181pl Posted February 10, 2017 Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 Remember, these are equal branches. I question whether a Federal Judge has any authority over the discretion a President has to draw federal executive orders over areas exclusively carved out for the Executive branch under either the Constitution or Federal Statute passed by Congress. http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/trump-must-break-judicial-power/ LAW OF THE LAND TRUMP MUST BREAK JUDICIAL POWER Pat Buchanan: 'A clipping of the court's wings is long overdue' Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/trump-must-break-judicial-power/#FymssGRYKAEbPYbr.99 Disheartening and demoralizing,” wailed Judge Neil Gorsuch of President Trump’s comments about the judges seeking to overturn his 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. from the Greater Middle East war zones. What a wimp. Did our future justice break down crying like Sen. Chuck Schumer? Sorry, this is not Antonin Scalia. And just what horrible thing had our president said? A “so-called judge” blocked the travel ban, said Trump. And the arguments in court, where 9th Circuit appellate judges were hearing the government’s appeal, were “disgraceful.” “A bad student in high school would have understood the arguments better.” Did the president disparage a couple of judges? Yep. Yet compare his remarks to the tweeted screeds of Elizabeth Warren after her Senate colleague, Jeff Sessions, was confirmed as attorney general. Sessions, said Warren, represents “radical hatred.” And if he makes “the tiniest attempt to bring his racism, sexism & bigotry” into the Department of Justice, “all of us” will pile on. Now this is hate speech. And it validates Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s decision to use Senate rules to shut her down. These episodes reveal much about America 2017. They reflect, first, the poisoned character of our politics. The language of Warren – that Sessions is steeped in “racism, sexism & bigotry” – echoes the ugliest slander of the Hillary Clinton campaign, where she used similar words to describe Trump’s “deplorables.” Such language, reflecting as it does the beliefs of one-half of America about the other, rules out any rapprochement in America’s social or political life. This is pre-civil war language. For how do you sit down and work alongside people you believe to be crypto-Nazis, Klansmen and fascists? Apparently, you don’t. Rather, you vilify them, riot against them, deny them the right to speak or to be heard. And such conduct is becoming common on campuses today. As for Trump’s disparagement of the judges, only someone ignorant of history can view that as frightening. Thomas Jefferson not only refused to enforce the Alien & Sedition Acts of President John Adams, his party impeached Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, who had presided over one of the trials. Jackson defied Chief Justice John Marshall’s prohibition against moving the Cherokees out of Georgia to west of the Mississippi, where, according to the Harvard resume of Sen. Warren, one of them bundled fruitfully with one of her ancestors, making her part Cherokee. When Chief Justice Roger Taney declared that President Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of the writ of habeas corpus violated the Constitution, Lincoln considered sending U.S. troops to arrest the chief justice. FDR proposed adding six justices to emasculate a Supreme Court of the “nine old men” he reviled for having declared some New Deal schemes unconstitutional. President Eisenhower called his Supreme Court choices Earl Warren and William Brennan two of the “worst mistakes” he made as president. History bears Ike out. And here we come to the heart of the matter. Whether the roll-out of the president’s temporary travel ban was ill-prepared or not, and whether one agrees or not about which nations or people should be subjected to extreme vetting, the president’s authority in the matter of protecting the borders and keeping out those he sees as potentially dangerous is universally conceded. That a district judge would overrule the president of the United States on a matter of border security in wartime is absurd. When politicians don black robes and seize powers they do not have, they should be called out for what they are – usurpers and petty tyrants. And if there is a cause upon which the populist right should unite, it is that elected representatives and executives make the laws and rule the nation. Not judges, and not justices. Indeed, one of the mightiest forces that has birthed the new populism that imperils the establishment is that unelected justices like Warren and Brennan, and their progeny on the bench, have remade our country without the consent of the governed – and with never having been smacked down by Congress or the president. Consider. Secularist justices de-Christianized our country. They invented new rights for vicious criminals as though criminal justice were a game. They tore our country apart with idiotic busing orders to achieve racial balance in public schools. They turned over centuries of tradition and hundreds of state, local and federal laws to discover that the rights to an abortion and same-sex marriage were there in Madison’s Constitution all along. We just couldn’t see them. Trump has warned the judges that if they block his travel ban, and this results in preventable acts of terror on American soil, they will be held accountable. As rightly they should. Meanwhile, Trump’s White House should use the arrogant and incompetent conduct of these federal judges to make the case not only for creating a new Supreme Court, but for Congress to start using Article III, Section 2, of the Constitution – to restrict the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, and to reclaim its stolen powers. A clipping of the court’s wings is long overdue. Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/trump-must-break-judicial-power/#FymssGRYKAEbPYbr.99 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted February 10, 2017 Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 1 hour ago, 181pl said: Remember, these are equal branches. I question whether a Federal Judge has any authority over the discretion a President has to draw federal executive orders over areas exclusively carved out for the Executive branch under either the Constitution or Federal Statute passed by Congress. http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/trump-must-break-judicial-power/ LAW OF THE LAND TRUMP MUST BREAK JUDICIAL POWER Pat Buchanan: 'A clipping of the court's wings is long overdue' Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/trump-must-break-judicial-power/#FymssGRYKAEbPYbr.99 Disheartening and demoralizing,” wailed Judge Neil Gorsuch of President Trump’s comments about the judges seeking to overturn his 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. from the Greater Middle East war zones. What a wimp. Did our future justice break down crying like Sen. Chuck Schumer? Sorry, this is not Antonin Scalia. And just what horrible thing had our president said? A “so-called judge” blocked the travel ban, said Trump. And the arguments in court, where 9th Circuit appellate judges were hearing the government’s appeal, were “disgraceful.” “A bad student in high school would have understood the arguments better.” Did the president disparage a couple of judges? Yep. Yet compare his remarks to the tweeted screeds of Elizabeth Warren after her Senate colleague, Jeff Sessions, was confirmed as attorney general. Sessions, said Warren, represents “radical hatred.” And if he makes “the tiniest attempt to bring his racism, sexism & bigotry” into the Department of Justice, “all of us” will pile on. Now this is hate speech. And it validates Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s decision to use Senate rules to shut her down. These episodes reveal much about America 2017. They reflect, first, the poisoned character of our politics. The language of Warren – that Sessions is steeped in “racism, sexism & bigotry” – echoes the ugliest slander of the Hillary Clinton campaign, where she used similar words to describe Trump’s “deplorables.” Such language, reflecting as it does the beliefs of one-half of America about the other, rules out any rapprochement in America’s social or political life. This is pre-civil war language. For how do you sit down and work alongside people you believe to be crypto-Nazis, Klansmen and fascists? Apparently, you don’t. Rather, you vilify them, riot against them, deny them the right to speak or to be heard. And such conduct is becoming common on campuses today. As for Trump’s disparagement of the judges, only someone ignorant of history can view that as frightening. Thomas Jefferson not only refused to enforce the Alien & Sedition Acts of President John Adams, his party impeached Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, who had presided over one of the trials. Jackson defied Chief Justice John Marshall’s prohibition against moving the Cherokees out of Georgia to west of the Mississippi, where, according to the Harvard resume of Sen. Warren, one of them bundled fruitfully with one of her ancestors, making her part Cherokee. When Chief Justice Roger Taney declared that President Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of the writ of habeas corpus violated the Constitution, Lincoln considered sending U.S. troops to arrest the chief justice. FDR proposed adding six justices to emasculate a Supreme Court of the “nine old men” he reviled for having declared some New Deal schemes unconstitutional. President Eisenhower called his Supreme Court choices Earl Warren and William Brennan two of the “worst mistakes” he made as president. History bears Ike out. And here we come to the heart of the matter. Whether the roll-out of the president’s temporary travel ban was ill-prepared or not, and whether one agrees or not about which nations or people should be subjected to extreme vetting, the president’s authority in the matter of protecting the borders and keeping out those he sees as potentially dangerous is universally conceded. That a district judge would overrule the president of the United States on a matter of border security in wartime is absurd. When politicians don black robes and seize powers they do not have, they should be called out for what they are – usurpers and petty tyrants. And if there is a cause upon which the populist right should unite, it is that elected representatives and executives make the laws and rule the nation. Not judges, and not justices. Indeed, one of the mightiest forces that has birthed the new populism that imperils the establishment is that unelected justices like Warren and Brennan, and their progeny on the bench, have remade our country without the consent of the governed – and with never having been smacked down by Congress or the president. Consider. Secularist justices de-Christianized our country. They invented new rights for vicious criminals as though criminal justice were a game. They tore our country apart with idiotic busing orders to achieve racial balance in public schools. They turned over centuries of tradition and hundreds of state, local and federal laws to discover that the rights to an abortion and same-sex marriage were there in Madison’s Constitution all along. We just couldn’t see them. Trump has warned the judges that if they block his travel ban, and this results in preventable acts of terror on American soil, they will be held accountable. As rightly they should. Meanwhile, Trump’s White House should use the arrogant and incompetent conduct of these federal judges to make the case not only for creating a new Supreme Court, but for Congress to start using Article III, Section 2, of the Constitution – to restrict the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, and to reclaim its stolen powers. A clipping of the court’s wings is long overdue. Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/trump-must-break-judicial-power/#FymssGRYKAEbPYbr.99 A clipping of Pat Buchanan's wings is long long overdue. Hope this helps! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
181pl Posted February 10, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 Listen, I'm not the biggest Buchanan fan, but the history he cites is compelling. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted February 10, 2017 Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 4 minutes ago, Drummer61 said: Noon, before being sarcastic or dismissive,read Buchanans' book, State of Emergency". COMPELLING TO SAY THE LEAST...Tell us the last 5 books you have read.. Algorithms to Live By The Talent Code Incognito Drive currently: The Neuro Revolution But I do way more learning from various educational subscriptions I have. In the middle of a class on How to Listen to and Understand Great Music. I don't read agenda driven, false interpretations that correlate with a set of wants, void of objective analysis like Buchanan writes. hope this helps! 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
181pl Posted February 10, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 5 more than I've read in the last year.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
181pl Posted February 10, 2017 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 4 more. Forgot. Did read a book written by one of my friends (visiting professor at Princeton) about the murder of his brother when we were young kids. Great book- but sad because it is real life. Called: "Alligator Candy". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted February 10, 2017 Report Share Posted February 10, 2017 16 minutes ago, Drummer61 said: None appear to be non fixion historical or political.. But at least your reading.. What sources do you use for political ot historical context..ie John Adams, Killing Jesus, Killing the Rising Sun or Hoodwinked by Jack Cashill.. Did you ever read any of the ACA ??? Cognito......As in Richie?? Born in Bogota,NJ... Not non-fiction? These are books are neuropsychology! If that is not non-fiction, I don't know what is! and you are correct, not a one is political. Good God. I am fascinated to understand the working of the mind, what is it that makes you think reading propaganda is respected for an example. I left you links to every book. You could not even click on a one. And yeah, you won't find these on the best seller list. God forbid people really ;learn something. Enjoy your divisive books that tell you what you want to hear, I don;t waste my time like that. I also enjoy learning about the universe and it;'s workings. Not Palin's workings. We are very different. FYI, your boy Buchanan is effectively writing fiction. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted February 11, 2017 Report Share Posted February 11, 2017 4 hours ago, noonereal said: Algorithms to Live By The Talent Code Incognito Drive currently: The Neuro Revolution But I do way more learning from various educational subscriptions I have. In the middle of a class on How to Listen to and Understand Great Music. I don't read agenda driven, false interpretations that correlate with a set of wants, void of objective analysis like Buchanan writes. hope this helps! Have you ventured "out there" yet in your psychology reading? I have a first edition 1975 copy of Walter Delaney's, Ultra-Psychonics, How to Work Miracles with the Limitless Power of Psycho-Atomic Energy. There's some real "Men Who Stare at Goats" stuff in there lol. Interesting reading though, if you're into that sort of thing. I read it along with several other science-occult-religion type books that that I was super interested in a few years back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawgGoneIt Posted February 11, 2017 Report Share Posted February 11, 2017 7 hours ago, 181pl said: Remember, these are equal branches. I question whether a Federal Judge has any authority over the discretion a President has to draw federal executive orders over areas exclusively carved out for the Executive branch under either the Constitution or Federal Statute passed by Congress. http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/trump-must-break-judicial-power/ LAW OF THE LAND TRUMP MUST BREAK JUDICIAL POWER Pat Buchanan: 'A clipping of the court's wings is long overdue' Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/trump-must-break-judicial-power/#FymssGRYKAEbPYbr.99 Disheartening and demoralizing,” wailed Judge Neil Gorsuch of President Trump’s comments about the judges seeking to overturn his 90-day ban on travel to the U.S. from the Greater Middle East war zones. What a wimp. Did our future justice break down crying like Sen. Chuck Schumer? Sorry, this is not Antonin Scalia. And just what horrible thing had our president said? A “so-called judge” blocked the travel ban, said Trump. And the arguments in court, where 9th Circuit appellate judges were hearing the government’s appeal, were “disgraceful.” “A bad student in high school would have understood the arguments better.” Did the president disparage a couple of judges? Yep. Yet compare his remarks to the tweeted screeds of Elizabeth Warren after her Senate colleague, Jeff Sessions, was confirmed as attorney general. Sessions, said Warren, represents “radical hatred.” And if he makes “the tiniest attempt to bring his racism, sexism & bigotry” into the Department of Justice, “all of us” will pile on. Now this is hate speech. And it validates Majority Leader Mitch McConnell’s decision to use Senate rules to shut her down. These episodes reveal much about America 2017. They reflect, first, the poisoned character of our politics. The language of Warren – that Sessions is steeped in “racism, sexism & bigotry” – echoes the ugliest slander of the Hillary Clinton campaign, where she used similar words to describe Trump’s “deplorables.” Such language, reflecting as it does the beliefs of one-half of America about the other, rules out any rapprochement in America’s social or political life. This is pre-civil war language. For how do you sit down and work alongside people you believe to be crypto-Nazis, Klansmen and fascists? Apparently, you don’t. Rather, you vilify them, riot against them, deny them the right to speak or to be heard. And such conduct is becoming common on campuses today. As for Trump’s disparagement of the judges, only someone ignorant of history can view that as frightening. Thomas Jefferson not only refused to enforce the Alien & Sedition Acts of President John Adams, his party impeached Supreme Court Justice Samuel Chase, who had presided over one of the trials. Jackson defied Chief Justice John Marshall’s prohibition against moving the Cherokees out of Georgia to west of the Mississippi, where, according to the Harvard resume of Sen. Warren, one of them bundled fruitfully with one of her ancestors, making her part Cherokee. When Chief Justice Roger Taney declared that President Abraham Lincoln’s suspension of the writ of habeas corpus violated the Constitution, Lincoln considered sending U.S. troops to arrest the chief justice. FDR proposed adding six justices to emasculate a Supreme Court of the “nine old men” he reviled for having declared some New Deal schemes unconstitutional. President Eisenhower called his Supreme Court choices Earl Warren and William Brennan two of the “worst mistakes” he made as president. History bears Ike out. And here we come to the heart of the matter. Whether the roll-out of the president’s temporary travel ban was ill-prepared or not, and whether one agrees or not about which nations or people should be subjected to extreme vetting, the president’s authority in the matter of protecting the borders and keeping out those he sees as potentially dangerous is universally conceded. That a district judge would overrule the president of the United States on a matter of border security in wartime is absurd. When politicians don black robes and seize powers they do not have, they should be called out for what they are – usurpers and petty tyrants. And if there is a cause upon which the populist right should unite, it is that elected representatives and executives make the laws and rule the nation. Not judges, and not justices. Indeed, one of the mightiest forces that has birthed the new populism that imperils the establishment is that unelected justices like Warren and Brennan, and their progeny on the bench, have remade our country without the consent of the governed – and with never having been smacked down by Congress or the president. Consider. Secularist justices de-Christianized our country. They invented new rights for vicious criminals as though criminal justice were a game. They tore our country apart with idiotic busing orders to achieve racial balance in public schools. They turned over centuries of tradition and hundreds of state, local and federal laws to discover that the rights to an abortion and same-sex marriage were there in Madison’s Constitution all along. We just couldn’t see them. Trump has warned the judges that if they block his travel ban, and this results in preventable acts of terror on American soil, they will be held accountable. As rightly they should. Meanwhile, Trump’s White House should use the arrogant and incompetent conduct of these federal judges to make the case not only for creating a new Supreme Court, but for Congress to start using Article III, Section 2, of the Constitution – to restrict the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, and to reclaim its stolen powers. A clipping of the court’s wings is long overdue. Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/trump-must-break-judicial-power/#FymssGRYKAEbPYbr.99 I'm taking my first break at; That a district judge would overrule the president of the United States on a matter of border security in wartime is absurd Was there an official declaration of war that I'm unaware of? Ok, I'll go back to reading now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted February 11, 2017 Report Share Posted February 11, 2017 10 hours ago, HawgGoneIt said: Have you ventured "out there" yet in your psychology reading? I have a first edition 1975 copy of Walter Delaney's, Ultra-Psychonics, How to Work Miracles with the Limitless Power of Psycho-Atomic Energy. There's some real "Men Who Stare at Goats" stuff in there lol. Interesting reading though, if you're into that sort of thing. I read it along with several other science-occult-religion type books that that I was super interested in a few years back. I had a short fling probing the possibilities of such things as clairvoyance, astrology, pseudo science this and pseudo science that..... many years ago. Checked it all out thoroughly. As with Echo's self serving math, after leaning for myself that one and one were just not two in these worlds, I have closed my mind. We only have so much time to learn and to waste it, is a sin. I like science. It kills me that I can't converse with the wisest in the fields as I never formally studded it and as with medicine, it's involves leaning a language of it's own. I'll need to be content learning and sharing in macro, it's what I am best at and enjoy most anyway so it's not a total loss. When I read basic psychology I as often argue with the author as learn anything. Heck, I even flipped out back in the 80's when stephen hawking told me (via PBS) that information was lost on the event horizon. As we all know, years later he recanted and admitted he was wrong. Dumb Fuc%. lol 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted February 11, 2017 Report Share Posted February 11, 2017 14 hours ago, Drummer61 said: Not if you know history and which of his books did you read?? Did you read,State of Emergency" ??? We also live on EARTH???? You may be in the UNIVERSE.. I never had an interest in history.... for me. life is a progression. My bad, I know it intellectually. i have of late, only the last two years or so, taken a shine to it. I became interested in understanding through my music appreciation learnings. It kinda expanded. Drummer, I never read an editorial in my life. Not once. I simply don;t care what a writers opinion is. I devoured papers and formed my own opinions. I find political propaganda, like Buchanan writes, wholly unacceptable (from either extreme) and frankly trite. Would not waste my time. and that is exactly what it is, to me. A waste of time. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SJR 04 Posted February 11, 2017 Report Share Posted February 11, 2017 ??? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Connman Posted February 11, 2017 Report Share Posted February 11, 2017 2 hours ago, SJR 04 said: ??? I kept thinking I was going into the same thread by mistake because this is the 3rd straight thread you've posted this in. Am I going to have to see it in any more? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pops Posted February 11, 2017 Report Share Posted February 11, 2017 13 minutes ago, Connman said: I kept thinking I was going into the same thread by mistake because this is the 3rd straight thread you've posted this in. Am I going to have to see it in any more? The commo-lefty cartoonist apparently doesn't even know which POTUS is called "Dubya", but is somehow an oracle to that flock of seagulls that just can't stop making noise 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted February 11, 2017 Report Share Posted February 11, 2017 6 hours ago, Drummer61 said: I studied drums under a Louis Bellson teacher.. Favorite drum solo is song 7 on the album,"Ellington Uptownq" called Skin Deep.. Best drum solo I have ever heard...Ginger Baker came a little close but did not have the foot speed or rudimentary knowledge of Bellson..Nowhere near double bass acuity either. Way cool! Hey, the class of 59 lost 5 in the last month. Sad stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noonereal Posted February 12, 2017 Report Share Posted February 12, 2017 13 hours ago, Drummer61 said: A few years older than me, but I knew them.. My uncle was pretty upset. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.