Ted Cruz: The Nasty Newcomer

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.........

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......... Originally Posted by Whirlaway

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.

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.

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. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

You could very well be 100% correct.

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. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Your every post is a negative spin. Have you ever noticed that Twirlyword?

I never knew the antonym of "favorable" was "corrosive".

Hoky doky!

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 ! Originally Posted by Whirlaway

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.

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

Not possible without a Constitutional amendment. Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

God the Dems ought to support one...Cruz would get crushed in the general.

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 Originally Posted by bojulay

Those dang blacks...never understood why they hate those Uncle Toms! They should be ashamed.

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.

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. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

No charge!

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. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

but I stayed in a Holiday Inn.....

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.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Why do you bother? They are trash, scum...

I suppose when your ass gets locked up in the next streetwalker sting, you'll call a pimp!