dmcoco84 4
Recommended Posts
dmcoco84 4
Quote***Incorrect only if adhering to the definitions in use when the founding father's penned their documents.
Which is all that matters...
And which is the only reasonable adherence when discussing US Law... unless you are a Progressive.
P.S...
And when did these definitions begin to be changed (manipulated)?
The Progressive Era.
SkyDekker 1,150
dmcoco84QuoteI live in a parliamentary constitutional monarchy, yet wouldn't call you stupid for contending it is a democracy.
I would.
***Incorrect only if adhering to the definitions in use when the founding father's penned their documents.
Which is all that matters...
And which is the only reasonable adherence when discussing US Law... unless you are a Progressive.
Oh, well if you would, then you would be the slightly retarded one. Since in our parliamentary constitutional monarchy our government is elected through a democratic process, one would be fully in their right, under the english language, to call it a democracy.
Your founding father's definitons also included blacks as not being equal to whites. Women not being equal to men. Obviously over time definitions and interpretations change.
turtlespeed 212
SkyDekker***
QuoteI live in a parliamentary constitutional monarchy, yet wouldn't call you stupid for contending it is a democracy.
I would.
***Incorrect only if adhering to the definitions in use when the founding father's penned their documents.
Which is all that matters...
And which is the only reasonable adherence when discussing US Law... unless you are a Progressive.
Oh, well if you would, then you would be the slightly retarded one. Since in our parliamentary constitutional monarchy our government is elected through a democratic process, one would be fully in their right, under the english language, to call it a democracy.
Your founding father's definitons also included blacks as not being equal to whites. Women not being equal to men. Obviously over time definitions and interpretations change.
You analogy makes no sense.
It is like saying that all governments that use voting is a democracy.
Ok, that's fine, as long as you can confirm that everyone that owns a hammer is a carpenter, or that everyone that has a band-aid is a healthcare worker.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
dmcoco84 4
Quote33 years ago the GOP candidate for President was Ronald Reagan. In the years since then the GOP has swung far to the right. I truly believe Reagan would be ashamed of today's GOP.
QuoteIn the years since then the GOP has swung far to the right.
Equally stupid statement... if you define Left and Right as the Founders did, not as established in Europe and the multiple French governments that resulted after their revolution began.
Both parties have swung in the exact same direction.
Quote33 years ago the GOP candidate for President was Ronald Reagan.
Seriously, Fuck RR. He is not the Model President for our Republic. He is a Progressive Republican, who was a Massive Progressive Democrat before he changed his mind on some minor things...
At no point was he a Democrat or a Republican... he has always been a Progressive D/R.
QuoteI truly believe Reagan would be ashamed of today's GOP.
Please do elaborate, because I think he would fit right in with McCain and Graham... they can have themselves a progressive circle jerk.
SkyDekker 1,150
QuoteIt is like saying that all governments that use voting is a democracy.
If that voting is done in an open, fair and free fashion, it would indeed be pretty democratic.
turtlespeed 212
SkyDekkerQuoteIt is like saying that all governments that use voting is a democracy.
If that voting is done in an open, fair and free fashion, it would indeed be pretty democratic.
ONLY if the votes individually counted.
I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun
SkyDekker 1,150
QuoteSeriously, Fuck RR.
Necrophelia over democracy does explain certain things.
SkyDekker 1,150
turtlespeed***
QuoteIt is like saying that all governments that use voting is a democracy.
If that voting is done in an open, fair and free fashion, it would indeed be pretty democratic.
ONLY if the votes individually counted.
Are you contending individual votes do NOT count in the US?
dmcoco84 4
QuoteAnd the fact is that the GOP is currently doing exactly what is described in the video.
First of all...
I would like to see the full context of the video... however, saying you don't want everyone to vote, is not the same as you want to forcibly prevent people from voting.
And, he is clearly referencing a structural reason; not racial.
I don't want everyone to vote either... specifically all the low information voters.
I don't want my grandparents to vote... I think they are pathetically ridiculous when it comes to voting.
Secondly...
That's BS. Verifying who you are before voting is common sense, not racism.
turtlespeed******
QuoteI live in a parliamentary constitutional monarchy, yet wouldn't call you stupid for contending it is a democracy.
I would.
***Incorrect only if adhering to the definitions in use when the founding father's penned their documents.
Which is all that matters...
And which is the only reasonable adherence when discussing US Law... unless you are a Progressive.
Oh, well if you would, then you would be the slightly retarded one. Since in our parliamentary constitutional monarchy our government is elected through a democratic process, one would be fully in their right, under the english language, to call it a democracy.
Your founding father's definitons also included blacks as not being equal to whites. Women not being equal to men. Obviously over time definitions and interpretations change.
You analogy makes no sense.
It is like saying that all governments that use voting is a democracy.
Ok, that's fine, as long as you can confirm that everyone that owns a hammer is a carpenter, or that everyone that has a band-aid is a healthcare worker.
Definition of DEMOCRACY
1 a: government by the people; especially: rule of the majority
b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
dmcoco84 4
SkyDekkerQuoteIt is like saying that all governments that use voting is a democracy.
If that voting is done in an open, fair and free fashion, it would indeed be pretty democratic.
No, you are wrong... Turtle is exactly right.
dmcoco84 4
QuoteOh, well if you would, then you would be the slightly retarded one. Since in our parliamentary constitutional monarchy our government is elected through a democratic process, one would be fully in their right, under the english language, to call it a democracy.
Sad... very sad.
You contradict yourself in your own statement.
QuoteYour founding father's definitons also included blacks as not being equal to whites.
If you are referring to to 3/5ths Compromise...
... Massively Stupid statement.
SkyDekker 1,150
I don't think you understand that head of state, head of government and parliament all are different entities.
But, please do explain where the contradiction is.
But, please do explain where the contradiction is.
dmcoco84 4
QuoteDefinition of DEMOCRACY
1 a: government by the people; especially: rule of the majorityQuote
A - Which we especially are NOT. The Founders were especially against the rule of the majority.
b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free electionsQuote
B - We can call this the Fox News Definition.
Quote
P.S... Their definition of Republic sucks as well.
Andy9o8 0
QuoteRules that are likely to have a disproportionate effect on certain classes of citizen (e.g. people without transportation, people who work normal hours) will still be made, because rich people generally make the rules, and poor people are impacted by them
Now, instead of its being a stated fact that the people in power don't want black or hispanic citizens to vote, it'll be a happy "coincidence" that people of whatever opposite political persuasion are less able to vote. Oh darn
![[:/]](/uploads/emoticons/dry.png "[:/]"){kind=small}
This, right here, is the essential point the 4 dissenting Justices were trying to get across - that the VRA is still relevant because disparate effect still occurs.
It's really the essential point of the thread, too. So to all of you, on both sides, who are getting yourselves all distracted and bothered arguing over the semantics of whether a democratic republic like the USA or a constitutional monarchy like the UK can or cannot be colloquially referred-to by the short-hand term "democracy": you all need meds for your ADHD. Ooh, look - shiny!
Oddly enough, I'd consider Merriam-Webster to be a more reputable source for the definition of an English word than some random person on an internet forum.
Blues,
Dave
Blues,
Dave
"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)
(drink Mountain Dew)
kallend 1,673
SkyDekker******
QuoteIt is like saying that all governments that use voting is a democracy.
If that voting is done in an open, fair and free fashion, it would indeed be pretty democratic.
ONLY if the votes individually counted.
Are you contending individual votes do NOT count in the US?
Hanging chad.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
I would.
Which is all that matters...
And which is the only reasonable adherence when discussing US Law... unless you are a Progressive.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites