Forum
#Topics
+Start a topic
?Search __________________________________

-Log In
-Register
Imagine President Santorum
Log In to post a reply
Pages: 5 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 | Next ]

View: flat \ threaded
________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

thomas2
thomas2
1558 posts

Re: Imagine President Santorum

http://unicornbooty.com/blog/2012/02/21/omg-a-rick-santorum-portrait-made-entirely-of-gay-porn-nsfw-ish/

Feb 22, 2012, 17:03


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

BOTE_
374 posts

Re: Imagine President Santorum

matthew6 wrote:
Who is Rick Santorum?


An asshole


Feb 22, 2012, 20:12


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

k.
k.
392 posts

President Pervert

He's one freaky dude. He'll pack the cabinet with Lindsey Graham, for sure.

He's perverted, yes, and seems pretty scary when you listen to what he says, but I don't buy it. The one issue that will never change will be the abortion issue. It is the single biggest rallying position for conservatives. They'll never overturn Roe v. Wade, because Republicans won't have anything to run on anymore.

Feb 22, 2012, 20:15


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

s_lush_s
s_lush_s
7353 posts

Re: Imagine President Santorum

I've been studying Marxism.

I want to watch the film Laetitia scored but not until I understand Marxism.

I don't know if it was successful and it will be interesting to hear how the ideology is functioning in this modern era. You know, how it's working out.

I can definitely see the influence in the groops lyrics even some of the recent releases, especially.

Does anyone have any other Marxist music recommendations to accompany my study ?

Feb 23, 2012, 05:11


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Psi-Phi
Psi-Phi
182 posts

Re: Imagine President Santorum

Mu Mu wrote:
What specific proof can you provide to support yr crazy idea that Obama appointees on the (SCOTUS) have used their position to "effectively invalidate the Constitution?"

You have apparently mistaken the subject of that sentence. Let's begin with that part of the sentence you left out of the quote:

Psi-Phi wrote:
Obama is not the first 'Progressive' that tried to pack the court with 'activists'[/quote]
The Secondary Subject of that sentence is 'Activists" who, etc., but the Primary Subject of that sentence is "Progressive (Presidents) who tried to pack the Court with Activists"(by whom I was referring to both Presidents Roosevelt, Teddy and Franklin, chiefly, but Truman, Nixon, and Eisenhower, as well as Kennedy and Carter and Clinton.)

But let us not forget The Supremes and their big hit single during the Bush II Regime, "Elections Hanging by a Chad!"

I have never been shy about pointing out that Labels such as "REPUBLICAN" and "DEMOCRAT" and "PROGRESSIVE" and "CONSERVATIVE" and even "PATRIOT" and "CHRISTIAN" are often merely cloaks of invisibility under which rascals and criminals hide at will, adopting whatever Label suits their selfish purpose best at the time.

Reagan and Perry were both "DEMOCRAT" before they were "REPUBLICAN."

(See my reply to calapia)

Read my Post! I did not say or claim that Kagan and Sotomayor have used their positions to
[quote="Psi-Phi"]'change' the Constitutional separation of powers, even to the point of effectively invalida
Constitution itself.[/quote]
(Yet!) But others -(SCOTUS Justices)- have, in practically every administration since the Civil War, and at least a couple before that time.

However, I did intend to make it clear that Kagan and Sotomayor are both of the same 'ilk' as Obama, in that their careers have all been shaped by the same leftist philosophies, and that in concert with those philosophies and one another, they seek to implement the same agenda as their mentors, (such as Frank Marshall Davis and Saul Alinsky,) and their minions, (such as Van Jones, et. al.)

See my replies below to several other questions and criticisms that have been posted in response to these statements.

Feb 23, 2012, 05:28


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Psi-Phi
Psi-Phi
182 posts

Re: Imagine President Santorum

RATS!
Formatting!
Do Over!

Feb 23, 2012, 05:29


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Psi-Phi
Psi-Phi
182 posts

Re: Imagine President Santorum

Mu Mu wrote:
What specific proof can you provide to support yr crazy idea that Obama appointees on the (SCOTUS) have used their position to "effectively invalidate the Constitution?"

You have apparently mistaken the subject of that sentence. Let's begin with that part of the sentence you left out of the quote:

Psi-Phi wrote:
Obama is not the first 'Progressive' that tried to pack the court with 'activists'[/quote]
The Secondary Subject of that sentence is 'Activists" who, etc., but the Primary Subject of that sentence is "Progressive (Presidents) who tried to pack the Court with Activists"(by whom I was referring to both Presidents Roosevelt, Teddy and Franklin, chiefly, but Truman, Nixon, and Eisenhower, as well as Kennedy and Carter and Clinton.)

But let us not forget The Supremes and their big hit single during the Bush II Regime, "Elections Hanging by a Chad!"

I have never been shy about pointing out that Labels such as "REPUBLICAN" and "DEMOCRAT" and "PROGRESSIVE" and "CONSERVATIVE" and even "PATRIOT" and "CHRISTIAN" are often merely cloaks of invisibility under which rascals and criminals hide at will, adopting whatever Label suits their selfish purpose best at the time.

Reagan and Perry were both "DEMOCRAT" before they were "REPUBLICAN."

(See my reply to calapia)

Read my Post! I did not say or claim that Kagan and Sotomayor have used their positions to
[quote="Psi-Phi"]'change' the Constitutional separation of powers, even to the point of effectively invalida
Constitution itself.[/quote]
(Yet!) But others -(SCOTUS Justices)- have, in practically every administration since the Civil War, and at least a couple before that time.

However, I did intend to make it clear that Kagan and Sotomayor are both of the same 'ilk' as Obama, in that their careers have all been shaped by the same leftist philosophies, and that in concert with those philosophies and one another, they seek to implement the same agenda as their mentors, (such as Frank Marshall Davis and Saul Alinsky,) and their minions, (such as Van Jones, et. al.)

See my replies below to several other questions and criticisms that have been posted in response to these statements.

Feb 23, 2012, 05:32


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

Psi-Phi
Psi-Phi
182 posts

Re: Imagine President Santorum

Psi-Phi wrote:
Obama is not the first 'Progressive' that tried to pack the court with 'activists' to 'change'

calapia wrote:
And what have any conservatives done? Been fair and balanced, and only appointed judges that uphold law, but don't reflect their political aims? Yeah, I don't think so.

To answer your second question first, see my reply to Mu Mu's post.

Psi-Phi wrote:
The Supremes have become, illegitimately,

calapia wrote:
Can you please explain how this was done "illegitimately?"

Psi-Phi wrote:
illusionary 'power' to 'make law' rather than simply adjudicating cases

My claim that SCOTUS has come to be understood as a political oligarchy is actually validated by all those who believe that if the Court is stacked one way or the other, they can 'decide' that something patently unConstitutional is OK!

The 'Illusionary Power' is the misperception, (mostly on the part of the People, and mostly as the result of a deliberate, widespread, long term campaign to foster that perception) that a Ruling by the Supreme Court is equivalent to Law. It is not.

The 'Illegitimately' part is precisely their reliance (The Powers That Be, The Ruling Elite) on that popular misperception to cloud issues.

Such as when Al Gore said there was 'no controlling legal authority' regarding campaign irregularities on his part, he meant SCOTUS had not made a ruling, thereby effectively ignoring the existing Law.

Feb 23, 2012, 06:11


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

cyberpainter
cyberpainter
5267 posts

Re: Imagine President Santorum

Since the supreme court tends to have it's power in it's members who constitute the "center", how far left or right that center is can certainly change. I'm extremely happy when a more left of center president is able to get a more liberal justice in there. We have a few relatively young, right wingers on the court, and balance needs to be maintained. Am I happy that someone like Kennedy holds the power in the court? Not likely, but it could be far worse. He got a little wiser (slightly shifted to the left) as the years went on.

Feb 23, 2012, 06:46


________________\________________________________________________\______________________________________

cyberpainter
cyberpainter
5267 posts

Re: Imagine President Santorum

I'd say Obama isn't really left of center however, I think he's way more conservative than I would like, and has disappointed me in many areas. The alternative is horrifying. The mentality of these candidates and the things they spout, make GW look downright studious.

Feb 23, 2012, 06:52

Pages: 5 – [ Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 | Next ]

add a reply to this topic
________________________________________________________________\______________________________________
stereolab table Index