Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (42894)	4/23/2010 5:35:05 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

And if I'm of mind to start contenting that the Earth is controlled by rainbow colored unicorns who hide amongst the ice and rock in the rings of Saturn, the burden of proof would also be on me. Which is just about as relevant to the issue, since I never claimed that state law overides federal law in this area, and in fact have even at least twice specifically denied the claim. What I said is 1 - States do regulate federal elections - That's true (regulate does not mean "exclusively regulate", or "exercise total control over") 2 - You have failed to point out a specific constitutional prohibition of this state regulation - That's also true. 3 - Because no such prohibition exists - Probably true, but if you can point one out I'll acknowledge my error. 4 - If the constitution directly said that states could not regulate federal elections, it would not be a supremacy issue, but rather an issue of the specific constitutional prohibition - That's also true. 5 - If there is no direct constitutional prohibition, then there could be a supremacy clause issue, if a specific federal statute prohibits any state regulation of federal elections, either directly, or by otherwise superseding or precluding such regulation - That's also true. 6 - You have not quoted or even named any such federal law - That's also true. 7 - I suspect that no such law exists (because the states do after-all regulate federal elections) - That's true (I do indeed suspect that), but its just a statement about my own thoughts. However if such a law does exist why don't you just quote it? None of those statements even vaguely resembles - "individual STATES can over-rule federal laws governing FEDERAL ELECTIONS" After the first time you suggest that I was saying such a thing I figured you just misunderstood. After the 2nd I still figured it was a misunderstanding. But now I find it hard to believe you are not deliberately attacking a straw man.