General Discussion 5 - Page 48
Global Justice Alliance

Page 48 of 51 FirstFirst ... 384647484950 ... LastLast
Results 471 to 480 of 502

Thread: General Discussion 5

  1. #471
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    You know, this is probably going to get filed under those "firebrand comments" I talked about earlier, but I feel I must talk about it. You see, yesterday the President and his Treasury Secretary "Turbo-Tax" Tim Geithner went before the American people and Congress and asked for sweeping powers to nationalize any financial institution that the government deems to be a threat to the economy . . . OK, I'll be honest with you, that's socialism, that's evil. I mean, seriously, when you have Euros criticizing you on your economic policy, you know you've gone too far.

    That, combined with the with the facts that he's taking away pilots' guns in favor of administrators to provide oversight of them, stopping the use of the phrase "War on Terror" in favor of the phrase "Overseas Contingency Operation", and attempting to start a government run "volunteer" organization, gives a very dark impression to whole administration. So much so that one begins to wonder who's side Obama's really on.
    Just a few things here; he's taking away everybody's guns. Everybody except people who have the proper rights to use them. He's not doing this to reduce our safety, but increase it; that has more to do with controlling street violence than anything. And that's happening here, in fact, just a few towns over from where I live is the one of nation's most violent cities. You have gun control, you lower the chances of someone that doesn't need a gun getting one in his grasp. That happens everyday, and a lot of people have died as a result, so that is why he is putting that into effect

    Two, so what if he stops saying "War on Terror"? It wasn't supposed to be a war to begin with (original plan; go in, catch bad guys, get out; this is what we were told before they started with Iraq), and we're pulling out now, so it doesn't need to be called that anymore. End of story.

    And as for socialism. Look up what socialism is as a whole, then tell me what Obama's doing is some sort of evil.
    Click on the eggs, please!

  2. #472
    Registered User Veteran Member Cody MacArthur Fett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the United States of America
    Posts
    787
    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    You know, this is probably going to get filed under those "firebrand comments" I talked about earlier, but I feel I must talk about it. You see, yesterday the President and his Treasury Secretary "Turbo-Tax" Tim Geithner went before the American people and Congress and asked for sweeping powers to nationalize any financial institution that the government deems to be a threat to the economy . . . OK, I'll be honest with you, that's socialism, that's evil. I mean, seriously, when you have Euros criticizing you on your economic policy, you know you've gone too far.

    That, combined with the with the facts that he's taking away pilots' guns in favor of administrators to provide oversight of them, stopping the use of the phrase "War on Terror" in favor of the phrase "Overseas Contingency Operation", and attempting to start a government run "volunteer" organization, gives a very dark impression to whole administration. So much so that one begins to wonder who's side Obama's really on.
    Just a few things here; he's taking away everybody's guns. Everybody except people who have the proper rights to use them. He's not doing this to reduce our safety, but increase it; that has more to do with controlling street violence than anything. And that's happening here, in fact, just a few towns over from where I live is the one of nation's most violent cities. You have gun control, you lower the chances of someone that doesn't need a gun getting one in his grasp. That happens everyday, and a lot of people have died as a result, so that is why he is putting that into effect
    Actually, I was referring to a Washington Post editorial in which they discussed an Obama plan that was recently enacted that took away the guns all US commercial pilots were given and trained to use after 9/11 (you know, to stop terrorists from storming into the cockpit), and instead used the 3,000,000 dollars invested in the program to hire administrators to preform field inspections of aforementioned US pilots. I just wasn't able to find the link.

    Besides, the Second Amendment says, and I quote:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    : In other words, any laws that keep people from owning weapons (of any kind) in the United States are unconstitutional. Besides, the very nature of a criminal is to violate the law, do you really think a murderer or a drug dealer is not going to get a gun just because it's against the law? All gun control laws do is keep law abiding citizens from putting a bullet between the eyes of the mugger coming at them with a Colt.

    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Two, so what if he stops saying "War on Terror"? It wasn't supposed to be a war to begin with (original plan; go in, catch bad guys, get out; this is what we were told before they started with Iraq), and we're pulling out now, so it doesn't need to be called that anymore. End of story.
    No, it's nowhere near the end of the story. The bad guys (Al-Qaldia, Iran, Hezzbolla, etc.) are still calling it a war, and they're still fighting it like it's a war. This is like a squad of GIs and a squad of German Stormtroopers shooting at eachother, and then one of the GI standing up, stop firing, and then saying to the stormtroopers, "Hey guys, thank for the laughs, but I don't think I wanna fight this war anymore so I'm just going to stand here and ignore the gunfire."

    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    And as for socialism. Look up what socialism is as a whole, then tell me what Obama's doing is some sort of evil.
    What?! Are you kidding me? Socialism is goverment ownership of privete industry. It's destoryed the European economies, and left their population unable to produce in any meaningful way (I point to the protests in France when the government there tried to make it so that companies could actually fire employies without having to go through the court system in an effort to curb the 20+% unenployment there as evidence). It's one step bellow Communism. And on top of that, our country was capitalist! The entire idea with our system was that companies could rise to the stars and burn to the ground without the government interfering. In fact, every time the government has gotten involved with the economy it's turnned out badly, very, very, very badly. (Look it up, you'll see what I mean.)

  3. #473
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    You know, this is probably going to get filed under those "firebrand comments" I talked about earlier, but I feel I must talk about it. You see, yesterday the President and his Treasury Secretary "Turbo-Tax" Tim Geithner went before the American people and Congress and asked for sweeping powers to nationalize any financial institution that the government deems to be a threat to the economy . . . OK, I'll be honest with you, that's socialism, that's evil. I mean, seriously, when you have Euros criticizing you on your economic policy, you know you've gone too far.

    That, combined with the with the facts that he's taking away pilots' guns in favor of administrators to provide oversight of them, stopping the use of the phrase "War on Terror" in favor of the phrase "Overseas Contingency Operation", and attempting to start a government run "volunteer" organization, gives a very dark impression to whole administration. So much so that one begins to wonder who's side Obama's really on.
    Just a few things here; he's taking away everybody's guns. Everybody except people who have the proper rights to use them. He's not doing this to reduce our safety, but increase it; that has more to do with controlling street violence than anything. And that's happening here, in fact, just a few towns over from where I live is the one of nation's most violent cities. You have gun control, you lower the chances of someone that doesn't need a gun getting one in his grasp. That happens everyday, and a lot of people have died as a result, so that is why he is putting that into effect
    Actually, I was referring to a Washington Post editorial in which they discussed an Obama plan that was recently enacted that took away the guns all US commercial pilots were given and trained to use after 9/11 (you know, to stop terrorists from storming into the cockpit), and instead used the 3,000,000 dollars invested in the program to hire administrators to preform field inspections of aforementioned US pilots. I just wasn't able to find the link.

    Besides, the Second Amendment says, and I quote:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    : In other words, any laws that keep people from owning weapons (of any kind) in the United States are unconstitutional. Besides, the very nature of a criminal is to violate the law, do you really think a murderer or a drug dealer is not going to get a gun just because it's against the law? All gun control laws do is keep law abiding citizens from putting a bullet between the eyes of the mugger coming at them with a Colt.
    So? Bush did a lot of things that were unconstitutional, such as torture and tapping phones, so why call Obama out now? And really, he's not preventing people from getting guns, he's just stopping the bad guys from having them. There's nothing unconstitutional about stopping violence.

    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    No, it's nowhere near the end of the story. The bad guys (Al-Qaldia, Iran, Hezzbolla, etc.) are still calling it a war, and they're still fighting it like it's a war. This is like a squad of GIs and a squad of German Stormtroopers shooting at eachother, and then one of the GI standing up, stop firing, and then saying to the stormtroopers, "Hey guys, thank for the laughs, but I don't think I wanna fight this war anymore so I'm just going to stand here and ignore the gunfire."
    That's not what we are doing though. We're leaving the country, entirely, in a few years, because it isn't our fight anymore. Iraq wasn't our fight to begin with. Now, I think that they needed a different set-up, yes, but the way we handled it was wrong. We destablized a country, in the name of "spreading democracy".

    I just think... that was making more of a mess than there needed to be.

    What?! Are you kidding me? Socialism is goverment ownership of privete industry. It's destoryed the European economies, and left their population unable to produce in any meaningful way (I point to the protests in France when the government there tried to make it so that companies could actually fire employies without having to go through the court system in an effort to curb the 20+% unenployment there as evidence). It's one step bellow Communism. And on top of that, our country was capitalist! The entire idea with our system was that companies could rise to the stars and burn to the ground without the government interfering. In fact, every time the government has gotten involved with the economy it's turnned out badly, very, very, very badly. (Look it up, you'll see what I mean.)

    I know what socialism is and I know what's done; I was saying that what Obama is doing is not socialism. Not by the true definition anyway. Actually, the media has turned "spreading the wealth around" into something to be feared, because it remotely resembles socialism. But he means something different by it, from what I know.
    Click on the eggs, please!

  4. #474
    Registered User Exalted Member lunchmeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    The Tick Capitol Of The Known Universe
    Posts
    4,025
    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    You know, this is probably going to get filed under those "firebrand comments" I talked about earlier, but I feel I must talk about it. You see, yesterday the President and his Treasury Secretary "Turbo-Tax" Tim Geithner went before the American people and Congress and asked for sweeping powers to nationalize any financial institution that the government deems to be a threat to the economy . . . OK, I'll be honest with you, that's socialism, that's evil. I mean, seriously, when you have Euros criticizing you on your economic policy, you know you've gone too far.

    That, combined with the with the facts that he's taking away pilots' guns in favor of administrators to provide oversight of them, stopping the use of the phrase "War on Terror" in favor of the phrase "Overseas Contingency Operation", and attempting to start a government run "volunteer" organization, gives a very dark impression to whole administration. So much so that one begins to wonder who's side Obama's really on.
    Just a few things here; he's taking away everybody's guns. Everybody except people who have the proper rights to use them. He's not doing this to reduce our safety, but increase it; that has more to do with controlling street violence than anything. And that's happening here, in fact, just a few towns over from where I live is the one of nation's most violent cities. You have gun control, you lower the chances of someone that doesn't need a gun getting one in his grasp. That happens everyday, and a lot of people have died as a result, so that is why he is putting that into effect

    Two, so what if he stops saying "War on Terror"? It wasn't supposed to be a war to begin with (original plan; go in, catch bad guys, get out; this is what we were told before they started with Iraq), and we're pulling out now, so it doesn't need to be called that anymore. End of story.

    And as for socialism. Look up what socialism is as a whole, then tell me what Obama's doing is some sort of evil.
    Interestingly enough the news noted yesterday that Maryland, which has some of the most stringent gun control laws in the country, is also the #2 state for both homicides and violent crime. Rcihmond, Virginia is the 9th most violent city in the US

    According to the Department of Justice http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/hmrt.htm homicide rates have continued declining since the expiration of the ban on faux assault guns (real assault guns are automatic weapons and regulated by the machine gun act of 1934). Same with violent crime overall: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/vsx2.htm. This gives one a pretty good idea on how effective it was.

    It's interesting to note that one is more likely to die of septicemia (infection) or suicide (by about 2:1) than homicide and close to four times as likely to die of influenza or pneumonia, according to the most recent year for CDC refined data: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr56/nvsr56_10.pdf.

    The UN WHO, hardly a body closely aligned with the NRA had some stats just on suicide: "Among the Member States in the European Region reporting suicide to WHO, the highest rates are
    found in eastern countries, such as Lithuania (51.6 per 100 000), the Russian Federation (43.1 per
    100 000), Belarus (41.5 per 100 000) and Estonia (37.9 per 100 000). These are twice the rates found
    in such western countries as Belgium (24.0 per 100 000), Finland (28.4 per 100 000), France (20.0
    per 100 000) and Germany (14.3 per 100 000). As to the trends in suicide in the twentieth century,
    Finland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, Scotland (United Kingdom), Spain and Sweden
    experienced significant increases, while England and Wales (United Kingdom), Italy and
    Switzerland experienced significant decreases.", it should be noted most of these places have extensive and often draconina gun control regulations.
    Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto - “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.”

  5. #475
    Registered User Veteran Member Cody MacArthur Fett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the United States of America
    Posts
    787
    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    You know, this is probably going to get filed under those "firebrand comments" I talked about earlier, but I feel I must talk about it. You see, yesterday the President and his Treasury Secretary "Turbo-Tax" Tim Geithner went before the American people and Congress and asked for sweeping powers to nationalize any financial institution that the government deems to be a threat to the economy . . . OK, I'll be honest with you, that's socialism, that's evil. I mean, seriously, when you have Euros criticizing you on your economic policy, you know you've gone too far.

    That, combined with the with the facts that he's taking away pilots' guns in favor of administrators to provide oversight of them, stopping the use of the phrase "War on Terror" in favor of the phrase "Overseas Contingency Operation", and attempting to start a government run "volunteer" organization, gives a very dark impression to whole administration. So much so that one begins to wonder who's side Obama's really on.
    Just a few things here; he's taking away everybody's guns. Everybody except people who have the proper rights to use them. He's not doing this to reduce our safety, but increase it; that has more to do with controlling street violence than anything. And that's happening here, in fact, just a few towns over from where I live is the one of nation's most violent cities. You have gun control, you lower the chances of someone that doesn't need a gun getting one in his grasp. That happens everyday, and a lot of people have died as a result, so that is why he is putting that into effect
    Actually, I was referring to a Washington Post editorial in which they discussed an Obama plan that was recently enacted that took away the guns all US commercial pilots were given and trained to use after 9/11 (you know, to stop terrorists from storming into the cockpit), and instead used the 3,000,000 dollars invested in the program to hire administrators to preform field inspections of aforementioned US pilots. I just wasn't able to find the link.

    Besides, the Second Amendment says, and I quote:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    : In other words, any laws that keep people from owning weapons (of any kind) in the United States are unconstitutional. Besides, the very nature of a criminal is to violate the law, do you really think a murderer or a drug dealer is not going to get a gun just because it's against the law? All gun control laws do is keep law abiding citizens from putting a bullet between the eyes of the mugger coming at them with a Colt.
    So? Bush did a lot of things that were unconstitutional, such as torture and tapping phones, so why call Obama out now? And really, he's not preventing people from getting guns, he's just stopping the bad guys from having them. There's nothing unconstitutional about stopping violence.
    OK, first of all, waterboarding is not torture. It's a college hazing ritual. Go ahead, look it up. You'll see I'm right. And wiretapping? It ain't unconstitutional if you do it to people outside the country, and if people from inside the country get caught in the net . . . well, I guess they shouldn't have been calling foreigners being wiretapped, now shouldn't they?
    Second of all, there is nothing any human can do to stop the bad guys from getting guns. If they don't get them here then they'll just go over the border and buy a Kalashnikov for a couple hundred bucks. Heck, that's what they already do. After all, before purchasing any firearm in the US you have to submit to a background check.

    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    No, it's nowhere near the end of the story. The bad guys (Al-Qaldia, Iran, Hezzbolla, etc.) are still calling it a war, and they're still fighting it like it's a war. This is like a squad of GIs and a squad of German Stormtroopers shooting at eachother, and then one of the GI standing up, stop firing, and then saying to the stormtroopers, "Hey guys, thank for the laughs, but I don't think I wanna fight this war anymore so I'm just going to stand here and ignore the gunfire."
    That's not what we are doing though. We're leaving the country, entirely, in a few years, because it isn't our fight anymore. Iraq wasn't our fight to begin with. Now, I think that they needed a different set-up, yes, but the way we handled it was wrong. We destablized a country, in the name of "spreading democracy".

    I just think... that was making more of a mess than there needed to be.[/quote]
    Who was talking about Iraq? I sure wasn't. Thanks to Bush's troop surge violence in the country is way down and the country is on the road to being a pioneer republic in the region. It'll be a cold day in Hell before I wish democracy on my worst enemy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    What?! Are you kidding me? Socialism is goverment ownership of privete industry. It's destoryed the European economies, and left their population unable to produce in any meaningful way (I point to the protests in France when the government there tried to make it so that companies could actually fire employies without having to go through the court system in an effort to curb the 20+% unenployment there as evidence). It's one step bellow Communism. And on top of that, our country was capitalist! The entire idea with our system was that companies could rise to the stars and burn to the ground without the government interfering. In fact, every time the government has gotten involved with the economy it's turnned out badly, very, very, very badly. (Look it up, you'll see what I mean.)
    I know what socialism is and I know what's done; I was saying that what Obama is doing is not socialism. Not by the true definition anyway. Actually, the media has turned "spreading the wealth around" into something to be feared, because it remotely resembles socialism. But he means something different by it, from what I know.
    Didn't you read what I first said? He whats the power to nationalize any business in America. That's socialism, and not only is that socialism, but it's an abomination to the memory of our capitalist system. He's already nationalized AIG, Fannie May, and Freddie Mac, what's to stop him from seizing every financial institution in America? Especially since he's already demonstrated a desire to control the political system when he siezed the Census Department, thus gaining control of the electoral college.

    Not that a lot of this matters anyway. As I said earlier, he's already exceded the global GDP in spending in the last three months. And since we're monetizing our debt . . . Well, you better get ready to start paying for bread with wheelbarrows.

  6. #476
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    You know, this is probably going to get filed under those "firebrand comments" I talked about earlier, but I feel I must talk about it. You see, yesterday the President and his Treasury Secretary "Turbo-Tax" Tim Geithner went before the American people and Congress and asked for sweeping powers to nationalize any financial institution that the government deems to be a threat to the economy . . . OK, I'll be honest with you, that's socialism, that's evil. I mean, seriously, when you have Euros criticizing you on your economic policy, you know you've gone too far.

    That, combined with the with the facts that he's taking away pilots' guns in favor of administrators to provide oversight of them, stopping the use of the phrase "War on Terror" in favor of the phrase "Overseas Contingency Operation", and attempting to start a government run "volunteer" organization, gives a very dark impression to whole administration. So much so that one begins to wonder who's side Obama's really on.
    Just a few things here; he's taking away everybody's guns. Everybody except people who have the proper rights to use them. He's not doing this to reduce our safety, but increase it; that has more to do with controlling street violence than anything. And that's happening here, in fact, just a few towns over from where I live is the one of nation's most violent cities. You have gun control, you lower the chances of someone that doesn't need a gun getting one in his grasp. That happens everyday, and a lot of people have died as a result, so that is why he is putting that into effect
    Actually, I was referring to a Washington Post editorial in which they discussed an Obama plan that was recently enacted that took away the guns all US commercial pilots were given and trained to use after 9/11 (you know, to stop terrorists from storming into the cockpit), and instead used the 3,000,000 dollars invested in the program to hire administrators to preform field inspections of aforementioned US pilots. I just wasn't able to find the link.

    Besides, the Second Amendment says, and I quote:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    : In other words, any laws that keep people from owning weapons (of any kind) in the United States are unconstitutional. Besides, the very nature of a criminal is to violate the law, do you really think a murderer or a drug dealer is not going to get a gun just because it's against the law? All gun control laws do is keep law abiding citizens from putting a bullet between the eyes of the mugger coming at them with a Colt.
    So? Bush did a lot of things that were unconstitutional, such as torture and tapping phones, so why call Obama out now? And really, he's not preventing people from getting guns, he's just stopping the bad guys from having them. There's nothing unconstitutional about stopping violence.
    OK, first of all, waterboarding is not torture. It's a college hazing ritual. Go ahead, look it up. You'll see I'm right. And wiretapping? It ain't unconstitutional if you do it to people outside the country, and if people from inside the country get caught in the net . . . well, I guess they shouldn't have been calling foreigners being wiretapped, now shouldn't they?
    Call it anything you want, but hears the thing, it was Bush and his people who said those things, and they were proved to have lied about it, amongst other things. Torture is torture, and invading privacy is invading privacy; it doesn't matter what you call it or if it was 'unconstitutional', it's still wrong, and I don't use my country to justify anything like that.


    Who was talking about Iraq? I sure wasn't. Thanks to Bush's troop surge violence in the country is way down and the country is on the road to being a pioneer republic in the region. It'll be a cold day in Hell before I wish democracy on my worst enemy.
    They do, and I would too if somebody just stormed in and did something like that. We didn't help them, we made it worse throughout the region, and that's why we're still in there, trying to fixing the mess. Now, things have improved in the past year or so, I'll admit, but we had no business in there. None at all.

    Didn't you read what I first said? He whats the power to nationalize any business in America. That's socialism, and not only is that socialism, but it's an abomination to the memory of our capitalist system. He's already nationalized AIG, Fannie May, and Freddie Mac, what's to stop him from seizing every financial institution in America? Especially since he's already demonstrated a desire to control the political system when he siezed the Census Department, thus gaining control of the electoral college.

    Not that a lot of this matters anyway. As I said earlier, he's already exceded the global GDP in spending in the last three months. And since we're monetizing our debt . . . Well, you better get ready to start paying for bread with wheelbarrows.
    Sounds a bit paranoid to me.
    Click on the eggs, please!

  7. #477
    Registered User Veteran Member Cody MacArthur Fett's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    the United States of America
    Posts
    787
    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cody MacArthur Fett View Post
    You know, this is probably going to get filed under those "firebrand comments" I talked about earlier, but I feel I must talk about it. You see, yesterday the President and his Treasury Secretary "Turbo-Tax" Tim Geithner went before the American people and Congress and asked for sweeping powers to nationalize any financial institution that the government deems to be a threat to the economy . . . OK, I'll be honest with you, that's socialism, that's evil. I mean, seriously, when you have Euros criticizing you on your economic policy, you know you've gone too far.

    That, combined with the with the facts that he's taking away pilots' guns in favor of administrators to provide oversight of them, stopping the use of the phrase "War on Terror" in favor of the phrase "Overseas Contingency Operation", and attempting to start a government run "volunteer" organization, gives a very dark impression to whole administration. So much so that one begins to wonder who's side Obama's really on.
    Just a few things here; he's taking away everybody's guns. Everybody except people who have the proper rights to use them. He's not doing this to reduce our safety, but increase it; that has more to do with controlling street violence than anything. And that's happening here, in fact, just a few towns over from where I live is the one of nation's most violent cities. You have gun control, you lower the chances of someone that doesn't need a gun getting one in his grasp. That happens everyday, and a lot of people have died as a result, so that is why he is putting that into effect
    Actually, I was referring to a Washington Post editorial in which they discussed an Obama plan that was recently enacted that took away the guns all US commercial pilots were given and trained to use after 9/11 (you know, to stop terrorists from storming into the cockpit), and instead used the 3,000,000 dollars invested in the program to hire administrators to preform field inspections of aforementioned US pilots. I just wasn't able to find the link.

    Besides, the Second Amendment says, and I quote:
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
    : In other words, any laws that keep people from owning weapons (of any kind) in the United States are unconstitutional. Besides, the very nature of a criminal is to violate the law, do you really think a murderer or a drug dealer is not going to get a gun just because it's against the law? All gun control laws do is keep law abiding citizens from putting a bullet between the eyes of the mugger coming at them with a Colt.
    So? Bush did a lot of things that were unconstitutional, such as torture and tapping phones, so why call Obama out now? And really, he's not preventing people from getting guns, he's just stopping the bad guys from having them. There's nothing unconstitutional about stopping violence.
    OK, first of all, waterboarding is not torture. It's a college hazing ritual. Go ahead, look it up. You'll see I'm right. And wiretapping? It ain't unconstitutional if you do it to people outside the country, and if people from inside the country get caught in the net . . . well, I guess they shouldn't have been calling foreigners being wiretapped, now shouldn't they?
    Call it anything you want, but hears the thing, it was Bush and his people who said those things, and they were proved to have lied about it, amongst other things. Torture is torture, and invading privacy is invading privacy; it doesn't matter what you call it or if it was 'unconstitutional', it's still wrong, and I don't use my country to justify anything like that.
    Hey, wiretapping is a critical and fundamental linchpin in the intelligence machine in the information age. If you take that away you might as well rip out the eyes of this country's body. I'm sorry if that doesn't gel with Utopian vision, but that's just the way the world works, the sooner you get used to it the better.

    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Who was talking about Iraq? I sure wasn't. Thanks to Bush's troop surge violence in the country is way down and the country is on the road to being a pioneer republic in the region. It'll be a cold day in Hell before I wish democracy on my worst enemy.
    They do, and I would too if somebody just stormed in and did something like that. We didn't help them, we made it worse throughout the region, and that's why we're still in there, trying to fixing the mess. Now, things have improved in the past year or so, I'll admit, but we had no business in there. None at all.
    You think Iraq was better off under Saddam Hussein then under a constitutional republic?! You think that country was better off with a dictator that sent anybody he didn't like into an acid shower or a wood chipper then a government that is based on the rule of law and the will of the people? I'm sorry, but that has to be the daftest thing I've ever heard.

    And let me remind you ma'am, that at 02:15 PM today you said that we were leaving the country entirely, and now you say we're still there trying to fix the mess. Can you please explain to me your duality on the issue?

    Quote Originally Posted by Twila Starla View Post
    Didn't you read what I first said? He whats the power to nationalize any business in America. That's socialism, and not only is that socialism, but it's an abomination to the memory of our capitalist system. He's already nationalized AIG, Fannie May, and Freddie Mac, what's to stop him from seizing every financial institution in America? Especially since he's already demonstrated a desire to control the political system when he siezed the Census Department, thus gaining control of the electoral college.

    Not that a lot of this matters anyway. As I said earlier, he's already exceded the global GDP in spending in the last three months. And since we're monetizing our debt . . . Well, you better get ready to start paying for bread with wheelbarrows.
    Sounds a bit paranoid to me.
    HA! Says you! I maybe paranoid (oh, the puns I've suffered because of that word), but I've been proved right every single time in the last six months with my dystopic vision of the future.

    Obama got elected. Check.

    He and the Congress sought out massive increases in government power. Check.

    We've been spent into an irrecoverable debt. Check, check, and check!

    The government's not going to see people that kill American citizens as enemies anymore. Check.

    The world will far into a deep depression and attempt to reenact the Thirty Years War even as America descends into a Second Revolution. Not check, but I'm patient, so I can wait awhile. :P

    So yeah, that's why I laugh. Because everyone wanted to believe things were great while I was saying that thing's are going down the tubes. It's the sick kind of pleasure someone gets from telling everyone, "I told you so!"

  8. #478
    Registered User Exalted Member lunchmeat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    The Tick Capitol Of The Known Universe
    Posts
    4,025
    At a guess, gun control would probably work about as well as the 18th amendment did and have similar side effects.
    Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto - “You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.”

  9. #479
    Administrator Honored Elder jeriddian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Denton, Texas
    Posts
    8,854
    Okay........................I have a suggestion. I think it's time to take this particular debate to PM, guys. It's alright to disagree and make points over a few posts, but this is getting a bit long winded, and a little too confrontational on one poster's part. So if you don't mind, let's get the GD thread going in another direction and take this debate out of it. Thanks.
    "Say the Word"

  10. #480
    Quote Originally Posted by jeriddian View Post
    Okay........................I have a suggestion. I think it's time to take this particular debate to PM, guys. It's alright to disagree and make points over a few posts, but this is getting a bit long winded, and a little too confrontational on one poster's part. So if you don't mind, let's get the GD thread going in another direction and take this debate out of it. Thanks.

    My apologies, jeriddian. We shall take this elsewhere.
    Click on the eggs, please!

Similar Threads

  1. General Discussion 4
    By jeriddian in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 500
    Last Post: 08-16-2008, 02:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •