RollinThundr wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 10:33:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 10:22:
You said: "He's also made reference to executive orders on the 2nd amendment which is not in his power to do."
Then you posted links to videos that specifically reference the 23 EOs that Obama laid out after Sandy Hook. It was only later that you started posted vids about other EOs.
So, yeah, you were talking about the 2nd amendment-related EOs. Would you care to retract that claim now since you can't seem to defend it?
Ahh ok, I see where the confusion is, I was referring to his comment that "I can do this via EO" not that he did. Sorry for the confusion there. However I still believe some if not all of those 23 are not legal. Especially confiscating private property, and work camps, ala fema camps which we have evidence have been popping up all over.
I've never heard as much mention of a fore coming martial law than I have in the last year or so. And I certainly wouldn't put it past him, the guy isn't genuine, it's obvious.
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 10:22:
You said: "He's also made reference to executive orders on the 2nd amendment which is not in his power to do."
Then you posted links to videos that specifically reference the 23 EOs that Obama laid out after Sandy Hook. It was only later that you started posted vids about other EOs.
So, yeah, you were talking about the 2nd amendment-related EOs. Would you care to retract that claim now since you can't seem to defend it?
RollinThundr wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 08:21:Beamer wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 02:03:
Guys, guys, I'm sure he can post some poorly made, unsourced YouTube video that explains everything with ocersimplifications, misunderstandings, typos, comic sans a killer soundtrack.
And I'm sure you can change your situation depending on the topic, like you have a couple times already. I take anything you say with a grain of salt at this point, you've proven you're full of shit more often than not.
RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 13:16:
I dunno between all his EO's most of which I would think violate the Constitution, his stance on guns, ramming through Obamacare and lying about it. The fact that the dollar could very well collapse any day now and honestly did in 2008 and we'll be Greece before you know it.
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 09:18:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 08:21:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 00:46:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 23:36:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:16:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:02:At least he's confirmed once and for all that he has nothing of substance to say and is incapable of having a rational discussion.nin wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 20:40:Derpa derpa derp. Da derp derpa derpity derp. Derp derp!
"I'm going to make these crazy statements, but I'm much too busy to back them up with any facts..."
durpa durpa dunder...
Where in the constitution does it grant a president to make EO's like that? Point it out for me smart guy, if anything, when you read especially the 5th amendment in regards to property alone, some of those are unconstitutional. You guys are either obtuse or really love obama's cock or some shit.
If you're not going to name the specific EOs of the 23 related to the gun issue that we've been talking about, and explain exactly how those violate the constitution, then I'll just continue to believe you're still just derping along in your decidedly non-blissful ignorance. I'm not going down another rabbit hole until you show that you can conclude a discussion about a single issue.
READ THE ENTIRE LIST regardless if its about guns. JFC you are obtuse. HELLO MC FLY? ANYONE HOME IN THERE? NO?
No. You made the specific claim that "most" of the 23 EOs Obama laid out related to the gun issue were unconstitutional. I want you to back that up with specifics about which EOs violate which parts of the Constitution. If you refuse, then there's no further point in discussing anything.
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 09:18:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 08:21:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 00:46:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 23:36:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:16:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:02:At least he's confirmed once and for all that he has nothing of substance to say and is incapable of having a rational discussion.nin wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 20:40:Derpa derpa derp. Da derp derpa derpity derp. Derp derp!
"I'm going to make these crazy statements, but I'm much too busy to back them up with any facts..."
durpa durpa dunder...
Where in the constitution does it grant a president to make EO's like that? Point it out for me smart guy, if anything, when you read especially the 5th amendment in regards to property alone, some of those are unconstitutional. You guys are either obtuse or really love obama's cock or some shit.
If you're not going to name the specific EOs of the 23 related to the gun issue that we've been talking about, and explain exactly how those violate the constitution, then I'll just continue to believe you're still just derping along in your decidedly non-blissful ignorance. I'm not going down another rabbit hole until you show that you can conclude a discussion about a single issue.
READ THE ENTIRE LIST regardless if its about guns. JFC you are obtuse. HELLO MC FLY? ANYONE HOME IN THERE? NO?
No. You made the specific claim that "most" of the 23 EOs Obama laid out related to the gun issue were unconstitutional. I want you to back that up with specifics. If you refuse, then there's no further point in discussing anything.
RollinThundr wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 08:21:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 00:46:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 23:36:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:16:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:02:At least he's confirmed once and for all that he has nothing of substance to say and is incapable of having a rational discussion.nin wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 20:40:Derpa derpa derp. Da derp derpa derpity derp. Derp derp!
"I'm going to make these crazy statements, but I'm much too busy to back them up with any facts..."
durpa durpa dunder...
Where in the constitution does it grant a president to make EO's like that? Point it out for me smart guy, if anything, when you read especially the 5th amendment in regards to property alone, some of those are unconstitutional. You guys are either obtuse or really love obama's cock or some shit.
If you're not going to name the specific EOs of the 23 related to the gun issue that we've been talking about, and explain exactly how those violate the constitution, then I'll just continue to believe you're still just derping along in your decidedly non-blissful ignorance. I'm not going down another rabbit hole until you show that you can conclude a discussion about a single issue.
READ THE ENTIRE LIST regardless if its about guns. JFC you are obtuse. HELLO MC FLY? ANYONE HOME IN THERE? NO?
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 00:46:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 23:36:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:16:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:02:At least he's confirmed once and for all that he has nothing of substance to say and is incapable of having a rational discussion.nin wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 20:40:Derpa derpa derp. Da derp derpa derpity derp. Derp derp!
"I'm going to make these crazy statements, but I'm much too busy to back them up with any facts..."
durpa durpa dunder...
Where in the constitution does it grant a president to make EO's like that? Point it out for me smart guy, if anything, when you read especially the 5th amendment in regards to property alone, some of those are unconstitutional. You guys are either obtuse or really love obama's cock or some shit.
If you're not going to name the specific EOs of the 23 related to the gun issue that we've been talking about, and explain exactly how those violate the constitution, then I'll just continue to believe you're still just derping along in your decidedly non-blissful ignorance. I'm not going down another rabbit hole until you show that you can conclude a discussion about a single issue.
Beamer wrote on Oct 28, 2013, 02:03:
Guys, guys, I'm sure he can post some poorly made, unsourced YouTube video that explains everything with ocersimplifications, misunderstandings, typos, comic sans a killer soundtrack.
RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 23:36:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:16:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:02:At least he's confirmed once and for all that he has nothing of substance to say and is incapable of having a rational discussion.nin wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 20:40:Derpa derpa derp. Da derp derpa derpity derp. Derp derp!
"I'm going to make these crazy statements, but I'm much too busy to back them up with any facts..."
durpa durpa dunder...
Where in the constitution does it grant a president to make EO's like that? Point it out for me smart guy, if anything, when you read especially the 5th amendment in regards to property alone, some of those are unconstitutional. You guys are either obtuse or really love obama's cock or some shit.
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:16:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:02:At least he's confirmed once and for all that he has nothing of substance to say and is incapable of having a rational discussion.nin wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 20:40:Derpa derpa derp. Da derp derpa derpity derp. Derp derp!
"I'm going to make these crazy statements, but I'm much too busy to back them up with any facts..."
durpa durpa dunder...
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:16:trollindunder wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:02:At least he's confirmed once and for all that he has nothing of substance to say and is incapable of having a rational discussion.nin wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 20:40:Derpa derpa derp. Da derp derpa derpity derp. Derp derp!
"I'm going to make these crazy statements, but I'm much too busy to back them up with any facts..."
durpa durpa dunder...
RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 21:02:At least he's confirmed once and for all that he has nothing of substance to say and is incapable of having a rational discussion.nin wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 20:40:Derpa derpa derp. Da derp derpa derpity derp. Derp derp!
"I'm going to make these crazy statements, but I'm much too busy to back them up with any facts..."
durpa durpa dunder...
nin wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 20:40:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 20:34:trollindunder wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 18:26:So you can't say which one violates it, nor can you say how. So you're just full of shit and wasting my time.Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 18:02:
So how long are you going to keep dodging my question? How do any of the 23 EOs violate the Constitution?
You've obvious never even read the contents of the Constitution, start with the first and work your way up, you'll figure it out I think.
"I'm going to make these crazy statements, but I'm much too busy to back them up with any facts..."
durpa durpa dunder...
RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 18:26:So you can't say which one violates it, nor can you say how. So you're just full of shit and wasting my time.Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 18:02:
So how long are you going to keep dodging my question? How do any of the 23 EOs violate the Constitution?
You've obvious never even read the contents of the Constitution, start with the first and work your way up, you'll figure it out I think.
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 18:02:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 17:47:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 17:18:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 16:11:Mad Max RW wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 15:15:
And it gets even better as liberal Californians who supported the law are discovering they have to pay up:
Some health insurance gets pricier as Obamacare rolls out - Many middle-class Californians with individual health plans are surprised they need policies that cover more — and cost more.Pam Kehaly, president of Anthem Blue Cross in California, said she received a recent letter from a young woman complaining about a 50% rate hike related to the healthcare law.
"She said, 'I was all for Obamacare until I found out I was paying for it,'" Kehaly said.
Classic.
Notice how none of the usual suspects are defending any of this.
I'm still waiting for you to explain how any (let alone most) of the EOs violate the Constitution. I don't plan to engage on any other topics until we settle at least one. You changing the subject constantly is just tedious.
So, I'll ask once again, please do explain which EOs violate the Constitution, and how.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBj7wj0Lx7c
Since when can a president sign into order the right for the government to not only seize all means of transportation, both public and private, Since when can the government take over food production and farms? Since when can the government mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision? Either you refuse to watch the same link I've posted 5 times or you're fine with it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x14IF7f3tLw
So how long are you going to keep dodging my question? How do any of the 23 EOs violate the Constitution?
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 18:02:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 17:47:Wowbagger_TIP wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 17:18:RollinThundr wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 16:11:Mad Max RW wrote on Oct 27, 2013, 15:15:
And it gets even better as liberal Californians who supported the law are discovering they have to pay up:
Some health insurance gets pricier as Obamacare rolls out - Many middle-class Californians with individual health plans are surprised they need policies that cover more — and cost more.Pam Kehaly, president of Anthem Blue Cross in California, said she received a recent letter from a young woman complaining about a 50% rate hike related to the healthcare law.
"She said, 'I was all for Obamacare until I found out I was paying for it,'" Kehaly said.
Classic.
Notice how none of the usual suspects are defending any of this.
I'm still waiting for you to explain how any (let alone most) of the EOs violate the Constitution. I don't plan to engage on any other topics until we settle at least one. You changing the subject constantly is just tedious.
So, I'll ask once again, please do explain which EOs violate the Constitution, and how.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bBj7wj0Lx7c
Since when can a president sign into order the right for the government to not only seize all means of transportation, both public and private, Since when can the government take over food production and farms? Since when can the government mobilize civilians into work brigades under government supervision? Either you refuse to watch the same link I've posted 5 times or you're fine with it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x14IF7f3tLw
So how long are you going to keep dodging my question? How do any of the 23 EOs violate the Constitution?