• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Schumer calls for hearings on 'un-American' court decision

Actually what's ridiculous is one of the most hyper partisan posters on the left on this site storming in, not even bothering to do this amazing thing called "Reading the thread" and thinking he's making some grand revelation in a sarcastic and jerkish way that one of his far more reasonable ideological compatriots already made and had been discussed at some length.

That's what I think is ridiculous personally.

Since you appear to be too lazy today to even read the FIRST PAGE let me help you without causing you too much strain, as I'm sure it would be difficult.

....

That should give you a good indication of where to begin the conversation, as you're not worth rehashing things already talked about over 4 days ago with a far more reasonable poster

Lemme get this straight -- YOU don't read the full article before starting the thread and that's OKAY.

But if I call you out on it before reading for the full thread, then shame on me...???

Oh, the irony of self-righteous-foot-in-mouth disease. It gives the rest of us a chance to double dip on ridiculing your mistake...

And in all your backpeddling and spinning of your OP throughout the thread, you're still trying to put words in Schumer's mouth...

Go back and read your own article:

"As chairman of the Senate Rules Committee, which is the committee with jurisdiction over these issues, I'm announcing that we will hold hearings on the impact of this decision within the next of couple of weeks," Schumer said.
 
Go back and read your own article:

Yes, I see Schumer trying to do something that his committee has no business doing and he has no business mucking his nose in based on his position
 
Yes, I see Schumer trying to do something that his committee has no business doing and he has no business mucking his nose in based on his position

Really?

PURPOSE AND JURISDICTION

(Taken from the Standing Rules of the Senate: Rule 25.1.n)

(1) Committee on Rules and Administration, to which committee shall be referred all proposed legislation, messages, petitions, memorials, and other matters relating to the following subjects:

(A) Administration of the Senate Office Buildings and the Senate wing of the Capitol, including the assignment of office space.

(B) Congressional organization relative to rules and procedures, and Senate rules and regulations, including floor and gallery rules.

(C) Corrupt practices.

(D) Credentials and qualifications of Members of the Senate, contested elections, and acceptance of incompatible offices.

(E) Federal elections generally, including the election of the President, Vice President, and Members of the Congress
.

And...

(2) Such committee shall also -

(A) make a continuing study of the organization and operation of the Congress of the United States and shall recommend improvements in such organization and operation with a view toward strengthening the Congress, simplifying its operations, improving its relationships with other branches of the United States Government, and enabling it better to meet its responsibilities under the Constitution of the United States; and

(B) identify any court proceeding or action which, in the opinion of the Committee, is of vital interest to the Congress as a constitutionally established institution of the Federal Government and call such proceeding or action to the attention of the Senate.
...

Did you want to further articulate why Schumer's committee shouldn't hold hearings on the impact of the decision?

I mean, with FEC oversight and all...
 
Hmm, a wonderful point. I was taking their perview over elections was the generalized rules regarding it and contesting of it and was thinking of this, as the Supreme Court cached it, as a speech issue first and foremost more than an election issue. That said, addressing the ramifications of the situation as it comes to elections seems to be loosely connected to the committee. Well done, you've shown me wrong and I admit my mistake.

Amazingly enough, this could've happened much sooner and interesting discussion could've happened if you had acted as a mature debator from the start and hadn't swung in with you worthless sarcasm and immediete jerkish attitude towards the situation and tried to participate in the discussion members were
having instead of acting like a child who wanted everyone in the rooms eyes to be on them.

Let me also say to aps and Redress, who acted as mature debaters, I was in error in my initial reading and understanding of the committee's abilities. While I still disagree with you redress in regards to speech, you are correct in this is not a case of schumer attempting to intimidate or interfere in a court decision.
 
Last edited:
The supreme court treated it as a free speech issue. That's true. That's almost as bad as roe v wade which claimed that abortion is a right to "privacy" under the 14th amendment.

The first one is a ruling making bribery legal. The second one is making killing babies legal.

Conservatives used to whine about Judicial activism. When it suits their purpose they are all for it.

Another chip in the constitution.
 
I want to make a bribe, er donation, to the forum. Do I need to get a pay pal account before I make a bribe, er donation?
 
Well, it works both ways. If you are a liberal why are you for the perversion of free speech?

I'm not. Freedom of speech means, like, no restrictions on speech.

BTW, those liberals at the ACLU supported the decision too.

If it makes you feel better, this decision will almost certainly apply to unions too.
 
Last edited:
I want to make a bribe, er donation, to the forum. Do I need to get a pay pal account before I make a bribe, er donation?

No, just posting here is bribery, remember?
 
Sometimes it's just not worth feeding the trolls aps. For some of our posters, over the top rhetoric is the only way they know to post.

I've always found Purina Troll Chow good for that. :mrgreen:
 
From the link.

How can people conclude that this is Schumer threatening the Supreme Court?

If the Supreme Court strikes down a law passed by Congress, it's certainly Congress's right to come back and pass a new law that is within the guidelines expressed by the Supreme Court.

Actually, Schumer appears to be in solidary with others' comments.
"I think it's an un-American decision," Van Hollen said at a press conference along side Schumer on Thursday. "I think when the American people understand what this radical decision has meant they will be even more furious and concerned about special interest influence in politics than they are today."

It looks like a "they said/they said" to me. Schumer and company call it un-American and radical while the court's ruling is that parts of McCain-Feingold are un-American. When ruling on the constitutionality of these misguided laws the Supreme Court is calling them un-American. Of course, Schumer has the right of free speech to question their decision, however, the Supreme Court has the role of making such a decision. Schumer loses!
 
It looks like a "they said/they said" to me. Schumer and company call it un-American and radical while the court's ruling is that parts of McCain-Feingold are un-American. When ruling on the constitutionality of these misguided laws the Supreme Court is calling them un-American. Of course, Schumer has the right of free speech to question their decision, however, the Supreme Court has the role of making such a decision. Schumer loses!
The "Schumer loses" comment only makes sense if you believe that SCOTUS is incapable of making a decision not in the best interests of the country. I don't think anyone on either side of the spectrum believes this.
 
I've always found Purina Troll Chow good for that. :mrgreen:

lol is there anything they don't make??? Purina that is...I heard there was even Purina Monkey Chow once upon a time....lol
 
Back
Top Bottom