One Political Plaza - Home of politics
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main
Which One Of The Bill Of Rights Don't You Like?
Page 1 of 2 next>
Oct 20, 2020 14:28:17   #
Liberty Tree
 
V**e Democrat and it will be gone.

Reply
Oct 20, 2020 14:30:50   #
Weasel Loc: In the Great State Of Indiana!!
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
V**e Democrat and it will be gone.


V**e Democrat and 62% of your earnings as a small business will be gone

Reply
Oct 20, 2020 14:31:36   #
Kevyn
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
V**e Democrat and it will be gone.

For the bill of rights to be changed it requires a constitutional amendment. How exactly will a v**e for Democrats achieve that? You should have at least a rudimentary understanding of our constitution before you comment on it.

Reply
 
 
Oct 20, 2020 14:42:44   #
Seth
 
Kevyn wrote:
For the bill of rights to be changed it requires a constitutional amendment. How exactly will a v**e for Democrats achieve that? You should have at least a rudimentary understanding of our constitution before you comment on it.


A determined president and Congress could pass laws that eliminate important parts of those rights without touching them. Just look at the way Democrats are constantly nibbling away at the Second Amendment. Look at the "Fairness Doctrine" they tried to push a few years ago that would have crippled conservative talk radio, encroaching on their First Amendment rights without actually touching the amendment itself.

You are obtuse.

Reply
Oct 20, 2020 15:04:19   #
Kevyn
 
Seth wrote:
A determined president and Congress could pass laws that eliminate important parts of those rights without touching them. Just look at the way Democrats are constantly nibbling away at the Second Amendment. Look at the "Fairness Doctrine" they tried to push a few years ago that would have crippled conservative talk radio, encroaching on their First Amendment rights without actually touching the amendment itself.

You are obtuse.

The fare ness doctrine worked successfully for years and infringed on no ones free speech it simply insisted that use of public airwaves for broadcast offered opposing editorial views. The second amendment is clearly interpreted by the Supreme Court any law countering this understanding will be struck down by the courts. You are whining about things that are not going to happen.

Reply
Oct 20, 2020 15:22:05   #
Liberty Tree
 
Seth wrote:
A determined president and Congress could pass laws that eliminate important parts of those rights without touching them. Just look at the way Democrats are constantly nibbling away at the Second Amendment. Look at the "Fairness Doctrine" they tried to push a few years ago that would have crippled conservative talk radio, encroaching on their First Amendment rights without actually touching the amendment itself.

You are obtuse.


Freedom of religion is being restricted by governors, freedom of speech is being suppressed, freedom of the press has become freedom to ignore t***h and control the information the public receives and freedom to peaceably assemble and redress grievances has become freedom to destroy property, r**t, injure and k**l. All this has happened without any Constitutional amendment. It will get worse under a President Harris (forget Biden as he would not be around long).

Reply
Oct 20, 2020 16:11:56   #
GmanTerry
 
Kevyn wrote:
For the bill of rights to be changed it requires a constitutional amendment. How exactly will a v**e for Democrats achieve that? You should have at least a rudimentary understanding of our constitution before you comment on it.


WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. You l*****ts have already stolen our "Freedom of Speech" with your politial correctness. and cancel culture.


Semper Fi

Reply
 
 
Oct 20, 2020 16:30:45   #
Larai Loc: Fallon, NV
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
Freedom of religion is being restricted by governors, freedom of speech is being suppressed, freedom of the press has become freedom to ignore t***h and control the information the public receives and freedom to peaceably assemble and redress grievances has become freedom to destroy property, r**t, injure and k**l. All this has happened without any Constitutional amendment. It will get worse under a President Harris (forget Biden as he would not be around long).


100% agree! Not to mention Nancy Pelosi bringing up the 25th Amendment, stating that "it's not about Trump~it's for future presidents." Ok, well.. since she doesn't believe in her pea brain that Trump will win another term, (or maybe she does) but this is so that IF Biden were to get elected, she can oust him due to his mental decline, and put Harris in as President, God only knows who her VP would be, Michael Obama, or Clinton? Hard tellin.. And Trump getting re-elected would also give her leave to TRY to get Trump out with the 25th Amendment..

Reply
Oct 20, 2020 16:36:21   #
Crayons Loc: St Jo, Texas
 
Kevyn wrote:
The fare ness doctrine worked successfully for years and infringed on no ones free speech it simply insisted that use of public airwaves for broadcast offered opposing editorial views. The second amendment is clearly interpreted by the Supreme Court any law countering this understanding will be struck down by the courts. You are whining about things that are not going to happen.

The only whiners are you luci klanteefa arsonists who only like chaos, destruction and 'fire'

Reply
Oct 20, 2020 16:46:07   #
Kevyn
 
GmanTerry wrote:
WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. You l*****ts have already stolen our "Freedom of Speech" with your politial correctness. and cancel culture.


Semper Fi


Your freedom of speech simply guarantees the government won’t arrest you for what you say. What kind of an i***t believes they can say the most outrageous h**e filled nonsense without societal repercussions?

Reply
Oct 20, 2020 16:50:48   #
Crayons Loc: St Jo, Texas
 
Kevyn wrote:
Your freedom of speech simply guarantees the government won’t arrest you for what you say. What kind of an i***t believes they can say the most outrageous h**e filled nonsense without societal repercussions?
KlanTeeeFa and the demonrat maoist brigades

Reply
 
 
Oct 20, 2020 17:17:42   #
Seth
 
Kevyn wrote:
The fare ness doctrine worked successfully for years and infringed on no ones free speech it simply insisted that use of public airwaves for broadcast offered opposing editorial views. The second amendment is clearly interpreted by the Supreme Court any law countering this understanding will be struck down by the courts. You are whining about things that are not going to happen.


No, it was geared towards taking away the right of citizens to listen to what they wished to listen to.

Radio stations survive through saleable commercial airtime, selling ad space.

Exponentially more Americans were tuning, by choice, into conservative talk radio while liberal talk radio wasn't getting enough listeners to attract advertisers, so they couldn't afford to maintain programs that weren't even paying for themselves.

This was the marketplace in action, and the Democrats couldn't stand that more people were able to hear news and opinion that was beyond the reach of the "progressive" mainstream media to do anything about.

In typically anti-America fashion, they decided to deny Americans the "right to choose" whose political commentary they wanted to listen to by forcing the stations that were featuring conservative programs to give equal time to "liberal" programming whose money losing airtime would offset the profits made on what most listeners tuned in to hear. So now to stay in business, these stations had to cut back on conservative shows to meet requirements of a totally unconstitutional -- if not in intent then in spirit -- "edict" by the Democrats.

A perfect example of l*****t Democrats using totalitarian techniques to silence political opposition, and a vivid example of how l*****ts allow their politics to control the marketplace, which is much better off without government meddling.

Only an immature crybaby, an ignorant fool or a card carrying C*******t could post what you posted.

Reply
Oct 20, 2020 20:33:40   #
ImLogicallyRight
 
Larai wrote:
100% agree! Not to mention Nancy Pelosi bringing up the 25th Amendment, stating that "it's not about Trump~it's for future presidents." Ok, well.. since she doesn't believe in her pea brain that Trump will win another term, (or maybe she does) but this is so that IF Biden were to get elected, she can oust him due to his mental decline, and put Harris in as President, God only knows who her VP would be, Michael Obama, or Clinton? Hard tellin.. And Trump getting re-elected would also give her leave to TRY to get Trump out with the 25th Amendment..
100% agree! Not to mention Nancy Pelosi bringing u... (show quote)


Triumph with Trump

***God only knows who her VP would be, Michael Obama, or Clinton?
>>> It would never be Clinton. She isn't ready to commit suicide with 6 shots to the back of her head.

Triumph with Trump

Reply
Oct 20, 2020 20:38:01   #
Larai Loc: Fallon, NV
 
ImLogicallyRight wrote:
Triumph with Trump

***God only knows who her VP would be, Michael Obama, or Clinton?
>>> It would never be Clinton. She isn't ready to commit suicide with 6 shots to the back of her head.

Triumph with Trump


First day of v****g in NV was this past Saturday the 17th, I V**ED! TRUMP2020!! WWG1WGA!

Reply
Oct 21, 2020 00:59:19   #
SSDD
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
V**e Democrat and it will be gone.


Interesting prognostication, can you list all of the rights the liberals have eliminated in the past?

Reply
Page 1 of 2 next>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2024 IDF International Technologies, Inc.