"How was the event yesterday in aTx, not an act of terror?"

Whoa, bite your tongue son!  Did you say the "T" word?  Stop the presses, I've just been handed this news flash.  Since it occurred against an office of our government,  the correct term now has been pussified to Overseas Contingency Operation.  The present administration is attempting to go easy on those who are set in their ways to murder individuals in the USA.  If one manages to survive such an incident, one is assured of a warm place to live, three meals a day, a trial lawyer of your choice, as well as a guarantee that any potential jail time be served with assistants at your beck & call 24 hours a day.
You are assured of not being asked any questions of your motives or intent.  Did I say you will be provided a lawyer?  Our government is expanding this job initiative overseas, did you hear?  Right as we speak, the government has opened a new mission in Digyourbouti, Yemen, to recruit individuals for such missions.  This is the US Government's method of job security here in the US for those who survive any such incidents.  Taking the Al Qaeda trained Jihadists off the dusty streets of Yemen & providing them a good life right here in the US.  You will be provided with clean undergarments as well, your choice of boxers or briefs, in new spring "commando" color designs~OOH La La!  This will also have appeal to residents of the US, who may be disenchanted with their life's mission.  One plane to flown into a building, or a truck driven into a 7-11, possibly commandeering a LNG Tanker into a major US port of call?  No problem, if you survive, you'll get all the comforts of home.

In closing, please consider your choice of the word terror in the future.  Your government thanks you, and offers you a lemon drop to go along with the next naughty incident.   Can I get you a warm towel for the next debacle?

Yes Dog.  Those individuals who want to strike fear & death onto our country should have all means possible done to them to bring justice.    They have made a conscious decision that they want to murder us.  Everything.  Lock them up, throw away the key,  intel them until they are blue, hang them by their ears to talk.  Bring that pussy Eric Holder down to watch.  Nothing is too severe for them.

Pdog wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 9:18am:

Pick one.  To me, it does not matter.  As long as there are persons who want to kill me, my family, my friends, any means of interrogation of individuals or groups by any means is just fine with me.  Graphic images of & stories of friends who perished on 9/11 are indelible in my mind.  We should be forever vigilant.  This is a new time & place.  Until there is better intel on who comes into our country,  we cannot sacrifice an opportunity to check every lead.  These individuals want us dead, why is there a question on anything that needs to be done to safeguard this?

Pdog wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 11:15am:




This is a blatant lie, Pdog!!! That figure is not even close! Please site your sources for this fraudulent number! You rail about Constitutional rights, yet in the very same breath you are ready to hand over all of your medical choices to the federal government! Funny! The very same federal government that has managed to destroy the housing, banking, and auto industries, just to name three of their most recent colossal fuck ups, you're going to trust with you family's health care?!?!?! Really?!?!?! Wow!!!! If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome, then you, my friend, are insane.

You are the very definition of a drone! You put all your faith in the very instruments of government that brought our economy to the brink ( pssst....Bush had very little to do with it!!!!), and then in a drone-like fashion you accuse greedy big buisness for screwing people over. My god son, you need to pull your head out of your ass and read!!! How about I cite the amount of people that the American health care system has saved and compare it those systems that are up and running in the UK, Canada, etc. Suffice it to say, our health care system is vastly superior to theirs, and if you don't know that for a fact that only means that you are clueless on this subject. Read!!!! Get your news from other outlets besides the idiots on MSNBC, CNN, or the shitty HuffPo.



You think that the government should be the panacea for the masses? The opiate for the masses, if you will? Well that is the exact opposite way that the Founding Fathers thought! So, that means, that what you are proposing is un-American. Gee, a liberal suggesting something that is wholly un-American. Color me shocked.


People that can't afford health care still get it Pdog!!!! By law, in fact!! It's called Medicaid, and your boy Barry is about to destroy that program too! Medicaid is set to be totally bankrupt by 2030, and Medicare soon thereafter. He is also proposing to lower the entitlement age for Medicare to 55 (currently it's at 65) at the same time he's talking of slashing over 500 billion dollars from the Medicare budget!!! So he wants to lower the age of eligibility, increasing the Medicare rolls by hundreds of thousands of people (a leftarded plan to get more people dependant on big brother, btw ), at the same time he plans on slashing the budget by a half a trillion dollars!!!!! Want to help me understand how that is going to work without the government rationing care and dictating who gets treatment, and goes to an early grave! See, Sarah Palin was 100% right about the death panels, and some people are just too stupid to see it, or are too emotionally invested in the worst president, and congress in US history to admit it!!


Take a look at what is happening in Greece right now, Pdog. That is the end result of handing the government almost omnipotent power. They go bust, and take their population with them! There has never been an instance in history where that has not been the case! Yet, you think that this time the Democrats will get it right?! And you have the unmittigated gall to say that the Tea Party attendees are whack jobs?!?!?! God you have been brainwashed beyond help!!



You have no desire to understand the truth. None! You have your mind made up, and nothing is going to change it. Even the lessons of history must take a backseat to your worldview. In that way you are very much like Obama. Be proud. I would personally hang my head in shame if anyone ever compared me to that piece of shit Barry, but you? Well, be proud, I guess.


Riffy

Pdog wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 11:15am:

Hey Tex, follow my lead.
Do some investigation about how the people on AA 11 in business class died on 9/11.
Make certain you read every shred of description.  I knew one of these people who died. 
That says it all.  I have my reasons.  They are not changing.  I'm not for anything which
lessens the grip on finding anyone who wants to cause harm.  Tap a phone-check at the rmv-
watch what books are checked out at the library-it's all good.  Those terrorists who took flying lessons, if our country was more secure in the day, who knows what could have been prevented.,

As much as you get your rocks off calling people names, does not phase me in the least. 
Just shows your true colors.  Good luck with your life, we are done.

3/5 of a man? Affluent only governance? Women can't vote? There is some SHIT in there too.
Slaves were running to the Brits during the Revolutionary War, and the Brits were giving them sanctuary.
George Washington heard of this and told his soldiers to shoot them.

When better ideas surface, they need to be considered. Period.


Oh yeah funman, show me your reference on these blatant lies. You're such a fucking drone, you don't even know it.
You're an idealogue. I will laugh at you in November. Laugh I tell you !!!! Hahahahahahahahah !!!!!!!!!

fuman wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 12:37pm:




Funman, you need to understand something, and that is this....you understand very little. Better ideas should never involve surrendering individual rights to garner more power to a centralized government. Period.


Can you please tell me the history of the 3/5ths man provison? I'll hang up and listen. Thank you.



Riffy

Great goolge work Pdog! Now can you articulate the brilliance of the 3/5ths of a man compromise? Here's a hint, the left's definition of this bit of history is always wrong. Always!



Riffy

Reagan On Torture Prosecutions
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/04/reagan-on-torture-p...

From his signing statement ratifying the UN Convention on Torture from 1984:

"The United States participated actively and effectively in the negotiation of the Convention . It marks a significant step in the development during this century of international measures against torture and other inhuman treatment or punishment. Ratification of the Convention by the United States will clearly express United States opposition to torture, an abhorrent practice unfortunately still prevalent in the world today.

The core provisions of the Convention establish a regime for international cooperation in the criminal prosecution of torturers relying on so-called 'universal jurisdiction.' Each State Party is required either to prosecute torturers who are found in its territory or to extradite them to other countries for prosecution."

My italics. Reagan was adamant about prosecuting torture, but also prosecuting inhuman treatment that some might claim was not full-on torture.

Now go read National Review or The Weekly Standard. And look what has happened to conservatism in America.

More people are murdered in the L.A. basin area alone per-year from arms(guns) than in ALL of Iraq during the whole occupation.
This is a prophetic warning from a Republican:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

Pdog wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 1:22pm:




Again, there you go with calling me an authoritarian, when the fact is that I am the one person in this debate between the two of us that wholeheartedly rejects all forms of authoritarian control from a large centralized government. I am anything, but an authoritarian! I, unlike so many of today's liberals, believe in the unwavering rights of the individual!

The 3/5ths provision was brilliant! Why? Because back in the days when the Constitution was being ratified by the states the South was the economic powerhouse of our new nation. This was pre-industrial revolution, after all. The Founders, most notably John Adams and James Madison, were strong supporters of slaves rights. They did not believe in the practice of slavery at all, and wanted it abolished. However, they were men of their times, and as such had to devise a way of eventually making the practice of slavery untenable. Even Jefferson, a slave owner himself, knew that the very preamble of the Declaration of Independence was at odds with the notion of slavery. That is why the Founders, Jefferson among them, wrote provisions into the Constitution that would eventually kill the practice of it outright.

By only counting slaves has 3/5ths of a man they limited the southern states the legislative power to overwhelm the congress with a pro slavery position. The Founders knew that the southern states were never going to grant slaves the right to vote, so Adams, Madison, etc. devised the 3/5ths provision in order to thwart the Southern states the representation of a large portion of their populations that would never be granted any representation to begin with. This is one of the reasons that the Civil War took so long to occur. Once the Industrial Revolution was in full swing the northern states were financially in the driver's seat, and they advanced the abolitionist movement which led to the Civil War. Which is not to say that the slavery issue was the sole reason for the Civil War. The main reason was the stop the dissolution of the country via the southern stated seceding from the Union. Lincoln played the slaves rights issue up as way of ginning up support for the war, and he did this by playing the hand that the Founding Fathers had dealt him. Brilliant, huh?! Absolutely! Do you think Obama is that smart? Fat chance! Pelosi? LOL! Reid? Please!

Fast forward 200 plus years, and liberals today try and point to the 3/5ths provision as way of proving that he Founding Fathers were backwards in their way of dealing with the slavery issue, and frankly, were bigots. This, of course, is complete and utter bullshit, and is just one example of the lie of liberalism. This is the way that modern day liberals think. But these brilliant intellectual libs have removed the debate from the context of the time, and have perverted the actual intention of the 3/5ths provision as a way of trying to cast the Constitution as "living and breathing". It's just one more example of liberals rewriting history in order to advance the lie of liberalism.

By inserting the 3/5ths provision the Founders were doing the only thing that they could given the economic realities and mores of their day. However, they were brilliant because they knew full well that they were only kicking the can down the road until such time as the rights of all would be forced on the young republic, by either law, or war. Then along came the founder of the Republican Party, Abraham Lincoln, and the rest, as they say, is history.


Too bad there are not more people inside Washington that were as wise as the Founding Fathers. These clowns running the show now aren't even fit to polish the boots of these great men!



Riffy


PS-There is no strawman argument from me in this debate at all. I am merely shinning the light on the realities of our shared history. No strawman there my friend.

Riffhard wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 5:13pm:


b/c a bunch of guys with some good ideas accepted slavery, and treated those matters in a political way, to advance their other ideals, doesn't now or then make slavery ok, nor does it make the dehumization of slaves for a politcal purpose ok. It was a cancer, and in many ways must still be dealt with... a kind of making ammends as a country for our past sins... you don't like it b/c it insults many things you call iberal lies, which are not liberal lies, they are crimes against humanity. Slavery wasn't a neccesary evil, it was a crime against human beings. made legal by our constitution. abolished by a war, that like most wars, was more about economics than morals... like you said yourself, those morals come later to justify... sound familiar? the reason that it was so easy for the comprmoise, was that they people in question were already considered less than human, they were a commodity, with no rights or protection under the constitution and laws... Even most abolishnists, didn't want former slaves living with them... doesn't surprise me one bit, that the sons and daughters of slaves, are people that still seem to be the same people who suffer the most from the politcal ideals you seem to be for/ or more so against.

Pdog wrote on Feb 20^th, 2010 at 6:01pm:




So by that very strange measure what you're saying is that the Founding Fathers should have acknowledged slaves as a "full man" politically, and thus given the southern states the legislative sledgehammer to keep them in shackles permanently?


Go read a little history, Pdog. Madison, and Adams, among many of the Founding Fathers, did not agree with slavery at all! It wasn't about political expediency my man! It was the reality of the 18th century world that they lived in! They had the foresight to write into the US Constitution provisions that would eventually lead to the abolishment of slavery on a national level! The 3/5ths of a man provision was designed to help the very slaves that the slave states treated as chattel!!


And yes, liberalism is a lie! A complete sham that only intellectually lazy, or pompous people still cling to.



Riffy