fatslob-:O said:
|
Yes they must adhere to the current constitution but that DOES NOT imply that they CAN'T CHANGE IT!
In addition to not being accurate (the president actually can not change the constitution), this literally has nothing to do with anything.
I NEVER BROUGHT IN THE ARGUMENT OF WETHER THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA OR NOT! That's just a strawman on your part that you just accused me of doing ...
I was only trying to bust the myth that you CAN'T profile according to religion ...
YOU argued NEED, I proved otherwise ...
Heck, presidents don't even need to do anything aside from being commander in chief of an army, appointing officials, reporting to congress, paying officers and the rest is OPTIONAL ...
Feasibility is another argument altogether ...
Then you are being intentionally obtuse. I didn't think I needed to specify that we're talking about reality and the real world demands of being a president. I thought that was a given considering we're voting for the president in reality, and not in some fantasy land where the president can sit in the oval office and jerk off 24/7 as long as he's over 35. What you've proven is that you are not able to follow the obvious context of a conversation in a reasonable manner.
You're like the child who sits in his bed playing video games, and when his parents say "I told you to go to sleep" he says, "No, you said go to bed!"
Unfortunately, that's a strawman that Bill O Reilly made as Drumpf has made no such statements even at his initial launch of a presidential campaign ...
That's one lie that the media made up and you seem to have went with it unless you have another source to object. He makes it clear that he dislikes anchor babies and even says that their not citizens but he didn't outright say to deport them ...
Errrr... that's a direct quote from Drumpf. I'm not sure how you can call a transcript that I gave you a lie from the media.
Drumpf said anchor babies are not citizens. He has suggested deporting all illegal immigrants. 1+1=2. That's why Drumpf didn't dispute it when O' Reilly challenged him. If it was a media lie, Drumpf was right there to argue against it, and he did not.
Just look at our previous posts ...
That is not an ad hominen. That is a trait of antisocial personality disorder. If I say that I like to suck penis and you say that I might be gay, that's not an ad hominen. Antisocial personality disorder means you do not consider the feelings of others, but that doesn't necessarily mean you disregard the feelings of every single person. There are different levels of severity. If you don't think you should care about other people that are not in your immediate life, then that is indeed a trait of sociopathy.
I never said anything about whether we all treat each other equally. Again, you're just kind of responding to things I never said.
Again, neat ad hominem (sarcasm), personally those who sacrifice their own existence along with their new born just for this great so called species known as humanity are sickingly selfless to the point when they don't consider how much they'll be missed or needed by others so that's still plain selfish that you'd be the one to lightly weigh how much your life is worth since that's for everyone else to determine ...
I really don't undrstand what you're going off on. I'm not trying to be mean or nasty, but you're being entirely incoherent. I'm trying to talk about Drumpf's policies, and you're talking about sacrificing existence and newborns. I have no idea how this relates to anything that we've been talking about. It's all one big sentence bereft of punctuation, and I'm pretty sure those aren't all actual words. This is utterly unintelligible.
Humans should have an absolute right to decide based on their own feelings and those that deprive themselves of that are worse than monsters ...
O...k..? Again, I have no idea what you are responding to, or what point you're trying to make.
