Bimmerpost for Android has just been updated to version 4.3.55 with a host of bug fixes. Try it out!
BMW M3 Forum (E90 E92)

BMW Garage BMW Meets Register Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Go Back   M3Post - BMW M3 Forum > BIMMERPOST Universal Forums > Off-Topic Discussions Board > Politics/Religion
 
Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      01-08-2015, 10:53 AM   #1
F32Fleet
Major General
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
895
Rep
6,957
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

"Can talk the talk but can't walk the walk"-The Republican party

http://mises.com/blog/red-state-fasc...a-and-oklahoma

So much for states rights.

Last edited by F32Fleet; 01-08-2015 at 11:05 AM.
Appreciate 0
      01-08-2015, 11:52 AM   #2
Dalko43
Captain
148
Rep
888
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by F32Fleet View Post
A lot of this is just rhetorical BS written by someone who is obviously very opinionated. Would you mind providing a link to a link to an actual news story regarding the law suit against Colorado....that might lead to a more educated conversation here.

Otherwise, all you're going to do is provoke a Dem vs Repub argument which ultimately goes nowhere.
Appreciate 0
      01-08-2015, 01:01 PM   #3
F32Fleet
Major General
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
895
Rep
6,957
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

The links are in the story.
Appreciate 0
      01-08-2015, 04:57 PM   #4
Dalko43
Captain
148
Rep
888
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
The article referenced (about the law suit) is simply another article by the same author on the same blog site.

Why not reference an actual news article and post it in this thread rather than repost someone else's opinion on said news article....that would be so much easier to digest and discuss than this blogger's rant.
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe
Appreciate 0
      01-08-2015, 10:12 PM   #5
F32Fleet
Major General
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
895
Rep
6,957
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43 View Post
The article referenced (about the law suit) is simply another article by the same author on the same blog site.

Why not reference an actual news article and post it in this thread rather than repost someone else's opinion on said news article....that would be so much easier to digest and discuss than this blogger's rant.
Well a story was in my newspaper last weekend about it so if you want to find it Google is your friend. The lawsuit is real. The Denver post has a story about it. The slate story IS a news article. Hell there a links embedded in the text of the slate report. Just click on them.
Appreciate 0
      01-09-2015, 10:02 AM   #6
Dalko43
Captain
148
Rep
888
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Great excuse....
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe
Appreciate 0
      01-10-2015, 01:44 PM   #7
128Convertibleguy
Captain
39
Rep
703
Posts

Drives: 2010 128 Covertible
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Smile

Forget marijuana, that's small stuff. Many conservative Republicans don't believe that States have the right to legalize gay marriage. Or abortion.

They want Federal enforcement of positions they agree with. And to let the States have the right to override Federal positions they disagree with. Having their cake and eating it too comes to mind. (Not that Democrats don't do this sometimes, also. But they're not quite so sanctimonious about State's rights, either.)

If anyone wants an unquestionably factual link, with the view from the right:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsul...ban-marijuana/

"Forgetting Federalism, Oklahoma And Nebraska Demand That Colorado Ban Marijuana"

And the full text of the suit.

http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-con...o-12-18-14.pdf

Last edited by 128Convertibleguy; 01-10-2015 at 01:59 PM.
Appreciate 0
      01-13-2015, 10:46 AM   #8
SoCal235
Private First Class
-16
Rep
166
Posts

Drives: M235
Join Date: May 2014
Location: SoCal

iTrader: (0)

GOP "We want State's Rights"

Populace "Ok, sure, but that means we get Gay Marriage, legalized pot, and the state might add some regulations to your gun ownership a bit too"

GOP "State's Rights are from the Antichrist!!!"

Seriously though, the republican party is just a shell of pre-lobbyists. These aren't politicians that want to make the country a better place, they just want to help stack the deck in their cronies' favor.
Appreciate 0
      01-13-2015, 10:55 AM   #9
SoCal235
Private First Class
-16
Rep
166
Posts

Drives: M235
Join Date: May 2014
Location: SoCal

iTrader: (0)

Here's a Denver Post article about Nebraska & Oklahoma trying to sue Colorado.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_27...a-legalization

It didn't take more than a quick search in google to come up with this article, Dalko43. Try reading up on the subject rather than just shooting the messenger.
Appreciate 0
      01-13-2015, 01:52 PM   #10
Dalko43
Captain
148
Rep
888
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCal235 View Post
Here's a Denver Post article about Nebraska & Oklahoma trying to sue Colorado.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_27...a-legalization

It didn't take more than a quick search in google to come up with this article, Dalko43. Try reading up on the subject rather than just shooting the messenger.
SoCal235 , it is not my responsibility or yours to post the appropriate article to start the conversation on this thread, it's the OP's job. I applaud you for posting a more 'mainstream' media source to fuel this conversation, but it would have been nice on the OP's part, and responsible, to have done that from the very beginning rather than repost some blogger's rant.

As for the heart of the issue:
I agree that Oklahoma and Nebraska are attempting to overreach their authority as states by suing Colorado. However I also acknowledge that they have a stake in the game: people are able to travel to Colorado and bring marijuana into their states (where it is still considered illegal). So there is an obvious law enforcement issue that needs to be addressed, but suing Colorado isn't a feasible solution.

Another article which brings up that issue:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...ing-marijuana/

I disagree with what some other posters have claimed to be a GOP or conservative war on states' rights. The overall agenda and goal of conservative, libertarian and GOP groups has been to de-regulate the economy and minimize Federal interference in local affairs to the greatest extent possible (on issues like gun laws, health care, political donations, freedom of the press, ect.)

The current legal action by Nebraska and Oklahoma is very much an exception to the norm in this regard.
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe
Appreciate 0
      01-13-2015, 03:33 PM   #11
SoCal235
Private First Class
-16
Rep
166
Posts

Drives: M235
Join Date: May 2014
Location: SoCal

iTrader: (0)

Holy crap Dalko, "It is not my responsibility...yada yada...." holy heck man, just freaking use google. You must be a hoot at parties.
Appreciate 0
      01-13-2015, 07:42 PM   #12
bbbbmw
Major General
1948
Rep
5,411
Posts

Drives: 135i
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Southwest

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by 128Convertibleguy
Forget marijuana, that's small stuff. Many conservative Republicans don't believe that States have the right to legalize gay marriage. Or abortion.

They want Federal enforcement of positions they agree with. And to let the States have the right to override Federal positions they disagree with. Having their cake and eating it too comes to mind. (Not that Democrats don't do this sometimes, also. But they're not quite so sanctimonious about State's rights, either.)

If anyone wants an unquestionably factual link, with the view from the right:

http://<a href="http://<a href="http...juana/</a></a>

"Forgetting Federalism, Oklahoma And Nebraska Demand That Colorado Ban Marijuana"

And the full text of the suit.

http://<a href="http://<a href="http...14.pdf</a></a>
Odd that you choose those two issues.

The Supreme Court in 1975 overturned the state laws and arbitrarily legalized abortion, without citing precedent or constitutional principles - first time that had ever been done.

Voters in California (I think that's a democrat/liberal state?) voted to ban gay marriage is 2008. The Supreme Court of CA decided that the voters didn't matter, and struck down the law. The same thing has happened with many of the Federal Circuit Courts as well.

Seems like perhaps the Democrats are the ones trampling states rights. But that may not fit your narrative.

In 1972, the Supreme Court of the U.S. was presented academic if two men from MN who wanted to marry. They refused to hear the case, saying "The appeal is dismissed for want of a substantial Federal question." - which means they deferred to the states. The States have largely spoken through the voters, and are being overridden by the federal Circuit Courts. Only one Circuit Court has rejected gay marriage, and the written opinion is quite well-positioned. Jeffrey Sutton wrote the six arguments, and concluded with "If, before a new concensus has emerged on a social issue, federal judges may decide when the time is ripe to recognize a new constitutional right, surely the people should receive some deference in deciding when the time is ripe to move from one picture of marriage to another."
__________________
<OO (llll)(llll) OO>

Last edited by bbbbmw; 01-21-2015 at 11:11 PM.
Appreciate 0
      01-13-2015, 08:09 PM   #13
Dalko43
Captain
148
Rep
888
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCal235 View Post
Holy crap Dalko, "It is not my responsibility...yada yada...." holy heck man, just freaking use google. You must be a hoot at parties.
Holy Heck SoCal235 , this isn't my thread...so while I agree with you're message your preaching to the wrong choir.


And I take offense to your sarcastic comment...I've been told by more than a few that I have very engaging pillow talk....
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe
Appreciate 0
      01-14-2015, 05:44 PM   #14
ShocknAwe
Major General
ShocknAwe's Avatar
United_States
1503
Rep
6,009
Posts

Drives: E82 N54
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Charleston

iTrader: (15)

Infringement upon the constitution shall not be tolerated without amendment.

Funny how often that is forgotten.
__________________
2010 135i M-Sport 6MT Jet Black
N54 | BUILD THREAD
Appreciate 0
      01-14-2015, 06:07 PM   #15
128Convertibleguy
Captain
39
Rep
703
Posts

Drives: 2010 128 Covertible
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShocknAwe View Post
Infringement upon the constitution shall not be tolerated without amendment.

Funny how often that is forgotten.
More often, it's simply a matter of dispute.

There's a reason the Supreme Court exists. Like most of life, it's imperfect, but one thing is true.

What the Supreme Court says is constitutional, is constitutional. By definition. Other people may disagree, but, their disagreement has no practical effect. The Supreme Court gets the last word.
Appreciate 0
      01-15-2015, 12:09 AM   #16
Dalko43
Captain
148
Rep
888
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by 128Convertibleguy View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShocknAwe View Post
Infringement upon the constitution shall not be tolerated without amendment.

Funny how often that is forgotten.
More often, it's simply a matter of dispute.

There's a reason the Supreme Court exists. Like most of life, it's imperfect, but one thing is true.

What the Supreme Court says is constitutional, is constitutional. By definition. Other people may disagree, but, their disagreement has no practical effect. The Supreme Court gets the last word.
The Supreme Court's job is not to dispute the contents of the Constitution, it is to interpret the Constitution.

The Supreme Court's interpretations of the Constitutional law are considered constitutional. However, these interpretations are required to be guided by the intent of the Founding Fathers and the Constitutional government that they founded.

If the Supreme Court were to say arbitrarily one day that the US President is in fact allowed to sign and pass laws without Congressional input, that obviously would not be a Constitutional ruling.

This is not simply a matter of 'Whatever the Supreme court says, goes.'
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe
Appreciate 0
      01-15-2015, 12:17 AM   #17
128Convertibleguy
Captain
39
Rep
703
Posts

Drives: 2010 128 Covertible
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43 View Post
The Supreme Court's job is not to dispute the contents of the Constitution, it is to interpret the Constitution.

The Supreme Court's interpretations of the Constitutional law are considered constitutional. However, these interpretations are required to be guided by the intent of the Founding Fathers and the Constitutional government that they founded.

If the Supreme Court were to say arbitrarily one day that the US President is in fact allowed to sign and pass laws without Congressional input, that obviously would not be a Constitutional ruling.

This is not simply a matter of 'Whatever the Supreme court says, goes.'
Pretty close, though. To reverse them, they'd have to be impeached and convicted, and the barrier for that is high. Your example would suffice, but it would have to be darn near that extreme.

Conviction requires 2/3 of the Senate. Hard to get these days.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2015, 08:29 AM   #18
F32Fleet
Major General
F32Fleet's Avatar
United_States
895
Rep
6,957
Posts

Drives: 2015 435i
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southeastern US

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SoCal235 View Post
Here's a Denver Post article about Nebraska & Oklahoma trying to sue Colorado.

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_27...a-legalization

It didn't take more than a quick search in google to come up with this article, Dalko43. Try reading up on the subject rather than just shooting the messenger.
Some people must be spoon fed.
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2015, 03:30 PM   #19
Devious21
Captain
Devious21's Avatar
No_Country
30
Rep
711
Posts

Drives: 2006 Z4M
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: SF Bay Area

iTrader: (1)

I will say that link did suck. It's 3 paragraphs of pure rambling before they even start to get to any kind of point and I have any idea what the hell the article is about.

Compare that to the slate article. You understand exactly what they're talking about within the first two sentences.
__________________

|Evolve Airbox - Euro Headers - Strömung Exhaust - H&R Coils - 19" BBS CH-R|
Appreciate 1
      01-16-2015, 04:06 PM   #20
Dalko43
Captain
148
Rep
888
Posts

Drives: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Upstate NY

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by Devious21 View Post
I will say that link did suck. It's 3 paragraphs of pure rambling before they even start to get to any kind of point and I have any idea what the hell the article is about.

Compare that to the slate article. You understand exactly what they're talking about within the first two sentences.
I'm glad that I'm not the only one who thought that.
__________________
Current: 2011 Toyota 4Runner Trail
Sold: 2013 BMW 335is Coupe
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2015, 04:26 PM   #21
Devious21
Captain
Devious21's Avatar
No_Country
30
Rep
711
Posts

Drives: 2006 Z4M
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: SF Bay Area

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalko43 View Post
I'm glad that I'm not the only one who thought that.
It wouldn't be so bad if the OP gave us a hint in the thread title or his first comment. The whole thing was just unnecessarily ambiguous.
__________________

|Evolve Airbox - Euro Headers - Strömung Exhaust - H&R Coils - 19" BBS CH-R|
Appreciate 0
      01-16-2015, 04:29 PM   #22
128Convertibleguy
Captain
39
Rep
703
Posts

Drives: 2010 128 Covertible
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Mountains

iTrader: (0)

Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Devious21 View Post
It wouldn't be so bad if the OP gave us a hint in the thread title or his first comment. The whole thing was just unnecessarily ambiguous.
Arguably the first post was, although not to someone familiar with the general issue. But we went far beyond it, in the whole thing.

I trust the Slate and Forbes articles are clear enough for you?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...undermine.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jacobsul...ban-marijuana/

And I stand by this:

"Republicans want Federal enforcement of positions they agree with. And to let the States have the right to override Federal positions they disagree with. Having their cake and eating it too comes to mind. (Not that Democrats don't do this sometimes, also. But they're not quite so sanctimonious about State's rights, either.)"

Last edited by 128Convertibleguy; 01-16-2015 at 04:35 PM.
Appreciate 0
Post Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:26 PM.




m3post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST