Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 93

Thread: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

  1. #61
    Heavy Hitter


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    63,805

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Auto makers are not responsible for misuse of their products.

    Gun manufacturers are still responsible for negligence of manufacture and for design flaws which cause injury, just like any other manufacturer.
    I see it a bit like cigarette companies: a product which even when used as intended kills. Sounds like a lawyer's wet dream. Bush signing an immunity agreement shows a lot about what he was about: protecting the makers of harmful products from legal reprecussions.

  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    04-05-13 @ 12:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    203

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by ReformCollege View Post
    Are you quite finished? No one cares about how much a socialist is in love with Obama.
    sorry I missed this earlier ... I'm not a big Obama fan ... in fact, I think of him as a moderate Republican (yes, once there was such an animal), then there's Guantanamo, drones, caving time and time again, and on and on ... but given a choice between Romney and the Republicans and Obama and the Dems, it was an easy call ... But you need to learn not to jump to conclusions ... have a good one ...

  3. #63
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:27 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,605

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    I see it a bit like cigarette companies: a product which even when used as intended kills. Sounds like a lawyer's wet dream. Bush signing an immunity agreement shows a lot about what he was about: protecting the makers of harmful products from legal reprecussions.
    Entirely false equivalency, and silly mischaracterization of Bush's intent.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  4. #64
    Heavy Hitter


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    63,805

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Entirely false equivalency, and silly mischaracterization of Bush's intent.
    Tobacco and guns, both are as American as apple pie and going to grandma's for Christmas.

  5. #65
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,986

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    Well you asked a dishonest question as I stated She was Anti Gun.
    You also said she was against the Constitution, specifically the 2nd Amendment, and I asked for you to provide evidence. Your evidence was a lawsuit she pursued as part of her job, a lawsuit which had nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment.

    Then U tried to play like she wasn't Anti Gun.
    I did no such thing. All I said is you have yet to provide any tangible proof. A bunch of Senators and Republican media spouting rhetoric is not an example.

    Course you were also the one that said you couldn't find anything on this woman at all.
    Again, false. I never said I couldn't find anything on this woman, I said I couldn't find anything to suggest she was against the 2nd Amendment.

    When clearly there is all kind of stuff out there on her.
    I'm still waiting for you to produce any of it.

    While I am sure all those liberal sources are saying she favors the Second
    I don't need any "liberal" sources, I have her direct testimony which says she supports the ruling of the Supreme Court on the matter.

    But as usual you libs look to deflect when coming out the box.
    Excuse me for a moment, as I laugh out loud at you.

    Your focus was on her case over the manufacturers out of New York. My case was she was Anti Gun and an Obama Puppet.
    Again, MY focus was your direct words of "Stopping any attorney that don't support and believe in the Constitution despite saying otherwise. Is a plus for the Country. Not a detriment. Perhaps you should read up on her and seeing how she would play with the Second Amendment and what shall not be infringed upon." and asking you to support it. Which you have still failed to do.

    There is no getting round the fact that she is Anti Gun and Anti 2nd Amendment. Despite what she said.


    So you ignore her EXACT words on the subject and instead focus on something you have yet to produce a single solid piece of evidence to support. Amazing.

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Speaking of *sigh*, that does not mean what you REWROTE IT INTO meaning.

    And yes, it's an argument which has gone on for decades, and you're on the side of it which is 100% wrong, in every way it can be wrong. And after all of this, I have no reason to chalk it up to being an "honest mistake."




    I never claimed that it did. In fact, I explicitly said the arguments were elsewhere to be found. Can you get through a post without lying about something?




    No, there aren't. There was never the slightest peep of your "argument" before 1940.

    More lies
    .




    No, that goes all the way back the explicit statements of the Founders and the Framers, as well as comments in federal and Supreme Court decisions throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, including -- INCLUDING -- US v. Miller.

    For you, is this ignorance? Dishonesty? Probably a combination of both, motivated by the latter.




    Incorrect, and you again attribute to me something I didn't say. I said your interpretation was wrong. It is.




    Oh, you blame ME for YOU accusing me of saying something I did not say. That's on no one but you. Holy flirking snit, the depth of your dishonesty sinks even further.




    Oh, wow -- you're sobbing and lying at the same time.



    Oh, you poooooor thing. What's the problem -- accustomed to message boards where people can't see through your dishonest tactics? It all does seem quite practiced, so I assume this isn't your first rodeo.

    Unfortunately, when you play the game, you don't get to choose the opposing team.


    It's been a long time since I encountered someone this delusional, and the last time I did so, the other person had yet to reach their 18th birthday. You come into a thread to start an argument completely unrelated to the thread, accuse me of dishonesty when I CLEARLY was willing to use any interpretation of the 2nd Amendment in my point, falsely accuse me of engaging in a logical fallacy and then have the audacity to whine when your troll card is called.

    It's clear you are not interested in any reasonable or rational discussion. The sad thing is you're obviously more intelligent than MMC, and yet you'd rather act in such a silly manner, using childish insults which have been clearly proven untrue. Instead of wasting everyone's time acting like a child, how about you actually engage in the thread discussion? It seems far more productive than the two of us accusing each other of being dishonest. After all, while I am new here, the rules have made me believe this forum is more about mature debate and not about childish name-calling.

    So let's try this again. I disagree with your interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. Many others do as well. But whether we use your interpretation or my interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is irrelevant to the question I originally asked, which is how the lawsuit in question is in violation of either interpretation. Now, do you have any opinions on that matter?

  6. #66
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,766

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    I see it a bit like cigarette companies: a product which even when used as intended kills. Sounds like a lawyer's wet dream. Bush signing an immunity agreement shows a lot about what he was about: protecting the makers of harmful products from legal reprecussions.
    that's stupid. using a gun properly often preserves the life of the user.

    why should beretta be sued by assholes using public tax dollars when some gang banger shoots another gangbanger with a stolen beretta or maybe a Glock. You see, those assholes never proved any negligence by the makers nor did they demonstrate whose guns were "falling" into the wrong hands.



  7. #67
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,766

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    You also said she was against the Constitution, specifically the 2nd Amendment, and I asked for you to provide evidence. Your evidence was a lawsuit she pursued as part of her job, a lawsuit which had nothing to do with the 2nd Amendment.

    I did no such thing. All I said is you have yet to provide any tangible proof. A bunch of Senators and Republican media spouting rhetoric is not an example.

    Again, false. I never said I couldn't find anything on this woman, I said I couldn't find anything to suggest she was against the 2nd Amendment.

    I'm still waiting for you to produce any of it.

    I don't need any "liberal" sources, I have her direct testimony which says she supports the ruling of the Supreme Court on the matter.

    Excuse me for a moment, as I laugh out loud at you.

    Again, MY focus was your direct words of "Stopping any attorney that don't support and believe in the Constitution despite saying otherwise. Is a plus for the Country. Not a detriment. Perhaps you should read up on her and seeing how she would play with the Second Amendment and what shall not be infringed upon." and asking you to support it. Which you have still failed to do.



    So you ignore her EXACT words on the subject and instead focus on something you have yet to produce a single solid piece of evidence to support. Amazing.




    It's been a long time since I encountered someone this delusional, and the last time I did so, the other person had yet to reach their 18th birthday. You come into a thread to start an argument completely unrelated to the thread, accuse me of dishonesty when I CLEARLY was willing to use any interpretation of the 2nd Amendment in my point, falsely accuse me of engaging in a logical fallacy and then have the audacity to whine when your troll card is called.

    It's clear you are not interested in any reasonable or rational discussion. The sad thing is you're obviously more intelligent than MMC, and yet you'd rather act in such a silly manner, using childish insults which have been clearly proven untrue. Instead of wasting everyone's time acting like a child, how about you actually engage in the thread discussion? It seems far more productive than the two of us accusing each other of being dishonest. After all, while I am new here, the rules have made me believe this forum is more about mature debate and not about childish name-calling.

    So let's try this again. I disagree with your interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. Many others do as well. But whether we use your interpretation or my interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is irrelevant to the question I originally asked, which is how the lawsuit in question is in violation of either interpretation. Now, do you have any opinions on that matter?

    suing gun makers for guns being misused by others is nothing more than a backdoor attempt to bankrupt gun makers and thus deprive citizens from obtaining firearms

    Yes that asshole was against the second amendment. EVERYONE who supports and pushes such lawsuits are anti gun turds.



  8. #68
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,986

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    suing gun makers for guns being misused by others is nothing more than a backdoor attempt to bankrupt gun makers and thus deprive citizens from obtaining firearms
    So when I sue McDonalds because I spilled the hot coffee on myself, is that a backdoor attempt to bankrupt McDonalds and deprive citizens of their right to freedom of expression?

    Probably not, but it makes as much sense.

    Yes that asshole was against the second amendment. EVERYONE who supports and pushes such lawsuits are anti gun turds.
    You do realize SHE didn't pursue the case, but rather the state of New York pursued the case, correct? And that when the case was dismissed, the dismissal said nothing about being dismissed with regards to the 2nd Amendment.

    You don't seem to know very much about this. I'll admit, I'm fairly ignorant to it as well, but I seem to understand it a little better than you.

  9. #69
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:27 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,605

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    Tobacco and guns, both are as American as apple pie and going to grandma's for Christmas.
    Feel better?
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  10. #70
    warrior of the wetlands
    TurtleDude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    180,766

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    So when I sue McDonalds because I spilled the hot coffee on myself, is that a backdoor attempt to bankrupt McDonalds and deprive citizens of their right to freedom of expression?

    Probably not, but it makes as much sense.

    You do realize SHE didn't pursue the case, but rather the state of New York pursued the case, correct? And that when the case was dismissed, the dismissal said nothing about being dismissed with regards to the 2nd Amendment.

    You don't seem to know very much about this. I'll admit, I'm fairly ignorant to it as well, but I seem to understand it a little better than you.
    If 40 or 50 leftwing mayors engaged in lawsuits against McDonalds for such actions then I would say yes.

    the dismissals had nothing to do with the second amendment but the lawsuits were clearly designed to interfere with the lawful ownership of firearms

    you can pretend you understand it better than me. You would be wrong. You can look around the entire United states for decades and I doubt you will find someone who actually knows more about this subject than I do.



Page 7 of 10 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •