RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing?

RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

lockedaway -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 5:49:47 PM)
Good God, man, what are you saying? I absolutely know the definition and the permutations of socialism. We HAVE socialism in this country. We have it for the super rich whose destructive debt got nationalized and we have it for the super poor that pay nothing. Capitalism only exists in the middle. What are you trying to tell me. That total socialism is bad but I should endure more of it than there already is? I reject that argument.

Real0ne -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 5:50:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: unless of course you deny the point that the US is based on majority rule. It manifestly isn't. Never was. Isn't now, quite, thank God and the Founders. It was based on individual rights and property rights and States rights, all of which have been severely eroded and all of which are threatened with extinction. I agree that it's not yet time to take up arms, but the key word is yet and the trendline is alarming. So, you maintain that the majority of voters do not decide who holds office? If that is the case why the hell do we hold elections? so that we can scratch our butts wondering how the voting machines can come up with - as in MINUS -11000 votes.... I guess those were antimatter voters! LMAO Oh oh oh... then the supreme court gets to elect the prez for ya!

Real0ne -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 5:52:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave Oh please jlf. I maintain that the rights that were to have been immune regardless of who elected whom have been severely eroded and are threatened with extinction. The Constitution is a bulwark against the tyranny of the majority. Once again: as you well know. We have real differences we can discuss, you know. No need to invent them. what does immunity mean? It means he is NOT in the same jurisdiction you are! Now the question you all need to ask is how can that possibly be???

slvemike4u -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 5:56:19 PM)
So amongst other unsavory attributes you add cad to the list.It is my understanding that you identify as a sub...how is that working out for you?

VideoAdminTheta -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 5:56:44 PM)
Good Evening Everyone. Let's refrain from attacking one another and continue with some good debate. Thank you

Owner59 -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 5:57:01 PM)
You may shush too,it`s your right as an American....[:D]

truckinslave -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 5:57:41 PM)
quote: Creating a constitution as in creating law once codified, no longer contains any needed mechanism or requires society to consult the 'opinions' or thoughts (quotes) of those who codified. SCOTUS frequently consults and cites the writings of those who wrote/enacted specific legislation. They do the same with the very debates leading to the passage of whatever law is under consideration. The federal judge who just allowed the key portions of the Fl anti-0bama0Care suit to go forward noted Senate debates that said the insurance requirement was not a tax and contratsted that with the federal argument in court that it was a tax. He said they shouldn't be allowed to have it both ways. Simply put, you could hardly be more wrong.

VideoAdminTheta -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 5:58:25 PM)
LOL that one didn't look so good! As we were! Enjoy the good debate!

slvemike4u -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 6:02:06 PM)
Wow owner ,that took some balls...imagine telling Theta to shut up.....not terribly polite of you but I suppose you thought it was justified [:D]

VideoAdminTheta -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 6:03:07 PM)
[:D][:D][:D]

slvemike4u -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 6:04:18 PM)
Thanks for taking that in the whimsicle spirit it was intended.....lol.

pahunkboy -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 6:12:25 PM)
Re the voting machines- "they" sure act like they are fair. Locally we have them and I dont like them. The poll worker looks to make sure you are ok. I resent that. My vote is private unless I choose to tell anyone.

MrRodgers -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 6:24:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway Good God, man, what are you saying? I absolutely know the definition and the permutations of socialism. We HAVE socialism in this country. We have it for the super rich whose destructive debt got nationalized and we have it for the super poor that pay nothing. Capitalism only exists in the middle. What are you trying to tell me. That total socialism is bad but I should endure more of it than there already is? I reject that argument. I have been writing and arguing that for 30 years. We have had 'socialism' for the rich and capitalism for everybody else for all of them. As for 'total' socialism...there has been no country in history that has adopted 'total' socialism. Plus, so what ? Even our taxpayer-insured, govt. run, laissez faire oligarchy has been infinitely more costly to society than anything close to just food stamps, welfare or Medicare. The problem politically is that the right now rants over the type of govt....they helped start and eagerly imposed for those 30 years only the worst of which was...the last 8. I tend to write what I am trying to tell people most of which is simply the egregious hypocrisy of the right complaining about what they themselves started and now ask us to believe and vote for them again, promising they...won't drink anymore. Even my father, republican-for-life rightie stopped voting for them after Bush the elder...and stopped voting period.

pahunkboy -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 6:40:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MrRodgers quote: ORIGINAL: lockedaway Good God, man, what are you saying? I absolutely know the definition and the permutations of socialism. We HAVE socialism in this country. We have it for the super rich whose destructive debt got nationalized and we have it for the super poor that pay nothing. Capitalism only exists in the middle. What are you trying to tell me. That total socialism is bad but I should endure more of it than there already is? I reject that argument. I have been writing and arguing that for 30 years. We have had 'socialism' for the rich and capitalism for everybody else for all of them. As for 'total' socialism...there has been no country in history that has adopted 'total' socialism. Plus, so what ? Even our taxpayer-insured, govt. run, laissez faire oligarchy has been infinitely more costly to society than anything close to just food stamps, welfare or Medicare. The problem politically is that the right now rants over the type of govt....they helped start and eagerly imposed for those 30 years only the worst of which was...the last 8. I tend to write what I am trying to tell people most of which is simply the egregious hypocrisy of the right complaining about what they themselves started and now ask us to believe and vote for them again, promising they...won't drink anymore. Even my father, republican-for-life rightie stopped voting for them after Bush the elder...and stopped voting period. You said it!! Good post.

Owner59 -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 7:29:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Wow owner ,that took some balls...imagine telling Theta to shut up.....not terribly polite of you but I suppose you thought it was justified [:D] Thank goodness for (in reply too......) [:D]

slvemike4u -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 7:33:02 PM)
Yep..

MrRodgers -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 7:45:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: Creating a constitution as in creating law once codified, no longer contains any needed mechanism or requires society to consult the 'opinions' or thoughts (quotes) of those who codified. SCOTUS frequently consults and cites the writings of those who wrote/enacted specific legislation. They do the same with the very debates leading to the passage of whatever law is under consideration. The federal judge who just allowed the key portions of the Fl anti-0bama0Care suit to go forward noted Senate debates that said the insurance requirement was not a tax and contratsted that with the federal argument in court that it was a tax. He said they shouldn't be allowed to have it both ways. Simply put, you could hardly be more wrong. quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave There are hundreds of quoted fro the Founders supporting my contention that they recognized the need for an armed populace so that the citizenry could overthrow any government that became oppressive. And you know it. You're just being petty. quote: With this you begin to debate what was on their minds. (quotes ?) Creating a constitution as in creating law once codified, no longer contains any needed mechanism or requires society to consult the 'opinions' or thoughts (quotes) of those who codified. The only exception being whether a given law violates sections of the const. and is subject to a federal court challenge and only from those who have standing to bring a suit. I've emboldened the area because it seems you didn't read it. Leave it to the latest SCOTUS to only now suggest what the framers 'really' meant after 100 years of what it 'really' meant. Seems the constitution does read and despite or because of society at the time, quotes and all, does not contain or allow an individual right for 'everybody' to own a gun anymore than the 1st amend. empowers one to yell fire in a theater (unless it's true) or society's individual right to own a Howitzer. The SCOTUS is the only venue in my mind that has any rights for dispositive review and very rarely at that. As for so-called Obamacare, if it is unconstitutional...so is medicare, plus drug, milk and crop subsidies, medicaid, food stamps, unequal bankruptcy laws, FDIC bank insurance, all govt.insurance, anti-trust law exemptions and a whole host of the cherished, corporate welfare state 'programs.'. We already know who will suffer most if [it] is ruled in violation.

truckinslave -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 7:58:51 PM)
quote: Seems the constitution does read and despite or because of society at the time, quotes and all, does not contain or allow an individual right for 'everybody' to own a gun SCOTUS recently affirmed the individual right for "everybody" to own guns. As nearly as I can tell youi didn't address my point that SCOTUS frequently uses the very guidelines you denied they use. If English is your second language, I understand it's very hard to learn. If not, well, I just have no idea what you're trying to say.

Real0ne -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 9:16:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: truckinslave quote: Seems the constitution does read and despite or because of society at the time, quotes and all, does not contain or allow an individual right for 'everybody' to own a gun SCOTUS recently affirmed the individual right for "everybody" to own guns. As nearly as I can tell youi didn't address my point that SCOTUS frequently uses the very guidelines you denied they use. If English is your second language, I understand it's very hard to learn. If not, well, I just have no idea what you're trying to say. so what do ya think? Another 200 years and they will add bear? Oh and its arms not guns, and that means tanks bazookas and nukes.

Real0ne -> RE: Is this a threat? sedition? or just posturing? (10/22/2010 9:37:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Well, if the right wing extremists who are saying this do try an armed revolt, it would get our troops out of Afghanistan. \ in violation of the posse commitatus act?

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625