Total Posts:47|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Ginsburg Should Resign or Be Impeached

RookieApologist
Posts: 469
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Robkwoods
Posts: 570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 1:40:45 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...

Yesss! Did you listen to the podcast? Just fantastic, I was frightened for a little bit (still going buy a gun soon) but the left is literally starting to show its true colors. People are starting to wake up, maybe Obama was actually good for the country, hahaha.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.
RookieApologist
Posts: 469
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 2:06:54 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...

Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Supreme Court judges do not have the 1st Amendment Right to discuss their view of political candidates, any more than military members do. It is unethical for her (or any other justice) to interject her thoughts on political matters, just as it is prohibited for those in the military to publicly endorse a particular candidate.

Once someone takes on a certain position, like a Supreme Court Justice, they DO in fact give up certain rights that would otherwise be protected by the Constitution. So your 1st Amendment argument is completely inadequate. But please try again.
RookieApologist
Posts: 469
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 2:17:40 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 2:06:54 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...

Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Supreme Court judges do not have the 1st Amendment Right to discuss their view of political candidates, any more than military members do. It is unethical for her (or any other justice) to interject her thoughts on political matters, just as it is prohibited for those in the military to publicly endorse a particular candidate.

Once someone takes on a certain position, like a Supreme Court Justice, they DO in fact give up certain rights that would otherwise be protected by the Constitution. So your 1st Amendment argument is completely inadequate. But please try again.

If a Supreme Court judge cannot demonstrate how important the 1st Amendment rights are by exercising her own. Why should she be taken seriously?
Elections have consequences and as a voter judges are just as effected by elections. That was what Ginsburg was expressing. Trump is a fake, he will be bad for the country.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.

RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...
RookieApologist
Posts: 469
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 2:24:26 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.


RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...

Completely irrelevant. Because someone else did it doesn't make it right. Even left-wing media pundits know it was wrong:

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And now apparently she finally realizes it too:

http://www.ajc.com...
RookieApologist
Posts: 469
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 2:26:48 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.


RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com...
vortex86
Posts: 559
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 2:29:22 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.


RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...

That is such a tired and terrible argument. Two wrongs don't make a right. Excusing one individuals shortcomings because someone before them did the same is hardly the standard we should be setting. If it was no big deal then she wouldn't have apologized publicly like she just did, nor would she receive the criticisms she did from both sides of the political spectrum. It was in poor taste, and her personal attacks were what set it over the line.

This sums it all up, "On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them. Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. "
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 2:30:49 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 2:24:26 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.


RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...

Completely irrelevant. Because someone else did it doesn't make it right. Even left-wing media pundits know it was wrong:

No one thought it was wrong when they mixed politics with their Supreme Court duties. It is not against the law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And now apparently she finally realizes it too:

http://www.ajc.com...

That is just another political gesture to withdraw her comments. The country knows where she stands.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 2:34:40 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 2:29:22 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.


RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...

That is such a tired and terrible argument. Two wrongs don't make a right. Excusing one individuals shortcomings because someone before them did the same is hardly the standard we should be setting. If it was no big deal then she wouldn't have apologized publicly like she just did, nor would she receive the criticisms she did from both sides of the political spectrum. It was in poor taste, and her personal attacks were what set it over the line.

Everyone knows the Supreme Court judges are politically nominated and follow party lines. The American judicial system is a joke. They even let the courts decide who the president should be. Bush vs Gore.

This sums it all up, "On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them. Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. "
RookieApologist
Posts: 469
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 2:37:27 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 2:30:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:24:26 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.


RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...

Completely irrelevant. Because someone else did it doesn't make it right. Even left-wing media pundits know it was wrong:

No one thought it was wrong when they mixed politics with their Supreme Court duties. It is not against the law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And now apparently she finally realizes it too:

http://www.ajc.com...

That is just another political gesture to withdraw her comments. The country knows where she stands.

Not even sure what your argument is here. Somehow believing she was justified in making her comments is just being intellectually lazy. Just because something isn't technically against the law doesn't mean we should do it. They have a code of ethics for a reason. Separation of Powers exists for a reason.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 2:42:43 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 2:37:27 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:30:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:24:26 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.


RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...

Completely irrelevant. Because someone else did it doesn't make it right. Even left-wing media pundits know it was wrong:

No one thought it was wrong when they mixed politics with their Supreme Court duties. It is not against the law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And now apparently she finally realizes it too:

http://www.ajc.com...

That is just another political gesture to withdraw her comments. The country knows where she stands.

Not even sure what your argument is here. Somehow believing she was justified in making her comments is just being intellectually lazy. Just because something isn't technically against the law doesn't mean we should do it. They have a code of ethics for a reason. Separation of Powers exists for a reason.

Dumb Amerucans like you should take heed Ginsburg knows what she is talking about. Trump is a faker and will be bad for the country if elected. If Trump University tapes are released the country will know just how big a fraudester Trump is.
If it is the truth what does it matter who says it.
Robkwoods
Posts: 570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 3:05:35 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 2:42:43 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:37:27 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:30:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:24:26 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.


RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...

Completely irrelevant. Because someone else did it doesn't make it right. Even left-wing media pundits know it was wrong:

No one thought it was wrong when they mixed politics with their Supreme Court duties. It is not against the law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And now apparently she finally realizes it too:

http://www.ajc.com...

That is just another political gesture to withdraw her comments. The country knows where she stands.

Not even sure what your argument is here. Somehow believing she was justified in making her comments is just being intellectually lazy. Just because something isn't technically against the law doesn't mean we should do it. They have a code of ethics for a reason. Separation of Powers exists for a reason.

Dumb Amerucans like you should take heed Ginsburg knows what she is talking about. Trump is a faker and will be bad for the country if elected. If Trump University tapes are released the country will know just how big a fraudester Trump is.
If it is the truth what does it matter who says it.

Uhhh, "Dumb Amerucans"
Slow down on the keyboard there buddy.

Ginsburg is a left wing fanatic who has shown zero impartiality. She is the picture definition of who a judge shouldn't be. She is a morally bankrupt gasbag.

Interested to know what you think about Hillary.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 5:48:19 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 3:05:35 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:42:43 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:37:27 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:30:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:24:26 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.


RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...

Completely irrelevant. Because someone else did it doesn't make it right. Even left-wing media pundits know it was wrong:

No one thought it was wrong when they mixed politics with their Supreme Court duties. It is not against the law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And now apparently she finally realizes it too:

http://www.ajc.com...

That is just another political gesture to withdraw her comments. The country knows where she stands.

Not even sure what your argument is here. Somehow believing she was justified in making her comments is just being intellectually lazy. Just because something isn't technically against the law doesn't mean we should do it. They have a code of ethics for a reason. Separation of Powers exists for a reason.

Dumb Americans like you should take heed Ginsburg knows what she is talking about. Trump is a faker and will be bad for the country if elected. If Trump University tapes are released the country will know just how big a fraudester Trump is.
If it is the truth what does it matter who says it.

Uhhh, "Dumb Amerucans"
Slow down on the keyboard there buddy.

Ginsburg is a left wing fanatic who has shown zero impartiality. She is the picture definition of who a judge shouldn't be. She is a morally bankrupt gasbag.

Interested to know what you think about Hillary.
Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well.
Trump is a loose cannon, a fraud and a narcissistic money grubbing thin skinned racist. He should seek some leadership position in the EU. He is not suited for America which is a melting pot for immigrants.
Trump will run America like his business. Bankruptcies, fake College degrees and failure after failures. He will default on the American debt payment and sue every opposition. But he is the last white hope. Demographics are changing in America.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 6:11:11 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

I agree it was problematic for Ginsburg to comment, but it is definitely not something new -- and to pretend that judges aren't "involved in politics" is pretty silly. They express their political opinions in writing all the time. The Justice's political leanings are no secret. Unless a case came down questioning the legitimacy of the presidential race's outcome, I don't see how her vocalized opinion is relevant. Inappropriate? Sure. A serious issue? No. She should have said something snarky and sarcastic without mentioning Trump by name. Something like "How someone could get so far is beyond me..." or whatever.
President of DDO
Robkwoods
Posts: 570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 6:50:24 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 5:48:19 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 3:05:35 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:42:43 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:37:27 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:30:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:24:26 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.


RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...

Completely irrelevant. Because someone else did it doesn't make it right. Even left-wing media pundits know it was wrong:

No one thought it was wrong when they mixed politics with their Supreme Court duties. It is not against the law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And now apparently she finally realizes it too:

http://www.ajc.com...

That is just another political gesture to withdraw her comments. The country knows where she stands.

Not even sure what your argument is here. Somehow believing she was justified in making her comments is just being intellectually lazy. Just because something isn't technically against the law doesn't mean we should do it. They have a code of ethics for a reason. Separation of Powers exists for a reason.

Dumb Americans like you should take heed Ginsburg knows what she is talking about. Trump is a faker and will be bad for the country if elected. If Trump University tapes are released the country will know just how big a fraudester Trump is.
If it is the truth what does it matter who says it.

Uhhh, "Dumb Amerucans"
Slow down on the keyboard there buddy.

Ginsburg is a left wing fanatic who has shown zero impartiality. She is the picture definition of who a judge shouldn't be. She is a morally bankrupt gasbag.

Interested to know what you think about Hillary.
Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well.
Trump is a loose cannon, a fraud and a narcissistic money grubbing thin skinned racist. He should seek some leadership position in the EU. He is not suited for America which is a melting pot for immigrants.
Trump will run America like his business. Bankruptcies, fake College degrees and failure after failures. He will default on the American debt payment and sue every opposition. But he is the last white hope. Demographics are changing in America.

Her comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit.

You didn't write Hillary's name once in your response. You already told me what you think about Trump; I agree with some of your assessment.

Trump has said maybe two actually racist things. Trump has done some shady things with Bankruptcies laws; he used the system to his advantage, it is called self-interest. Failures aren't a bad thing, if you learn from them. Default on American debt? What are you babbling about?

America is not a melting pot for immigrants. America was an experiment in nation building without the core of Imperialism. A place where the principle source of power was the individual not some God King. Your idea of this melting pot is one of moral relativism. America was founded on unchanging core principles, despite those in power seeking to change them. Only those with the balls to live by these principles are welcome here.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/14/2016 7:44:07 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 6:50:24 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/14/2016 5:48:19 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 3:05:35 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:42:43 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:37:27 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:30:49 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:24:26 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:21:05 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 2:13:02 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
At 7/14/2016 1:52:23 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/14/2016 12:21:37 PM, RookieApologist wrote:
It is completely unacceptable and unethical for a sitting Supreme Court Justice to speak about the Presidential race. This is why the Constitution discusses separation of powers. This is way justices serve for life, so they do not get involved in politics. Her comments are totally out of line, and she should be held accountable for her actions.

http://www.dailywire.com...
Supreme Court judges have run for political office in the past, Ginsburg was exercising her 1st Amendment rights. If it is the truth, what does it matter who said it.

Canon 5. A judge or candidate for judicial office shall not engage in political or
campaign activity that is inconsistent with the independence, integrity, or impartiality
of the judiciary
.


RBG Is Hardly the First Supreme Court Justice to Mess With Presidential Politics
http://www.politico.com...

Completely irrelevant. Because someone else did it doesn't make it right. Even left-wing media pundits know it was wrong:

No one thought it was wrong when they mixed politics with their Supreme Court duties. It is not against the law.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

And now apparently she finally realizes it too:

http://www.ajc.com...

That is just another political gesture to withdraw her comments. The country knows where she stands.

Not even sure what your argument is here. Somehow believing she was justified in making her comments is just being intellectually lazy. Just because something isn't technically against the law doesn't mean we should do it. They have a code of ethics for a reason. Separation of Powers exists for a reason.

Dumb Americans like you should take heed Ginsburg knows what she is talking about. Trump is a faker and will be bad for the country if elected. If Trump University tapes are released the country will know just how big a fraudester Trump is.
If it is the truth what does it matter who says it.

Uhhh, "Dumb Amerucans"
Slow down on the keyboard there buddy.

Ginsburg is a left wing fanatic who has shown zero impartiality. She is the picture definition of who a judge shouldn't be. She is a morally bankrupt gasbag.

Interested to know what you think about Hillary.
Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well.
Trump is a loose cannon, a fraud and a narcissistic money grubbing thin skinned racist. He should seek some leadership position in the EU. He is not suited for America which is a melting pot for immigrants.
Trump will run America like his business. Bankruptcies, fake College degrees and failure after failures. He will default on the American debt payment and sue every opposition. But he is the last white hope. Demographics are changing in America.

Her comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit.

You didn't write Hillary's name once in your response. You already told me what you think about Trump; I agree with some of your assessment.

I responded directly under your question about Hillary. Read the post again.

I wrote:" Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well. "

Trump has said maybe two actually racist things. Trump has done some shady things with Bankruptcies laws; he used the system to his advantage, it is called self-interest. Failures aren't a bad thing, if you learn from them. Default on American debt? What are you babbling about?

You don't follow the news to good. Trump said one of the ways to reduce the debt soon to be 21 trillion dollars was to default on the payment. Hillary repeated his suggestion as reckless.

America is not a melting pot for immigrants. America was an experiment in nation building without the core of Imperialism. A place where the principle source of power was the individual not some God King. Your idea of this melting pot is one of moral relativism. America was founded on unchanging core principles, despite those in power seeking to change them. Only those with the balls to live by these principles are welcome here.
Robkwoods
Posts: 570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2016 1:52:49 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/14/2016 7:44:07 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Interested to know what you think about Hillary.
Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well.
Trump is a loose cannon, a fraud and a narcissistic money grubbing thin skinned racist. He should seek some leadership position in the EU. He is not suited for America which is a melting pot for immigrants.
Trump will run America like his business. Bankruptcies, fake College degrees and failure after failures. He will default on the American debt payment and sue every opposition. But he is the last white hope. Demographics are changing in America.

Her comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit.

You didn't write Hillary's name once in your response. You already told me what you think about Trump; I agree with some of your assessment.

I responded directly under your question about Hillary. Read the post again.

Ohhhhhh, thought you were talkin about Ginsberg.

Comment still stands
Her actions and comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit. You are clearly not competent.

I wrote:" Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well. "

Trump has said maybe two actually racist things. Trump has done some shady things with Bankruptcies laws; he used the system to his advantage, it is called self-interest. Failures aren't a bad thing, if you learn from them. Default on American debt? What are you babbling about?

You don't follow the news to good. Trump said one of the ways to reduce the debt soon to be 21 trillion dollars was to default on the payment. Hillary repeated his suggestion as reckless.

Clearly you do without question. Trump is an idiot, but it is a possible solution. Hillary is an flaming garbage can. So because Hillary says so, it just must be; trying pulling your head out of your a$$. 21 trillion (not the number BTW) but whose fault was that?

America is not a melting pot for immigrants. America was an experiment in nation building without the core of Imperialism. A place where the principle source of power was the individual not some God King. Your idea of this melting pot is one of moral relativism. America was founded on unchanging core principles, despite those in power seeking to change them. Only those with the balls to live by these principles are welcome here.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,005
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2016 2:08:33 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/15/2016 1:52:49 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/14/2016 7:44:07 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Interested to know what you think about Hillary.
Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well.
Trump is a loose cannon, a fraud and a narcissistic money grubbing thin skinned racist. He should seek some leadership position in the EU. He is not suited for America which is a melting pot for immigrants.
Trump will run America like his business. Bankruptcies, fake College degrees and failure after failures. He will default on the American debt payment and sue every opposition. But he is the last white hope. Demographics are changing in America.

Her comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit.

You didn't write Hillary's name once in your response. You already told me what you think about Trump; I agree with some of your assessment.

I responded directly under your question about Hillary. Read the post again.

Ohhhhhh, thought you were talkin about Ginsberg.

Comment still stands
Her actions and comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit. You are clearly not competent.

I wrote:" Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well. "

Trump has said maybe two actually racist things. Trump has done some shady things with Bankruptcies laws; he used the system to his advantage, it is called self-interest. Failures aren't a bad thing, if you learn from them. Default on American debt? What are you babbling about?

You don't follow the news to good. Trump said one of the ways to reduce the debt soon to be 21 trillion dollars was to default on the payment. Hillary repeated his suggestion as reckless.

Clearly you do without question. Trump is an idiot, but it is a possible solution. Hillary is an flaming garbage can. So because Hillary says so, it just must be; trying pulling your head out of your a$$. 21 trillion (not the number BTW) but whose fault was that?

America is not a melting pot for immigrants. America was an experiment in nation building without the core of Imperialism. A place where the principle source of power was the individual not some God King. Your idea of this melting pot is one of moral relativism. America was founded on unchanging core principles, despite those in power seeking to change them. Only those with the balls to live by these principles are welcome here.

21 trillion was tbe number given by Trump. It is currently at 19-20 trillion.he is expecting it will go up by the time he takes office. Others estimate his tax cuts and Trump You solutions will raise the deficit by another 15 trillion. The lower dollar will help trump just like the lower British pound is expected to help his Golf resort in Scotland.
Islamists can sit back and watch Trump help America implode.
Robkwoods
Posts: 570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2016 2:24:12 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/15/2016 2:08:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/15/2016 1:52:49 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/14/2016 7:44:07 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Interested to know what you think about Hillary.
Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well.
Trump is a loose cannon, a fraud and a narcissistic money grubbing thin skinned racist. He should seek some leadership position in the EU. He is not suited for America which is a melting pot for immigrants.
Trump will run America like his business. Bankruptcies, fake College degrees and failure after failures. He will default on the American debt payment and sue every opposition. But he is the last white hope. Demographics are changing in America.

Her comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit.

You didn't write Hillary's name once in your response. You already told me what you think about Trump; I agree with some of your assessment.

I responded directly under your question about Hillary. Read the post again.

Ohhhhhh, thought you were talkin about Ginsberg.

Comment still stands
Her actions and comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit. You are clearly not competent.

I wrote:" Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well. "

Trump has said maybe two actually racist things. Trump has done some shady things with Bankruptcies laws; he used the system to his advantage, it is called self-interest. Failures aren't a bad thing, if you learn from them. Default on American debt? What are you babbling about?

You don't follow the news to good. Trump said one of the ways to reduce the debt soon to be 21 trillion dollars was to default on the payment. Hillary repeated his suggestion as reckless.

Clearly you do without question. Trump is an idiot, but it is a possible solution. Hillary is an flaming garbage can. So because Hillary says so, it just must be; trying pulling your head out of your a$$. 21 trillion (not the number BTW) but whose fault was that?

America is not a melting pot for immigrants. America was an experiment in nation building without the core of Imperialism. A place where the principle source of power was the individual not some God King. Your idea of this melting pot is one of moral relativism. America was founded on unchanging core principles, despite those in power seeking to change them. Only those with the balls to live by these principles are welcome here.

21 trillion was tbe number given by Trump. It is currently at 19-20 trillion.he is expecting it will go up by the time he takes office. Others estimate his tax cuts and Trump You solutions will raise the deficit by another 15 trillion. The lower dollar will help trump just like the lower British pound is expected to help his Golf resort in Scotland.
Islamists can sit back and watch Trump help America implode.

Actually the number is estimated at 200 Trillion when you include unfunded liabilities. Stop watching TV and do some research. Trump's policies, like what he believes today, would raise the debt maybe a 1 trillion. Hillary's policies are estimated to raise the debt about 3-5 trillion.

What are you on about? The BSP is on the rise.

I have a good plan for strengthening the dollar, but I am pretty sure that you won't agree with it.
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2016 2:42:10 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/15/2016 2:24:12 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/15/2016 2:08:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/15/2016 1:52:49 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/14/2016 7:44:07 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Interested to know what you think about Hillary.
Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well.
Trump is a loose cannon, a fraud and a narcissistic money grubbing thin skinned racist. He should seek some leadership position in the EU. He is not suited for America which is a melting pot for immigrants.
Trump will run America like his business. Bankruptcies, fake College degrees and failure after failures. He will default on the American debt payment and sue every opposition. But he is the last white hope. Demographics are changing in America.

Her comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit.

You didn't write Hillary's name once in your response. You already told me what you think about Trump; I agree with some of your assessment.

I responded directly under your question about Hillary. Read the post again.

Ohhhhhh, thought you were talkin about Ginsberg.

Comment still stands
Her actions and comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit. You are clearly not competent.

I wrote:" Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well. "

Trump has said maybe two actually racist things. Trump has done some shady things with Bankruptcies laws; he used the system to his advantage, it is called self-interest. Failures aren't a bad thing, if you learn from them. Default on American debt? What are you babbling about?

You don't follow the news to good. Trump said one of the ways to reduce the debt soon to be 21 trillion dollars was to default on the payment. Hillary repeated his suggestion as reckless.

Clearly you do without question. Trump is an idiot, but it is a possible solution. Hillary is an flaming garbage can. So because Hillary says so, it just must be; trying pulling your head out of your a$$. 21 trillion (not the number BTW) but whose fault was that?

America is not a melting pot for immigrants. America was an experiment in nation building without the core of Imperialism. A place where the principle source of power was the individual not some God King. Your idea of this melting pot is one of moral relativism. America was founded on unchanging core principles, despite those in power seeking to change them. Only those with the balls to live by these principles are welcome here.

21 trillion was tbe number given by Trump. It is currently at 19-20 trillion.he is expecting it will go up by the time he takes office. Others estimate his tax cuts and Trump You solutions will raise the deficit by another 15 trillion. The lower dollar will help trump just like the lower British pound is expected to help his Golf resort in Scotland.
Islamists can sit back and watch Trump help America implode.

Actually the number is estimated at 200 Trillion when you include unfunded liabilities. Stop watching TV and do some research. Trump's policies, like what he believes today, would raise the debt maybe a 1 trillion. Hillary's policies are estimated to raise the debt about 3-5 trillion.

What are you on about? The BSP is on the rise.

I have a good plan for strengthening the dollar, but I am pretty sure that you won't agree with it.

Why would you want to strengthen the dollar from where it is at? It just gives us greater trade imbalance and makes it harder on US companies with large overseas sales.
Robkwoods
Posts: 570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2016 3:00:08 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/15/2016 2:42:10 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/15/2016 2:24:12 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/15/2016 2:08:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/15/2016 1:52:49 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/14/2016 7:44:07 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Interested to know what you think about Hillary.
Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well.
Trump is a loose cannon, a fraud and a narcissistic money grubbing thin skinned racist. He should seek some leadership position in the EU. He is not suited for America which is a melting pot for immigrants.
Trump will run America like his business. Bankruptcies, fake College degrees and failure after failures. He will default on the American debt payment and sue every opposition. But he is the last white hope. Demographics are changing in America.

Her comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit.

You didn't write Hillary's name once in your response. You already told me what you think about Trump; I agree with some of your assessment.

I responded directly under your question about Hillary. Read the post again.

Ohhhhhh, thought you were talkin about Ginsberg.

Comment still stands
Her actions and comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit. You are clearly not competent.

I wrote:" Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well. "

Trump has said maybe two actually racist things. Trump has done some shady things with Bankruptcies laws; he used the system to his advantage, it is called self-interest. Failures aren't a bad thing, if you learn from them. Default on American debt? What are you babbling about?

You don't follow the news to good. Trump said one of the ways to reduce the debt soon to be 21 trillion dollars was to default on the payment. Hillary repeated his suggestion as reckless.

Clearly you do without question. Trump is an idiot, but it is a possible solution. Hillary is an flaming garbage can. So because Hillary says so, it just must be; trying pulling your head out of your a$$. 21 trillion (not the number BTW) but whose fault was that?

America is not a melting pot for immigrants. America was an experiment in nation building without the core of Imperialism. A place where the principle source of power was the individual not some God King. Your idea of this melting pot is one of moral relativism. America was founded on unchanging core principles, despite those in power seeking to change them. Only those with the balls to live by these principles are welcome here.

21 trillion was tbe number given by Trump. It is currently at 19-20 trillion.he is expecting it will go up by the time he takes office. Others estimate his tax cuts and Trump You solutions will raise the deficit by another 15 trillion. The lower dollar will help trump just like the lower British pound is expected to help his Golf resort in Scotland.
Islamists can sit back and watch Trump help America implode.

Actually the number is estimated at 200 Trillion when you include unfunded liabilities. Stop watching TV and do some research. Trump's policies, like what he believes today, would raise the debt maybe a 1 trillion. Hillary's policies are estimated to raise the debt about 3-5 trillion.

What are you on about? The BSP is on the rise.

I have a good plan for strengthening the dollar, but I am pretty sure that you won't agree with it.

Why would you want to strengthen the dollar from where it is at? It just gives us greater trade imbalance and makes it harder on US companies with large overseas sales.

Explain to me why having a trade deficit is a bad thing?

If I have goods and you have money, we have a trade deficit. This is not a bad thing, why do people not understand this.

NO stupid regulations make it hard on US companies. You are stifling growth and prosperity in your protectionist world. You are assuming that to gain in one area is to lose in another.
Robkwoods
Posts: 570
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2016 3:01:18 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/15/2016 2:43:12 PM, slo1 wrote:
PS, Ginsburg apologizing is how respective people handle themselves.

No, not saying it in the first place is what you expect from a Supreme Court Justice.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2016 3:48:35 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/15/2016 3:01:18 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/15/2016 2:43:12 PM, slo1 wrote:
PS, Ginsburg apologizing is how respective people handle themselves.

No, not saying it in the first place is what you expect from a Supreme Court Justice.

It's like saying a teacher that slapped a kid, then apologized is respectable....
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2016 3:50:04 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/15/2016 3:00:08 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/15/2016 2:42:10 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/15/2016 2:24:12 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/15/2016 2:08:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 7/15/2016 1:52:49 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/14/2016 7:44:07 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Interested to know what you think about Hillary.
Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well.
Trump is a loose cannon, a fraud and a narcissistic money grubbing thin skinned racist. He should seek some leadership position in the EU. He is not suited for America which is a melting pot for immigrants.
Trump will run America like his business. Bankruptcies, fake College degrees and failure after failures. He will default on the American debt payment and sue every opposition. But he is the last white hope. Demographics are changing in America.

Her comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit.

You didn't write Hillary's name once in your response. You already told me what you think about Trump; I agree with some of your assessment.

I responded directly under your question about Hillary. Read the post again.

Ohhhhhh, thought you were talkin about Ginsberg.

Comment still stands
Her actions and comments show that she is none of those adjectives. Recognition by world leaders does not increase your virtue one bit. You are clearly not competent.

I wrote:" Stable, experienced and a very competent person. She has learnt from her mistakes and the world leaders know her well. "

Trump has said maybe two actually racist things. Trump has done some shady things with Bankruptcies laws; he used the system to his advantage, it is called self-interest. Failures aren't a bad thing, if you learn from them. Default on American debt? What are you babbling about?

You don't follow the news to good. Trump said one of the ways to reduce the debt soon to be 21 trillion dollars was to default on the payment. Hillary repeated his suggestion as reckless.

Clearly you do without question. Trump is an idiot, but it is a possible solution. Hillary is an flaming garbage can. So because Hillary says so, it just must be; trying pulling your head out of your a$$. 21 trillion (not the number BTW) but whose fault was that?

America is not a melting pot for immigrants. America was an experiment in nation building without the core of Imperialism. A place where the principle source of power was the individual not some God King. Your idea of this melting pot is one of moral relativism. America was founded on unchanging core principles, despite those in power seeking to change them. Only those with the balls to live by these principles are welcome here.

21 trillion was tbe number given by Trump. It is currently at 19-20 trillion.he is expecting it will go up by the time he takes office. Others estimate his tax cuts and Trump You solutions will raise the deficit by another 15 trillion. The lower dollar will help trump just like the lower British pound is expected to help his Golf resort in Scotland.
Islamists can sit back and watch Trump help America implode.

Actually the number is estimated at 200 Trillion when you include unfunded liabilities. Stop watching TV and do some research. Trump's policies, like what he believes today, would raise the debt maybe a 1 trillion. Hillary's policies are estimated to raise the debt about 3-5 trillion.

What are you on about? The BSP is on the rise.

I have a good plan for strengthening the dollar, but I am pretty sure that you won't agree with it.

Why would you want to strengthen the dollar from where it is at? It just gives us greater trade imbalance and makes it harder on US companies with large overseas sales.

Explain to me why having a trade deficit is a bad thing?

If I have goods and you have money, we have a trade deficit. This is not a bad thing, why do people not understand this.

NO stupid regulations make it hard on US companies. You are stifling growth and prosperity in your protectionist world. You are assuming that to gain in one area is to lose in another.

Calm down, calm down. If you give me some black licorice, I'll give you a kiss.

I never said anything about trade protectionism you jack wagon.
slo1
Posts: 4,318
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2016 3:54:15 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/15/2016 3:48:35 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/15/2016 3:01:18 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/15/2016 2:43:12 PM, slo1 wrote:
PS, Ginsburg apologizing is how respective people handle themselves.

No, not saying it in the first place is what you expect from a Supreme Court Justice.

It's like saying a teacher that slapped a kid, then apologized is respectable....

That is the most asinine anology I have read today. I never said the behavior was OK.

But on your anology I guess that explains why you support Trump because you support people who don't recognize when they done wrong and don't apologize for their wrong behaviors.

Put that parrot in your pipe and smoke it.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/15/2016 3:56:08 PM
Posted: 4 months ago
At 7/15/2016 3:54:15 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 7/15/2016 3:48:35 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 7/15/2016 3:01:18 PM, Robkwoods wrote:
At 7/15/2016 2:43:12 PM, slo1 wrote:
PS, Ginsburg apologizing is how respective people handle themselves.

No, not saying it in the first place is what you expect from a Supreme Court Justice.

It's like saying a teacher that slapped a kid, then apologized is respectable....

That is the most asinine anology I have read today. I never said the behavior was OK.

But on your anology I guess that explains why you support Trump because you support people who don't recognize when they done wrong and don't apologize for their wrong behaviors.

Put that parrot in your pipe and smoke it.

No matter how respectable you may think the person is, some behaviors cross the line.