Which attack comes first from this Administration ? by AURaptor

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

We wait and see.

Then when the attack comes, be prepared for it, and fight against it with everything we've got.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 5:27 AM

PIRATECAT

It's not tank tops that make men beat their wives. It's men who beat their wives make tank tops bad. Plus women don't know what shut up means after the third time. Is it to hard to bring us men beanie weanies and a cold beer. But no they gotta go on and on about what happen at Wal-Mart. Sweet Baby Jane a man's trailor is his castle. Anyhoo Clearchannel is laying off big time. So the economy is taking care of the 1st amendment. Now Obama is doing wonders for guns sales. Assualt rifles, shot guns, and automatics are just cleaned out everywhere.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 5:41 AM

2nd.

It doesn't take any political analysis to see this, all it takes is a visit to Hyde Park, Chicago.

Obama's neighborhood is littered with crackheads with AKs shooting at everything that moves, including yours truly. And, I'm sure, in the past, including the Obamas, including Malia and Sasha. And sure, while now they live in the not-all-that-different DC, their friends back in Hyde Park are still under reaver fire. I have to say that it's not political idealism, it's on the ground realism to attack the second amendment if you're Barack Obama. When you've sat there wondering for the past few years if some rape gang is going to gnab your daughter, or some random Crip is going to blow your head off, you're just going to turn around and put the lid on these a**holes, and you're not going to care about the defensive rights of some rural white folk that get stepped on in the process. It's just natural human logic. If you were in Iraq fighting insurgents, and say you're a devout christian, you're not going to stop and think "Oh, but 1% of them are christian, I have to be careful," you're going to say "f^&k 'em."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 5:41 AM

PirateCat,

Wifebeater is the name of the sleeveless shirt.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 5:47 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

See?

The difference between the socialist and the individualist is right there.

The socialist says to themselves "Hey, there are these rape gangs with guns running around, the police and the government should stop them! Take away their guns!"

The individualist says "Hey there are these rape gangs with guns running around, how many bullets do I have, and is a .357 too big for my little girl to handle?"

One is about being a sheep and giving the government the power to completly control you...the other is about standing up to the darkness, and being free.

Fuck socialists.

They want to be the new slaves? Fine, let them. But not in my country.

Not ever.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 5:55 AM

Wulf, walk a mile in the man's shoes, and you'll understand his position. This isn't about individual lawful citizens' rights, it's about crackheads. It's reavers at his front door, and damn right he's going to do something about it. As a citizen, I'm sure, yes, he took the same angle you did. But as leader of the free world, he's going to squash those suckers. I may not agree with the policy angle or the overall concept, but I do get where he's coming from, I've lived in Obama's neighborhood, I know what it's like, and it's getting worse.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 5:57 AM

Oh, so NOW you care, after other people did all the work to set up defenses while you were busy with your temper tantrums...

Rappy, you should be damn glad some folk care even about the rights of folk who they do not agree with, cause if they were like you about it you'd be pretty screwed right now - I'd say you should learn from that, but I doubt you're capable.

For the record I don't much care for the fairness doctrine either - ain't the governments business to tell folk running their own programs what they can and cannot say politically, that's certainly an infringement.

And if certain programs and papers wanna run their business into the ground catering to an ever shrinking minority with no political power due to lack of attention span or sufficient thought process for it (and yes, I am mocking both far ends of the political spectrum with that) well then let em, they're already losing money and subscribers hand over fist as folks shake off the long nightmare and jump off the radical fringes, not like they'll last long without learning to appeal to a wider audience, so let em, and screw bailing them out, if they cannot learn to run a business profitably then the Govt has no business forcing them to, or rewarding their failure with a bailout when it does happen, so hell no.

Of course, in Rappys case those rules of course apply only to those he disagrees with, otherwise he'd have been howling for his buddy Rush to be tossed in the slammer right next to all the "drug addicts" he was flaming, yes ?

As for the second amendment, I've made my case half a hundred times around here, and damn well, while all you did is scream and fuss like a child, so despite our agreement, tenatively, on defending those rights the one critical difference is that I will defend them for everyone, you, that *dickhead* phelps, wackos like PN and Jeffie Rense, shills like Rush, anyone, everyone....

You will only defend them for those who agree with you, forever blinded to the fact that if a right is not UNIVERSAL, it's not a right at all, but an act of oppression and class warfare against your fellow man.

And if you had the sense the gods gave a clay brick you'd realize that, but you either don't, or don't care - and so in the end, to me...

You wind up looking like this.

Again, be damn glad some folk care about even the rights of folk they can't stand, cause otherwise you'd have never had em to bitch about losin in the first place ya bloody fool.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 5:59 AM

Dreamtrove ?

Two words - Citizen Militia.

I got a story on that, relative, but I'll save it for another thread.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 6:06 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"Wulf, walk a mile in the man's shoes, and you'll understand his position. This isn't about individual lawful citizens' rights, it's about crackheads. It's reavers at his front door, and damn right he's going to do something about it. As a citizen, I'm sure, yes, he took the same angle you did. But as leader of the free world, he's going to squash those suckers. I may not agree with the policy angle or the overall concept, but I do get where he's coming from, I've lived in Obama's neighborhood, I know what it's like, and it's getting worse."

Yes, and I've lived in neighborhoods just like it. Without the camo of the same skin-tone.

I've already walked the mile (and more) in those shoes.

With crackheads, you can either setup Detox centers, and allow them to get clean, or shoot them.

As to the gangbangers, hoods, dealers and gangsters? Well...they terrorize folks, ruin whole neighborhoods, turn areas into warzones...seems to me thats a terrorist action.

I'm with Frem on this, have a Citizen militia tear into them, WITH government approved M-16s.

Nuke the place for morbid, so to speak.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 6:21 AM

What's the fairness doctrine?
I'll have to look it up.

As for the neighborhoods, most of the targets are black, but I was white there too.

Citizen militia? Is a war really the answer here?

I'm not supporting Obama's angle on this, just saying I see where the guy is coming from. The place is degenerating into a war zone. Sending in more guns and forces on the other side, that's not avoiding it turning into a war zone. It's his home, he doesn't want to see it turn into Baghdad, even if that's the more constitutional solution. He wants to end it, use his executive power and cut them off. I think any one of us would do the same, make right our own world, once given the one ring before we try to do it right. It's easy to be objective from a distance. Obama's neighborhood has gone from a place where you can safely walk the streets at all hours say, even ten years ago, to a place where people set the stop watch to see that everyone can make it from the house to the car in under 15 seconds. I'm not making this up. I told you about being shot at by some crackwhore, and some of my friends in Hyde Park coming home to find the family in the neighboring apt. slaughtered.

With all due respect: a sane person would go and kick their ass.

[edit]

I'm going to agree with Wulf on the terrorism thing. I think that we did the same thing in Iraq, disarm the populous temporarily in a war zone, and I'm not going to take issue with Obama if he wants to do that in specific war zones, or to people who have drug dealing convictions, etc. Sure, restore the rights, preserve them, but I see the personal angle here too.

I mean, some people are just reavers. And, sure, maybe reavers can be rehabilitated, and maybe not, but in the meantime, it's not doing anyone any good to have them roaming around shooting people. I would ask all the second amendment crowd if radical muslim legal immigrants were to set up an American Mujahideen, and then go around shooting women who didn't wear burqas, would you be tempted to defend their right to bear arms, and treat each case as an individual homocide? Or would you go medieval on their asses.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 6:35 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

So, you were shot at by some crackwhore? Did you shoot back? If not, why not?

Give as good as you get, and more, depending on the circumstances.

The Citizens Militia sounds like a good idea...except that either someone would go all Rambo (turning the Roman politic/citizenry aginst it, or it would become corrupt.)

Right now, we have to contain it, and give us a chance to figure out what to do with it. Don't let your neighborhoods become like these areas, in the first place.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 6:38 AM

It wouldn't come to that, Dreamtrove - they'd head for greener pastures within a month or so.

Back when MI went right to carry, and after the attorney general got sick of the police illegally sandbagging that and took some strong measures, that's prettymuch what happened.

I lived right next to Flint at the time and drove a cab there, crime dropped like a rock as the stone-recidivist career criminal scum bailed out and headed for Chicago, they're all about risk management, and there's no percentage in the take if it carries the risk of getting shot.

As a cabbie with extensive contacts in the low element of society, I got to see it first hand since you do a lot of shipping these guys to court hearings and parole appointments, and they like to talk - the primary sentiment among them was "Man, I need to fly this place before somebody bust a cap in my ass...".

There's still a lot of crime there cause of economic and other factors like high unemployment, but that's mostly crimes of desperation and opportunity, rather than folks who make a lifestyle and living out of it.

But if you want the latter out of your neighborhood, raising the risk of engaging a citizen to where it's no longer profitable is the best way to do it.

Regardless of how the media likes to demonise Citizen Militias, the Michigan Militia is a bunch of damn solid folk who can and will turn out volunteers for missing person searches, on devils night to help prevent fires and vandalism, and so forth as long as it's abundantly clear they're not auxilary jackboots and will neither conduct themselves as such nor support that crap.

They were especially helpful around here during a string of schoolgirl snatchings that got so damned bad that some places were sending the kids to school in packs under the armed escort of a police cruiser - the utility companies oddly enough offered their own assistance by ordering their people to render aid and keep a lookout as a matter of official policy, and the Militia turned out a bunch of folk to assist as well.

The officials caught about four of these bastards, who seemed to be copycatting each other because not a one of em had any idea who the others were or that there was more of them operating - as for how many in total, I guess we'll never know, but that shit DID stop, save for a certain snatch-for-hire crew who's all but vanished after their last attempt screwed up bigtime and left sufficient evidence to maybe catch them if they try again.

I guess it depends on whether you think it's worth the risk to clean house of them in Hyde Park, but if you could convince enough locals to risk their ass over it - I'd say that's evidence enough on it's own that it would be worth a try.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 7:17 AM

Why did you change the title of this?

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 7:19 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Sig, stop fucking around.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:08 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Frem,

Agreed.

Oh...and (bump)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:14 AM

Wulf,

Faith based initiative, conflict avoidance. This isn't my battle, no reason to risk my life over it. Me and the 86 year old WWII vet I was with did the sensible thing, we dodged, and retreated. And if you want to call it a wuss move, go ahead, but it was his call, and this is a guy who actually was one of the few that did go head to head with the Nazis on the front lines. He knew the difference between stupidity and bravery. We let the police take her down. He's a pretty able guy, he coulda gone back around the corner and gotten his gun and taken her out... but it wasn't his battle either.

Frem, true, they move in, you just gotta make your place the place they don't move into.

As far as Hyde Park, this was about a block from his house. They ate at the same restaurant for lunch every day, hell, I used to eat there. It's fine to paint the idealistic final battle scene, and I'm not saying a younger Obama might not have pulled that move himself. But you and I aren't sitting in that office.

If you had the power right now, take your own personal issue, institutionalized child abuse. If you had the absolute power right now, deep down, tell me that you would still encourage survivors and volunteers to risk their lives, or would you just take that hammer and shut those f^&kers down. I know what your ideals say, but when it comes to the real world, and the real opportunity, it's gotta be tempting. I'm just saying, I see his point of view is all. Remember, it's his town, and there's a chance if he takes the battle to the street, that people are going to die, people he knows. And, from a personal point of view, people I know. It's not the idealist in him, it's the realist. It's a tough call, and he hasn't made that call yet, but he will. Because it's personal.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:19 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"Sig, stop fucking around."

Once again Wulf, you let your hate and bias get in the way of reality. In order to change a title you have to post on the thread. "Like this." SignyM has not posted.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:24 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Ok, I thought it was Sig doing this.

"Once again Wulf, you let your hate and bias get in the way of reality."

Oh, please....I let it go from before, you need to do the same.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:27 AM

For the sake of whatever power folks believe in, let's not have another second amendment battle.

For posterity, the thread title of this is sometimes:
AURAPTOR:
Which attack comes first from this Administration ?

ChrisIsAll:
Which attack comes first from this Administration ? Where peeps who KNOW that government is just for getting in a mans way, gather.

ChrisIsAll:
Which attack comes first from this Administration ? (Where peeps that like to select, buffet-style from the Constitution, gather to rant)

RUE: Like This.

Wulfenstar: BRING THE HAMMER DOWN! (on peeps who keep changing the titles....heh)

DreamTrove: This pointless second amendment battle has become a pointless first amendment battle!

ChrisIsAll: The He-Man Constitution Haters Club -OR- Why We Don't Need Our Rights As Citizens

ChrisIsAll: We Hate America & Want Her To Fail Under Obama's Socialist Agenda (How DARE he respect that goddamn piece of paper)

Seems Chris is most guilty

Not so easy. Still refer my comment:

I think that when you respond to a post where the edit was made, the old title comes back.

But is this a free speech issue? The right to hack? I don't know, but i think that the abuse should be limited, people should show restraint, but reserve the right to do so.

Now I like John, but sometimes I just want to change the title "Here are some links to my site. They not only draw in draft, they up my pidgeon count!"

But I think if we reserve the power, we can use it, fairly. Just like we restrain from flaming, usually. Anyone can change it back because you can't change it on the page itself.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:32 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Dream,

Wouldn't call you a wuss, just asking why you didn't shoot back.

Hey, if retreat was the better part of valor, so be it.

Sometimes its NOT prudent to return fire, AT THAT TIME.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:34 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Ok, I thought it was Sig doing this.

Doing what???

ETA: OHHH... You mean... NOT LIKE THIS????
---------------------------------
It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:38 AM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"Ok, I thought it was Sig doing this."

Or, in your eloquent and insulting phrase "fucking around".

"Oh, please....I let it go from before, you need to do the same."

Well, let's see. What disparaging names should I call you in order for YOU to have something to let go ? What insulting things should I say about you ?

***************************************************************

How about ignorant, hate-filled jackass who can't get along in life without blaming others for his problems ? How about bigot looking for a target ? How about hypocrite who talks the talk about letting go of hate but can't begin to walk the walk ? Poor white trash ? Gun nut ?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:44 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Ok, Rue,

I apologized earlier for tearing you life apart. Don't make me second guess that decision.

I'm giving you this ONE chance to let it be.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:48 AM

I changed the thread title, and guess what? I'm doin' it again.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:50 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Dammit Chrissy, here you got me blaming Sig for this..

Lol

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:51 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Dammit Chrissy, here you got me blaming Sig for this..

Lol

Shades of WMD.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:56 AM

Lol. I can see your edits =)
This is getting silly. But some folks can't not change the title, it's multiple personalities are woven through the thread, like certain users I could name.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:56 AM

Double Post

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 8:56 AM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
I changed the thread title, and guess what? I'm doin' it again.

The laughing Chrisisall

Fool of a Took! *throws blanket over the seeing stone secret title jack code*

There's enough chaos around here!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 9:04 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
There's enough chaos around here!

Never enough chaos.

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 11:42 AM

Quote:
If you had the absolute power right now, deep down, tell me that you would still encourage survivors and volunteers to risk their lives, or would you just take that hammer and shut those f^&kers down.

Wouldn't do it - COULDN'T do it.

I've said it many times, the changes we need to make, people, individually HAVE to make themselves, any attempt to force them upon the common folk and it's just another refrain of meet the new boss, same as the old boss which is the very set of chains we're trying to break - that's like burning down the castle to defend it, you see ?

That's why I go a little bonkers when some well meaning idealist tries some variation on it.

The moment we cross that line, we become "them" and have wasted everything that came before in vain, something I'll never do - the temptation simply isn't there cause I know the price, remember yer talkin to a guy who enraged the entire previous town he lived on by simply doing what he was elected TO do by folks who didn't quite think through the implications and consequences, and was promptly run out of town on a rail for it.

And I knew it would happen from the moment it started, and damn well did it anyway, cause imma stubborn bastard and believe heart and soul in the fact that those changes MUST come from the people themselves or they will never make a damn bit of difference in the end - you want an example of that kinda failure, look how government intervention is one of the few things keeping racism alive, hell if it weren't for federal seed money shovelled into it by informants and provocateurs, most of those movements would be dead as a doornail by now, quaint little relics of the past.

It wasn't the law that crushed the concept that women were less than people and could be abused with impunity, wasn't even the right to vote, these things helped but in the end it was that people themselves decided that the idea of striking a woman was repugnant on a personal, social, internal level - and that killed it dead, it just took a while.

So too with any other cause.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 12:20 PM

Quote:
those changes MUST come from the people themselves

I guess I agree in concept, but don't really believe that will happen. I oppose social engineering, but I also know people are manipulating for all sorts of ends and human nature ain't pure.

Just saying I get where Obama is coming from, the war came to his front door, and he has he power to end it, rather than fight it, and I understand. During the time he ran for president I personally can relate three gruesome mass murders within a block or two of his house. I'm sure there were more...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 12:25 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"I'm giving you this ONE chance to let it be."

I was giving YOU something to let be. Now we're even.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 12:32 PM

Here's a case in point from the local news.
http://abclocal.go.com/wjrt/story?section=news/local&id=6619647

Two robbers, both armed, hit an insurance agency, owner says fine, take what you want and go, ain't worth a fight to me.

But nope, fully expecting and anticipating meek submission from their intended victim, COUNTING on it and expecting the disarmed sheep to comply and likely be executed to remove the witness, they were not satisfied with that, nope...

So they shoved him into the back of the office, where he kept a piece, which at this point knowing the probable outcome, he used quickly and efficiently.

See, that's the problem with "cooperate with the robber" - it encourages them to continue, and even escalate what they do, and people wind up dead for it.

You'll notice that folks who actively, immediately resist tend to do better than folk who don't even if they're unarmed ?

That's cause by disarmament, cooperating, and vilifying self-defense we've completely enabled, aided and abetted the criminals, they depend, even rely on unarmed and submissive victims, and are therefore thrown completely off when someone does resist and usually wind up on the losing end of things.

Ain't about guns so much, they're important to level the field, sure - but it's the ACT of resistance that makes the difference.

But the piece matters too, when it's a sixty year old lady versus a ninteen year old thug, the piece matters a damn lot.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 1:32 PM

There was a 39 yo woman who got mugged, and she complied, and then they shot her anyway. So, yeah. OTOH, there's a better way...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, January 23, 2009 9:05 PM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

Quote:
Originally posted by PirateCat:
It's not tank tops that make men beat their wives. It's men who beat their wives make tank tops bad. Plus women don't know what shut up means after the third time. Is it to hard to bring us men beanie weanies and a cold beer. But no they gotta go on and on about what happen at Wal-Mart. Sweet Baby Jane a man's trailor is his castle.

I know, right? If the bitches would just shut up and do what they're told, there'd be no need for any beatings. /sarcasm

If this is supposed to be funny, it's an epic fail.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 3:24 AM

KWICKO

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
The attack on the 1st Ammendment with the reviving of the (un)Fairness Doctrine, or the attack on the 2nd Ammendment, on our right to bear arms ?

It is not those who use the term "Islamo-Fascism" who are sullying the name of Islam; it is the Islamo-Fascists. - Dennis Prager

" They don't like it when you shoot at 'em. I worked that out myself. "

Seems you'd be in favor of the Fairness Doctrine, since it would eliminate that "liberal bias" in the media, and give conservative voices equal time.

Just sayin' is all.

Me, I figure if I don't like what they're sellin' on one station, I can turn it off or change channels. There's a lot of garbage on the airwaves, but last time I checked, garbage still has the right to be garbage.

Mike

"It is complete now; the hands of time are neatly tied."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 3:57 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
For the record I don't much care for the fairness doctrine either - ain't the governments business to tell folk running their own programs what they can and cannot say politically, that's certainly an infringement.

Whether you like the underlying philosophy or not, the fairness doctrine actually kept the American media honest, and helped prevent propaganda organs like Fox News from appearing on the scene. Nothing good has come from getting rid of it. Besides, the fairness doctrine never infringed on an individuals free speech, corporations aren't individuals. Some of the biggest problems both America and Britain are facing today are directly attributable to treating corporations as individuals with all the rights, but none of the responsibilities, inherent to that status.

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Two words - Citizen Militia.

You want my Militia you'll have to damn well pay for it.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 4:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by citizen:
Some of the biggest problems both America and Britain are facing today are directly attributable to treating corporations as individuals with all the rights, but none of the responsibilities, inherent to that status.

Many share this view, as do I.

I've decided to incorporate myself, go broke due to incompetence, & have myself declared 'too big to fail'.
What do you think of my plan?

The laughing Chrisisall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 4:18 AM

CITIZEN

Quote:
Originally posted by chrisisall:
I've decided to incorporate myself, go broke due to incompetence, & have myself declared 'too big to fail'.
What do you think of my plan?

You're going to need to eat a lot more Big Macs.

More insane ramblings by the people who brought you beeeer milkshakes!
No one can see their reflection in running water. It is only in still water that we can see.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 5:02 AM

PIRATECAT

Yin Yang I might smell like Old Spice but I sense man issues from you. Sometimes we need to turn off the Oprah channel.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 5:16 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Oh, so NOW you care, after other people did all the work to set up defenses while you were busy with your temper tantrums...

Rappy, you should be damn glad some folk care even about the rights of folk who they do not agree with, cause if they were like you about it you'd be pretty screwed right now - I'd say you should learn from that, but I doubt you're capable.

Frem, i've ALWAYS cared for rights spelled out in the U.S. Constitution. Those who are at odds w/ the Constitution, not me, are one's I'm worried about. There's the difference you fail to comprehend.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 5:31 AM

Rap, read 4, and 5. Ya seem to get stuck with 1 and 2. No one gives a damn about 3. There have been only a couple 3rd amendment cases in history.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 6:51 AM

Quote:
Whether you like the underlying philosophy or not, the fairness doctrine actually kept the American media honest

It ever was ?

Come on, this is the industry that gave us Hearst and Yellow Journalism, and even before that, there was plenty enough of chicanery to go around.

Quote:
Some of the biggest problems both America and Britain are facing today are directly attributable to treating corporations as individuals with all the rights, but none of the responsibilities, inherent to that status.

Amen - but gettin THAT genie back in the bottle is gonna be a tricky proposition, and far from easy.

Quote:
You want my Militia you'll have to damn well pay for it.

Only if I get football hooligans as the force base.

And Rappy ?

Quote:
Frem, i've ALWAYS cared for rights spelled out in the U.S. Constitution.

Then why aren't you screaming your head off to close Gitmo, neh ?
Or laying the smack down on the Executive for UnConstitutional Usurpation of the power to declare war ?

The Tribunals, mind you, do fall within Constitutional Authority, but the suspension of Habeus Corpus does not because we are neither in a state of rebellion nor invasion.

And there's that pesky fourth amendment and all this warrantless wiretapping and other side dodges, where were you on that ?

Or how bout Treaties - which might I remind you, once signed, stand themselves in authority equal to the Constitution ?

And of course none of this touches your repeated stand against Constitutional Rights, particularly those of the First and Fourth amendments, for those whom you personally or politically disagree with.

Which you have done, quite repeatedly, here for all to see.

And when I *did* offer a hand across the aisle seeking support for the nearly inevitable further infringements on the Second Amendment, you were too busy howling and throwing a temper tantrum to reach back, something I flat out told you would come back to bite you on the ass, and look, here we are.

Nor does it address the fact that you idolize people who take hypocrisy straight into the realm of parody, who think the rules are for "other" (read: Lesser) people - like your buddy Rush, and his drug use, or Shrub and his utter contempt for the Constitutional limits placed on his office for damned good reason.

Or that you've repeatedly posted outright propaganda fluff-pieces for an agenda that borders so close to neo-fascism as makes no nevermind, which even five minutes of actual investigation reveal to be either gross distortions or pure fiction cut from whole cloth to rile up folks without the sense to properly verify it.

What you've always failed to understand is that I hate the neo-socialist agendas of the current democrats as much as I hate the neo-fascist agendas of the current republicans, and most especially - WHY.

Because neither one truly respects the Constitution and the limitations of power necessary for at least a minimum of liberty - something that your own partisanship and placing party before reason has blinded you to, time and time again.

All they gotta do is ring the right bells, and you fly the party banner on command even when it contravenes everything you say you believe - and THAT, fellowman, is a problem only YOU can deal with.

And you'd better, if you ever want anyone to take you seriously.

Get all snippy if you like, but I'd not have wasted the time to point this shit out to you instead of mocking you as usual - if I didn't believe it was worth the trouble.

Ponder that a bit, willya.

-Frem

It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 7:15 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Frem-

The 'detainees' are outside the realm of the Constitution, I believe. They are not citizens, hell, they aren't even uniformed members of any nation's military! So even the Geneva Convention says they could have been shot and left for dead on the battle field.

The President has the power to do what he did, and the Congress could have stopped it at any time. They voted on it, and then both parties supported it. No issue there.

The courts have ruled the there WAS no violation of the 4th Amendment, so your point there is moot as well.

I've not once posted anything remotely close to supporting "neo" fascism. You have me confused w/ some one else.

At the point of contention, I'll agree, was Bush's view that the Presidency should be a stronger office than others view. He started his 1st administration right out of the blocks, trying to expand not just HIS powers, but the powers of the office. Looks great when the right guy's in charge, but in the hands of the wrong person, it has the ability to suck.

My main ongoing beef w/ pretty much the entire gorram world is that much of what Bush is being vilified for is based solely on lies, distortions and contrived political hyperbole.

I guess it falls in line w/ my lot in life. As an atheist, I have to butt heads w/ pretty much everyone on planet. Why should I have it any easier in politics? Liberals who think Jesus was a communist are just as evil as Conservatives who think Jesus hates gays looked like this.....

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 7:48 AM

KIRKULES

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
My main ongoing beef w/ pretty much the entire gorram world is that much of what Bush is being vilified for is based solely on lies, distortions and contrived political hyperbole.

I guess it falls in line w/ my lot in life. As an atheist, I have to butt heads w/ pretty much everyone on planet. Why should I have it any easier in politics? Liberals who think Jesus was a communist are just as evil as Conservatives who think Jesus hates gays looked like this.....

Amen, bro.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 8:57 AM

YINYANG

You were busy trying to get yourself lit on fire. It happens.

Quote:
Originally posted by PirateCat:
Yin Yang I might smell like Old Spice but I sense man issues from you. Sometimes we need to turn off the Oprah channel.

Please don't pretend like you know anything about me. The only issues I have with men are the ones who spew out venom, like apologias for sexism and misogyny (such as your wife-beating example above). And, I don't watch Oprah.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, January 24, 2009 9:29 AM