Replies

So just WHERE in that is your lofty interpretation of the Constitution in this???

Where are you from, Europe? Article VI, Clause 3 reads, The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution.

You stated an opinion in a condescending manner. Hardly a display of intellectual prowess.

I do tend to be froward with the froward.

...let me be fair, you come up with evidence as to this "Supreme Law of the Land" clause in the constitution that has been violated, what Article or Amendment gives hoodlums the right to destroy or damage property not belonging to them in the name of a "New" Anti-Bush sewing club, and I might not ignore your silly arse in the future.

You have assumed that I stated hoodlums had such a right. And I thought you were an expert on what happens when one assume things. How disappointing.

Ohhh a word I have not seen in at least 10 years! froward: Meaning: turning back to one's own ways; difficult to deal with: stubbornly disobedient or contrary; going in one's own willful ways. Very well applied to yourself. Kudos for the attack of honesty.

Back to your original quote:
When the President starts following the Constitution, he will represent us. Not before. And if you are going to pretend to be an authority on the Constitution, and lecture others on it, you should at least read it.

Ooo!AND a BRILLIANT quoting of Article 6 to boot.

Yes, I was born in the United States. Make not ASS U MPTIONS that you can not come close to proving just to be insulting. That is a sign of a weak mind as well.

You STILL have not made your argument. Exactly where is the President not holding up the Constitution? Exactly how is it that you can exclude the entire Congress from your analysis, do you "Just Blame Bush" as a knee jerk response? Only thing I can come up with is not defending the Borders of this Nation, but that is a real big HARD thing to prove, seeing as he is following not only the Presidents that came before him and followed the same policies, but Congress has a hand in that as well. Be all that as it may, it is still not any sort of walking talking proof of his failure to up hold the Constitution. By no means do I excuse him for not closing the Borders. I am quite livid about it actually.

NEXT! Say, while you are furiously digging up arguments, why don't we ASSUME that we are speaking about both your original post and the story that it was related to instead of tilting at windmills? Lets stick to the topic dear.