At her debate, Christine O'Donnell couldn't come up with the name of a recent Supreme Court decision with which she disagreed, so why not ask this question of the dumb Republican candidate in your race, everyone?
Agreed you don't have to actually watch. Also, since Tweety never finishes asking a question and letting the guests answer, you don't have to actually listen either.
I disagree with that ruling, but that's a case the Repubicans and TP'ers surely love. Except the Federal government usurped Florida's process of choosing electors, though the Constitution plainly says "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors....".
That was "Kelo" - any right wing nut ought to be able to spit that one out. The trouble with it, if you actually read the decision, is that it is a "states' rights" decision. The good people of the state of Connecticut decided private property could be taken by eminent domain for private use. And the Supremes agreed.
I think it's a crying shame our political discourse has been reduced to these "gotcha" questions.
Why can't more people be like Sheer "Am i An Idiot?" InSannity - get the candidates on your show for a free infomercial and grill with tough questions like "What's your favorite cookie?"
Nix v. Hedden: The U.S. Supreme Court on May 10, 1893 declared that the tomato is a vegetable, based on the popular definition that classifies vegetables by use, that they are generally served with dinner and not dessert.
Name a Supreme Court decision?
How about "Ralph?"
"Kilo."
Very funny!
Agreed you don't have to actually watch. Also, since Tweety never finishes asking a question and letting the guests answer, you don't have to actually listen either.
I disagree with that ruling, but that's a case the Repubicans and TP'ers surely love. Except the Federal government usurped Florida's process of choosing electors, though the Constitution plainly says "Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors....".
That was "Kelo" - any right wing nut ought to be able to spit that one out. The trouble with it, if you actually read the decision, is that it is a "states' rights" decision. The good people of the state of Connecticut decided private property could be taken by eminent domain for private use. And the Supremes agreed.
I think it's a crying shame our political discourse has been reduced to these "gotcha" questions.
Why can't more people be like Sheer "Am i An Idiot?" InSannity - get the candidates on your show for a free infomercial and grill with tough questions like "What's your favorite cookie?"
Missionary vs. Doggie-style?
Agreed! Maybe that eminent domain decision a few years ago -- government can take property for private purpose.
The point -- I suppose -- is where is the unconstitutionality goin' on?
Nix v. Hedden: The U.S. Supreme Court on May 10, 1893 declared that the tomato is a vegetable, based on the popular definition that classifies vegetables by use, that they are generally served with dinner and not dessert.
The whole nation has gone downhill since then.
How about Dartmouth vs. State of New Hamshire? And that's not an annual football game, either.