Conservative Judicial Philosophy: That's BullShit

[xadam2dudex]

cute slipping in that Coke ad making it look like a scoreboard

[OolTube02]

Hey Sam! Have Penn & Teller sued you yet over the title of your pieces?

[canucksfan94]

Apple should make iPowderedWigs.

[abntemplar82]

well lets interject some truth to this arguement....truth #1 the president can nominate whoever he wants as a supreme court justice. it is the job of congress to decide if that person is right for the job. truth #2 kagan is a socialist read her white papers and you wont be able to argue that point...truth #3 the idea of a socalist system while maintaining our nationist ideals is an already tried and failed (misarably) system. sam since you of all people should know that historical FACT!

[joe035]

The Constitution is not a living breathing document! Our military as well as our political leaders swore an oath to uphold it as it was written! Of the thousands of proposals that have been made to amend the Constitution, only 33 obtained the necessary two-thirds vote in Congress. Of those 33, only 27 amendments (including the Bill of Rights) have been ratified. It is the FOUNDATION of our REPUBLIC! When writing the 9th amendment they feared the very thing you now advocate!

[Chargrad]

I did not like this video. Was that constant cutting back supposed to be funny? Really annoying. Content was fine, but I had a hard time paying attention.

[insidetrip101]

Ehhhhhhh I think this video could have been much better. It sort of just said, Conservatives suck, that's bullshit, ect, ect.

What he should have gone into is how language is a bunch of sounds articulated from the mouth that are symbols which point to things outside themselves. This makes all language metaphorical, thus interpretive. There is know way to know the "original intent" for sure, you can only INTERPRET what the intent was.

"Original Intent" is based on severely outdated linguistics.

[LordBalto]

Don't hold your breath, Sam.

[trushinogul]

Sam, I think you need to understand what Conservative judicial philosophy actually is. In terms of law, a conservative is someone who uses a strict view of the constitution and of the law, examining both the letter of the law and the intent behind it (or spirit). A liberal judge is one that uses the power of the court to decide what the law says to fit a certain agenda. This applies to political liberals and conservatives.

[joe035]

@trushinogul Well put!

[VerbotenDingleberry]

gfy

[profg11]

Ummm... "the Constitution explicitly tasks our government to provide for our national security." It does? Can you show me where it EXPLICITLY says that?

It doesn't. In fact, the ONLY place the Constitution EXPLICITLY states anything at all about the security of our country is in the Second Amendment - which tsays that we have the right to keep and bear arms BECAUSE it's "necessary to the security of a free State"!

So your little example doesn't even hold water! *sigh* liberals…

[leeroynaggins]

@profg11

"...promote the common defense..."

[profg11]

@leeroynaggins Ummm... where does the Constitution say "promote the common defense" ?

[leeroynaggins]

@profg11

Preamble...

Oh and it's "...provide for the common defense"

Also of note is that part about "...promote the general Welfare"

Interesting that...

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

[didles123]

"The Constitution is a living document"

It's livelihood comes from the fact that it can be amended, not from activist judges.

"The constitution promotes values"

It does not promote anything, rather it limits the government's power. It's not difficult for congressmen to pass laws which obey the constitution.

Security/Press dilemma:

The constitution does not obligate the federal government to keep military secrets, but it does deny congress the power to restrict the press.

[zbjordan23]

@didles123

Actually since the consitution is vague...congressman can pass any law and then try to interpret the constitution to fit their view.

[didles123]

@zbjordan23 Actually, the constitution itself isn't vague. The only reason it seems vague today is because activist judges have made up bullshit rulings which are vague and contradictory. Do not confuse these rulings with the actual document.

Most of it is very straight forward, and even the slightly vague points can be understood when considering original intent (the federalist/anti-federalist papers).

[jaksun93]

fat cats MEOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW­WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW­WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW­WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW­WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW­WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW­WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW­WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW LASAGNA

[yz450fyamaha1]

This guy is like such a dumbass and a fuckhead tee hee ha ha

[imriey]

keep hating on big corporations say bye bye to millions of jobs and low cost things..

[zbjordan23]

@imriey

nobody hates big corporations for the sake of hating them...they hate the corruption and the excess money they use to sway politicians from working for the people to working for halliburton. Instead of protecting people, the money sways them to protect a certain company

[collosalchris]

Don't be conservative! BE RON PAUL!!!!!!!!!

Oh by the way...The Constitution was only meant to live via adding Ammendments and nothing else!

[gilbet]

Fat cats and corporations are what made America #1 in jobs, income, and purchasing power. They got rich making everyone else richer than the rest of the world. Don't like it, move to France or Greece where everybody is equal. More like equally non-productive. That's why nothing you buy ever comes from France or Greece. (other than food)

[zbjordan23]

@gilbet

Actually nowadays nothing you ever buy comes from the USA...just go to your local wal-mart and look at the tag. We are a country that no longer makes ANYTHING.

[wwerdnaa]

Please back up at least one statement and show me a conservative saying "evil activist judge."

Also, your statements comparing the constitution to IKEA are ridiculous. Ridiculous.

One last thing. I just wasted my time watching a senseless poorly informed video. Thanks.

[imriey]

1:10 this whole video is BS he's drunk! John Roberts is right by the way someone who is interpreting the meaning of constitution is making law, the Judicial branch does not make law for they are not given that power in Article 3 buddy.

[zbjordan23]

@imriey

The constitution is filled with contradictions and vagueness. You cant make a ruling without having to interpret.

[littlerocken]

The comment around 2:38 is BULLSHIT..Keep our noises out of other countries business and do business in our own country like we are meant to do..Stop going against the Constitution..Period

One more thing we don't need the media, they need us..Stop listening to them and reading total propaganda..That's the Real BULLSHIT!

[1ThinkingMachine]

What a fricken dweeb .Another Liberal Queen butt sniff

[paintballer70]

0:00

[ozzyfranf]

Are trying to say something polite?

[EmpathyWorks]

fantastic video. Subscribed.

[ozzyfranf]

Your BULLSHIT!

[EmpathyWorks]

@ozzyfranf don't you mean "you're"? not "your".

...or is good grammar "bullshit" these days amongst conservatives?

[spiehole]

plus, the only job of government is to protect people from physical injury, and to protect property. the amendment conflict example he gives...he should have given a recent example-like 9/11. the government prohibited movies to be made about it for some time after-prohibiting free speech in favor of...protecting the country against riot.

[MorphIntoCouch]

your bullshit

[theygunaHATEME]

wow good old socialist propaganda, they learned so much from the nazis, those progressives 6000 views this definetly one of the most popular videos on youtube or else why would it be here

[34jikimo]

@theygunaHATEME That's funny bc the Nazis were fascists not socialists. Fascism is closer to neo-conservatism than socialism.

[mattschol]

But the judicial branch isn't supposed to make laws. They should judge on what the constitution says, not what they want the constitution to say. I'll agree that all judges need to interpret.

[zbjordan23]

@mattschol

You cant judge if there is vagueness and contradiction. In those instances you HAVE to interpret.

[kerrywsmyth]

Thank God your opinion is irrelevant in American government.

[EmpathyWorks]

@kerrywsmyth his points were relevant to me.

and I just subscribed to him :D

[kerrywsmyth]

If you were in charge of baseball, you would have balls hit inside the wall ruled a home run because the hitting team was losing. I'm right, aren't I?

[RealityReallyHurts]

I'm not even going to bother reading responses to this as I'm sure I'll be erased or just insulted...have a nice life.

[RealityReallyHurts]

No I don't have to think about that one, enlisted men are just that, enlisted and they do and say as they were and are now told...and that was a time of war genius. You're arguement is flawed and completely bullshit. The typical liberal tactic is to not make a point and defend it, it's to make 100 points and defend none as quickly as possible. Also to erase, talk over, or just ignore whatever arguement may come from the other side.

[kerrywsmyth]

YOUR WRONG .

[DNofs13]

DISLIKE!

[spiehole]

first and foremost, not all conservatives are corporate-they are our private businessmen and inventors, too. this country was founded on men who were successful in business because of their personal abilities. The anti trust laws (1890)-which are unconstitutional (government intervention), deregulated the free market-and essentially caused the great depression. it was the businessmen who had POLITICAL PULL that made competition uneven-the electric companies is an example.

[pbas9513]

I love how this dude thinks the founders wanted the judicial branch to make law when that makes no sense. The constitution gives "ALL LEGISLATIVE POWERS HEREIN" to congress. none to the judicial branch. which of course means judicial activism and making law from the bench was a unintended consequense of human nature. I think it is inevitable that there will be judicial activism, but it is up to the president and the senate to make sure the justices they give such power to are not too activist

[zbjordan23]

@pbas9513

Your proving his point. The constitution is NOT black and white. How would you want the judge to rule on the newpaper revealing secret information???...The constitution states both is allowed and is too vague to give any specifics??...Your answer of "Do what the constitution says" MAKES no sense because it says you can do both. It's a contradiction that needs interpretation if a ruling is to be made.

[hawkerdoo]

This is a typical liberal reasoning video, all lies. First they didn't say not to interpret the constitution, they say not to make policy or laws from the bench, which they shouldn't. The example used of free speech and protecting our nation was weak. First off the leaders won't tell a newspaper we'll be attacking on Normandy so you have nothing to report until the aftermath. Your brain is bleeding from delusional thought, get help.

[duanescot]

@hawkerdoo exactly, ruling from the bench is synonymous with treason in my opinion

[TheLoneAdvocator]

@hawkerdoo None of the things that video you listed, had lies in it. You said it yourself it was weak, or you disagree, but you never followed up on your inital "its all lies" comment. You don't know how to use the word Lie.

However, I agree with the disagreeing part. I disagree with this video. The Free speech part was weak. the video over all was WEAK. But Not a lie. You lose motherfucker. You just proved his video right though. And because its a shitty video, you lost even more. Fuckoff.

[hawkerdoo]

@TheLoneAdvocator Your comprehension is not up to par for understanding my statement, so I suggest you take another literature course to build up an understanding of how not to add between the lines. You contradicted yourself, where I was straight forward in my thought. No losers just dumb asses like you.

[TheLoneAdvocator]

@hawkerdoo Your constant reiteration of some ‘hidden’, yet meaningful statement (by your standards) out of a thesaurus referenced comment on a youtube video, is not made to be comprehended. Because you don't want it to be. I also won't correct the misuse of the term 'Literature' in a course/college environment. Which says a lot.

You would rather argue about how the statement you made actually does convey yourself, instead of just being a man and correcting it. You are such a shit basket.

[hawkerdoo]

@TheLoneAdvocator hahaha you must have comprehension to appreciate literature, which you don't. I stand corrected on my misuse of the term, you need to go back to basic reading and writing. Your young and not fully developed yet so it stands to reason that time will prevail in your manner of thinking. Let me know when you have left mamas nest and became a man.

[HateNeverCeasesHate]

@hawkerdoo meh, I guess I will counter some of the ignorant comments on here. Have you heard of someone leaking information, or the website wikileaks? What is someone other than a leader leaked the info... Think for a second!

[hawkerdoo]

@HateNeverCeasesHate First off a leak could be intentional for the enemy, second I believe the newspapers have a legal obligation to not jeopardize our national security, and when one does it could be considered treason. Your comment is not valid when speaking of national security, and free speach is not a good example for this video or it's subject matter. This guys point is moot at best.

[HateNeverCeasesHate]

@hawkerdoo National security issues are the MAIN issues for this discussion. Whenever a leak happens, the gov claims it is for national security that it must be stopped, and the paper claims free speech as why it should not be stopped. This is what happens in reality.

Please read this aloud: the constitution trumps legal obligations, the constitution trumps legal obligations...

[hawkerdoo]

@HateNeverCeasesHate Read this aloud: The constitution comands you obey the laws of the land. I agree with you on free speach, but national security is not to be compromised by an ideology because of free speach. Treason is not in line with free speach. Again his example was inaccurate at best. Free speach is not forgiving in some cases, so there needs to be a balance of common sense.

[HateNeverCeasesHate]

@hawkerdoo It kinda sounds like you just don't understand the constitution at all. All laws exist by will of the constitution. The constitution defines law by saying the "laws of the land" are something you have to follow. Any law that is deemed improper by the constitution is illegal, even if it was voted into legal existence by congress. Thus, free speech trumps any law against treason.

If you are arguing for a balanced interpretation of the const., then you are agreeing with the video.

[hawkerdoo]

@HateNeverCeasesHate Except for in the case where giving away our posistion and creating a threat to our national security would be an act of treason. Articale II. section 4: The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or or other high Crimes and Misdermeaners. The paper may not be liable, but it is still treason. Common sense must prevail.

[joe035]

@hawkerdoo I think it's interesting that a democrat campaigning against an incumbant democrat can come out & say he was offered a job by the whitehouse and how that is not being investigated as bribery. Clinton was impeached for lying under oath not for the BJ itself but dems prefer to just say he had sex then lied to the nation. I am an Independant, but these onesided views where honesty comes second to advocation of ideology should make everyone sick.

[hawkerdoo]

@joe035 Oh it does my friend, it does.... I do believe thought that the job offer is still being looked into, it just isn't on the front burner like some issues that need to be. Lets hope we can reenact the Constitution before it's too late.

[joe035]

@HateNeverCeasesHate I think this guy like Sam Seder have a completely warped view of the Constitution as well as the purpose of government as desired by the founders. I find Sam Seder incredibly offensive, it's no wonder Air America didn't last you can only stomach so much bullshit!

[Oriongiant66]

Checkout my stupid,but yet funny videos.I hope you laugh.

[Rikotistic]

Well said!!!!! Thumbs up!!!!

[MastaRikta]

Way to rip off AVGN, asshole.

[MastaRikta]

@HateNeverCeasesHate Have you ever seen one of his bullshit segments?

[shadowsdarknes]

wow, you're a douche

[pohatu559]

4:20 <3

[2sik4u]

whats bullshit is the sound quality gl trying to understand what hes saying

[freedombase]

well first the constitution states gun control is illegal and free speech rules not thought control laws. why do you liberals back Nazi White power started gun control that was used by hitler to kill 6 million Jews and millions of Non Aryans. the kkk used gun control to keep non Aryans under control. the poor liberals are defending Robert Sheets Byrd a Hardcore liberal atheist and Grand Dragon of the KKK which was created by the Hitler

[booley]

@freedombase

First read a history book.

Gun control is NOT what led to the holocaust.

Second read the constitution.

It doesn't say there can be no control over guns ever. In fact it provides a parameter (a well regulated militia) to decide whether gun control goes to far or not.

And third read a dictionary.

Gun control is NOT the same as gun PROHIBITION>

We have alcohol and car control laws too. Yet we have plenty of booze and cars. (just hopefully not at the same time)

[2sik4u]

@freedombase wtf does that mean i feel like i just got mind raped, try and make sense next time?

[jhamm999]

i just want more judges that can read the constitution. like 4 judges who think the second amendment basically doesn't exist. also the constitution is not a living document. if it is then it is rendered useless, only at the whims of nine persons in a black robe.

[shammadamma]

It's so cute how he thinks the left is all for the little guy while conservatives are in bed with corporations. BOTH major parties are owned by corporations. Just look at the health-care bill. It enriches insurance companies and does nothing to actually enact reform.

[shammadamma]

There are no dilemmas under which one Constitutional value "trumps" another. The fact that the government provides for national security has nothing to do with the right of the press to report on war.

This is not a "conservative" value. It's common sense. If there's no original intent, you can invent whatever law you want, rendering the document meaningless.

[2sik4u]

@shammadamma finally someone who knows what they are talking about.

[cujhawk71]

If the Founders intended the Constitution to be a living document, they would have prescribed a means by which it can be modified as time goes on.

Oh, yeah, right... it's called the amendment process.

[WhiteFlowerLei76]

I'd really like to see Sam Seder rip apart that right wing douchebag Steven Crowder.

[joe035]

@WhiteFlowerLei76 He would need facts, history and logic to support his criticisms which he comes up short on. His slander is especially entertaining though!

[nrf91]

Glad to see they let you out of the studio, Sam :-) My favorite right wing hypocrisy of the week is their talking point that Kagan should be filibustered because she has liberal views. Apparently it's bad for someone to hold liberal biases, yet when Bush was appointing SC justices, we were told he had every right to pick justices with conservative biases because of his electoral majority.

Bottom line: IOKIYAR

[JayPhilosopher]

Excellent. How refreshing to hear some one speak intelligently. Thanks, Sam

[asdfxcxv]

That's some fistfuckin bullshit, shoulder-deep honey

[captfoster1]

You can hear it now... some right-wingers who watches this who also happens to be a baseball fan will no doubt scream or rant or name call about that remark by Sam that the founding fathers "those dudes" loved baseball (baseball was not even a sport until the late 1860's or so)... I understood what Sam was saying... but will any right-winger?

[fret2424]

When you talk, I only get audio on the left side. FIX YOUR AUDIO PLEASE!

Otherwise, nice video, well done!

[concord327]

nice jumbotron subliminal messages

[psynthpriest]

I love these videos, but I did find the background and the background noise off putting this time. Not a big deal, I'm sure it was just a one time deal but thought I would mention it. Anyway, great show! Keep it up.

[ToTheConquered]

It makes too much sense.

My head is going to explode!!!!