[Lemmy]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

It's not about party. It's about whether or not we want to be a country of laws where the laws mean what they say or if we want our laws to mean whatever the hell the left wants them to say.

Like the way the left twists that amendment about protecting the militia to justify the private acquisition of automatic weapons?

[stratos]

$1:

Like the way the left twists that amendment about protecting the militia to justify the private acquisition of automatic weapons?

Lemmy in this case it's all about where someone puts the (,) when reading the 2nd amendment.

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. "

The part that sates "the right of the people to keep and bear arms" comes after the comma thus is a separate portion in regards to the militia. Then the all encompassing "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED"

That's what has many people up in arms both figuratively and literally

[BartSimpson]

Lemmy Lemmy:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

It's not about party. It's about whether or not we want to be a country of laws where the laws mean what they say or if we want our laws to mean whatever the hell the left wants them to say.

Like the way the left twists that amendment about protecting the militia to justify the private acquisition of automatic weapons?

$1:

"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials." — George Mason

If you don't like it then there's a way to amend it. Reinterpreting it to suit your particular opinion of what it should be is precisely what Scalia opposed.

[peck420]

It is really pissing me off, with how disrespectful some are being towards Scalia (RIP).

Love him or hate him, he did dedicate a great deal of his life to his country, and that is to respected.

[BartSimpson]

peck420 peck420:

It is really pissing me off, with how disrespectful some are being towards Scalia (RIP).

Love him or hate him, he did dedicate a great deal of his life to his country, and that is to respected.

+5.

[Thanos]

peck420 peck420:

It is really pissing me off, with how disrespectful some are being towards Scalia (RIP).

Love him or hate him, he did dedicate a great deal of his life to his country, and that is to respected.

Oddly enough, for all his reputation as a hardliner, Scalia in life was significantly more moderate and respectful of the rule of law than those (apparently) self-taught (at Internet University) "constitutionalists" who are now saying that Obama has no constitutional right to put forward a candidate to fill Scalia's empty seat.

[BartSimpson]

No one that I've heard of has said that Obama doesn't have a right to submit an appointee to the Senate.

What they're saying, and rightly so, is that Obama filibustered Samuel Alito in 2006 and turnabout is fair play.

It's also noted that Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) promised to block any USSC nominee of George W. Bush's eighteen months ahead of the 2008 election saying that it was 'inappropriate' for Bush to make an appointment 'so close' to the election.

We're only eight months from the election.

The Democrats set the rules of the game and now I hope they choke on them.

[Thanos]

I suppose I could suggest "be better than a toad like Chuck Schumer" as an alternative but it wouldn't get much attention in an electoral cycle where being your worst (Cruz, Trump, Hillary) gains you far more than being your best (Lincoln, Jefferson, Eisenhower) ever will.

[BartSimpson]

Lincoln and Jefferson had far more contentious elections than what we're seeing this year.

Remember, Lincoln won the election and the South almost immediately seceded after he was inaugurated.