Dog Brothers Public Forum
Return To Homepage
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
July 26, 2014, 08:18:29 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Welcome to the Dog Brothers Public Forum.
81258 Posts in 2243 Topics by 1046 Members
Latest Member: MikeT
* Home Help Search Login Register
  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 43
1651  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Issues in the American Creed (Constitutional Law and related matters) on: November 06, 2011, 01:27:30 PM
I don't see the rule of law being waived by sympathetic politicians.  Sorry.  There have been several crackdowns.  I have read of the rape in the Philly Occupy on CNN.  And the ACLU continues to protect free speech, GM.  Like they did with well known Stalinists in Skokie.  Speech you don't like it the fing point of the 1st Amendment. 

Why not? The rule of law is being waived by the sympathetic politicians in various cities, the MSM is doing it's best to not report on the culture of criminality found within OWS and the American Criminal Liberties Union is performing it's Stalinist mission of using the American legal system to harm America.

You don't see this?
1652  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Issues in the American Creed (Constitutional Law and related matters) on: November 06, 2011, 04:55:23 AM
Yeah, I am totally sure that this is true. 
1653  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: Issues in the American Creed (Constitutional Law and related matters) on: November 05, 2011, 09:48:15 PM
DougMacG: The issue in TN was that the law was not content neutral.  The law was passed with Occupy in mind, not as a general preventative manner. 
1654  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: November 03, 2011, 08:46:06 AM
"What I am asking for is the media to actually be a watchdog.  They are in this case."

Pretty selective in their watch-doggery, ain't they?

Good dodge.  And it answers my question your level of concern about the GOP candidates.  Morality is optional with you, as long as they are REAL conservatives.

"Cain MIGHT have done the things he is accused of. "

And those would be?

You've read the stories, GM.  Don't play dumb.  You're better than that.
1655  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: November 03, 2011, 08:14:34 AM
"I am not saying that the media aren't biased.  I am not saying that there might not be a copy cat effect going on with number three.  I am saying that at some point you have to recognize that there is a possibility that there is something there.  And, when you run for the POTUS as a REPUBLICAN, you should expect that stories like these will break."

I think that when it's discovered that he attended a racist church for 20 years, got his house from a shady deal with a convicted felon and had his political career started by an unrepentant terrorist, he's done, right?


 rolleyes

So, you misquoted me to make a point.  Cool.  Let's get this straight, again.  I did not vote for Obama.  I won't be voting for Obama.  What I am asking for is the media to actually be a watchdog.  They are in this case.

Sex sells, GM.  It is not as if the media turned a blind eye to the Weiner wiener scandal.  It isn't Dem. v. Rep on this front.  It isn't.  And after all the conservative talk about Clinton and Weiner and etc., I am rather frustrated that this issue is seen as a media slant.  Cain MIGHT have done the things he is accused of.  I would think that his supporters, or those who want the best possible conservative in office, would want the truth to come out.  And, if he emerges from this then he is really battle tested, and likely a stronger candidate for it. 

You guys talk about immorality in the Oval Office all the damn time.  Do you REALLY want to know the truth, or does your fondness for Cain cloud your willingness to learn that he might be less moral than he appears?Huh
1656  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: November 03, 2011, 04:51:17 AM
A)  The point of the article I posted was first was that the woman was willing to and trying to put her name to it.
B) An abuse of power is an abuse of power.  Some have more power, Guro, like the use of a state's police force, but coercion, blackmail, abuse of position, or whatever, is still an abuse.
C) So, dropping trou is the only way to be sexual explotive, abusive, or ....Huh?
D) There are now three women making an accusation.  My point about Clinton and Jones is that some point there MAY be a pattern emerging.  You'll forgive me, I hope, if I want the GOP frontrunner to be vetted.  Maybe we can prevent Clinton 2.0 from taking the Oval Office.
E) I don't understand this point. 

I am not saying that the media aren't biased.  I am not saying that there might not be a copy cat effect going on with number three.  I am saying that at some point you have to recognize that there is a possibility that there is something there.  And, when you run for the POTUS, you should expect that stories like these will break.  Why?  Because they do.  It is 24/7 media driven cycle.  And, I would like to note that Cain blames Perry (http://news.yahoo.com/struggling-cain-accuses-perry-harassment-case-022511386.html).  It is also true that presidential candidates work to discredit, miscredit, or downright blame/attack their opponents.

Good reminders of media bias, but pertaining more to the Media thread.

BTW BD in the Paula Jones case:

a) SHE PUT HER NAME TO IT.
b) Her allegation was that she was summoned to the Governor's presence by a State Trooper
c) and that Slick Willie dropped his drawers.   I gather that she also gave some specifics about the appearance of Clinton's penis (that it curved when erect) though one wonders how verifying evidence would be obtained , , ,
d) Clinton had quite the rep as the ladies man
e) Clinton was married to Hillary

Quite a contrast here!





1657  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / 10 political scandals that ended in election on: November 02, 2011, 10:00:22 PM
http://www.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1955750_1955749,00.html
1658  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / #3 on: November 02, 2011, 09:52:25 PM
I wonder if we should have listened to Paula Jones?  Of course not, she was just trying to ruin the career of a presidential hopeful...

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-exclusive-third-worker-says-cain-harassed-her-205655781.html
1659  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / hackers bring it on: November 02, 2011, 06:29:20 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/01/world/americas/hackers-challenge-mexican-crime-syndicate.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=hackers%20kidnapping%20mexico&st=cse
1660  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / not so anonymous anymore? on: November 02, 2011, 06:26:33 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/lawyer-cain-accuser-wants-allowed-talk-025045050.html
1661  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / domestic terror plot in GA on: November 02, 2011, 06:24:24 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/georgia-men-charged-plotting-ricin-012138938.html
1662  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: November 01, 2011, 09:09:30 AM
"I hope you realize that I do not make this distinction."

Just pointing out that many judges and elected officials sure seem to. Did CNN include this in their coverage of the OWS protests? If not, why not?

I know what you were doing.  The thanks was sincere. 
1663  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: November 01, 2011, 07:09:55 AM
And, yet, it is LEFTIST political speech and therefore due higher protection than it has been given:


Some animals are more equal than others.....

I hope you realize that I do not make this distinction. 

Your article on the cost to the Tea Party is very interesting.  Thanks. 
1664  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: American History on: November 01, 2011, 05:49:16 AM
This is a completely different version than I have always heard, including from a professor of mine who is a former CIA historian.

In particular, the missles out of Turkey is an odd piece of contention because I have always heard that the US was planning to remove them anyway.

Also, the "MAP" doesn't explain the CIA's continued, although often odd and questionable, efforts to remove Castro. 
1665  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / FBI on Russian spies on: November 01, 2011, 05:28:13 AM
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/31/fbi-releases-russian-spy-trove/?hpt=hp_c2
1666  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: November 01, 2011, 05:15:03 AM
And, yet, it is political speech and therefore due higher protection than it has been given:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/31/us/tennessee-occupy-protests/index.html?hpt=hp_t1
1667  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / FBI releases Russian spy trove on: October 31, 2011, 01:53:07 PM
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/31/fbi-releases-russian-spy-trove/?hpt=hp_c2
1668  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: FMA Strategies for Surviving the Zombie Apocalypse Workshop w/ Guide Dog on: October 31, 2011, 07:10:42 AM
Kelly McCann on zombie attack defense:

http://www.blackbeltmag.com/daily/self-defense-training/combatives/survival-guide-when-multiple-zombies-attack/ 

Zombie repulsion is officially an industry! 
1669  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: Guro Crafty in Chicago Nov 19-10 on: October 29, 2011, 06:53:06 PM
Woof, Guro.  I think the dates are 19-20, yes?  Alas, I can't break away for the seminar as I thought I would be able to earlier in the year.  Enjoy! 
1670  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The United Nations/ US Sovereignty/International Law on: October 28, 2011, 03:21:42 PM
Thank you, Guro. 
1671  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The United Nations/ US Sovereignty/International Law on: October 28, 2011, 11:43:03 AM
Despite this:
"Again, I am not necessarily unopposed to the snark."  The role of the UN in the attempted prevention of small arms and the related limits to the 2nd Amendment spring to mind here.  I just want to understand HOW, or perhaps WHY, the UN now how this reputation.  Is it because of a failed, or flawed, design or it the "derailment" more of a normative sense from those of you how feel this way.

And this:

"...has it gone off the rails due to institutional design or normatively?"

And this:
"I don't understand the institutional design that leads to the conclusion that having those countries on these commissions will allow they to dictate the outcome."

And this:
"I really am just seeking clarification about an institution I know comparatively little about.  And, thank you to all of you addressing this line of questioning, by the way.)"

And this:

"Could you you do me a favor and tell me what the UN's ambitions are, without the US or the EU?  (This is a serious question.  Since the US, UK and France are all permanent SC members with veto power, I am not sure what you mean.)"

Next time I will try harder to admit my ignorance about a subject. 


I got a bit of a similar impression; the idea that communicated was "What does it matter?  We have veto on the Security Council."
1672  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The United Nations/ US Sovereignty/International Law on: October 28, 2011, 04:45:32 AM
I agree with Guro.  That was a very good post, and useful.  Thank you.

I do not understand, however, how you jumped to this conclusion: "I don't see how Bigdog you take lightly the fact that those horribly repressive regimes were sitting on committees judging other people's human rights violations."

I recall saying nothing of the sort. 
1673  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The United Nations/ US Sovereignty/International Law on: October 27, 2011, 04:46:13 PM
Thank you. 

BD,

When an institution goes off the rails as the UN has, I think it does matter.

OK.  So again... has it gone off the rails due to institutional design or normatively?  If it is the design, what portion? 

It was a utopian concept that was flawed from the beginning and just went south from there. It assumed that every nation would rationally decide issues rather than break into voting blocs. It treats every nation as equally rational and decent.  rolleyes
1674  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The United Nations/ US Sovereignty/International Law on: October 27, 2011, 04:25:32 PM
Again, I am not necessarily unopposed to the snark.  The role of the UN in the attempted prevention of small arms and the related limits to the 2nd Amendment spring to mind here.  I just want to understand HOW, or perhaps WHY, the UN now how this reputation.  Is it because of a failed, or flawed, design or it the "derailment" more of a normative sense from those of you how feel this way.




BD:

I have next to zero respect for the legitamacy or competence of the UN towards those ends, nor am I sure that I even agree with all of them.  (Whatever the hell "social progress" is according to the General Assembly of the UN, I suspect I rather strongly disagree.

This might explain the generally snarky tone of this thread towards the UN.  grin

To the extent the UN succeeds in claiming power, US sovereignty is diminished.

1675  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The United Nations/ US Sovereignty/International Law on: October 27, 2011, 04:22:39 PM
BD,

When an institution goes off the rails as the UN has, I think it does matter.

OK.  So again... has it gone off the rails due to institutional design or normatively?  If it is the design, what portion? 
1676  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The United Nations/ US Sovereignty/International Law on: October 27, 2011, 03:49:03 PM
GM, I am not sure.  And I am not sure that it should matter. 

Guro, isn't the purpose of the UN to serve as a moral arbitrator?

"The principles of the UN as explained in the Charter are to save future generations from war, reaffirm human rights, and establish equal rights for all persons. In addition it also aims to promote justice, freedom, and social progress for the peoples of all of its member states."  http://geography.about.com/od/politicalgeography/a/unitednations.htm



1677  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The United Nations/ US Sovereignty/International Law on: October 27, 2011, 03:05:53 PM
OK, so this is not really an instituional question, but rather a normative one of what constitutes the "good" of the country? 

(Incidentally, I am not trying to argue with any of you, Guro, GM, DougMacG, PC.  I literally study institutions, so this is my mindset here.  I really am just seeking clarification about an institution I know comparatively little about.  And, thank you to all of you addressing this line of questioning, by the way.)
1678  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The United Nations/ US Sovereignty/International Law on: October 27, 2011, 05:33:16 AM
Moving here due to Guro's request. 

I may not have been clear with my request.  I understand that China, Cuba, etc. are in the UN.  I even understand that they are commissions that seem to run counter to their history.  I don't understand the institutional design that leads to the conclusion that having those countries on these commissions will allow they to dictate the outcome.  First, they aren't a majority, even when taken together, on the commission.  Second, there are at least three nations, all with veto power, who are permanent members of the Security Council.  These three are the US, the UK, and France, the later two of which are also members of the EU. 

I don't see, then, given the institutional design of the UN (or at least my understanding of the design) allows the opportunity for the UN to act in a manner against the US and the EU.


"I have this feeling someone may come to regret encouraging GM to provide links and articles that show the UN to be a group running in a direction counter to US interests. 

It was not just Cuba, but Libya and Syria were on the human rights commission.  And the Obama administration was 'self-reporting' Arizona for checking IDs with cause.

What was the agenda of the UN Oil for Food scandal?

Our pathological science thread chronicles quite a duplicitous agenda coming out of the UN IPCC on manipulated climate data and studies.  It wasn't 1 or 2 scientists.  It was a movement with an agenda and money, within the UN bureaucracy.  Yes the UN would like to have more power and bigger budgets.  Yes, they want global taxes and global regulations.  I know that sounds like I have a conspiracy problem, but I would only count what they say in their own words.  I will put few links down but these are easy to find.  I would be far more interested in seeing links that indicate otherwise.

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-global-tax-proposal-up-for-senate-vote/
http://www.cfif.org/htdocs/freedomline/un_monitor/in_our_opinion/global_taxes.htm

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=17102
 July [2004], Inter Presse news service reported that a top U.N. official was preparing a new study that will outline numerous global tax proposals to be considered by the General Assembly at its September meeting. The proposals will likely include everything from global taxes on e-mails and Internet use to a global gas tax and levies on airline travel. If adopted, American taxpayers could wind up paying hundreds of billions of dollars each year to the United Nations.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is among those leading the charge, having stated that he "strongly supports finding new sources of funding" for the U.N. through global taxes, according to Inter Presse. In fact, Annan made very clear his support for the imposition of global taxes in a 2001 Technical Note that he authored for a U.N. conference. "The need to finance the provision of global public goods in an increasingly globalized world also adds new urgency to the need for innovative new sources of financing," Annan wrote. The Note goes on to describe and evaluate the merits of several global tax proposals.
-----

Snopes took on the veracity of a pass around email that says a list of countries like Jordan and Saudi Arabia vote against us 70% of the time and found out the truth was they were voting against us closer to 90% of the time: http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/unvote.asp

Yet we host and we pay..."
 
1679  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Middle East: War, Peace, and SNAFU, TARFU, and FUBAR on: October 26, 2011, 10:34:41 PM
I guess I don't understand, still, how this can be the case.  I fail to see the opportunities that would allow the UN to act outside the will of the US and two key EU nations.  Any chance there is a reference?  A how to manual?
1680  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Middle East: War, Peace, and SNAFU, TARFU, and FUBAR on: October 26, 2011, 04:55:43 PM
Woof,
 I'm talking about the UN BEING FRIENDLY TO THE IDEA OF A ISLAMIC CALIPHATE just to gather up all these independent Arab states in a neat little package, much like the European Union. Good for UN's ambitions, not so good for the EU or us.
                                        P.C.

I see that you are trying to distinguish.  Could you you do me a favor and tell me what the UN's ambitions are, without the US or the EU?  (This is a serious question.  Since the US, UK and France are all permanent SC members with veto power, I am not sure what you mean.)
1681  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Middle East: War, Peace, and SNAFU, TARFU, and FUBAR on: October 26, 2011, 01:13:54 PM
The enemy, of my enemy, is my friend.
                  P.C.

That'll get you another OBL. 
1682  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: October 21, 2011, 11:20:48 AM
Nevermind.  I stand corrected.


http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/story/2011-10-20/obama-foreign-policy-gadhafi/50845858/1

On Iran: Perhaps, but Stuxnet was a US decision.  I say that because it is possible (and I mean only possible), that Obama's use of intel, spec ops, and the like are being put to task in less obvious ways in Iran.  I will confess to not enjoying the "wait and see" on this particular possibility.

On McCain:  grin indeed! 

Really? Then why did Buraq say almost nothing when there was a real chance at a "Persian Spring" in 2009 while he instead focused on underming Israel's security at that time?
We spent more than a billion dollars on the Libya op. Aside from Ka-daffy's head, we shall see what spins out of it. Somehow I'm not expecting flowers and rainbows.
1683  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Super PACs on: October 21, 2011, 11:18:25 AM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2011-10-20/presidential-candidates-donors-give-to-superpacs/50847148/1
1684  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: 2012 Presidential on: October 21, 2011, 08:10:12 AM
On Iran: Perhaps, but Stuxnet was a US decision.  I say that because it is possible (and I mean only possible), that Obama's use of intel, spec ops, and the like are being put to task in less obvious ways in Iran.  I will confess to not enjoying the "wait and see" on this particular possibility.

On McCain:  grin indeed! 
1685  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Politics on: October 21, 2011, 06:22:20 AM
Ditching the 2 term presidency?

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/10/11/first_times_a_charm
1686  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / America's Pacific Century on: October 21, 2011, 06:20:43 AM
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/10/11/americas_pacific_century
1687  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: The Decline, Fall, (and Resurrection?) of America on: October 21, 2011, 06:14:37 AM
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/10/11/america_really_was_that_great?page=full

versus

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/10/11/the_myth_of_american_exceptionalism?page=full

versus

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2011/10/11/napoleons_curse
1688  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: This is worse than the Kitty Genovese case on: October 21, 2011, 05:22:02 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/20/world/asia/china-toddler-dead/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

 cry cry cry

1689  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Impact of Gadhafi's death on 2012 Presidential on: October 21, 2011, 04:52:17 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/qadhafi-death-blunts-gops-critique-133500278.html

Thoughts?
1690  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / Re: FMA Strategies for Surviving the Zombie Apocalypse Workshop w/ Guide Dog on: October 20, 2011, 02:49:59 PM
I am glad I did my part for thread coherence.  Sorry about that, GD!  I hope your event goes well!

And that book looks, well, "useful."
1691  DBMA Martial Arts Forum / Martial Arts Topics / reference book? on: October 20, 2011, 11:07:25 AM
http://www.cdc.gov/phpr/zombies_novella.htm
1692  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Libya and on: October 20, 2011, 09:04:39 AM
Reports that Gadhafi is dead: http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/20/libyan-fighters-say-they-have-captured-gadhafi/?iref=BN1&hpt=hp_t1
1693  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Mexico-US matters on: October 19, 2011, 11:06:01 PM
We've done this before.  I was merely addressing what I was asked. 


But, he won an award from the ACLU, GM.  I was asked about this: "any examples of the ACLU or Senators," and found both. 

Hitler liked animals and was a vegitarian, doesn't make him not Hitler. If the ACLU is actually ever on the right side of something, it's either an accident or part of their pose to convince the uninformed into thinking that they actually are something else than a Stalinist group designed to damage America from within.
1694  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Mexico-US matters on: October 19, 2011, 10:38:11 PM
But, he won an award from the ACLU, GM.  I was asked about this: "any examples of the ACLU or Senators," and found both. 
1695  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Mexico-US matters on: October 19, 2011, 09:08:06 PM
I am not sure that you will accept him as a "liberal" since that may be up to you, and not me to define.  Here is a Democrat, who has sponsored bills"reforming procedures for providing court-appointed defense counsel to indigent defendants, and carried DNA legislation that has resulted in freeing many wrongly convicted citizens."  Moreover, he was NOW's "Legislator of the Year." In 2005, he "received the John Henry Faulk award from the [A]merican Civil Liberties Union." Damn near a hippy protesting at OWS!!!!!

BUT, he has also "worked with a bipartisan group of legislators to allocate more than $120 million on training and technology for border security."


I give you: http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/senate/members/dist20/dist20.htm, a liberal senator who is also pro-border security. 



I highlighted the "every liberal portion" of your assertion.  I am liberal, at least compared to the average forum participant, and I think that defending the borders is of paramount importance. 

" I am liberal, at least compared to the average forum participant, and I think that defending the borders is of paramount importance."

Fair enough. In regard to those that aren't members of this forum, can you speak to any examples of the ACLU or Senators and Representatives that actively engage in securing the borders without trying to pass inclusive legislation that makes it possible for those that are here illegally, "citizens?"

It's a fair question.
1696  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Mexico-US matters on: October 19, 2011, 08:47:02 PM
And as I've told you, sir, your regard is much appreciated. 

"I am liberal, at least compared to the average forum participant, and I think that defending the borders is of paramount importance." 

That may be, but given how hard-core right most of us are that could be a true statement of someone who is center or even right of center. cheesy

As I previously bantered with you in a sidebar, I consider you a Democrat back from when mainstream Democrats were patriotic, reasonable, and rational people i.e. NOT a liberal  evil cheesy
1697  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Science, Culture, & Humanities / Re: The American Creed: Our Founding Fathers: on: October 19, 2011, 08:44:30 PM
DF,
     Forgive me, but I've not heard the definition of republic that you offer below.  May I ask for the dictionary, or other source, where you found it?  Thank you.

For everyone's benefit:

In a Democracy, The individual, and any group of individuals composing any minority, have no protection against the unlimited power of The majority. It is a case of majority over man.


A Republic, on the other hand, has a very different purpose and an entirely different form, or system, of government. Its purpose is to control The majority strictly, as well as all others among the people, primarily to protect The individualís God given, unalienable rights and therefore for the protection of the rights of The minority, of all minorities, and the liberties of people in general.

The definition of a Republic is: a constitutionally limited government of the representative type, created by a written Constitution--adopted by the people and changeable (from its original meaning) by them only by its amendment, with its powers divided between three separate Branches: Executive, Legislative and Judicial.
1698  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Mexico-US matters on: October 19, 2011, 05:09:29 PM
I highlighted the "every liberal portion" of your assertion.  I am liberal, at least compared to the average forum participant, and I think that defending the borders is of paramount importance. 
1699  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Mexico-US matters on: October 19, 2011, 01:08:41 PM
"...we have groups (the ACLU and every Liberal in the country), that actively speak out against the United States being able to secure her borders."

The problem with broad, sweeping absolute claims like this one is that it is easy to disprove. 


Yet another attempt by the Left Wing press to divert attention from the need to patrol and secure the border with Mexico.

To GM's point, they are back as soon as they are released from custody.

Additionally, there are many articles by the Leftist press showing the "plight" of these poor, downtrodden illegals and their "need" to come to the United States by any means necessary. Ironically, Mexico is lacking an ACLU of its own that demonizes Mexico and her citizens.
I have seen first hand, people in Mexico helping illegal immigrants in their country with gifts of food and water, yet it is commonly known that illegal immigrants are not welcome in Mexico and nearly every woman that crosses Mexico illegally is raped before they reach the United States (which is the reason that many Guatemalans and El Salvadorans do not like Mexicans), yet it is odd to me that Mexico, her politicians, or anyone else for that matter, would have anything to say about United States defending her borders by any means that we feel prudent as was witnessed by everyone a few days ago when Mexican politicians spoke out against Cain's joke about making an electric fence on the border with a sign on the other side stating that the fence could kill you.

To GC's point, the United States isn't Russia, nor should it be, but to GM's point, we have groups (the ACLU and every Liberal in the country), that actively speak out against the United States being able to secure her borders. Their allegiance to the principles within the constitution are questionable to say the least. I'm not sure what should be done about that. We have enough enemies from within to deal with, let alone allowing people to come here that have no intention of embracing America's founding ideologies. Patrolling the border with soldiers is the least that we should be doing.
1700  Politics, Religion, Science, Culture and Humanities / Politics & Religion / Re: Mexico-US matters on: October 19, 2011, 05:38:42 AM
Deportations at an all time high:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/18/us/immigrant-deportations/index.html?hpt=hp_c2
Pages: 1 ... 32 33 [34] 35 36 ... 43
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!