Dick Durbin vs the Constitution

[Dancing David]

This is what top democrats think of your Constitution, folks:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/durbin-maybe-illegal-alien-will-become-p



Just one little problem with that …

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution as now written states:

Wow so now the conservative Dick Durbin, war hawk and beloved of conservative voters of Illinois can't use a conditional word without some person pretending it is disregarding the COTUS, gee, why does Reagan get a free pass for actually ignoring the law?

 

[Dancing David]

Yes, it could. Is that the democrats' plan? To amend the Constitution so that illegal aliens can be President? And what other changes would they like? Allow illegal aliens to vote, too?

I seem to recall the idea of a naturalized citizen becoming president was an idea of some party not too long ago...

 

[Upchurch]

What exactly have I misunderstood?

You have misunderstood that the real world does not behave the way fevered right-wing paranoids imagine it does. You have misunderstood that people who have a different political stance than you are not necessarily trying to destroy America or aid our enemies. Most importantly, you have misunderstood that our government requires balance between left and right and that you constant harping on right-wing conspiracy theories degrades actual political discourse and distracts from real issues.

You have misunderstood a great deal.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

You have misunderstood that the real world does not behave the way fevered right-wing paranoids imagine it does. You have misunderstood that people who have a different political stance than you are not necessarily trying to destroy America or aid our enemies. Most importantly, you have misunderstood that our government requires balance between left and right and that you constant harping on right-wing conspiracy theories degrades actual political discourse and distracts from real issues.

You have misunderstood a great deal.

 

[BenBurch]

BAC, you deliberately try to misunderstand things don't you?

Ding! Ding! Ding! Give the man a Kewpie Doll!

 

[BenBurch]

You have misunderstood that the real world does not behave the way fevered right-wing paranoids imagine it does. You have misunderstood that people who have a different political stance than you are not necessarily trying to destroy America or aid our enemies. Most importantly, you have misunderstood that our government requires balance between left and right and that you constant harping on right-wing conspiracy theories degrades actual political discourse and distracts from real issues.

You have misunderstood a great deal.

Bravo, sir.

Hammer. Nail. BANG!

 

[Biscuit]

This is what top democrats think of your Constitution, folks:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/durbin-maybe-illegal-alien-will-become-p



Just one little problem with that …

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution as now written states:

Just one little problem with that...

Article V. Constitution of the United States of America

I guess what Dick Durban thinks of the U.S. Constitution is that you should read the whole thing.


ETA: Bravo Upchurch! well said!

 

[fuelair]

None of this follows.


You're trying to spin this into something it's not.

Joe, Joe, say it ain't so, Joe!!????

BAC would never do that........would he???!!!

 

[BeAChooser]

Or, call me crazy, maybe he simply misspoke when going into rhetoric common to the American dream. There isn't anything necessarily idiotic nor nefarious about it. Maybe he's human.

Funny how leftists cry *he's only human* when one of their own makes a MAJOR flub, but doesn't give ... say ... Michael Bachman the same leeway when she makes a minor one. And that's but one of many examples of the doublestandard that leftists seem to have. No, U, I'm only applying the same standard that you on the left have applied to conservatives who ... *misspeak*.

 

[johnny karate]

Funny how leftists cry *he's only human* when one of their own makes a MAJOR flub, but doesn't give ... say ... Michael Bachman the same leeway when she makes a minor one. And that's but one of many examples of the doublestandard that leftists seem to have. No, U, I'm only applying the same standard that you on the left have applied to conservatives who ... *misspeak*.

No, you're not.

Durbin misspoke once. Everyone is prone to do that occasionally, and it proves nothing.

Bachmann seems to "misspeak" with every third thing she says. Except she doesn't even acknowledge it as misspeaking. She instead doubles down on whatever wrong thing she said and pretends it's actually true.

If you can point to a history of Durbin saying demonstrably incorrect things, and then arrogantly refusing to acknowledge his mistakes, then - and only then - would you be holding him to the same standard to which Bachmann has been held.

 

[BeAChooser]

"conservative Dick Durbin"

Seriously, DD, you think Dick Durbin is "conservative" and a "warhawk"?

Do you seriously think a conservative has made it into the #2 leadership position of Senate democrats?

No, the truth is that Durbin is one of the most liberal members of Congress. Which is why he was given the position of Whip.

Consider these facts:

His Liberal Action Score places him at having participated in 88% of a of liberal actions in the 112th Congress.

His comparable Conservative Action Score is only 13%.

He gets a 100% rating from Pro-Choice and Planned Parenthood groups and a 0% rating from the National Right to Life Committee.

He's one of only 23 senators to vote against the joint resolution authorizing the Iraq War.

He gets an 82% rating from the ACLU.

He wants the "Fairness Doctrine" imposed, highly leftist legislation.

The Sierra Club gives him a 90% rating on environmental issues.

The NAACP gives him a 100% rating.

The National Education Association of America gives him an A rating.

The National Rifle Association gives him an F rating.

The AFL-CIO gives him a rating of 100% rating. SEIU gives him a 91% rating.

The Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law gives him an A+ rating.

The Cato Institute gives him a rating of 17%.

Christian Coalition gives him a rating of 0%.

In fact, here's a source that currently ranks him the 10th most liberal senator out of 50. The National Journal voted him the most liberal member of the Senate in 2006.

Seriously, DD, what have you been smoking?

 

[BeAChooser]

Durbin misspoke once.

Really? Don't you think Durbin misspoke when he said the way American soldiers treated prisoners at Guantanamo Bay reminded him of what was "done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings"?

 

[leftysergeant]

Really? Don't you think Durbin misspoke when he said the way American soldiers treated prisoners at Guantanamo Bay reminded him of what was "done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings"?

I don't get it.

 

[mysteronyx]

I have to admit I'm a little confused here. As far as I can tell, the US constitution has been altered 27 times so far. At least 10 of those changes were made by the very same people who wrote it in the first place. And while I don't know the exact details, I suspect quite a few of those amendments were proposed and supported by Republicans.

So lets assume that this guy really is making a proposal that would require another amendment to the constitution. So what? It's been done many times before and no doubt will be done many more times. It would certainly be fair to debate the merits of such an amendment, but merely stating that an amendment would be required isn't really a criticism at all, and certainly not one specific to Democrats.

I'm with Cuddles on this.

Also, as far as "misspeaking" is concerned, Bachmann's flubs are typically due to an inaccurate understanding of history rather than simply saying "57" instead of "47". Anyhow, there is no mistake here on Durbin's part. He said they could one day be president. Given certain circumstances and law changes, they certainly could be. Where is the mistake?

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

I'm with Cuddles on this.

Also, as far as "misspeaking" is concerned, Bachmann's flubs are typically due to an inaccurate understanding of history rather than simply saying "57" instead of "47". Anyhow, there is no mistake here on Durbin's part. He said they could one day be president. Given certain circumstances and law changes, they certainly could be. Where is the mistake?

And of course, bringing this back to the context, the real target of his remarks was the DREAM Act. That's the legislation he was pushing.

I believe his mentioning the presidency was a flub on his part (in that he isn't at least on this occasion advocating for an amendment to change the requirements for POTUS), but even so what he said was still technically correct.

The stuff BAC says is yet another example of his arguing against a strawman. No one is suggesting a law or amendment allowing illegal aliens to be president or even vote. The law being promoted is basically an amnesty program for these kind of involuntary illegals who got caught in a legal limbo through no fault of their own.

 

[BenBurch]

Seriously, DD, you think Dick Durbin is "conservative" and a "warhawk"?

Do you seriously think a conservative has made it into the #2 leadership position of Senate democrats?

No, the truth is that Durbin is one of the most liberal members of Congress. Which is why he was given the position of Whip.

Consider these facts:

His Liberal Action Score places him at having participated in 88% of a of liberal actions in the 112th Congress.

His comparable Conservative Action Score is only 13%.

He gets a 100% rating from Pro-Choice and Planned Parenthood groups and a 0% rating from the National Right to Life Committee.

He's one of only 23 senators to vote against the joint resolution authorizing the Iraq War.

He gets an 82% rating from the ACLU.

He wants the "Fairness Doctrine" imposed, highly leftist legislation.

The Sierra Club gives him a 90% rating on environmental issues.

The NAACP gives him a 100% rating.

The National Education Association of America gives him an A rating.

The National Rifle Association gives him an F rating.

The AFL-CIO gives him a rating of 100% rating. SEIU gives him a 91% rating.

The Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law gives him an A+ rating.

The Cato Institute gives him a rating of 17%.

Christian Coalition gives him a rating of 0%.

In fact, here's a source that currently ranks him the 10th most liberal senator out of 50. The National Journal voted him the most liberal member of the Senate in 2006.

Seriously, DD, what have you been smoking?

And I thought you'd never say anything nice about him!

 

[johnny karate]

Really? Don't you think Durbin misspoke when he said the way American soldiers treated prisoners at Guantanamo Bay reminded him of what was "done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings"?

Your inability to address the substance of my post doesn't surprise me in the least.

 

[BStrong]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AYU4K201

As one of those who commented said, "Why isn't ICE removing everyone from that chamber back to where they came from?" Is the word "illegal" meaningless to democrats?

They're all potential voters, and the last president to grant illegal aliens amnesty was Reagan.

 

[bikerdruid]

Seriously, DD, you think Dick Durbin is "conservative" and a "warhawk"?

Do you seriously think a conservative has made it into the #2 leadership position of Senate democrats?

No, the truth is that Durbin is one of the most liberal members of Congress. Which is why he was given the position of Whip.

Consider these facts:

His Liberal Action Score places him at having participated in 88% of a of liberal actions in the 112th Congress.

His comparable Conservative Action Score is only 13%.

He gets a 100% rating from Pro-Choice and Planned Parenthood groups and a 0% rating from the National Right to Life Committee.

He's one of only 23 senators to vote against the joint resolution authorizing the Iraq War.

He gets an 82% rating from the ACLU.

He wants the "Fairness Doctrine" imposed, highly leftist legislation. The Sierra Club gives him a 90% rating on environmental issues.
The NAACP gives him a 100% rating.

The National Education Association of America gives him an A rating.

The National Rifle Association gives him an F rating.

The AFL-CIO gives him a rating of 100% rating. SEIU gives him a 91% rating.

The Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law gives him an A+ rating.

The Cato Institute gives him a rating of 17%.

Christian Coalition gives him a rating of 0%. In fact, here's a source that currently ranks him the 10th most liberal senator out of 50. The National Journal voted him the most liberal member of the Senate in 2006.

Seriously, DD, what have you been smoking?

gee, you list all that stuff as if it's bad.
christians hate him, he scores a 90 with the sierra club and he's in favour of fairness......what's not to love?

 

[mysteronyx]

gee, you list all that stuff as if it's bad.
christians hate him, he scores a 90 with the sierra club and he's in favour of fairness......what's not to love?

Agreed