SUBSIM Radio Room Forums

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)
-   General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   Federal Judge blocks parts of the Arizona immigration law (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=172949)

thorn69 07-30-10 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie (Post 1456339)
Ignore him. This is the kind of bigoted trash that we can do without here.


Ah, ignore anybody who disagrees! The only Nazi here is people like this POS!

Onkel Neal 07-30-10 07:03 PM

You're out of here.

krashkart 07-30-10 07:27 PM

And thus ended the great taco debacle (or, reparations for an insulted taco). :woot:

August 07-30-10 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man (Post 1456604)
We saw this when GWB stole the election from Al Gore.

:roll:

Sailor Steve 07-30-10 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August (Post 1456670)
:roll:

'S okay. Some people see only the "facts" they want to see, and nothing else counts.

The Third Man 07-30-10 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August (Post 1456670)
:roll:

Did not SCOTUS step in when the state was accused of a misdeed during the 2000 campaign? Same as AZ, accused for a missdeed. The lower courts have no jurisdiction here, if you believe in the constitution.

Section 2.


Quote:

In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls, and those in which a state shall be party, the Supreme Court shall have original jurisdiction.


CaptainHaplo 07-30-10 08:34 PM

The Third Man - while constitutionally you are correct, since 1978 this matter has been specifically changed through an initial Congressional action and tacit approval of the Court itself.

While its in the last bit of the page - you may find this enlightening on the matter:

http://supreme.justia.com/constituti...bassadors.html

August 07-30-10 08:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve (Post 1456675)
'S okay. Some people see only the "facts" they want to see, and nothing else counts.

Yeah and it's off topic anyways.

Sailor Steve 07-30-10 08:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Third Man (Post 1456679)
Did not SCOTUS step in when the state was accused of a misdeed during the 2000 campaign? Same as AZ, accused for a missdeed. The lower courts have no jurisdiction here, if you believe in the constitution.

Section 2.

1. When the Democrats demanded a recount, a recount was had. And another. And another. And another.

2. Finally, Florida's Attorney General said enough was enough. Whether you think that was right; whether you think it was politically motivated; that was part of her job and her prerogative.

3. The Gore camp went to the Florida State Supreme Court and they overturned her decision.

4. The Bush Camp then went to the US Supreme Court and they in turn overturned the Florida Court's ruling.

The point is that you can argue that any of those decisions was political or legitimate. What is downright silly is claiming that Bush "stole" the election. It is just as valid to argue that Bush was ahead, the Attorney General was correct in her action, and that Gore attempted to use the State Court to steal the election.

Unless you can actually show impropriety on the part of the Supreme Court, claiming "theft" shows a lack of understanding of how the system works.

August 07-30-10 08:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve (Post 1456685)
1. When the Democrats demanded a recount, a recount was had. And another. And another. And another.

2. Finally, Florida's Attorney General said enough was enough. Whether you think that was right; whether you think it was politically motivated; that was part of her job and her prerogative.

3. The Gore camp went to the Florida State Supreme Court and they overturned her decision.

4. The Bush Camp then went to the US Supreme Court and they in turn overturned the Florida Court's ruling.

The point is that you can argue that any of those decisions was political or legitimate. What is downright silly is claiming that Bush "stole" the election. It is just as valid to argue that Bush was ahead, the Attorney General was correct in her action, and that Gore attempted to use the State Court to steal the election.

Unless you can actually show impropriety on the part of the Supreme Court, claiming "theft" shows a lack of understanding of how the system works.

This ^

Zachstar 07-30-10 11:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens (Post 1456637)
You're out of here.

Thank you Neal! Hopefully it wont take a billion alerts next time.

Onkel Neal 07-31-10 07:54 AM

I don't mind billions of alerts, just not all by the same person, and all in the same day. :D

Platapus 07-31-10 08:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neal Stevens (Post 1456637)
You're out of here.

:yeah::salute:

Some people just don't belong sitting at the adult table.

Thanks Neal, I am sure that is not the most enjoyable aspect of running this website. :salute:

Subnuts 07-31-10 08:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thorn69 (Post 1456235)
I don't want to sound racist, but Get those taco peddling bastards out of America! :up:

Fixed.

Not that it matters, though.

mookiemookie 07-31-10 08:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mookiemookie (Post 1456339)
Ignore him. This is the kind of bigoted trash that we can do without here.

For the record, I was referring to the content of his post. But it's all a moot point now.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:24 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.