I wish the American people had the will to impeach the conservative members of the Supreme Court.

It's not that the majority of the American people oppose their policies

News flash: You cannot impeach judges because you don't like their decisions.

It's "messaging," and "branding!"

It's not that the majority of the American people oppose their policies

This is exactly what polling seems to indicate; so why wouldn't anyone believe it?

When polled, for example, on the recent Health Care bill, a narrow majority oppose it. BUT, when asked about individual aspects of the bill, EVERY important aspect enjoys wide margins of support and none of them reach 50% on the 'we want to repeal this part' question. None of them.

Which tells us that there is a gap between people's feelings on this issue and their brains on the issue. One that isn't explained by your narrative...

Then there are other factors, such as this being the first off-year election for a new president (they all lose seats in the House in this period, historically) and the fact that the Dems expanded into dozens of arguably Conservative districts in 2006 and 2008 - which now force them to spread out and play lots of defense to hold, which is tough in a tough environment.

Nothing about the last 2 years has been 'disastrous.' Obama passed several pieces of signature legislation, and despite mutterings from your side, they aren't going to be repealed or de-funded. He's wrapping up the Iraq war on time and he sent more troops to Afghanistan in the way that you and others wanted. I think you are exaggerating slig-- no, you're just talking out your ass, because you are as partisan a right-winger as they come, and the truth is that anger and yelling about things is a more effective tactic for you at this time than a sober examination of the facts.

Cycloptichorn

Simple...I don't accept your premise.

You telling us something doesn't make it so and there are numerous ways to ask questions in polls and numerous ways to interpret the results.

If everyone loves Obamacare, then how can the Dems lose in November?

And if they all love Obamacare but are allowing evil Fox and the GOP to brainwash them into rejecting the Dems, then they must be pretty pathetic -- Is that your argument?

You didn't pay attention to what I wrote. I think giving corporations people status may be unconstitutional. I think giving George W. Bush the presidency may be unconstitutional. That decision was so bad they specifically stated their decision shall not set precedence.

BBB

Brandon9000 wrote:

News flash: You cannot impeach judges because you don't like their decisions.

Why not?

Based on observable evidence,

I don't believe that's actually true, David.

But if you want to get in a pissing match with Finn
[I CHALLENGED YOU, not him, liberal] to prove who is the biggest right-wing ass

here on the board, hey - be my guest.

Re: what I wrote, if you think it's incorrect in any way, point it out.
Tell me which part is incorrect, specifically, and I'll be happy to show you that you are wrong.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

Simple...I don't accept your premise.

You telling us something doesn't make it so and there are numerous ways to ask questions in polls and numerous ways to interpret the results.

Cheap cop-out on your part. You can't argue the polling data, so you pretend that it's not real, or somehow made-up. Nobody buys this argument from you at all.

Turn it back around: YOU telling US something doesn't make it so. You pretend to know certain things, but provide no data or logic to back it up. Just assertions. Why do you think that is convincing?

The preceding is brought to you by Cyclo and his "I know you are but what am I?" school of debate.

In response:

1) You reference a poll with no citation, and I am supposed to accept the poll exists and that you have interpreted it accurately.

2) You consistently dismiss Rassmusen polls as ideologically motivated and yet I am supposed to to accept that the, thus far, imaginary poll you've referenced is legitimate.

3) No one has to "buy" my arguments - they are entirely free.

Quote:

If everyone loves Obamacare, then how can the Dems lose in November?

What kind of idiot question is this? The Dems are going to lose a lot of seats for the reasons I gave above: the economy is ****, the Democrats are spread very thin on defense, and the Republican base is highly motivated - some for reasons less savory than others.

When did you become convinced that this election is a referrendum on Health Care Reform? My guess is that you did so the second you thought it fit the narrative you are looking to craft.

The second the Dems shoved it down our throat, told it was good for us idiots, and the American people went nuts.

Quote:

And if they all love Obamacare but are allowing evil Fox and the GOP to brainwash them into rejecting the Dems, then they must be pretty pathetic -- Is that your argument?

Well, I believe a certain amount of them are indeed pathetically lead about by the nose by Fox and other right-wing news sources. Others are closet bigots and racists who are pissed at Obama for his intrinsic qualities. Others - like yourself - are greedy assholes who really ought to be smart enough to know better than to craft idiot narratives to explain mostly cyclical phenomena.

So anyone who opposes Obamacare or disagrees with Obama and, more importantly Cyclo, is either a pathetic sheep, a closet racist, or a greedy capitalist.

Who is the Hater Cyclo?

You don't hate Yemeni muslims or Mexican illegals, you just hate your fellow Americans.

Cycloptichorn

Dude, it's my opinion. I'm under no burden to justify it to you to begin with. Not only that, it's a colloquialism anyway. You're getting bent out of shape over a figure of speech.

If you want to believe that you are the biggest right-winger here, be my guest.

Cycloptichorn

Dude, it's my opinion. [I 'm a dude, in that I 'm long-time city dweller.]


I'm under no burden to justify it to you to begin with.
Not only that, it's a colloquialism anyway. You're getting bent out of shape over a figure of speech.
[Yeah, liberals don 't mean what thay say.]

If you want to believe that you are the biggest right-winger here, be my guest.
[Thanx for your permission qua what I can believe.]

Cycloptichorn

David "Dude"
It was just a mindless insult by an addict of the ad hominem

Cyclo didn't mean anything by it, just like there is never meaning in anything he posts.

Chill Bro - You are the Rightie Kahuna of A2K!

Because legal grounds for impeachment usually include terms such as "malfeasance," "gross misconduct," "gross immorality," "high crimes," "habitual intemperance," and "maladministration."

Reaching a certain decision doesn't constitute legal grounds for impeachment unless it indictes some other condition such as, for instance, mental impairment.

You didn't pay attention to what I wrote. I think giving corporations people status may be unconstitutional. I think giving George W. Bush the presidency may be unconstitutional.

You didn't pay attention to what I wrote. I think giving corporations people status may be unconstitutional.
I think giving George W. Bush the presidency may be unconstitutional.

Now I get it. The Supreme Court decides one way. BBB thinks it may have gotten it wrong.
Therefore, the Supreme Court justices who disagreed with BBB need to be impeached. Makes perfect sense!