Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: Poconoeagle On: Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:25 pm

exactly.

id rather be un-ethical than a faggot 8-)
Poconoeagle
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Buckwalter & Co. , EFM520
Stove/Furnace Model: No. 28 Glenwood 1880, Alaska

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: tvb On: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:55 am

Poconoeagle wrote:exactly.

id rather be un-ethical than a faggot 8-)


Lessee, being a "faggot" as you say won't put in jail.

But the ethics violations can and then you can be someone else's "faggot"

That's some great reasoning you got there. You betcha. Also.
tvb
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Alaska
Stove/Furnace Model: Channing III

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: samhill On: Tue Nov 24, 2009 9:37 am

Whats all this got to do with Graham not being up on the law? IMO just about everyone in washington has an ethics problem & the main reason is the ones that make the laws believe that they are above them. To me it doesn`t matter what or who makes their boat float, just do your job that you were elected to do. Whats so hard about representing the wishes & best interest of the people rather than their own? Jessie Ventura I believe said it best, they should all have to wear nascar type jackets with the names of their contributers & locos printed right on them.
samhill
 
Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: keystoker 160
Hand Fed Coal Stove: hitzer 75 in garage
Stove/Furnace Make: keystoker/hitzer
Stove/Furnace Model: koker 160/ hitzer 75


Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: ErikLaurence On: Tue Nov 24, 2009 9:44 am

Poconoeagle wrote:exactly.

id rather be un-ethical than a faggot 8-)



You stay classy San Diego.
ErikLaurence
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Reading Lehigh
Stove/Furnace Model: LL Hyfire II w/heat jacket

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: Poconoeagle On: Tue Nov 24, 2009 9:51 am

tvb wrote:
Poconoeagle wrote:exactly.

id rather be un-ethical than a faggot 8-)


Lessee, being a "faggot" as you say won't put in jail.

But the ethics violations can and then you can be someone else's "faggot"

That's some great reasoning you got there. You betcha. Also.



and i am sure you are well versed on ethic's violations....... it seems :|

most faggots go to jail. Im not talking gay's here. a faggot is an unethical queer just like your state allows
Poconoeagle
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Buckwalter & Co. , EFM520
Stove/Furnace Model: No. 28 Glenwood 1880, Alaska

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: stockingfull On: Tue Nov 24, 2009 12:57 pm

Poconoeagle wrote:
tvb wrote:
Poconoeagle wrote:exactly.

id rather be un-ethical than a faggot 8-)


Lessee, being a "faggot" as you say won't put in jail.

But the ethics violations can and then you can be someone else's "faggot"

That's some great reasoning you got there. You betcha. Also.



and i am sure you are well versed on ethic's violations....... it seems :|

most faggots go to jail. Im not talking gay's here. a faggot is an unethical queer just like your state allows

The word now requires contextual clarification, as the definition seems to be in flux these days.

http://hellforleathermagazine.com/2009/11/south-park-calls-harley-riders.html

But, based on your own clarification, you seem to have applied it to the wrong Governor. Either that or you were saying that you'd rather be McGreevey than Sanford. :P
stockingfull
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Yellow Flame
Stove/Furnace Model: W.A. 150 Stoker Furnace

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: coaledsweat On: Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:17 pm

Topic is also a word, so let's get back to it.
coaledsweat
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 260M
Coal Size/Type: Pea

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: mikeandgerry On: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:41 am

jpete wrote:
mikeandgerry wrote:
If you don't defend this nation with prejudice from foreign enemies, you will have peed on the Constitution.


Where are "extraordinary renditions" in the Constitution?

Where are wars without declarations from Congress?

Every war since WWII has been unconstitutional.

The last war we fought to "preserve freedom" was in 1812.


Had Lincoln not violated the Constitution we would not have a union or ended slavery.

Congress authorized the president to wage the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The war of 1812 was considered a stalemate but since the British burned Washington and took fewer casualties, some considered it a loss, but somehow we retained our freedom. Go figure. I'm glad the British lost the will to fight over trade.


-4
mikeandgerry
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman-Anderson Anthratube 130-M

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: mikeandgerry On: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:42 am

ErikLaurence wrote:
mikeandgerry wrote:
If you don't defend this nation with prejudice from foreign enemies, you will have peed on the Constitution.


This nation IS the Constitution.

This nation is not a chunk of land, it is not a people, it is an idea.

If you reject the ideas, you have rejected America.



So why do the left wingers reject America with their stupid ideas that run counter to constitutional ideas?

Where does it say in the constitution that the Federal government can force people to buy health insurance?

Where does it say that a baby in the womb is not a human life?

Where does it say that gun ownership isn't an individual right? Where does it say that pornography is protected free speech and hate speech isn't?

The list goes on and on.
Last edited by mikeandgerry on Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
mikeandgerry
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman-Anderson Anthratube 130-M

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: ErikLaurence On: Wed Nov 25, 2009 7:57 am

mikeandgerry wrote:
So why do the left wingers reject America with their stupid ideas that run counter to constitutional ideas?


Because they're just as bad as the right wingers.
ErikLaurence
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Reading Lehigh
Stove/Furnace Model: LL Hyfire II w/heat jacket

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: ErikLaurence On: Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:04 am

mikeandgerry wrote:Had Lincoln not violated the Constitution we would not have a union or ended slavery.


Slavery likely would have ended shortly in any case (as it had in most of Europe).

The civil war was really a war between the primacy of the Declaration of Independence vs the Constitution. Under the ideas of the Declaration the South had every right to secede, secession is a valid way to solve a political problem.


mikeandgerry wrote:Congress authorized the president to wage the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.


Show me where in the US Constitution it says the congress can delegate the task of deciding whether to go to war to the executive branch.
ErikLaurence
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Reading Lehigh
Stove/Furnace Model: LL Hyfire II w/heat jacket

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: coaledsweat On: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:37 am

ErikLaurence wrote:
mikeandgerry wrote:Congress authorized the president to wage the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.


Show me where in the US Constitution it says the congress can delegate the task of deciding whether to go to war to the executive branch.

Reread what you quoted.
coaledsweat
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman Anderson 260M
Coal Size/Type: Pea

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: ErikLaurence On: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:52 am

coaledsweat wrote:
ErikLaurence wrote:
mikeandgerry wrote:Congress authorized the president to wage the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.


Show me where in the US Constitution it says the congress can delegate the task of deciding whether to go to war to the executive branch.

Reread what you quoted.



The AUMF for Iraq was an unconstitutional document that passed the buck of declaring war from the congress to the executive branch.

http://www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf

The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary


Congress does not have the authority under the US Constitution to allow the President to "use force as he determines to be necessary".
ErikLaurence
 
Stove/Furnace Make: Reading Lehigh
Stove/Furnace Model: LL Hyfire II w/heat jacket

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: mikeandgerry On: Wed Nov 25, 2009 2:53 pm

ErikLaurence wrote:The AUMF for Iraq was an unconstitutional document that passed the buck of declaring war from the congress to the executive branch.

http://www.c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf

The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary


Congress does not have the authority under the US Constitution to allow the President to "use force as he determines to be necessary".


Congress authorizes (declares) the war. The President, as commander-in-chief runs the war.

Where is the problem?
mikeandgerry
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman-Anderson Anthratube 130-M

Re: Graham Gives Holder Lesson in Law

PostBy: mikeandgerry On: Wed Nov 25, 2009 3:07 pm

ErikLaurence wrote:
mikeandgerry wrote:Had Lincoln not violated the Constitution we would not have a union or ended slavery.


Slavery likely would have ended shortly in any case (as it had in most of Europe).

The civil war was really a war between the primacy of the Declaration of Independence vs the Constitution. Under the ideas of the Declaration the South had every right to secede, secession is a valid way to solve a political problem.




Well, the south didn't get the memo apparently. The role of the president was to preserve the union. Extraordinary circumstances called for extraordinary measures based on that objective.

The Declaration calls for "patient sufferance" to the point of losing what is yours. Curiously enough, it calls for that after it declares life an inalienable right for all people. The south didn't have the right to secede from the union for "light and transient" causes. It had to live up to its end of the Constitutional bargain. Lincoln defended the Constitution which was his duty.
mikeandgerry
 
Stoker Coal Boiler: Axeman-Anderson Anthratube 130-M