- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Clinton appointed Judge orders full restoration of DACA program
Posted on 1/1/19 at 6:02 pm to Dale51
Posted on 1/1/19 at 6:02 pm to Dale51
quote:
The claim was that the EO was supported by the will of the people, which it was...you inferred it wasn't by stating a gallop poll. That connects the two.
It connects the two. You are laughable. What because they were both on the same page. What a dope.
1
Posted on 1/1/19 at 6:11 pm to CDawson
Impeach the Freaking judge for being unconstitutional...
Posted on 1/1/19 at 7:34 pm to JuiceTerry
The wall will be good fortune for all
Posted on 1/1/19 at 7:40 pm to bamarep
We really should start executing these retard judges who think they can do whatever they want. It’s not their place. Time to put a stop to this nonsense
Posted on 1/1/19 at 7:54 pm to 14&Counting
quote:
Legislating from the bench
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:17 pm to texridder
quote:
It connects the two. You are laughable. What because they were both on the same page. What a dope.
Compelling counter argument.
Posted on 1/1/19 at 8:34 pm to omegaman66
quote:
YOU are the one that says different races have different value. How else could changing the proportions improve things unless one race is better than another.
You are a racist. And apparently to ignorant to know it.
You are lost. I’ve never said anything like that.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 11:40 am to Dale51
quote:I don't need a counter argument because you didn't make an argument.
It connects the two. You are laughable. What because they were both on the same page. What a dope.
Compelling counter argument
You started by saying "Since when is EO validity decided on by popularity polls??"
I posted that didn't say anything about the validity of an EO but only said that the other poster was incorrect by saying that the polls supported this particular EO.
Your response was that "The claim was that the EO was supported by the will of the people, which it was...you inferred it wasn't by stating a gallop poll. That connects the two."
"Connecting the two" doesn't say or mean anything about whether that I said that the particular EO was valid or invalid -- because I didn't.
You only tried to claim that I said the EO wasn't valid because of my previous post that said:
quote:Yours was a perfect example. But instead of admitting that you had jumped to the conclusion that I was against the validity of the EO, you tried to save face by making a ridiculous inference that I had actually said the EO was invalid.
It's incredible the number of times on here someone responds to a specific post, and the loons here assume that means that the poster is taking a unequivocal stance either for or against the larger issue. Yours is a perfect example.
Pitiful.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 12:53 pm to Stingy
quote:
Let me take guess: basement dwelling, unarmed security guard who didn't finish high school...and could use a haircut.
All I do is take it easy, make this money. Top Flight Security of the World!
Posted on 1/2/19 at 12:57 pm to Pelican fan99
quote:
We really should start executing these retard judges who think they can do whatever they want. It’s not their place. Time to put a stop to this nonsense
Even easier
The federal court system should be defunded by Congress who created it and completely shut down
Posted on 1/2/19 at 1:22 pm to texridder
quote:
I don't need a counter argument because you didn't make an argument.
You started by saying "Since when is EO validity decided on by popularity polls??"
I posted that didn't say anything about the validity of an EO but only said that the other poster was incorrect by saying that the polls supported this particular EO.
Your response was that "The claim was that the EO was supported by the will of the people, which it was...you inferred it wasn't by stating a gallop poll. That connects the two."
"Connecting the two" doesn't say or mean anything about whether that I said that the particular EO was valid or invalid -- because I didn't.
You only tried to claim that I said the EO wasn't valid because of my previous post that said:
quote:
It's incredible the number of times on here someone responds to a specific post, and the loons here assume that means that the poster is taking a unequivocal stance either for or against the larger issue. Yours is a perfect example.
Yours was a perfect example. But instead of admitting that you had jumped to the conclusion that I was against the validity of the EO, you tried to save face by making a ridiculous inference that I had actually said the EO was invalid.
Pitiful.
That makes little sense. Can you restate your "point" using different words?
Thanks.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 1:23 pm to bamarep
Leftist judges are literally taking the position that Democrat Presidents can be dictators.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 2:22 pm to Dale51
quote:It makes little sense because your stupid statement trying to
That makes little sense. Can you restate your "point" using different words?
twist my post made no sense.
My point was that I didn't say anything about whether the EO was valid or not.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 2:40 pm to texridder
quote:
My point was that I didn't say anything about whether the EO was valid or not.
I explained why you're full of dumb with that line of "reasoning".
Posted on 1/2/19 at 2:42 pm to Dale51
quote:
I explained why you're full of dumb
That really needs no explanation. We can read his posts and just... tell.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 2:47 pm to Dale51
He directly refuted another poster's fake news, then you jumped in with a complete non sequitur
It's that simple
It's that simple
Posted on 1/2/19 at 6:16 pm to Dale51
quote:You didn't explain anything. You are just saying crap to try to keep from admitting you are wrong.
My point was that I didn't say anything about whether the EO was valid or not.
I explained why you're full of dumb with that line of "reasoning".
Just simply post exactly where I said anything about whether the EO was valid or not -- when the only relevant post I made was the below Gallop poll response to the post below.
quote:
Is “because the American Republic wants it to end” not a good enough reason?
quote:
You need to get out of your cocoon. Gallop poll June 14, 2018 --83% approve of allowing DACA immigrants to become citizens.
or STFU.
Posted on 1/2/19 at 6:22 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
Leftist judges are literally taking the position that Democrat Presidents can be dictators.
The logic is getting more and more bizarre by the day
An executive order can now not even be reversed by the executive because the executive isnt giving good enough reasons for reversing an order that had no reason to be given in the first place
Forget that there is no reason that would satisfy the requirement. Like trying to get a carry permit in Hawaii.
Page 7 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News