- This topic has 16 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 15 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Against a “terrorist fist jab?”
http://gawker.com/tag/oh-no/?i=5014604&t=fox-blonde-warns-of-obamas-terrorist-fist-jab
Re: How would you defend
The best defense for the Terrorist Fist Jab is to take the blow directly with your own fist.
Re: How would you defend
quote john_mccollum:Against a “terrorist fist jab?”http://gawker.com/tag/oh-no/?i=5014604&t=fox-blonde-warns-of-obamas-terrorist-fist-jab
You take the freakin’ “body language expert” outside and repeatedly fist jab her to the face.
Re: How would you defend
Typical leftie blog BS, the newscaster was quoting someone else and her statement was taken out of context and used in a manner to rouse the masses. Pathetic.
Re: How would you defend
quote Miriam:You take the freakin’ “body language expert” outside and repeatedly fist jab her to the face.+1
I can’t even believe that made the news. rofl2Re: How would you defend
Idiocracy
I cannot even stand to watch the news. Even my local news station takes facts so out of the context its a wonder that we don’t roam the street like armed thugs looking to lynch the bad guy. W*0re$, every last one. Expect for Tim Russert….I miss that guy already. “Meet the Press” just isn’t the same with super ego Tom Brokaw.
Its rare now a days to get sharp, factual reporting that is not dripped down to a WWF level of communication. I swear, in 10 or 15 years I will not be surprised if news casters are delivering the “news” and dropping an “super” elbow on the sports caster.
Re: How would you defend
quote Jeremy Stafford:Typical leftie blog BS, the newscaster was quoting someone else and her statement was taken out of context and used in a manner to rouse the masses. Pathetic.What Jeremy said… Right on the money.
Thank God that five of the nine charged with upholding our Constitution saw things the right way yesterday. I was beginning to think that our remaining citizens might have to stand up in the way that the 2nd Amendment was put in place for…
Re: How would you defend
quote stevetuna:Thank God that five of the nine charged with upholding our Constitution saw things the right way yesterday. I was beginning to think that our remaining citizens might have to stand up in the way that the 2nd Amendment was put in place for…Almost, something very important was spoken during the hearings that was not highlighted by the NRA, I bet GoA did though (shout out!)
quote :JUSTICE STEVENS: Let me ask a question are you, in effect, reading the amendment to say that the right shall not be unreasonably infringed instead of shall not be infringed?MR. GURA: There is that inherent aspect to every right in the Constitution.
JUSTICE STEVENS: So we can — consistent with your view, we can simply read this: “It shall not be reasonably infringed”?MR. GURA: Well, yes, Your Honor, to some extent, except the word “unreasonable” is the one that troubles us, because we don’t know what this unreasonable standard looks like.
JUSTICE SCALIA: You wouldn’t put it that way. You would just say it is not being infringed if reasonable limitations are being placed upon it.
MR. GURA: That’s another way to look at it, Your Honor. Certainly —
CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: — you would define reasonable in light of the restrictions that existed at the time the amendment was adopted.
MR. GURA: Those restrictions.
Its was a bitter-sweet victory. “..shall not be infringed..” has taken on a whole different meaning as of late. Like “..shall not be infringed……if it serves our definition of public safety”
Re: How would you defend
quote stevetuna:What Jeremy said… Right on the money.Thank God that five of the nine charged with upholding our Constitution saw things the right way yesterday. I was beginning to think that our remaining citizens might have to stand up in the way that the 2nd Amendment was put in place for…
Oh no you di-unt! You mentioned Jeremy and the 2nd Amendment in the same breath??? Oh no… here we go… !! rofl2
quote Bracius:JUSTICE SCALIA: You wouldn’t put it that way. You would just say it is not being infringed if reasonable limitations are being placed upon it.Its was a bitter-sweet victory. “..shall not be infringed..” has taken on a whole different meaning as of late. Like “..shall not be infringed……if it serves our definition of public safety”
Exactly why I cannot stand Scalia. Everytime I was halfway through reading an opinion in law school where I stopped and thought, “Who wrote this? It’s completely idiotic and illogical,” it was invariably Scalia’s. I think anyone who caught his interview with Charlie Rose this past week can attest to that.Re: How would you defend
quote Miriam:
Exactly why I cannot stand Scalia. Everytime I was halfway through reading an opinion in law school where I stopped and thought, “Who wrote this? It’s completely idiotic and illogical,” it was invariably Scalia’s. I think anyone who caught his interview with Charlie Rose this past week can attest to that.I think I just feel in love with you!
You should have seen the speech he gave to a graduating class (Harvard I believe) when asked for the basis of his legal principles. I paraphrase but it was pretty close to “I derive my legal opinions from international law, mostly that of European law”
Re: How would you defend
quote Bracius:You should have seen the speech he gave to a graduating class (Harvard I believe) when asked for the basis of his legal principles. I paraphrase but it was pretty close to “I derive my legal opinions from international law, mostly that of European law”Well, thank you very much..and really??? I missed that one, but I’m not surprised. And well, there’s a joker/fool in every court, isn’t there?? To wit:
JESTER, n. An officer formerly attached to a king’s household, whose business it was to amuse the court by ludicrous actions and utterances, the absurdity being attested by his motley costume. The king himself being attired with dignity, it took the world some centuries to discover that [The King’s] own conduct and decrees were sufficiently ridiculous for the amusement not only of his court but of all mankind. The jester was commonly called a fool, but the poets and romancers have ever delighted to represent him as a singularly wise and witty person. ” — From ThinkExist
And…
In Shakespeare’s plays, the “Fools” are often the only characters willing to speak the truth in defiance of conventional wisdom/majority opinion.
rofl2
Re: How would you defend
The sad thing is that four out of the nine Justices were not able to put their personal bias aside and affirm the right as individual. I have much more respect for sheeple that call for an outright repeal of the Second Amendement than those who would attempt to marginalize it by the use of deceptive interpretations.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
