten us with your vast insight as how what I wrote there might be untrue.




Trip

  • Guest
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #36 on: August 05, 2013, 06:38:43 PM »

LIV = Low-Information Voter.   :rolleyes:

Evidently he's wanting to be the Poster Child for that as well.   :wink:

Offline walkstall

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24646
  • Gender: Male
  • WYSIWYG
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #37 on: August 05, 2013, 06:50:52 PM »
Evidently he's wanting to be the Poster Child for that as well.   :wink:

Look at it this way, at least he is posting in your encyclopedia of The Constitution.
A politician thinks of the next election. A statesman, of the next generation.- James Freeman Clarke

Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession.  I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first.  ~ Ronald Reagan ~

Always remember "Feelings Aren't Facts."

Trip

  • Guest
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #38 on: August 05, 2013, 06:57:28 PM »
Look at it this way, at least he is posting in your encyclopedia of The Constitution.

Posting is clearly not among his disabilities,  unfortunately finding a coherent, relevant argument seems to be a hurdle.

However, as you point out,  I do appreciate his serving as a foil.

Maybe some will come to his aid! It really is unfair being outnumbered and outgunned as he is.



Offline AndyJackson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #39 on: August 06, 2013, 06:52:04 AM »
Posting is clearly not among his disabilities,  unfortunately finding a coherent, relevant argument seems to be a hurdle.

However, as you point out,  I do appreciate his serving as a foil.

Maybe some will come to his aid! It really is unfair being outnumbered and outgunned as he is.
lol, this is the quintessential angry teen post.

Starts with a little insult or two.

Middle section is "you are my foil".

Last piece is "I have won every time !!!" hahahahahahaha  !

You got every classic kiddie component into one post.  Excelllllennntt.

You are not what you are portraying, that much is obvious.   We had a little fella named viking here recently, who was your brother in silliness.  Your meltdown is a little slower than his, but it's coming along nicely.

Offline AndyJackson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #40 on: August 06, 2013, 07:01:41 AM »

"AndyJackson"  you can relax. I've taken you off the hook, as I had no desire to wait for what would never be forthcoming.


I've enlightened you as to what a Bill of Attainder is, and why it is such an anathema to this country and individual freedoms, doing so in the ObamaCare: Why "Tax" or "Fine" is Irrelevant thread.

However you now can enlighten us with your vast insight as how what I wrote there might be untrue.

You took me off the hook......oh, thank you thank you thank you.

Did you miss where I sincerely, actually stated that I didn't know the meaning of the phrase  ?  I've had no reason in my life to know it.  Now that it's a random thing that's crept into my consciousness, great, I've learned something  !

I have no reason to say you're wrong; don't know that, don't think that, don't care.

As you apparently continue to 'enlighten me', can you at least tell us what has armed you to bring so much knowledge to the great unwashed  ?

Are you in fact a lawyer ?  A law school graduate ?  Studied the constitution as part of a course of study  ?

I've done none of the 3  !  Though I do have an architecture degree and a couple of graduate degrees, as I try to be the best facilities guy that I can be.

My guess is that you are a highly internet-educated guy, with many hours spent on wiki and various other websites.  That's the story of most guys who post endless 500-word diatribes, and claim victory in every disagreement, with every post.

Trip

  • Guest
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #41 on: August 06, 2013, 09:17:03 AM »
You took me off the hook......oh, thank you thank you thank you.

Did you miss where I sincerely, actually stated that I didn't know the meaning of the phrase  ?  I've had no reason in my life to know it.  Now that it's a random thing that's crept into my consciousness, great, I've learned something  !

I have no reason to say you're wrong; don't know that, don't think that, don't care.

Naa, no reason to actually know the phrase, it's just listed at the top of Article 1, Section 9, "Limits to Congress".  One might think if they believe that Congress has hard limits, it's important to understand them.

And it's not as if Bills of Attainder are not even at the foundation of common law itself, with even every one of the States having recognized that they are tyrannous legislative acts. 

And if one knew this, they might recognize that the States, like Massachusetts, also do not have any legitimate authority to enact laws that are flagrant Bills of Attainder, as Romney did, and proudly trumpeted the attainment of individual's rights as if State tyranny were some positive authority promoted by the country and Constitution! 

Maybe you should "care", as then you might have recognized how perverse what Romney  argued in the midst of the Republican Primary debates actually was!

As you apparently continue to 'enlighten me', can you at least tell us what has armed you to bring so much knowledge to the great unwashed  ?

Are you in fact a lawyer ?  A law school graduate ?  Studied the constitution as part of a course of study  ?

I've done none of the 3  !  Though I do have an architecture degree and a couple of graduate degrees, as I try to be the best facilities guy that I can be.

My guess is that you are a highly internet-educated guy, with many hours spent on wiki and various other websites.  That's the story of most guys who post endless 500-word diatribes, and claim victory in every disagreement, with every post.

What the hell is the best "facilities" guy that can be?  I have no idea what you're referencing.  Does that mean you try real hard to keep the floor clean when you're standing at the toilet?

Who I am is a pissed off Conservative American, disgusted by what is going on in this country, not  only by the Lefist Marxist Democrats, but my own Republican party, many of whom have the audacity to even call what is going on  "conservative".

I was born in Boston while my father was attending Harvard Law, a man who truly revered this country and its founding principles.   No, I'm not trying to imply that my presence there somehow mystically imbued me with some sort of innate understanding of the Law and Constitution.  In fact my level of understanding has take a great deal of work over a long period of time, and  I've been arguing with lawyers all my life.

I have undergraduate degrees in  Geology and English literature, and a minor in Geophysics, all obtained within a 4 year period by sometimes increasing my course load by 50%.  I also have a couple of graduate degrees as well. Originally I had intended to actually go to Law school, hence the English literature degree,  and was actually admitted, but chose another route.

Nonetheless, I have studied the Constitution and law intensively, and not just passively taken what I've been told by others for granted, but sought actual historical facts, and traced-out all Supreme Court references and relative writings, so as to thoroughly understand these, and by that often times recognize them as corrupt, rather than just warping these to fit my own and others preconception.   

As such, I recognize cases such as U.S. vs Wong Kim Ark to be one of the greatest obscenities done by the Court against the American people, the will of Congress, and the Constitution itself, but it is not alone in this.   In fact the thorough study of the Court has revealed a longstanding tradition of misrepresenting facts to the American people, going back to some of the earliest cases of the Court.

By this Court corruption, the adoration of the Rule of Law and fundamental principles generally generally shared by all real conservatives,  the United States Supreme Court cannot be relied on to be a remedy our problems and we must learn, and be conversant in the facts of this country ourselves.

Conservatives must learn to be socially active, and even actively engage in social defiance, along with intellectually active, despite this social defiance being contrary to their nature, or else this nation is forever lost, along with our freedoms.

I'm not pretending to be some vast, inerrant  font of knowledge trying to educate the "great unwashed" masses.  I try to bring before us what we most need to understand, and in the process I continue to educate myself.     

If you want no part of this, and have no desire to discuss it and learn it, instead dismissing it, then that's your own business, but don't simultaneously pretend what you're honoring is actually the conservation of the principles of this country.


Offline AndyJackson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #42 on: August 06, 2013, 09:35:33 AM »
lol, actually I'm an architect involved in managing facilities ops, maintenance, repair, and new construction.  It's on you if you can only infer or grasp mopping and toilets.

So, now it's evolved to the fact that your father was a lawyer.....and this is how you suppose to lecture us.

Hey, I give you kudos for being honest and telling the truth.  Most guys who angrily lecture everybody at message boards would have immediately replied that they have a JD, Phd in law, and make $ 1000 per hour as a consultant for Fortune 500 CEO's.

Hey, it looks like you've educated yourself somewhat, and maybe you are a conservative (or maybe you're role-playing for laughs).

But your take on what's conservative and what's not is just that....your take.  I believe (and I think most conservatives do) that states' rights are the ultimate test and power of the constitution and American republic.  You apparently are suspicious of states' independence and autonomy, instead.  We'll just have to disagree.

You're just trying way too hard to convince us that anybody who disagrees with you is ignorant and totally wrong.  Sometimes that's just not the case, lol.

Trip

  • Guest
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #43 on: August 06, 2013, 11:49:02 AM »
lol, actually I'm an architect involved in managing facilities ops, maintenance, repair, and new construction.  It's on you if you can only infer or grasp mopping and toilets.

So, now it's evolved to the fact that your father was a lawyer.....and this is how you suppose to lecture us.

Hey, I give you kudos for being honest and telling the truth.  Most guys who angrily lecture everybody at message boards would have immediately replied that they have a JD, Phd in law, and make $ 1000 per hour as a consultant for Fortune 500 CEO's.

Actually what I indicated was entirely the opposite from claiming I have any knowledge from my father being a  lawyer.  What I indicted is it took an enormous amount of time engaged in study, and in-depth research.  What the study of the law teaches is mental discipline, something you sorely lack.

Fortunately my being surrounded by well-trained JD's, and pursuing the mental discipline of science,  it has served me doubly-well in analysis.  And for the record, I am paid more than a 1000 dollars per hour to consult Fortune 500 companies, and the U.S. military.

WHat is conspicuous here is that you have engaged in nothing but nonstop personal address, this post included.  Nowhere have you actually  attempted to provide any sort of sourced argument in response to my numerous referenced posts.  Instead you've only engaged in ad hominem address, which is not only evidence that you have "no game", and no knowledge of the argument, but that your instinctive recourse is in line with the Leftist mode of attack, rather than any sort of reliance on fact, and knowledge.

This too is why we must condemn many in the Republican party, those driving it now. It's why Romney is no conservative at all, but you're compelled to this feeble defense of his corruption of the 10th Amendment in regard to RomneyCare, while you're utterly incapable of offering any sort of referenced argument at all.   

You're nothing but a hollow partisan ideologue, without any real grasp of the Constitution, Conservatism, or this country, and providing us nothing but bobble-headed nonsense which is actually a direct threat to our freedoms, as it invites corruptions like the U.N.'s Agenda 21/Sustainable Development, not to mention corruptions from this country's people themselves. 

Hey, it looks like you've educated yourself somewhat, and maybe you are a conservative (or maybe you're role-playing for laughs).

But your take on what's conservative and what's not is just that....your take.  I believe (and I think most conservatives do) that states' rights are the ultimate test and power of the constitution and American republic.  You apparently are suspicious of states' independence and autonomy, instead.  We'll just have to disagree.

You're just trying way too hard to convince us that anybody who disagrees with you is ignorant and totally wrong.  Sometimes that's just not the case, lol.

Not only have you not educated yourself, but it's clear that others have failed at educating you as well.

Your own "take" on  conservatism,  is nowhere supported by any of this country's actual principles, and only involves a state authoritarianism that thoroughly abrogates real rights, turning "unalienable rights" into a highly alienable farce,  and is precisely why the Republican party itself cannot possibly represent any sort of salvation to the threat our freedoms now face. 

Beyond being in no way "Conservative", your ideology single-handedly  makes every person who has EVER committed their life to the defense of this country, and every life actually given in the name of freedom, a total  joke and utterly worthless, because those rights and freedoms might simply be denied by your corrupt vision of state authoritarianism, without any foreign country even having fired a single shot!   

Congratulations. .

This corrupt ideology of 10th Amendment state authoritarianism you promote, is nothing short of the "enemy within", the proverbial corrupt Trojan horse able to topple the foundations of this country, every bit as much a threat to our freedom as is Marxist Progressive fascistic dictate.

As I've stated previously, the founders never indicated that "it is infinitely preferable to have our Rights and Freedoms denied by local government, rather than federal government", and your idea that they might have done so is not only thoroughly absurd, but extremely dangerous.


« Last Edit: August 06, 2013, 11:55:08 AM by Trip »

Offline AndyJackson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5620
Re: A Right To Secede?
« Reply #44 on: August 06, 2013, 12:10:57 PM »
haha, you actually grabbed and actually did claim the "I make more than 1000.00 per hour as a consultant" thing.  lol, that's sad.

People in this stratosphere end up on syndicated radio / TV, or in the White House.....like, um, Mark Levin  !

Not chumps who are desperately trying to get people to believe how smart and omniscient they are, on the internet.

And yes, I have made this about you.  I'm not the one claiming to be an expert, you are.  And it's clear that you have nothing to base it on.  Other than...uh, I know some lawyers and my daddy was one and I read a lot.  This is sad, too.

I just chafe at internet big mouths and know-it-alls.  Look at your nonsense, post after post, every one a never-ending magnum opus about all the wonderful things you know.  With a tinge of angry-kid-lashing-out if anybody disagrees with you.

You seem to know more than me on the topic, and that's fine.  You should have something to show for your lifetime of frantic internet research, and I'm glad it's that.

But I still have enough common sense, and life experience, to believe that I'm right WRT the states' rights issue.

So, um, deal with it.  Or pitch some more fits, lol.  Just keep it less than 2500 words, please.  People are falling asleep.

 

Powered by EzPortal