I'm baaaaaaad !

[TUSooner]

I'm reversing a judgment by federal district judge. :cool:

Actually, a harmless nerdy drudge like me cain't reverse diddly, but I'm recommending that a panel of circuit judges do it. It's fairly rare in this neighborhood, but they'll probably take my advice in this case.

Y'all should FEAR ME nonetheless !!
because I am, indeed...... sooo baaaad (for a nerdy drudge, that is). :cool:

[royalfan5]

Was a cool case like a triple contract murder or a bribery scandal or was it a lame ADA case or something?

[Fugue]

panel: "Affirmed"

[TUSooner]

Actually, its far more boring than even the ADA dealy.
In fact, it's too boring to discuss.
I just want you all to be awed by my awesome power and influence.

[TUSooner]

panel: "Affirmed"
:(

[SoonerJack]

<Rainman>definitely time for Wapner</Rainman>

[OCUDad]

I just want you all to be awed by my awesome power and influence.We bow in the presence of your awfulness.

[TUSooner]

We bow in the presence of your awfulness.

That's more like it!


or not

[Pricetag]

http://www.klov.com/screens/B/vBad_Dudes_Vs._Dragon_Ninja.png

[Jerk]

Can you repeal the 16th & 17th amendments while your at it?

[Xstnlsooner]

Can you repeal the 16th & 17th amendments while your at it?

WORD!!

[TUSooner]

Can you repeal the 16th & 17th amendments while your at it?

Repeal the income tax? OK.
But why hate the direct election of senators?

[Jerk]

Repeal the income tax? OK.
But why hate the direct election of senators?

Because, I believe, that States now have no representation in Washington. The people of the 50 states do, but not the actual state governments. The Feds get alot of power from unfunded mandates. Plus, the people already have representation in the House, which is where all tax bills originate.

I don't know why I am explaining this to you. It'd be like Sic'em telling me how to shift gears in a semi.

Point is, it would be more state power and less federal power, which I am for, because I believe that 'the people' have more influence over their politicians when they live in the same neighborhood - not 3,000 miles away.

[Widescreen]

I just want you all to be awed by my awesome power and influence.
You'd make a great speaker of the house.

;)

[olevetonahill]

You'd make a great speaker in the **** house.

;)

:eek:

[Okla-homey]

We demand a citation! This awesome power you wield must be savored.

BTW, it wasn't one of those prisoner's pro se appeal dealios written in long hand on toilet paper was it? Because that would be cool!

[StoopTroup]

Your awesomeness can only really be judged once you get Joe to overturn a decision. ;)

http://www.judgejoebrown.com/assets/global/left_courtcalendar.jpg

[SicEmBaylor]

Because, I believe, that States now have no representation in Washington. The people of the 50 states do, but not the actual state governments. The Feds get alot of power from unfunded mandates. Plus, the people already have representation in the House, which is where all tax bills originate.

I don't know why I am explaining this to you. It'd be like Sic'em telling me how to shift gears in a semi.

Point is, it would be more state power and less federal power, which I am for, because I believe that 'the people' have more influence over their politicians when they live in the same neighborhood - not 3,000 miles away.

I affirm everything you have just said.

The people already have their representative to the Federal system in the House of Representatives. The states have lost much of their clout and power due, in part, to losing their representation within the Federal system.

[TUSooner]

Because, I believe, that States now have no representation in Washington. The people of the 50 states do, but not the actual state governments. The Feds get alot of power from unfunded mandates. Plus, the people already have representation in the House, which is where all tax bills originate.

I don't know why I am explaining this to you. It'd be like Sic'em telling me how to shift gears in a semi.

Point is, it would be more state power and less federal power, which I am for, because I believe that 'the people' have more influence over their politicians when they live in the same neighborhood - not 3,000 miles away.
Agreed. I just wanted to hear that impeccable reasoning. :D

[TUSooner]

We demand a citation! This awesome power you wield must be savored.

BTW, it wasn't one of those prisoner's pro se appeal dealios written in long hand on toilet paper was it? Because that would be cool!
Actually, it was a pro se prisoner, but he didn't write on TP, and he was pretty good. He'll probably lose in the end, but at least someone might have to pay attention to him before they boot him. :)

[OklahomaTuba]

While you're at it, do something about womans sufferage. Those poor ladies have suffered way to long.

[Jerk]

Agreed. I just wanted to hear that impeccable reasoning. :D

I'm just re-hashing everything I learn listening to Neal Boortz :O

[Rogue]

I guess I don't understand the vigor of support for stronger states' rights so much. I suppose it serves as a reasonable buffer to simple majority rule.

[SicEmBaylor]

I guess I don't understand the vigor of support for stronger states' rights so much. I suppose it serves as a reasonable buffer to simple majority rule.

1)It brings government closer to the people. Your local elected officials who are from your own local area or community are the primary representative of government in your life. What does that mean? Well, it means that those individuals who are more closely aligned with your values and beliefs are going to be making decisions both economic and social that more closely match your political beliefs. So, instead of some moron from San Francisco or fat jackass from Illinois making major decisions that affect your life in small town Oklahoma...other people from Oklahoma are going to be making those decisions.

2)The real beauty of the constitution is the balance it strikes. We all know about the balance between branches of the Federal government, but one of the best ways the Founders curbed national centralized power was to create a two tiered system of states and the central government both of whom had unique responsibilities and powers and each of which were suppose to guard against the other becoming too powerful.

[Jerk]

The laws which govern NYC, LA, or Chicago, aren't necessarily the best laws to govern Montana, Alaska, or Oklahoma with. Morever, you really don't want to have the great masses from the large cities dictate legislation to the small rural states just because they have more people. That would be a democracy....two wolves and one sheep voting on what's for dinner. We (should) live in a constitutional republic, where the rights of the individual cannot be voted away. If the Christian Coalition ever were to take over congress and the white house, you can guarantee your *** that the liberals would be screaming this point.

(ETA_ I guess this is pretty much what sic'em says in point #1)

[Okla-homey]

1)It brings government closer to the people. Your local elected officials who are from your own local area or community are the primary representative of government in your life. What does that mean? Well, it means that those individuals who are more closely aligned with your values and beliefs are going to be making decisions both economic and social that more closely match your political beliefs. So, instead of some moron from San Francisco or fat jackass from Illinois making major decisions that affect your life in small town Oklahoma...other people from Oklahoma are going to be making those decisions.

2)The real beauty of the constitution is the balance it strikes. We all know about the balance between branches of the Federal government, but one of the best ways the Founders curbed national centralized power was to create a two tiered system of states and the central government both of whom had unique responsibilities and powers and each of which were suppose to guard against the other becoming too powerful.

Checks and balances in theory. You're still forgetting about the Fourth Branch of gubmint...the Administrative State. Through it, bureaucratic "morons from San Francisco" and "fat jackasses from Illinois" make substantial decisions that profoundly and permanently affect Oklahomans' lives every day...and very little of it comports with anyone's strict interpretation of what is possible under the Constitution. Judicial review is possible, but in the overwhelming majority of cases, the agency decision is upheld, whether the court agrees with it or not, as long as it's "reasonable" --which is code for the fact they defer to the agency about 98% of the time.

The thing is, this stuff is permitted by the courts simply because there is no practical alternative.