| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
Constitutional crisis
|
Constitutional crisis
On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote:
wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. |
Constitutional crisis
On Sep 7, 10:42 pm, wrote:
On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Vaughn: The one that happened in the mid 1800s resulted in some naval battles. |
Constitutional crisis
|
Constitutional crisis
On Sep 8, 12:39 am, wrote:
On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 19:42:38 -0700 (PDT), wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. It's a good question but you picked the wrong date. Make that January 7 and you have an interesting scenario. Jan 6 is when the congress actually decides who the Electoral college voted for. Up until then the election is really still undecided. If the "winner" was dead the congress might not ratify the vote. That is where the constitutional crisis would start. If it was not resolved, on Jan 20 the speaker of the house would be the president. There was that discussion in 2000. Now if the candidate had been declared the winner on Jan 6 and then fails to take office I believe the 25th amendment kicks in and the VP gets inaugurated. If I was retired I'd have all the time I needed to re-read the constitution and everything else I'd like to read. |
Constitutional crisis
|
Constitutional crisis
wrote in message ... On Sep 8, 12:39 am, wrote: If I was retired I'd have all the time I needed to re-read the constitution and everything else I'd like to read. its online and takes ten minutes. |
Constitutional crisis
On Sep 8, 10:39*am, "Raymond O'Hara"
wrote: wrote in message ... On Sep 8, 12:39 am, wrote: If I was retired I'd have all the time I needed to re-read the constitution and everything else I'd like to read. *its online and takes ten minutes. Everything he'd like to read is online and only takes ten minutes? |
Constitutional crisis
On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 23:37:00 -0700, "Calif Bill"
wrote: "hk" wrote in message ... wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? [Note: this reply is not cross posted.] It's like religion. Some folks believe in a strict, word by word interpretation of the bible, some use it as a guide while making their own rules. Conservatives like to stick with what the constitution actually says, liberals like to make their own laws picking and choosing the 'constitutional' words they will use. |
Constitutional crisis
John H wrote:
On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 23:37:00 -0700, "Calif Bill" wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? [Note: this reply is not cross posted.] It's like religion. Some folks believe in a strict, word by word interpretation of the bible, some use it as a guide while making their own rules. Conservatives like to stick with what the constitution actually says, liberals like to make their own laws picking and choosing the 'constitutional' words they will use. Conservatives like to *say* they are sticking with what the Constitution says, but the reality is, as evidenced by the last eight years of the Bush Administration, that they "interpret" or simply ignore the document as it suits their purposes. |
OT- Constitutional crisis
hk wrote:
John H wrote: On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 23:37:00 -0700, "Calif Bill" wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? [Note: this reply is not cross posted.] It's like religion. Some folks believe in a strict, word by word interpretation of the bible, some use it as a guide while making their own rules. Conservatives like to stick with what the constitution actually says, liberals like to make their own laws picking and choosing the 'constitutional' words they will use. Conservatives like to *say* they are sticking with what the Constitution says, but the reality is, as evidenced by the last eight years of the Bush Administration, that they "interpret" or simply ignore the document as it suits their purposes. Forgot to put OT in the subject header... :) |
Constitutional crisis
Calif Bill wrote:
"hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow |
OT- Constitutional crisis
Andrew Swallow wrote:
Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days? |
Constitutional crisis
On Sep 9, 2:37*am, "Calif Bill" wrote:
"hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. *Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. *Who would become president? *The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? *Would the Dems insist on a new election? *If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? *Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. *The Dems go crazy. *A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. *Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. *Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. *Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Bill, see the thread titled "So, who is in? " Please? |
OT- Constitutional crisis
|
Constitutional crisis
Andrew Swallow wrote:
Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow ahem Where is the Pornography exception found? exactly how do you "know" "The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs." Vince |
OT- Constitutional crisis
"hk" wrote in message . .. Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days? They would of allowed those arms also. The 2nd was not about hunting and fishing, was about the ability to toss a bad government. |
OT- Constitutional crisis
On Sep 9, 3:13*pm, "Calif Bill" wrote:
They would of allowed those arms also. *The 2nd was not about hunting and fishing, was about the ability to toss a bad government.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hey Bill, check out this thread... http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...34881f48773a0# It will explain a lot of what is going on here today, and why... It would be great to have you on board... Most everybody else is...;) |
OT- OT- Constitutional crisis
wrote:
On Sep 9, 3:13 pm, "Calif Bill" wrote: They would of allowed those arms also. The 2nd was not about hunting and fishing, was about the ability to toss a bad government.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Hey Bill, check out this thread... http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...34881f48773a0# It will explain a lot of what is going on here today, and why... It would be great to have you on board... Most everybody else is...;) |
OT- Constitutional crisis
hk wrote:
Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days? They were talking about anything a State Government may use to shoot an invasion by British soldiers. Andrew Swallow |
OT- Constitutional crisis
On Sep 9, 2:05*pm, hk wrote:
Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message m... wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. * Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. *Who would become president? *The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? *Would the Dems insist on a new election? *If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? *Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. *The Dems go crazy. *A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. *Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. *Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. *Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. *The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. *The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. *Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - or the 11,000 deaths they cause each year |
OT- Constitutional crisis
|
Constitutional crisis
Vincent wrote:
Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow ahem Where is the Pornography exception found? exactly how do you "know" "The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs." Vince "... or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; ..." a) Because the Constitution writers had never heard of DVDs. b) It says press ( = newspapers) not acting. c) Photographs are pictures not speech. d) Nudity is covered by the indecent exposure laws. Andrew Swallow |
Constitutional crisis
Andrew Swallow wrote:
Vincent wrote: Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow ahem Where is the Pornography exception found? exactly how do you "know" "The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs." Vince "... or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; ..." a) Because the Constitution writers had never heard of DVDs. b) It says press ( = newspapers) not acting. c) Photographs are pictures not speech. d) Nudity is covered by the indecent exposure laws. Andrew Swallow under your bizarre theory all dvds could be suppressed and all photos the press is not newspapers since it clearly covered books Pictures were printed with a press speech is separately protected nudity and nude pictures are not the same Sheesh Where did you study Constitutional law my widely cited article might be of some use to you: Vincent Brannigan & Bruce Ensor, Did Bose Speak Too Softly?:Product Critiques and the First Amendment,14HofstraL. Rev. 571, 573 (1986). Vince |
OT- Constitutional crisis
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:20:56 -0700 (PDT), wf3h wrote:
On Sep 9, 2:05*pm, hk wrote: Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message m... wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. * Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. *Who would become president? *The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? *Would the Dems insist on a new election? *If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? *Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. *The Dems go crazy. *A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. *Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. *Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. *Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. *The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. *The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. *Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - or the 11,000 deaths they cause each year If you would stop crossposting, we at rec.boats would sure appreciate it. Thanks! |
Constitutional crisis
"Andrew Swallow" wrote in message ... Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow they had pornography back then too. |
OT- Constitutional crisis
Calif Bill wrote:
"hk" wrote in message . .. Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days? They would of allowed those arms also. The 2nd was not about hunting and fishing, was about the ability to toss a bad government. Bingo! Most people do not understand the importance of the 1st and 2nd amendments and our ability to talk about our crappy government and second to force them out of office if they wont leave when their term is up. |
OT- Constitutional crisis
Andrew Swallow wrote:
hk wrote: Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days? They were talking about anything a State Government may use to shoot an invasion by British soldiers. Or Federal troops. |
OT- OT- Constitutional crisis
John H wrote:
On Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:20:56 -0700 (PDT), wf3h wrote: On Sep 9, 2:05 pm, hk wrote: Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - or the 11,000 deaths they cause each year If you would stop crossposting, we at rec.boats would sure appreciate it. Thanks! If you would stop posting here, Herring, rec.boats would be much nicer. |
OT- Constitutional crisis
On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:50:18 -0400, BAR wrote:
Andrew Swallow wrote: hk wrote: Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days? They were talking about anything a State Government may use to shoot an invasion by British soldiers. Or Federal troops. |
OT- Constitutional crisis
On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:50:18 -0400, BAR wrote:
Andrew Swallow wrote: hk wrote: Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days? They were talking about anything a State Government may use to shoot an invasion by British soldiers. Or Federal troops. Not crossposted. Played The Gauntlet down in Fredricksburg today. Lost about nine balls. Miserable course. Shot 108. Will probably never go back. |
OT - OT- Constitutional crisis
John H wrote:
On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:50:18 -0400, BAR wrote: Played The Gauntlet down in Fredricksburg today. Lost about nine balls. Miserable course. Shot 108. Will probably never go back. This is a boating newsgroup, dicquewad. |
OT- Constitutional crisis
John H wrote:
On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:50:18 -0400, BAR wrote: Andrew Swallow wrote: hk wrote: Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days? They were talking about anything a State Government may use to shoot an invasion by British soldiers. Or Federal troops. Not crossposted. Played The Gauntlet down in Fredricksburg today. Lost about nine balls. Miserable course. Shot 108. Will probably never go back. You have to come up and play this nice little muni on the Montgomery/Frederick County line sometime. Damn place kicks my ass everytime and I don't have to loose any balls. |
OT- OT- Constitutional crisis
BAR wrote:
John H wrote: Played The Gauntlet down in Fredricksburg today. Lost about nine balls. Miserable course. Shot 108. Will probably never go back. You have to come up and play this nice little muni on the Montgomery/Frederick County line sometime. Damn place kicks my ass everytime and I don't have to loose any balls. Why not post this crap to rec.sport.golf |
OT- Constitutional crisis
On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 19:07:01 -0400, BAR wrote:
John H wrote: On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 17:50:18 -0400, BAR wrote: Andrew Swallow wrote: hk wrote: Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. Andrew Swallow I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days? They were talking about anything a State Government may use to shoot an invasion by British soldiers. Or Federal troops. Not crossposted. Played The Gauntlet down in Fredricksburg today. Lost about nine balls. Miserable course. Shot 108. Will probably never go back. You have to come up and play this nice little muni on the Montgomery/Frederick County line sometime. Damn place kicks my ass everytime and I don't have to loose any balls. I'm tired of getting my butt kicked. I started some lessons last week. Since then nothing is working. Hopefully it will get better. How much do bowling balls cost? |
OT: OT- Constitutional crisis
John H wrote:
I'm tired of getting my butt kicked. I started some lessons last week. Since then nothing is working. Hopefully it will get better. How much do bowling balls cost? Why would you expect to be better at golf than you are at anything else? Try line dancing. |
OT- Constitutional crisis
|
OT- Constitutional crisis
In article , payer33859
@mypacks.net says... Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days? Certainly. Unless you think the 1st amendment doesn't cover modern methods of publication or the 4th covers telephones. -- Meddle ye not in the Affairs of Dragons, for Thou art Crunchy and taste Goode with Ketchup. |
OT- Constitutional crisis
tankfixer wrote:
In article , payer33859 @mypacks.net says... Andrew Swallow wrote: Calif Bill wrote: "hk" wrote in message . .. wrote: On Sep 7, 10:22 pm, hk wrote: wrote: Assume the following situation: McCain wins the electoral votes but Obama wins the popular vote. Late in December, Say Dec. 28, something happens to McCain so he is not able to take office. Who would become president? The constitution is not clear on this, would it be Palin? Would the Dems insist on a new election? If the decision went beyond the inaugural date, who would b president in the interim? Would it be House majority leader? Now, I get partisan. Assume Bush says he thinks Palin is the new pres and says he will hand over to her refusing to give Pelosi any way to bcome pres even for a few days. The Dems go crazy. A blue state or two decide they will not recognize Palin as Pres. Republicans in these two blue states are attacked. Palin sends in the Nat Guard..............new American Civil War. Could it really happen this easily? You really need to read the Constitution. Harry, I spend 99.999% of my time reading techie stuff and have not read the Constitution since i was 25 yrs old. Well, it isn't a lengthy document and most of it is pretty straightforward. Then how come the judges seem to have so many conflicting opinions regarding what the Constitution says? Simple. The writers of the first amendment were *not* talking about pornographic DVDs. The defence lawyers were having to deliberately misrepresent it to get their clients off. Obvious misrepresentation leads to arguments from the prosecution. I wonder if the writers of the second amendment were talking about any of the sorts of firearms around these days? Certainly. Unless you think the 1st amendment doesn't cover modern methods of publication or the 4th covers telephones. Precisely. The first and second amendments are open-ended, but the first does contain that specific phrase, "Congress shall make no law..." That means that Congress cannot even attempt to regulate freedom of speech." But, of course, it does, and so do local governments. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:04 PM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com