History making results from the Mid Terms

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
14,563
2,232
1,743
So Cal
#41
So, the Supreme Court decisions will mainly be about advancing corporate and religious rights and considerably less about promoting freedom and individulal liberty.
you're the one that keeps trying to make the Supreme Court about politics, while most of us simply want Judges that will rule in favor of "we the people", and will not legislate from the bench and stomp on our inalienable rights.

so.... the Supreme Court will be mainly about promoting freedom and individual liberty, and considerably less about the Federal Government running roughshod over us.

Roberts legislating from the bench on ObamaCare, and Ginsberg saying she prefers the South African Constitution over the one that she swore to uphold... creeps like that need to go.
 

cowboyinexile

Have some class
A/V Subscriber
Jun 29, 2004
12,121
8,884
1,743
38
Fairmont, MN
#42
First time ever a President totally won the midterm but lost a house that was so completely gerrymandered to his party it was impossible to lose.

It's dumb luck that Obama's economic recovery lasted so long-otherwise the fuhrer would have faced a more hostile Senate
 
Jul 20, 2018
670
94
28
58
77539
#43
First time ever a President totally won the midterm but lost a house that was so completely gerrymandered to his party it was impossible to lose.

It's dumb luck that Obama's economic recovery lasted so long-otherwise the fuhrer would have faced a more hostile Senate
Joy Behar? Is that you? Bloody moron.
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
66,208
48,032
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#47
If you blindly vote for one side regardless of who the candidate is, did you really make a choice?
Which is an irrelevant question. The question is, were people free to choose, not did they actually make a choice. The answer is, of course they were. Trump isn't a dictator, not any more than Obama was or W before him. When it is time for him to hand over power he will do so peaceably (just like W did to Obama and Obama did to Trump) and all your "Hitlers" will be for naught. So, stop. It does nothing but cheapen you. I think you're smarter than that.
 
Oct 15, 2003
14,563
2,232
1,743
So Cal
#49
If you blindly vote for one side regardless of who the candidate is, did you really make a choice?
Seriously? Two of my "choices" were both anti-American Democrats.... did I really have a "choice"?

I voted for Diane FrankNfeinstein over De Leon, because he is a total loon of the Ocasio-Cortez ilk, and Feinstein, as bad as she is, might at least not make it through her six year term.

I had to vote on one candidate not fulfilling her term over a whack job the could have ended up as.. dare I say it... an incumbent.

.... and who says I "blindly voted" for one side.... I voted for "one side" (where I could), with eyes wide open.
 

Jonkr06

Territorial Marshal
Aug 18, 2007
7,279
2,944
1,743
Katy, TX
#53
So, the Supreme Court decisions will mainly be about advancing corporate and religious rights and considerably less about promoting freedom and individulal liberty.
you're the one that keeps trying to make the Supreme Court about politics, while most of us simply want Judges that will rule in favor of "we the people", and will not legislate from the bench and stomp on our inalienable rights.

so.... the Supreme Court will be mainly about promoting freedom and individual liberty, and considerably less about the Federal Government running roughshod over us.

Roberts legislating from the bench on ObamaCare, and Ginsberg saying she prefers the South African Constitution over the one that she swore to uphold... creeps like that need to go.
I agree with your views here so serious question...are you concerned about Kavanaugh and the Fourth Amendment?
 
Oct 15, 2003
14,563
2,232
1,743
So Cal
#55
I agree with your views here so serious question...are you concerned about Kavanaugh and the Fourth Amendment?
I don't really know about his specific past rulings on search and seizure, but he was not my top choice for Supreme Being... he comes across as someone that will attempt to understand the original intent of the language rather than change dictionary meanings to suit his ruling (Roberts).

He had a few past rulings that make me suspect.

I darn sure wish that civil forfeiture laws would hit the Supreme Court.... that's some crazy crap there.

For the most part the Bill of rights should remain untouched forever. The Declaration and the Constitution made it pretty clear who had which rights and which powers, but just to make it doubly clear, they went back and said.... if it's not clear enough for you, here are 10 things that you are explicitly prohibited from doing to us.

I don't understand why everybody in America does not understand that the bill of rights is sacrosanct
 

RxCowboy

Has no Rx for his orange obsession.
A/V Subscriber
Nov 8, 2004
66,208
48,032
1,743
Wishing I was in Stillwater
#56
First time ever a President totally won the midterm but lost a house that was so completely gerrymandered to his party it was impossible to lose.

It's dumb luck that Obama's economic recovery lasted so long-otherwise the fuhrer would have faced a more hostile Senate
I'll say this too, if you are concerned over how much power is in the hands of Trump then you really need to look at your boy Obama who expanded presidential power, W before him, Clinton before him, etc. Because it just keeps expanding. At some point it has to stop and actually be limited by the Constitution. The 9th Circuit just ruled that Trump can't end DACA which was an EO, which gives it the same weight as legislation, which is absolutely nuts. If it was an EO signed into effect by a president a president should be able to end it because presidents cannot legislate by EO. The 9th circuit just effectively expanded executive power.
 

Cimarron

It's not dying I'm talking about, it's living.
Jun 28, 2007
51,957
18,016
1,743
#57
I'll say this too, if you are concerned over how much power is in the hands of Trump then you really need to look at your boy Obama who expanded presidential power, W before him, Clinton before him, etc. Because it just keeps expanding. At some point it has to stop and actually be limited by the Constitution. The 9th Circuit just ruled that Trump can't end DACA which was an EO, which gives it the same weight as legislation, which is absolutely nuts. If it was an EO signed into effect by a president a president should be able to end it because presidents cannot legislate by EO. The 9th circuit just effectively expanded executive power.
Exactly, it's a bit hypocritical for Democrats to complain about the power of the President when they were silent under the Obama administration who made it an art form.
 
Oct 15, 2003
14,563
2,232
1,743
So Cal
#59
The Supreme Court should always about applying the law of the United State and never about advancing any political view!
huh? The "law of the united states" is the thing advancing political views (like ObamaCare).

The Supreme Court should always rule that the Federal Government cannot take our rights and oppress us... because that is their job (uphold the Constitution)
 

cowboyinexile

Have some class
A/V Subscriber
Jun 29, 2004
12,121
8,884
1,743
38
Fairmont, MN
#60
I think you're smarter than that.
You obviously don't know me.....





The Hitler stuff is funny to me and points out the general hypocrisy of the right. There are multiple threads on here unjustifiably making fun of lefties. Someone pokes a little fun the other way and it isn't fair? If people can dish it out they need to be able to take it. Otherwise this forum is nothing more than a right wing circle jerk and where is the fun in that?


Being honest about some of this for a moment I am bothered by blind partisanship. In Minnesota, we were able to overlook troubling allegations to elect our Attorney General*. In Oklahoma they elected an anti vaxxer as governor. Texas kept the biggest ahole in the Senate around and dozens of congressional seats were safe because too many jackasses think the same way as the jackass who holds the seat. I really wish people would take a step back and vote for the candidate not the party.



* full disclosure I didn't vote for Ellison, mostly because I think he's gonna spend 2 years suing the crap out of the federal government. I don't know if he abused his girlfriend or not, and if the allegations are proven true I fully expect him to resign. But my concern with him is that he is going to use my taxpayer dollars to show primary voters in 2020 how he fought Trump.