| Author |
Message |
    
Pammy
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 06:54 pm: | 
|
I know, not really relevant to the bill....but a sample of some good ol' American citizenry... |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 07:08 pm: |
|
We can recover from treating McVeigh like a citizen.
We can't recover from treating enemies to the death like citizens. |
Hex
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 07:34 pm: |
|
Criminals and serial killers, every country has them I believe.
Maybe we should just get rid of our criminal justice system,
take down that silly green statue the French tried to get us to live up to,
and have the military conduct martial law.
Might suit some in Washington--past, present, and future.
Doubleplus good, Brothers?
If McCain's not a Republican, then what did your party present the rest of us for high office? |
Cityxslicker
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 07:38 pm: |
|
Jihad Jane |
Indy_bueller
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 07:48 pm: |
|
I am COMPLETELY against this bill. We have to retain Constitutional Rights for all American Citizens. We cannot allow a point to come where we start picking and choosing who "qualifies" and who doesn't. Citizen = Constitutional Rights. Thats it. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 08:01 pm: |
|
If McCain's not a Republican, then what did your party present the rest of us for high office?
A 1980's Democrat. |
Hex
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 08:17 pm: |
|
Lame. That trick never works.
If your party can't un-fracture itself, you'll deserve everything you're going to get for the next 7+ years.
If you can get it right, I'll join you at the ballot. |
Swampy
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 08:40 pm: |
|
A very long time ago a handful of very smart men came together to put the Constitution together for the benefit of American beings, not for the benefit of the gubimint or the state. It was purposly simple, for all to understand so that hopefully when the gubimint someday in the future would in some unintentional way begin to overstep its bounds the American beings would step up to the plate and say, "Hey wait a minute there now Mr. Pettifogger, Esquire, don't use those big words and try running that crap down our alley" and bla, bla, bla, bla, bla. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 09:44 pm: |
|
Wasn't a trick. Wasn't trying to be lame.
If you look at what McCain believes, he more closely represents the conservative Democrat from the 1980's.
He isn't conservative. This is why his polling was only lukewarm prior to the election. It wasn't until he added Palin to the ticket that he got much of a bounce from conservatives.
Conservatives don't herald Palin as the "future of the party", but much of what she believes echoes the beliefs of conservatives.
The Republicans have one shot and one shot only at President. The Democrats have lost at least the House or Senate and maybe both in November.
In order for the Republicans to win in 2012, they must nominate a true conservative. A wishy, washy liberal light candidate will not be attractive to independents. Additionally, the TEA Party folks will bolt and nominate a third party candidate unless the Republicans nominate a conservative.
That conservative must advocate the following:
Fiscal Conservatism
Strong National Defense
Strict Construction Constitutionist
Smaller Government
State's Rights
61% of the population believe we are going in the wrong direction:
Right Track-Wrong Track/Direction of Country
Conservatives make up the largest group (and growing) with the second largest group being Moderates:
“Conservatives” Are Single-Largest Ideological Group
Independents, thouse who don't identify with one party or another, are not a homogeneous "moderate" group. Independents are a cross section of the total American electorate with proportions similar to the national averages of conservative, moderate, and liberal.
I fear most a "business as usual" Republican party leadership. This will result in a repeat of 1992 and a third party candidate farther to the right of the Republican candidate and dooming both efforts to failure.
Obama will win with 38-40% of the vote.
Had Perot not been in the race, Bush would have won:
Maine
New Hampshire
Connecticut
Vermont
Massachusetts
Rhode Island
New Jersey
Delaware
Pennsylvania
West Virginia
Ohio
Kentucky
Tennessee
Illinois
Ohio
Wisconsin
Michigan
Minnesota
Iowa
Missouri
Louisiana
Indiana
Virginia
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
Florida
Alabama
Mississippi
Texas
Oklahoma
Kansas
Nebraska
North Dakota
South Dakota
Montana
Wyoming
Colorado
New Mexico
Arizona
Utah
Idaho
Washington
Oregon
California
Nevada
Alaska
Hawaii
Clinton would have won:
New York
Arkansas
DC
Kinda changes the outlook on things.
Instead of a 370 to 168 electoral college result in favor of Clinton, it would have been a 492 to 46 result in favor of Bush.
http://uselectionatlas.org/RESULTS/national.php?ye ar=1992
Republicans underestimated the threat of Perot. They do so again at their own peril.
Recycle another Bob Dole and the Republicans will lose in 2012. |
Swampy
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 10:33 pm: |
|
And again, they had every opportunity to nominate a true conservative black man, but what would have messed up the deal was that he was a true conservative, and true conservativism doesn't fit into the republican party.
So what conservatives have to get over is the fact that the republican party is no longer the party for conservatives, it is just the party for democrat lite.
So get over it!
Get over it...
Get over it |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 10:51 pm: |
|
Yep. The issue is whether the party can be remade from the inside out.
Democrats have a similar more pressing problem. The Democrat party has been hi-jacked by ultra leftists/socialists.
Moderate Democrats can't leave the party fast enough.
You know it's bad when Joe Lieberman, the VP nominee, gets thrown under the bus by the Democratic party and then beats them as an Independent. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 11:59 pm: |
|
McCain was the selection of the media/Dem's for Obama to beat. Brilliant plan too, worked like a charm. Check out the # of Obama voters that went McCain in the primaries. Really have to hand it to the guys who "ran" the last election.
For most of the conservative voters, it was a real hold you nose kind of thing, and many didn't vote or voted third party to protest the R's being idiots...and McCain wasn't wanted. If... and this is sci-fi... some one had pushed a rational middle conservative line, and had more charisma than a rock, he'd have won.
I admit to not liking McCain, I think it's Ironic that his bad bribery reform law made his opponent super rich and violated the Constitution to boot.
Oh, yeah, and the Republicans have a horrid habit of being an old boys club that picks people for office based on who's turn it is, ( how they picked Dole imho ) and little cohesion. The "country club" R's can't stand the conservative christian right, and vice versa, etc. etc.
Of course the D's are driven snow and monolithic in their loyalty....
So, like I'd bet a Ted Kennedy written bill was bad, just from the author...I feel the same way about McCain's stuff.
It seems the attitude here is the proposed law is crap, ( not properly careful of our rights ) but something like it ( that's not screwed up ) is needed to deal with foriegn terrorists?
(Message edited by aesquire on March 12, 2010) |
M2me
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 12:22 am: |
|
That conservative must advocate the following:
Fiscal Conservatism
Strong National Defense
Strict Construction Constitutionist
Smaller Government
State's Rights
Umm, what election are you trying to win? 2012 or 1852? What you're looking for is not a conservative but a reactionary. That's not going to work. Americans are progressive. Most Americans want to move forward, not backward. We are not going to have strict constitutionalists. We are not going to have smaller government. We are not going to have state's rights. These battles were fought over 150 years ago. It's time to get over it and move on. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 12:30 am: |
|
Umm, what election are you trying to win? 2012 or 1852? What you're looking for is not a conservative but a reactionary. That's not going to work. Americans are progressive. Most Americans want to move forward, not backward. We are not going to have strict constitutionalists. We are not going to have smaller government. We are not going to have state's rights. These battles were fought over 150 years ago. It's time to get over it and move on.
Check a poll lately? |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 10:43 am: |
|
Delusional.
"We are not going to have strict constitutionalists."
"We are not going to have state's rights."
If I and my friends have anything to say about it, we certainly will.
Delusion and lies won't stop us. |
Milt
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 10:55 am: |
|
I am old enough to remember when "state's rights" meant poll taxes, literacy tests and decriminalized lynching.
This not my America. |
Drkside79
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 11:08 am: |
|
Really weren't some of you just using Lincoln against us last week and now preaching about states rights this week.
Just Sayin |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 11:17 am: |
|
Does it even matter what the Constitution says?
Why even write anything down if everything is open to perception.
If you don't like what the Constitution says, advocate for the 28th Amendment.
The Framers NEVER intended the provisions of the Constitution to be open to interpretation.
People like progressivism until they understand the lack of freedom required to obtain it. |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 12:00 pm: |
|
States rights end with secession.
Up to that point, Article 1, Section 8 and the Tenth Amendment.
There is a difference between a state seceding from the union and declaring open war with other states and the Federal government rolling into a state (like Utah) and seizing several million acres for Federal use against the wishes of the state or imposing unfunded Federal mandates on the state. |
Hr_puffinstuff
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 12:57 pm: |
|
Most Americans want to move forward, not backward.
Move forward to ... what?
I have asked this of a few people, and have yet to find an answer. |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 01:07 pm: |
|
Socialism. |
Ratyson
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 01:37 pm: |
|
We are not going to have strict constitutionalists. We are not going to have smaller government. We are not going to have state's rights. These battles were fought over 150 years ago. It's time to get over it and move on.
These battles are STILL waging...
Get over it and move on?? Really?
"Oh, these folks just won't let up... so I guess I will just roll over and pull my pants down for them." Sad.. just sad.} |
Ft_bstrd
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 03:43 pm: |
|
Latest iteration from Pelosi and Slaughter is to change the procedural rules so that the House can pass the Senate Health Care bill without having a vote at all.
Louise Slaughter and her "deemed" scheme is so far beyond the pale it isn't even funny. |
Bikertrash05
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 04:01 pm: |
|
Socialism is a bad word, it is now called Progressive. They are the same.
"Americans are progressive. Most Americans want to move forward, not backward. We are not going to have strict constitutionalists. We are not going to have smaller government. We are not going to have state's rights."
Wow. Progressive? No, they are actually slightly right of middle. Forward? Demolition Man/1984 forward? NO. These battles that were fought 150 years ago continue today. |
Hr_puffinstuff
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 05:11 pm: |
|
thanks, Blake, but i was actually looking for an answer from a person of the progressive persuasion.
Americans are progressive.
please don't make the mistake of painting everyone with the same brush you tarnish yourself with. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 07:37 pm: |
|
"progressive"
Real nice word. Everyone wants to be with it, hep, cool, progress! sounds great!
The word was carefully selected to have just that effect.
Works on the ignorant, and judging by the last high school American "history" book I looked at last year, that's everyone who isn't home or self educated. They do not teach about the racism, eugenics, and marxist roots of the movement. There is chapter after chapter about the awesome dudes in the AFL & CIO, and worshipful pages on the New Deal and the Great Society. Very little mention of any of the little wars we fought against European Imperialists, and even the paragraph on the Spanish American War concentrates on the Maine and how Charles Foster Kane created the war out of whole cloth. ( actually they get the news baron's name right... when I asked the socialist studies teacher about that part, I use Kane's name....and she had no idea who he was....but defended the text anyway.) |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 08:33 pm: |
|
An interesting poll by Gallup that blows away the far left "Progressive" idea that they are in the mainstream.
http://sas-origin.onstreammedia.com/origin/gallupi nc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/w738nquazegahf q5xajfxa.gif
 |
Blake
| | Posted on Friday, March 12, 2010 - 08:35 pm: |
|
How BadWeBrs lean...
http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/messages/406 2/520435.html |
|
