GOP Platform: A Better Way

Agreed.

Agreed. I would add Hillary to that line of reasoning.

Then we come to the 800 pound Trump in the room. I have no fucking clue what he would do with an appointment opportunity.

1 Like

Yes they have. I can give them credit on this at the very least.

@zeb1 @anon50325502 @thunderbolt23 @Aragorn @smh_23 @Alrightmiami19c

Here is a write up of the NRA case from a site promoting defending 2nd A
There are 7 parts but I linked part 2 as part1 seemed to be a preview…

1 Like

This write up gets it wrong. The Second Amendment wasn’t at issue or implicated in this case. This is the case where Garland (by joining another judge, who wrote the decision) deferred to the DOJ’s interpretation of a statutory provision on when the government destroys records after a gun sale.

The statute wasn’t being challenged as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. No one was arguing the Second Amendment requires the statute has to be read a certain way (it doesn’t work like that).

What the judges did here was engage is a kind of judicial restraint - when a law or regulation is ambiguous, the judiciary defers to agency tasked with executing the law or regulation (unless their interpretation is beyond the pale of the language). That’s a practice associated with judicial conservatism (ask Scalia). Here, they said the DOJ’s interpretation would not be disturbed.

What the authors of this article are suggesting and wanting is judicial activism - making the case about the “spirit” of the Second Amendment, reading the statute with an eye to helping out gun owners, even though that is irrelevant and the meaning of the statute has nothing to do with the Second Amendment.

Conservatives generally don’t like this approach, because what is good for the goose is good for the gander, and if judges in the right start importing their preferences into the outcomes of cases when the law doesn’t require it, then you can’t argue against left wing judges who do the same when it is their turn, and courts just become another political battlefield with no pretense of even-handed justice.

Like the criminal sentencing case, this case is about something other than taking an anti-gun position against gun owners.

2 Likes

This is why reading the actual ruling is important.

2 Likes

Scalia and deference to agencies, for anyone interested:

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi%3Farticle%3D3075%26context%3Ddlj&ved=0ahUKEwiqjeiM1JjOAhXTdSYKHR-nCisQFggjMAI&usg=AFQjCNHJ0rpIVeDcjLUdfp72xSOnZWrOeA&sig2=cFNaKnlTTwbbra42RUU5Fg

1 Like

Hey I see you’re ready for another full day of degradation.

Great let’s begin.

Zeppelin level stupidity is wanting to take a poll to see who thinks you’re a kiss ass.

I told two people about that one last night and we all had really good laugh…that’s on you boy.

Hey thanks.

Going to kiss some butt today?

Hope so.

Will it continue? Hopefully it does.

Maybe they have grown a pair since getting their asses kicked over the past few years.

It’s not like it’d be a full day of you answering questions asked of you with even a semblance of facts or substance.

At any rate, I’m actually busy today. So, no, I doubt I’ll point out your shortcomings and playbook usage again today.

Did you tell them how you’re a giant pussy that no one respects on the interwebs?

Oh no, that’s disappointing. We had such fun yesterday and all at your expense.

Hold on another usmccd classic is brewing.

Look, I know you’re dumb and all that but two people who disagree with me has nothing to do with “no one respecting me” on the web.

And as long as we are on the topic of respect. How many people respect a kiss ass like you?

Feel free to take a poll hah haha

Oh man…you will never top that but please do try

Wow, what an embarrassment of a debate.

For anyone who read through that nonsense, I think it’s apparant who it is worth actually discussing things with compared to who to disagree with if you want an internet food fight.

3 Likes

usmccds423 is not a kiss ass
zeb1 is a jerk-off

4 Likes

And you carry grudges for years…sad man

Plus 10 for “poltroon” and plus 100 for those last two lines.

This thread turned into a hybrid supermassacre built of Gronkspikes, Lionel Messi nutmegging defenders, and LeBron James blocking Iggy in game 7 last month.

2 Likes

Was just reading back through the thread while eating lunch and caught this gem.

1 Like

I think we have a better than 50/50 chance that he would appoint someone more conservative than Hillary. If only in his own best interest. But, no gamble with the Pants Suit she will appoint a lefty.

(And TB will defend that lefty with his last breath)

1 Like

Dude is 70. It is highly unlikely that he would sit for two terms. His SCOTUS picks will be about ego and legacy, not re-election, period.

Reagan was 68 when elected the first time and served for two terms. I doubt anyone who serves as POTUS wants to quit after four years. Of course LBJ did it in 1968 but he had an abysmal record in Viet Nam and was either mentally shot, or was well aware he could not win reelection. Trump on the other hand should he win will no doubt try for a second term his ego is too large not to.