now that its passed
- Thread starter jeff f
- Start date
londonfog
Well-Known Member
OMG did you really type that...McCain???? Wow I would have at least thought you would have said Ron Paul...Gave you more credit then you deserve
McCain would have been a good place to start (if you really were a conservative).
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
How is that?
McCain would have been a good place to start (if you really were a conservative).
McCain is not a Conservative.
Do you want to fight with me over petty differences or do you want to win?
CrackerJax
New Member
I was scammed into fighting a senseless and useless war....Health Care Reform actually helps me so I'm happy
1. Have a child in college when she gets out she can still stay on Mommy and Daddy's insurance...Works for me...One less thing she has to concern herself about whilst looking for her job with benefits ...
2. Have a friend who's child has a pre-existing-condition. Her concern was losing her job and losing that insurance and unable to take care of her child. Well thats one less worry she has..again works for me..should my list continue???? Yours is just telling us its not going to work ( something you might have heard a lot in your life )....Well sir change is happening..you can either get on board or move to ......COSTA RICA
I'm still trying to figure out what that Iraq war did for me ????? Dude your talk is getting old and lame and just like this Health Care Reform passing you will be proven wrong time and time again Sir Cracker. Oh yeah hows that "birther" thing working out for you ......proven wrong time and time again my friend.
Way to stay on subject. No wonder you're lost.
ChChoda
Well-Known Member
McCain is not a Democrat. He may be bad, but worse is worse. It was a simple proposition, really. Obama (statist), or, McCain (populist). Do you think the populist would have rammed this through?
If you can label yourself as you wish without a link to reality, so can the other statists. I'd rather you be genuine; Obama too.
ChChoda
Well-Known Member
Less...you gave me less credit than I "deserve".
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Okay, you would rather fight. That's fine with me.
I am not a Statist.
How many times must I explain this to you?
In fact, current Republican values are more in line with Statism than mine.
Based on what you post here, you're not a Conservative anyway.
You're a Republican.
Big difference.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
NO stupid... I gave you more ...past tense I gave you more credit the you deserve..ROFL ....that was before you said McCain...pay attention
..see everyone should not smoke weed ..you making it hard for us to make this legal nation wide
londonfog
Well-Known Member
Hey nut the title of thread is "now that it has passed". I gave you two reason why I'm glad it did. I also told you about what your boy Bush did for me....Sorry if you could not follow.... next time I W i l l T y p e S l o w e r
ChChoda
Well-Known Member
NO stupid... I gave you more ...past tense I gave you more credit the you deserve..ROFL ....that was before you said McCain...pay attention
Yeah yeah....what's your daughters user name?
ChChoda
Well-Known Member
You are a statist.
You think privacy is a right, guaranteed by the US constitution.
You think gay marriage rights should be federally mandated.
You think the federal overturning of all state laws concerning abortion is a legitimate function of the courts.
You think the Republicans should adopt the Democrat stance on religion (separation of church and state).
These are just some of the statist positions you've supported and can't obfuscate by typing aimlessly about the Constitution.
Johnnyorganic
Well-Known Member
Who is the Statist?
And you don't believe that the individual has basic protections from an intrusive government.
Statist.
I believe the 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection to everyone. The 10th Amendment backs me up on this. But, you don't.
You think the government has the authority to dictate who can and cannot enter into a legal contract based on an arbitrary decision, by an official policy, based on religion.
Statist.
That is correct. See the previous two rebuttals.
You think the government has a right to invade the privacy of a woman's body.
Statist.
And you don't.
Remove the protection afforded by the Establishment Clause and you are left with government dictating which religious beliefs are appropriate.
Statist.
My position is clear.
Fortunately, yours is as well.
beardo
Well-Known Member
the government is allowing us to be invaded by forigners....isn't that what our military , coast gaurd, national gaurd, police soposed to be getting paid to protect us from? why do they want all these people here? so they will vote? or so they will rise up and try to take over parts of our country? so they can declare martial law? so we cant find jobs or earn a living wage? or so theirs more people on welfare or more people to pay sales taxes? im not sure whats up but their working on scaming us real good.
K
Keenly
Guest
oh the irony... sounds like a constitutionalist to me....
i guess your just not down with the constitution and what it stands for?
CrackerJax
New Member
One thing is for sure.... Choda aside. Obama is not down with the constitution, and therein lies the heart of all the protests.
I wish there was an incompetence clause for impeachment.
I wish there was an incompetence clause for impeachment.
ChChoda
Well-Known Member
If we as citizens of the United States of America enjoy the benefit of a high degree of personal privacy, it is because of a pseudo fidelity to the Constitution. The farther we stray from the Constitution, the more privacy we will lose.
When you literally say the Constitution says something it doesn't, you subscribe to the concept of a living and breathing document, which is the most egregious insult you can heap on a contract.
The reason statists like yourself, and the penners of the Soviet Constitution, want to attempt to enshrine privacy as a right, is because it is an impossibility in a civil society. Society, by definition, involves others beside yourself. In order to maintain civility, you cannot claim as an absolute right, privacy. You need to defer to laws, John.
But we both know your ploy. You infer what the Constitution means based on your own personal beliefs. Not on the original intent of the writers. You're an Alinksi-ite, John. You need to pretend to love what you hate in order to destroy it. Classic Obama/Alinski techniques.
As for your embrace of abortion, you're one sick puppy, John. Life is precious, you claim. Privacy is more precious, you claim. All killing is wrong, you claim. Abortion is a right, you claim. Statists are always hypocritical. No amount of camouflage can hide it. It's the chink in their/your armor.
I know, I know, Republicans are worse...
And yes, I am one. Seeing as how I've never in my life voted Democrat, guilty by association, I guess. And damn proud of it, John.
ChChoda
Well-Known Member
ChChoda
Well-Known Member
Yes I do. And, I believe that the size and scope of government correlates precisely to its intrusiveness. The larger the size and scope of government, the more intrusive.
I believe in equal protection; under the law, John. You don't.
I think the governments role is in enforcing contracts, not dictating the specifics of them. You do.
You talking about body cavity searches, John? You can't be talking about the right to an abortion here, can you? That is some lopsided logic, if you are...
Freedom of religious expression needn't stop at the federal building doorstep, John. Despite your dissembling, the Constitution still guarantees that right...
txhomegrown
Well-Known Member
I wish there was a:
None Of The Above
box on the ballot.
If there was an incompetence clause, we would have impeached every president since Jefferson.
doc111
Well-Known Member
.............except for Grover Cleveland. Now there was a president!
Similar threads
