Page 49 of 272 FirstFirst ... 3947484950515999149 ... LastLast
Results 721 to 735 of 4074

Thread: Had enough yet

  1. #721
    Member dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    4,636
    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    Mr. C.'s kin indeed were "inducted," and "served" in a world contemporaneous with the Hines ruling. Moreover, there were a multitude of statutory laws written during, and AFTER, the Hines ruling, which of course illustrated Federal preeminence in area of immigration, and supports Mr. C.'s original personal position. But, that observation will only feed your seemingly obsessive need to cite case law, regulations, statutory law, detailed instruction on how to give enemas, blah, blah, blah............

    But personally, I think you have missed the entire point of Lee's post.

    You just may ponder the reality-based fact that most servicemen in World War Two, such as Mr. C.'s uncles, spent more time considering how to stay alive and win a war, rather, than following each and every inflection, update or slant, contained in each and every Supreme Court ruling. I am sure Messers Black, Douglas, Vison, and the like, were rather grateful for the servicemen's necessary priorities. Unlike you, they did not enjoy the luxury of spewing case law, and ruling from the inflated bench of Speak Up.
    As I pointed out within a year of Hines SCOTUS issued a decision in which Hines was placed in context and demonstrated that the principles of which I speak are not new.

    I am not going to judge what his ancestors new or didn't know. I am pretty confident my late grand-uncle (who fought in World War II that I had plenty of discussions with) that while he may not have known of the exact source in the Constitution or case-law supporting it he knew of the principle of dual-sovereignty and federalism and the role it played in the balance of powers. Just as my late father and late father-in-law when they fought in the Korean war, or my uncles when they fought in Vietnam and the same went for me when I enlisted 2 days after my 18th birthday in 1984.
    “We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson

  2. #722
    Member dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    4,636
    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    Speaking of the Tenth Amendment, why does the left not fully embrace it when it comes to issue of Abortion? Should it not be a state issue?

    Wait for it...
    Personally, I believe that that issue does not belong to the Federal or State Governments, it belongs to the people.
    “We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson

  3. #723
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by dtwarren View Post
    Personally, I believe that that issue does not belong to the Federal or State Governments, it belongs to the people.
    Nice dodge.

  4. #724
    Member dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    4,636
    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    Nice dodge.
    Not a dodge, I have long held that belief. However, it does strike me that the people who rail against a nanny state is willing to accept the nanny state in their bedroom.
    “We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson

  5. #725
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by dtwarren View Post
    Not a dodge, I have long held that belief. However, it does strike me that the people who rail against a nanny state is willing to accept the nanny state in their bedroom.
    Not in the bed room, but in the mortuary if you are talking aborttion.

  6. #726
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by dtwarren View Post
    As I pointed out within a year of Hines SCOTUS issued a decision in which Hines was placed in context and demonstrated that the principles of which I speak are not new.

    I am not going to judge what his ancestors new or didn't know. I am pretty confident my late grand-uncle (who fought in World War II that I had plenty of discussions with) that while he may not have known of the exact source in the Constitution or case-law supporting it he knew of the principle of dual-sovereignty and federalism and the role it played in the balance of powers. Just as my late father and late father-in-law when they fought in the Korean war, or my uncles when they fought in Vietnam and the same went for me when I enlisted 2 days after my 18th birthday in 1984.
    And as I pointed out, there was plenty of statutory law, consistent with Hines, which asserted Federal supremacy in issues of immigration, during, and for years after, World War Two.

    This immigration debate arises from an evolutionary process, affected to a large extent by judicial activism. That activism, to some, interrupts and contradicts, what many, especially those of us getting on in years, regard as traditional Constitutional values.

    That is why, in order to appreciate generational perspectives, it is important to look at this issue through the prism of culture and historic context, not exclusively through the myopic eye of sterile, most recent, and/or, sometimes seemingly contradictory, Federal Circuit, or Supreme Court rulings, which can always be overturned.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 20th, 2017 at 04:17 PM.

  7. #727
    Member dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    4,636
    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    And as I pointed out, there was plenty of statutory law, consistent with Hines, which asserted Federal supremacy in issues of immigration, during, and for years after, World War Two.

    This immigration debate arises from an evolutionary process, affected to a large extent by judicial activism. That activism, to some, interrupts and contradicts, what many, especially those of us getting on in years, regard as traditional Constitutional values.

    That is why, in order to appreciate generational perspectives, it is important to look at this issue through the prism of culture and historic context, not exclusively through the myopic eye of sterile, most recent, and/or, sometimes seemingly contradictory, Federal Circuit, or Supreme Court rulings, which can always be overturned.
    So you are saying the people of that time had no concept or idea or understanding of federalism?
    “We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson

  8. #728
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by dtwarren View Post
    So you are saying the people of that time had no concept or idea or understanding of federalism?
    No son, you are saying that, not I. Do you know the meaning of the word "contemporary?"

    But, now to you: Are you saying that the liberals, TO THIS DAY, have no understanding of federalism when it applies to abortion? Silly Mr. Warren.

    At any rate, this pissing contest is taxing my kidneys, and my wife is concerned with all of the attendant attention I am giving to my "special purpose."

    Thank you for the exchange.
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 20th, 2017 at 06:08 PM.

  9. #729
    Member dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    4,636
    Doesn't the following demonstrate the people of that time understood these principles:

    Article entitled "ASKS STATE CONTROL OF PROHIBITION" http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter...stHlPage=false

    Article entitled "Barkley's Error" from http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter...stHlPage=false

    Article entitled "PERIL TO FEDERAL SANTA" from http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter...stHlPage=false
    Last edited by dtwarren; September 20th, 2017 at 06:07 PM.
    “We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson

  10. #730
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by dtwarren View Post
    Doesn't the following demonstrate the people of that time understood these principles:

    Article entitled "ASKS STATE CONTROL OF PROHIBITION" http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter...stHlPage=false

    Article entitled "Barkley's Error" from http://="http://fultonhistory.com/hi...stHlPage=false

    Article entitled "PERIL TO FEDERAL SANTA" from http://="http://fultonhistory.com/hi...stHlPage=false
    Now, you are talking to yourself.

  11. #731
    Member dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    4,636
    Quote Originally Posted by mark blazejewski View Post
    Now, you are talking to yourself.
    I was talking to myself a long time ago.
    “We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson

  12. #732
    Member dtwarren's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    West Seneca, New York, United States
    Posts
    4,636
    Here is an interesting one entitled "Federal Courts Prohibited From Enjoining Relitigation" from http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter...stHlPage=false
    “We in America do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” ― Thomas Jefferson

  13. #733
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,306
    Quote Originally Posted by dtwarren View Post
    Here is an interesting one entitled "Federal Courts Prohibited From Enjoining Relitigation" from http://fultonhistory.com/highlighter...stHlPage=false
    I understand that this judge will hear arguments involving the issues, after he rules on this case of national urgency:

    Attached Images Attached Images

  14. #734
    Member mark blazejewski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2015
    Posts
    5,306
    Hillary Clinton, a "Paulette Revere" regarding Russia?

    Seriously?

    The uranium deal, the "Reset," and all of the crap with Ukraine, under her and/or Obama's watch.

    Don't forget the rather cozy relationship with the Clinton Foundation.

    The only area that Hillary can credibly speak to regarding Paul Revere's midnight cry "The British are coming," is the word "coming." After being with Bill all those years, she must be an expert, from all perspectives, on that subject.

    And the left bitches that the "Deplorables" continue to call her out.

    Just sayin'.


    http://deadline.com/2017/09/hillary-...er-1202173539/
    Last edited by mark blazejewski; September 20th, 2017 at 07:34 PM.

  15. #735
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,643
    Her campaign manager, Podesta, had connections to the Russians that made any by Trump pale by comparison. He sat on numerous boards of directors of Russian controlled corporations and made a fortune from it. His brother is a exceedingly well paid lobbyist for Russian interests. You'll never hear told by Lester Dolt or any of the rest.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 217 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 216 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •