• 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!

The Nullification Party

No. You seem to think that the court cases involving SSM are partisan. THey are not. So, fail you.

Reading comprehension, champ, reading comprehension.

What I said is that they're attempts to get around the electoral and legislative process, which they are, and which is supposedly the premise of your thread. But I can see how you'd easily lose sight of that premise when it was never serious to begin with.
 
Reading comprehension, champ, reading comprehension.

What I said is that they're attempts to get around the electoral and legislative process, which they are, and which is supposedly the premise of your thread. But I can see how you'd easily lose sight of that premise when it was never serious to begin with.
No. Taking a matter to court is not even close to Nullification. It's what you are supposed to do.

You obviously lack understanding of the difference between acting within the framework of the Constitution and going outside of it.
 
And now you're not even putting up a pretense of dealing with THIS one.

I guess that's all.
Your arguments are silly. First you bring up Wisconsin. As if that has anything to do with what is happening in Washington today. Then you bring up a legitimate move to take bad law to court and having judges reverse them. Somehow, you equate that with what is happening in Washington today too.

So, considering how far off base your argument is, it's you who is barking up the wrong tree and looking foolish.
 
No. Taking a matter to court is not even close to Nullification. It's what you are supposed to do.

This is how YOU defined "nullification," ducks:

When they can't get their way, meaning when the GOP loses an election, they race to delegitimize the winners. They did it with Clinton, going so far as to impeach him after he won reelection by destroying that old fart, Bob Dole, who lost because he had no personality and no cohesive campaign back in 1996. They did it again after Obama routed another old fart, back in '08, when both Houses of Congress also went against them.

Remember the Tea Party protests of 2010 and the "Party of no"? Those fools acted like the world was coming to an end. Biggest bunch of sore losers I ever witnessed.

And, now, after another ass-beating in yet another reelection campaign, and after losing Senate seats in traditionally red states like Indiana and Missouri, the GOP is once again acting like a spoiled child, this time basically holding it's breath and watching the country turn blue.

They simply cannot abide by seeing a majority disagreeing with them politically. They simply cannot respect the opposition. If they win, they govern as if the opposition does not exist. If the opposition wins, they batten down the hatches and refuse to cooperate in any way shape or form. They are the nullification party.

Doing an end run around the electoral and legislative process process because you can't win there is exactly within this description.

And legislators fleeing their state to prevent a vote they don't want to happen is ABSOLUTELY exactly this, and actually illegal to boot.


You obviously lack understanding of the difference between acting within the framework of the Constitution and going outside of it.

No, obviously it's you who do not, because 1) the Republicans are doing NOTHING -- that is, NOTHING -- outside of the Constitution, and 2) YOU are the one advocating for the President to do things which the Constitution does not authorize him to do.
 
The only successful recall I know of was when the GOP recalled the California Governor, a Democrat.

Thanks for making my case.

there were quite a few others besides gray davis in cali.

and btw it wasnt the gop who forced his recall solely.its a democrat majority state,and democrats voted against him aswell.in cali nearly every side came together to oust gray davis,of course they could have chose a better replacement.the governator was a good man,with his heart in the right place,but a terrible politician who didnt know how to make politics work.
 
First off, calling for recalls is a legitimate measure the people can use when dissatisfied with an elected official.
Yes, whining liberals.
Thanks for making my point again.


See! Whining!
Get ready for lots of recalls of tea party occupiers in Congress when they cause the default and a million Americans lose their job in the ensuing tea party recession.
Ain't gonna happen.
 
Back
Top Bottom