Keith In Tampa
Moreover, Lincoln could have avoided the war,
if he had one ounce of diplomatic skills, which
obviously he didn't.
MJ
Of course Lincoln could have avoided HIS war, but it
had to do with enforcing the Morrill Tarriff and implementing
Clay's America System rather than
Keith In Tampa
Bush was never caught doing it without
legislation or Presidential Order, both being legal.
MJ
http://www.constitution.org/cons/constitu.txt
HERE is the Constitution -- the Law of the Land -- do
cite the Article, Section and Clause or Amendment
that:
Getting to be hoplessly boring to even trade
insults with you dullards.
and who started throwing insults first?
On Jun 29, 5:15 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:
plain,
Oh how VERY clever. And you are to this forum as crabs are to my hairy
crotch.
Jeez, people, try to
Plain,
I'm not objecting to the fact of the insults. I fully expect them from
you and a few others. My objection is to the lack of thought,
imagination and skill with which they are composed and delivered.
On Jun 30, 10:52 am, plainolamerican plainolameri...@gmail.com
wrote:
Getting to be
plainolamerican plainolameri...@gmail.com wrote: Only the guilty
have to fear domestic wiretaps.
Okay plain. Of course. The government will take proper care of
everything and never abuse it's power. So as someone else wrote, you
don't mind having your guns taken, making sure all your moves are
I didn't say without cause nor warrant, did I? Clearly you understand
the need of cooperation between the telecommunications companies and
the government to intercept international phone calls and/or e-mails
of any person suspected of being spies or terrorists. Like I said,
keep your nose clean
Most constitutionalists and conservatives stopped calling themselves
Republicans about 3 or 4 years ago.
And Obama is now a bigger violator of civil liberties than Bush
On Sun, Jun 28, 2009 at 11:35 PM, Frederick The Moderate
frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
So what do all those
Obama is the biggest violator of civil liberties since Lincoln:
http://www.facebook.com/ext/share.php?sid=94921804062h=n9REIu=zhKriref=mf
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 8:19 AM, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.comwrote:
Most constitutionalists and conservatives stopped calling themselves
Republicans
Hey, lay off of Lincoln! If the JAMES BUCHANAN had actually done his
JOB, then Lincoln wouldn't have had to do it for him!
Lincoln was of pure mind and heart.
On Jun 29, 9:18 am, bruce majors bruce.maj...@gmail.com wrote:
Obama is the biggest violator of civil liberties since Lincoln:
And, he had the coolest hat. I think that is what the Cat in the
Hat used as a model.
On Jun 29, 8:01 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey, lay off of Lincoln! If the JAMES BUCHANAN had actually done his
JOB, then Lincoln wouldn't have had to do it for him!
Lincoln was of
Mrs Rabbit: Cleary you understand the need to intercept...
international phone calls and/or e-mails
of any person suspected of being spies or terrorists.
Therein lies the problem. Bush at first claimed he was only listening
in on the kinds of calls you describe. It wasn't long before it was
Again, I don't have a problem with legally passed legislation. I don't
like or approve of many of our laws. But when Bush was caught doing
it, it wasn't legal.
On Jun 29, 5:42 am, Keith In Tampa keithinta...@gmail.com wrote:
You mean the Democrat Congress' Electronic Eavesdroppong Bill, that
Obama, Bush, FDR: Together Againhttp://www.reason.com/blog/show/134418.html
Posted on June 29, 2009, 9:04am | Nick
Gillespiehttp://www.reason.com/staff/hitandrun/129.html
Writing in the *Wash
That goes back to LBJ and Bill Moyers. That is what they did. They
also wiretapped their own staff. Nothing new with Bush. Bet Obama is
doing it right now.
Frederick The Moderate wrote:
So what you're opening up is the ability of a politician to wiretap
every political adversary and their
Although I didn't read Bruce's post, I didn't have to. He is
predictible in that, he reacts to any legitimate criticism of his
party / ideology in the way that has typified ConservaRepubs: either
1. Attack and insult the source. This eliminates the need of actually
addressing the issue or
2.
Moyers also tried to destroy people by outing gay political opponents. This
was forgotten and then recalled a few years ago and he tried to re-write
history and claim he had never done it.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:02 AM, dick thompson rhomp2...@earthlink.netwrote:
That goes back to LBJ and
Mrs. Rabbit,
Ok, you asked for it.
YOU have nothing to hide? So, your personal little life is the only
consideration here? The Constituion and Bill of Rights is not
important? You don't believe in a basic right of privacy.? All the
govt. has to do is mutter, well, it's for your own good and you
Once again, revisionist history by far left extremists.
Bush was never caught doing it without legislation or Presidential Order,
both being legal.
Unlike you Fred, I, and most conservatives have a big problem with the
legislation, to include the referenced Eavesdropping bill, (I am forgetting
Keith In Tampa
Bush was never caught doing it without
legislation or Presidential Order, both being
legal.
MJ
http://www.constitution.org/cons/constitu.txt
HERE is the Constitution -- the Law of the Land -- do
cite the Article, Section and Clause or Amendment
that:
a. provides Congress
Good Morning Michael,
I suggest that you read my whole post.
On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:59 AM, M. Johnson micha...@america.net wrote:
Keith In Tampa
Bush was never caught doing it without
legislation or Presidential Order, both being legal.
MJ
Any man that would start a civil war to collect inequally applied
taxes should not be admired. That would be Lincoln.
On Jun 29, 8:01 am, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
Hey, lay off of Lincoln! If the JAMES BUCHANAN had actually done his
JOB, then Lincoln wouldn't have had to
OMG Hollywood, here we go chasing tails again.sigh.
Regardless of what you *hear* or read, as Dick mentioned, they have
and will continue to do these acts. Not that Obama will admit it, but
he stays up late at night reading your postyeah, he's on to you.
Better get a wireless cards, but
Agreed Mark,
Moreover, Lincoln could have avoided the war, if he had one ounce of
diplomatic skills, which obviously he didn't.
President Lincoln grossly distorted and exaggerated the motives of the
South. He constantly insisted that the South wanted to “destroy” the Union,
when it merely wanted
50 lashes with a wet noodle for you ole boy! Buchana should have done
his damn jobgo back and read up on the 15 presidentno wonder
he never married!
Freeing the slaves was not Lincolns priority ya know
On Jun 29, 12:02 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE markmka...@gmail.com wrote:
Any man
nanana boostick your head inwell, you get the picture...:D
Seriously Holly, do you want to limit HOW we are protected?? What if
you have your way...and GOD forbid anything else happens on US
soilOBL or some other mad man/woman repeats similar acts as
9/11your family members are
btw, my position will always be me and mine first and foremostit's
the mama in me, can't help it.
:o)
On Jun 29, 12:37 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:
Mrs, Rabbit,
Once again, your position is only you and your life to be important,
that principles and legal
Keith: Unlike you Fred, I, and most conservatives have a big problem
with the
legislation, to include the referenced Eavesdropping bill,
If I was unclear, let me edify. I have a big problem with the Patriot
Act. I don't like it at all. I thought I mentioned that. What I was
writing was that
Mrs, Rabbit,
Lucky thing for the country you hold no elected position of
responsibility for the country as a whole, ain't it?
On Jun 29, 12:01 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
btw, my position will always be me and mine first and foremostit's
the mama in me, can't help it.
Mrs. Rabbit,
LOL! When were you guaranteed it would be safe to live as a free
person under our Constituion and Bill of Rights? Have Americans become
sniveling cowards? You GOD-DAMN right there are limitations on how we
are protected
.
How about the Govt. ban the private ownership of firearms so
So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
---
I don't claim to be either, but you should choose sides carefully.
Only the guilty have to fear domestic wiretaps.
On Jun 28, 10:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate
Plain,
An idiotic statement on your part. Too tired of dim-wits to explain
why.
On Jun 29, 3:51 pm, plainolamerican plainolameri...@gmail.com wrote:
So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
---
I don't claim to be
An idiotic statement on your part
hw - you've turned into quite a leghumper these days
esad
On Jun 29, 4:47 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:
Plain,
An idiotic statement on your part. Too tired of dim-wits to explain
why.
On Jun 29, 3:51 pm, plainolamerican
Too tired of dim-wits to explain why.
An amazizing show of self-awareness by Hollywood. We should all give
him a cheer!!!
On Jun 29, 3:47 pm, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:
Plain,
An idiotic statement on your part. Too tired of dim-wits to explain
why.
On Jun 29, 3:51 pm,
hw is to fritz as euwe is to bez
liberal-sick beyond repair
On Jun 29, 4:59 pm, Estimated Profit 71 richard_forbe...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Too tired of dim-wits to explain why.
An amazizing show of self-awareness by Hollywood. We should all give
him a cheer!!!
On Jun 29, 3:47 pm, Hollywood
I was just so proud of him for admitting that his dim-wittedness was
tiring.
On Jun 29, 4:05 pm, plainolamerican plainolameri...@gmail.com wrote:
hw is to fritz as euwe is to bez
liberal-sick beyond repair
On Jun 29, 4:59 pm, Estimated Profit 71 richard_forbe...@hotmail.com
wrote:
Too
plain,
Oh how VERY clever. And you are to this forum as crabs are to my hairy
crotch.
Jeez, people, try to show a some flair and panache, a little
imagination at least. Getting to be hoplessly boring to even trade
insults with you dullards.
On Jun 29, 5:05 pm, plainolamerican
LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred!
So I take it you oppose wiretapping? What are you afraid of? If you
are doing the right thing, then what does it matter? As many phones
calls made on a daily basis, there is NO way of being able to listen
to them all anyways. It's the people who
Mrs. Rabbit,
Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I
take the time to refute such an obviously flawed arguement? Think
about it a bit more.
On Jun 28, 10:53 pm, Mrs. Rabbit mrs.whiterab...@gmail.com wrote:
LOL, name calling is so second grade Fred!
So I take it
On Jun 28, 11:35 pm, Frederick The Moderate
frederickshel...@gmail.com wrote:
So what do all those Constitutionalists Republicans and
Conservatives think about his criminal acts in this regard?
That's easy, they deny it's a criminal act to begin with.
The lawyers see to that, but it's all a
I am not opposed to wire tapping, period. I have nothing to hide and
if they want to listen to my father complain about his aches and pains
or my teens latest boyfriens news or me getting Grandma's recipe, then
so be it. If it helps keep me and mine safe, then why would I oppose
it?
On Jun
Besides, agree or not, they have and will continue to do it, we just
may not be made aware of it! ;)
On Jun 29, 12:06 am, Hollywood jimmyrocket1...@hotmail.com wrote:
Mrs. Rabbit,
Are you serious? You sure that's the tactic you want to take? MUST I
take the time to refute such an
I cannot speak for others, but I will tell you what I think. I was
opposed to the Patriot Act from the beginning. It was reactive,
excessive and unconstitutional. The Congress had no right to draft
all the component pieces of legislation that were beyond the powers
and authority to do and they
So what you're opening up is the ability of a politician to wiretap
every political adversary and their families and friends, without
cause. No perhaps none of your friends or family would ever need
protecting but I wouldn't want any politician to have that kind of
power and neither did the
43 matches
Mail list logo
