Funny, the same thing seems to happen when homophobes join the GOP.
I figured he was gunning for his own half hour Fox News show, and Tea Party Speakers’ fees.
That’s the one.
I still want to know what shoe was about to drop that made him decide not to run for a second term.
Michael Carvin is the lawyer who is arguing against Obamacare before the Supreme Court. Part of his argument is that the law centers on a statute that was “written by white women and minorities.” He also said, “I don’t know that four justices, who are needed to [take the case] here, are going to give much of a damn about what a bunch of Obama appointees on the D.C. Circuit think.”
He misspelled “health insurance companies.”
LIBERTY UNIVERSITY School of Medicine - required courses
Medicine 100: Which Prayer For Which Disease?
Anatomy and Physiology 100: Why Women are Weak
Neurology 100: A New Look at “The Vapors”
Sure, rape and sexual slavery in prison is just straights choosing to be gay. Tidies up that little problem nicely.
To be fair, Republicans have always had a problem with rape where women are concerned, why should it be any different with men?
From his wiki bio: “Carson was a professor of neurosurgery, oncology, plastic surgery, and pediatrics, and he was the director of pediatric neurosurgery at Johns Hopkins Hospital.[9] At age 33, he became the youngest major division director in Johns Hopkins history, as director of pediatric neurosurgery. He was also a co-director of the Johns Hopkins Craniofacial Center.”
I’m pretty sure you have to be very, very smart to have those credentials. I have enough personal experience with very smart people who are also very religious to know that intelligence does not necessarily correlate with rationality, but I find it very difficult to believe that this guy really believes some of the things he says. I think he’s in it for the money — books, speaking fees, Fox News shows.
From a legal perspective, who the fuck cares who wrote it??? It passed through congress and the president signed it. How would the identity of the author or authors affect the constitutionality?
White women and minorities. Them’s ain’t real people, doncha know?
It may sound funny and/or sick, but I’ve actually heard people argue against giving women and minorities equal weight in political discussions, because they weren’t included in the original constitution, only in amendments.
It falls to the same absurd illogic, of course: “Amendments: Them’s ain’t the real constitution, doncha know?”
Texas state Rep, Betty Brown, R-Terrell, said Asian-descent voters should adopt names that are “easier for Americansto deal with.”
So we should have another thirty thousand John Lees? Lee is a good American name.
Based on the article I’m not sure that his statement was as racist of sexist as it sounds out of context, just really really stupid.
The idea is that all them activist liberals feel free to overturn the Constitution because they say it was written by dead white men who aren’t relevant to today. While this argument is based on words that were written a few years ago not by dead white men and so those activist liberal judges can’t use that argument. Of course this is a straw man, as the fact that the constitutions was written by dead white men wasn’t the reason the court declared the ACA constitutional. Also unlike the constitution we can actually ask the people who wrote this law what they meant, and 100% of them say that they didn’t mean it the way he wants to interpret it.
I think that’s close, but not exactly it. I thought he was trying to say that the idea of a “living constitution” relies on the constitution being really old so things have had the opportunity to change, and the constitution must therefore change to keep up, while a law that’s only a few years old can’t be said to be out of date in any way.
I don’t really have words for this. So I’ll just quote a few snippets.
The stupid Republican part:
The pure evil but it probably isn’t an SRIOTD part starts a few years back when he and his wife adopted two little girls who came from a sexually abusive background. Within a few months:
Well then, they don’t know their Constitution. Minorities absolutely were included in the original. For example, in the very first article, there’s a section that prohibits Congress from interfering with the slave trade.
Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR) thinks there are too many empty beds at Guantanamo:
Three fifths of them were.
Except for the Second Amendment. Especially if you ignore that “well regulated militia” part…