Ron Paul.
09-11-2007, 12:04 AM
#241
3.0 BAR
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,322
Re: Ron Paul.
My mother is also pro-bush (she works for the gov't).
C'mon people, Ron Paul is the way to go, and if you disagree than you obviously need to do some more research. I might not agree with EVERYTHING he says, but it's obvious that he means what he says, and his past can back it up.
I'm not a "blame america" person, but our policies aren't the best and we need a change.
C'mon people, Ron Paul is the way to go, and if you disagree than you obviously need to do some more research. I might not agree with EVERYTHING he says, but it's obvious that he means what he says, and his past can back it up.
I'm not a "blame america" person, but our policies aren't the best and we need a change.
09-11-2007, 12:09 AM
#242
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: Ron Paul.
Originally Posted by stevenb
Marriage is regulated by the federal government... that can be changed, but it still doesn't change the fact that conservatives forced their religion on everyone when they decided to make gay marriage illegal by defining marriage itself.
You're absolutely right you have the freedom to say whatever you want about anyone you want.
You're absolutely dodging my question that I'm asking you about the people who resend their citizenship. So I'll make it easy for you.
who determines whether or not these people have joined a foreign army, or a foreign resistance and therefore resended their citizenship?
I'll give you a guess, it's not the judicial branch of our government... it's the executive branch... since when did they become the judicial branch and start enforcing laws / prosecuting people under those laws? *HINT* not since Bush came to power. They have absolutely absolved everyone's right to habeus corpus which is clearly defined in our constitution. Just because someone says you're a murderer doesn't make you a murderer. And if you were to be charged with being a murderer you still have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to defend yourself in a court of law. Don't you see how open ended the military act is when it comes to ruining people's lives?
And, no they are using it on our citizens in country calls.. why do you think AT&T and all the major phone companies are being sued for violating our rights? Because they fucked up and gave the phone records to the government without warrants. Why do you think Bush is pushing for Retroactive immunity for the phone giants in his Foreign Intelligence Surveillance bill? The one that just got passed, without those stipulations and Bush is fighting for them.... Because they all know they broke the law, and violated a bunch of people's constitutional rights.
Wake up man.
You're absolutely right you have the freedom to say whatever you want about anyone you want.
You're absolutely dodging my question that I'm asking you about the people who resend their citizenship. So I'll make it easy for you.
who determines whether or not these people have joined a foreign army, or a foreign resistance and therefore resended their citizenship?
I'll give you a guess, it's not the judicial branch of our government... it's the executive branch... since when did they become the judicial branch and start enforcing laws / prosecuting people under those laws? *HINT* not since Bush came to power. They have absolutely absolved everyone's right to habeus corpus which is clearly defined in our constitution. Just because someone says you're a murderer doesn't make you a murderer. And if you were to be charged with being a murderer you still have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to defend yourself in a court of law. Don't you see how open ended the military act is when it comes to ruining people's lives?
And, no they are using it on our citizens in country calls.. why do you think AT&T and all the major phone companies are being sued for violating our rights? Because they fucked up and gave the phone records to the government without warrants. Why do you think Bush is pushing for Retroactive immunity for the phone giants in his Foreign Intelligence Surveillance bill? The one that just got passed, without those stipulations and Bush is fighting for them.... Because they all know they broke the law, and violated a bunch of people's constitutional rights.
Wake up man.
there are no americans in guantanamo bay. jose padilla resended his citizenship when he pledged allegiance to al qaeda. thats the only person i know of who was an american citizen who has been labeld an "enemy combatant" and held as one. and even he got a civilian trail...
marriage has always been between a man and a woman, disgusting ******* and liberals are trying to FORCE their morals on everyone else by saying it should be between anything and anything. they are the ones trying to force people to change to THEIR WAYS. THEIR MORALS. marriage = man + woman. NEVER has it been anything else.
those lawsuits you have cited, are ALLEGATIONS, and HAVE GONE NOWHERE. they have gone nowhere... if there was anything to this... it would be on the liberal news 24/7/365 and would be a massive deal and scandal. right now it is nothig, because nothing is there. only left wing groups sueing companies and the government left and right
09-11-2007, 12:09 AM
#243
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: Ron Paul.
Originally Posted by Jorsher
My mother is also pro-bush (she works for the gov't).
C'mon people, Ron Paul is the way to go, and if you disagree than you obviously need to do some more research. I might not agree with EVERYTHING he says, but it's obvious that he means what he says, and his past can back it up.
I'm not a "blame america" person, but our policies aren't the best and we need a change.
C'mon people, Ron Paul is the way to go, and if you disagree than you obviously need to do some more research. I might not agree with EVERYTHING he says, but it's obvious that he means what he says, and his past can back it up.
I'm not a "blame america" person, but our policies aren't the best and we need a change.
this doesn't get us anywhere, even if it was our fault. its still the reality now, and what are we going to do about it?
09-11-2007, 12:14 AM
#244
1.0 BAR
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 249
Re: Ron Paul.
Originally Posted by random-strike
let see, when you're picked up in afganistan with an ak fighting with the taliban, thats a pretty easy...
there are no americans in guantanamo bay. jose padilla resended his citizenship when he pledged allegiance to al qaeda. thats the only person i know of who was an american citizen who has been labeld an "enemy combatant" and held as one. and even he got a civilian trail...
marriage has always been between a man and a woman, disgusting ******* and liberals are trying to FORCE their morals on everyone else by saying it should be between anything and anything. they are the ones trying to force people to change to THEIR WAYS. THEIR MORALS. marriage = man + woman. NEVER has it been anything else.
those lawsuits you have cited, are ALLEGATIONS, and HAVE GONE NOWHERE. they have gone nowhere... if there was anything to this... it would be on the liberal news 24/7/365 and would be a massive deal and scandal. right now it is nothig, because nothing is there. only left wing groups sueing companies and the government left and right
there are no americans in guantanamo bay. jose padilla resended his citizenship when he pledged allegiance to al qaeda. thats the only person i know of who was an american citizen who has been labeld an "enemy combatant" and held as one. and even he got a civilian trail...
marriage has always been between a man and a woman, disgusting ******* and liberals are trying to FORCE their morals on everyone else by saying it should be between anything and anything. they are the ones trying to force people to change to THEIR WAYS. THEIR MORALS. marriage = man + woman. NEVER has it been anything else.
those lawsuits you have cited, are ALLEGATIONS, and HAVE GONE NOWHERE. they have gone nowhere... if there was anything to this... it would be on the liberal news 24/7/365 and would be a massive deal and scandal. right now it is nothig, because nothing is there. only left wing groups sueing companies and the government left and right
And just because one person got a civil trial, and everyone heard about it. Doesn't change the fact that it could still be being used to detain American Citizens in a non-constitutional way.
And your conservative buddies forced your opinion and beliefs down on everyone else when you decided that marriage could only be between a man and a woman. What's your ------- point? The way I see it, your friends are forcing their religious beliefs and morals upon everyone else in the fact that they create laws based on a bible.
Did you stop to think that liberals and conservatives both have something to gain from the rights being absolved? Our constitutional rights being destroyed benefits both parties beliefs and thought processes. Why would they bring attention to something that could harm their future plans?
09-11-2007, 12:15 AM
#245
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: Ron Paul.
In a 2-1 decision, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals last week dismissed a legal challenge to the warrantless surveillance program brought by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU).
In a separate ruling, also delivered on Friday, a California appeal court ruled federal agents are entitled to monitor the web sites a suspect visits or the email addresses he exchanges messages with. The Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco compared surveillance of internet activities to "pen register" devices, which were used to track the phone numbers suspects called rather than monitor the content of a conversations. Such devices were ruled legal by the Supreme Court in 1979, which ruled that numbers transmitted electronically between a suspect and a phone company do not enjoy any expectations of privacy.
Searches on suspects' surfing activities are no more intrusive than obtaining a list of phone numbers dialed or examining the outside of a mailed package, Judge Raymond Fisher said in the 3-0 ruling. The court made the ruling in considering a drug case referred to it by a lower court in the San Diego area. Dennis Alba was jailed for 30 years after he was convicted of running a lab manufacturing Ecstasy. Part of the evidence against him came from monitoring his activities on the net. He challenged the legality of this evidence gathering on appeal, an application the appeal judges rejected in confirming his earlier sentence, the San Francisco Chronicle reports.
In a separate ruling, also delivered on Friday, a California appeal court ruled federal agents are entitled to monitor the web sites a suspect visits or the email addresses he exchanges messages with. The Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco compared surveillance of internet activities to "pen register" devices, which were used to track the phone numbers suspects called rather than monitor the content of a conversations. Such devices were ruled legal by the Supreme Court in 1979, which ruled that numbers transmitted electronically between a suspect and a phone company do not enjoy any expectations of privacy.
Searches on suspects' surfing activities are no more intrusive than obtaining a list of phone numbers dialed or examining the outside of a mailed package, Judge Raymond Fisher said in the 3-0 ruling. The court made the ruling in considering a drug case referred to it by a lower court in the San Diego area. Dennis Alba was jailed for 30 years after he was convicted of running a lab manufacturing Ecstasy. Part of the evidence against him came from monitoring his activities on the net. He challenged the legality of this evidence gathering on appeal, an application the appeal judges rejected in confirming his earlier sentence, the San Francisco Chronicle reports.
09-11-2007, 12:15 AM
#246
3.0 BAR
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,322
Re: Ron Paul.
Originally Posted by random-strike
what do you suggest? what does ron paul suggest? he doesn't have an answer other than its america's fault.
this doesn't get us anywhere, even if it was our fault. its still the reality now, and what are we going to do about it?
this doesn't get us anywhere, even if it was our fault. its still the reality now, and what are we going to do about it?
We need a change. Ron Paul is for that.
Has bush got us anywhere?
The reality is now, and Ron Paul is what we should do about it. Unless you can show some proof that another candidate would be more beneficial, I'm voting for him.
Nobody is perfect. I don't agree with everything Mr. Paul says. But for the most part, I agree with his ideas and think that out of all the candidates, he would be the most beneficial. Pro-USA doesn't always mean agreeing with what the gov't does. Sometimes you have to admit fault and find what would help our country.
09-11-2007, 12:19 AM
#247
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: Ron Paul.
Originally Posted by stevenb
Dood, you keep dancing around the fact that someone has to deem these people enemy combatants. It is NOT the executive branch's decision to make. So quit dancing around the fact and answer my question. WHO DETERMINES WHETHER OR NOT THESE PEOPLE ARE ENEMY COMBATANTS?
if queer and liberals (same thing) want to make up some form of disgusting partnership that pretty much equats to marriage, go ahead. call it cockandballiiage.
09-11-2007, 12:24 AM
#248
1.0 BAR
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 249
Re: Ron Paul.
Originally Posted by random-strike
im not dancing around it, marriage has always been between a man and a woman. THAT IS THE DEFINITION. now you can argue that the government should not be involved in marriage in anyway, which i agree. but disgusting ******* are TRYING TO CHANGE THE DEFINITION OF MARRIAGE.
if queer and liberals (same thing) want to make up some form of disgusting partnership that pretty much equats to marriage, go ahead. call it cockandballiiage.
if queer and liberals (same thing) want to make up some form of disgusting partnership that pretty much equats to marriage, go ahead. call it cockandballiiage.
Marriage between a man and a woman is the definition because your conservative friends decided that's what it should be.
09-11-2007, 12:24 AM
#249
3.0 BAR
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,322
Re: Ron Paul.
****, who cares? They don't affect you. They don't make you like boys. Let them have what they want, it's a free country. Making fagism illegal won't change a damn thing. People will still be ****, just like potheads will still do drugs. Are you for freedom, or freedom (as long as you agree with it)?
I assume I'll get called a queer or something for saying this, but who really gives a ----? I don't like being around ****, but they will always be **** and why not just let them do what they want? Them getting their fudge packed at night won't affect me. I'll still be inserting my ***** in vagina with a smile. GOD might say in the bible (which is written by man) that fagism is bad, but if it doesn't affect you, who gives a ----?
Freedom means freedom.
I assume I'll get called a queer or something for saying this, but who really gives a ----? I don't like being around ****, but they will always be **** and why not just let them do what they want? Them getting their fudge packed at night won't affect me. I'll still be inserting my ***** in vagina with a smile. GOD might say in the bible (which is written by man) that fagism is bad, but if it doesn't affect you, who gives a ----?
Freedom means freedom.
09-11-2007, 12:25 AM
#250
0.0 BAR
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 0
Re: Ron Paul.
Originally Posted by Jorsher
So you think america is faultless? We've done some fucked up things and have made mistakes. Nobody is perfect, what's wrong with someone (us) being at fault?
We need a change. Ron Paul is for that.
Has bush got us anywhere?
The reality is now, and Ron Paul is what we should do about it. Unless you can show some proof that another candidate would be more beneficial, I'm voting for him.
Nobody is perfect. I don't agree with everything Mr. Paul says. But for the most part, I agree with his ideas and think that out of all the candidates, he would be the most beneficial. Pro-USA doesn't always mean agreeing with what the gov't does. Sometimes you have to admit fault and find what would help our country.
We need a change. Ron Paul is for that.
Has bush got us anywhere?
The reality is now, and Ron Paul is what we should do about it. Unless you can show some proof that another candidate would be more beneficial, I'm voting for him.
Nobody is perfect. I don't agree with everything Mr. Paul says. But for the most part, I agree with his ideas and think that out of all the candidates, he would be the most beneficial. Pro-USA doesn't always mean agreeing with what the gov't does. Sometimes you have to admit fault and find what would help our country.
we did everything for a reason, and the president and everyone in charge at the time only did it because they thought it was the best thing to do at the time, we saved the world from nazism, we saved the world from communism, the united states has never tried to conquer land, or be imperialist, we have never done anything to take over another country, or steal anything from it. the united states is one of the few forces for good in the world, we have fought evil throughout our history and you should be proud. we have made enemies along the way, but it is impossible to avoid, iran has never been our "friend" islamic radicals have never been our 'friends". we fought in korea and vietnam to stop the ------ of commuism. the entire world owes us a dept of gratitude of an unimaginable price.
