"Until this moment I think I never really gauged your cruelty"

@giujohn,

He didn't ask, he opined that she was not allowed to talk and suggested that Clinton wrote her husband's speech. That's very demeaning indeed.

1 Reply

@revelette2,

Quote:

"I believe Trump's unprecedented proposal would violate our Constitution," said Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe. "Both the First Amendment's Religion Clauses and the equality dimension of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment."

No one can be sure that our Constitution will be enforced when the wrong people head our government. During WWII, we Japanese Americans, two-thirds naturalized citizens, were put into concentration camps without being charged with a crime.

When 30% of Americans support Trump, no one can be sure our Constitutional protections are safe. It's the failure of leadership, and the discrimination of the American populace that is the danger.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

He didn't ask, he opined that she was not allowed to talk and suggested that Clinton wrote her husband's speech. That's very demeaning indeed.

Oh my God is that the best you can do? That's an insult? I never suspected you of being that naive. If you think for one minute that that speech was not prepared by Clinton staff then I have some time share property in Afghanistan I'd like you to take a look at.

What mr. Khan did was to prostitute the memory of his dead hero son for a purely political gain. That's the insult in all this... an insult to every veteran and the memory of every member of the military who has given their last measure of Devotion to this country. I am confident as a former Army veteran that his son an officer in the United States military would not have been pleased by the use of his memory in such a distasteful way.

And you should be ashamed of yourself for defending it.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Quote:
"I believe Trump's unprecedented proposal would violate our Constitution," said Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe. "Both the First Amendment's Religion Clauses and the equality dimension of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment."

No one can be sure that our Constitution will be enforced when the wrong people head our government. During WWII, we Japanese Americans, two-thirds naturalized citizens, were put into concentration camps without being charged with a crime.

When 30% of Americans support Trump, no one can be sure our Constitutional protections are safe. It's the failure of leadership, and the discrimination of the American populace that is the danger.

I find it curious when people talk about defending the Constitution but, as it seems, only if they can cherry pick the parts that they agree with.

Can I assume that when you want the Constitution defended that you are concerned about the rights of the individual? For instance the right of free speech? The right against illegal search and seizure? The right of self-incrimination? The right to keep and bear arms? These are all individual rights guaranteed and protected from governmental abridgement.

So the question here is, are you in favor of supporting the constitution in its entirety?

1 Reply

@giujohn,

Political gain? Keeping a lunatic out of the White House? What a load of old pony.

It's not down to you as to what some people find offensive. And calling people naïve just because they are able to empathise will only win you brownie points with others similarly afflicted.

Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it's not there.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

So I guess you agree with me then it was for political gain... and he pimped the memory of his dead hero son to do it.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

...Trump is setting the conservative movement back 20 years and the result will be progress for the country on issues like race, immigration, healthcare and the Supreme Court...

For every action there's an equal and opposite reaction. If the left wasn't so flamboyantly pursuing their desires, the right would not look so positively on our current Republican candidate, in my opinion. As a one-time physics teacher you might see the validity of this. There would have been no preference for a Trump if the Democrats came up with someone with a more charismatic persona (in my opinion), and less controversial work record. The Democrats might one day be faulted for having a "bull pen" with little talent?

0 Replies

@giujohn,

Am I in favor of fully supporting the Constitution? What kind of stupid question is that? It's the law of the land. Get used to it.

1 Reply

@giujohn,

I wouldn't agree with you on anything. He was putting Trump's Islamophobic bigotry into context. People need reminding that Muslims contribute to America's forces and have died doing their duty.

That's setting the record straight.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

Am I in favor of fully supporting the Constitution? What kind of stupid question is that? It's the law of the land. Get used to it.

Oh I'm very used to it so let me see you state publicly here that you support the individual's right to keep and bear arms.

1 Reply

@giujohn,

I support the US Constitution. If you don't understand what that means, you're too ignorant to have any reasonable discussion with.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

I wouldn't agree with you on anything. He was putting Trump's Islamophobic bigotry into context. People need reminding that Muslims contribute to America's forces and have died doing their duty.

That's setting the record straight.

When he held up the Constitution what part of it was he referring to that addressed to Islamic bigotry?

Let's face it man, it was a dog and pony show. And if I was his son I would have been extremely embarrassed.

2 Replies

@giujohn,

Quote:

When he held up the Constitution what part of it was he referring to that addressed to Islamic bigotry?

The same part that that referred to christian bigotry.

2 Replies

@RABEL222,

I guess guijohn still doesn't understand what "freedom of religion" means.

What amendment states freedom of religion?
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances.
First Amendment to the United States Constitution ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_Unit…

1 Reply

@RABEL222,

Please cite the exact reference... Not the one you've made up in your mind.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Are you having a stroke? When was I arguing the subject of freedom of religion with you or anyone else?

0 Replies

@giujohn,

I'm not interested in your constitution. And I don't see any point continuing this ridiculous conversation. It's like trying to explain green to a blind man.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Okay then if you can't keep up gather up all your toys and go home.

1 Reply

@giujohn,

I'm home right now. That's where my computer is. Not everybody has to go to a public library to access their emails.

2 Replies

@izzythepush,

Well that's great Izzy... Now hit that power button and back away slowly from the computer.

1 Reply

"Until this moment I think I never really gauged your cruelty"

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know