Re: Sarah Palin - hot or not?

Simon S Aysdie <gwhite@xxxxxx> wrote in
news:d80244d2-6f10-4f92-980d-31174790eabd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

On Sep 8, 2:57 pm, Kris Krieger <m...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Simon S Aysdie <gwh...@xxxxxx> wrote in news:4eb36d72-092d-4e34-8481-
85536e0ce...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:



On Sep 6, 4:26 pm, "Paul Hovnanian P.E." <p...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Simon S Aysdie wrote:

[snip]

The Supreme Court decides what is legal or illegal (Constitutional,
th
at
is. Congress is free to do what it wants within those bounds). Last
ti
me
I checked, there was nobody on the SCOTUS named Simon S. Aysdie.

Oh cool.  "Self government" means that one must take the word of a fe
w
black robes as if they were gods.  

You might try reading...

Way to miss the point entirely.

If you are a citizen of the US, you're subject to its laws;

No ***, you idiot.

Brilliant!  Who knew?

Anyone who has ever read anything about the US Constitution and the
governemnt set up in accordance with it.

That would not include you.

I guess you imagine that to be a clever response.



<snip>

Not a word in there said I have to believe they are always correct on
all matters of law. Read it again.

If they are always right, how come they overturned Plessy V Ferguson,
their own decision? Was Dred Scot correct? Why don't they like to
overturn decisions? (Hint: not because they weren't/aren't ever
wrong, but because they would cause too much a loss of confidence in
their own competancy.)

What I said (which you snipped) was that they are supposed to make their
best honest effort to determine the Constitutionality of laws. Now who has
missed the point?


My basic point for you and any other morons is this: "Self-
governance" means one can question and challenge governance, whether
in actual fact the government or the one challenging is wrong.

It takes a moron to call other people morons just becasue they don't simply
applaud the name-caller's every utterance.


"[W]e are not final because we are infallible, but we are infallible
only because we are final."--Brown v. Allen, 344 U.S. 443, 540 (1953),
concurring opinion.

That was taken off the following page, which you would do well to
read. In fact, you ought to read the whole book, and I can assign you
some other material too (quiz tomorrow):
<http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php
%3Ftitle=675&chapter=106961&layout=html&Itemid=27#c_lf0003_footnote_nt_16
16>


I always appreciate links and book-references that are informative.
Contrary to your unfounded insistance that I'm a moron, I *do* read and
learn new things.



.

Quantcast