RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment!

RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

NorthernGent -> RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment! (3/26/2007 10:09:41 AM)
Ron told the story, Firmhand. I'll add: Individuals retain sovereignty over their rights. Locke's stance seems inconsistent with imposing a value system upon a people.

Mercnbeth -> RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment! (3/26/2007 10:22:25 AM)
quote: Individuals retain sovereignty over their rights. But you personally don't believe that NG do you? You are in favor of imposing a value system upon a people consistent with your views regarding relatively minor issues such as smoking and diet; as well as major issues such as redistribution of wealth, and national sovereignty in general. You seek a world were individual "rights" are as you, and those who agree with you, define them. I won't argue that those in positions 180 degrees in opposition have that same goal in mind. I only point to it as a response to the quote you used, and to ask if you have it as a general reference to Locke or a point of your position.

NorthernGent -> RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment! (3/26/2007 11:42:45 AM)
Try the "Purpose of the State and the Social Contract" thread for some ideas.

Mercnbeth -> RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment! (3/26/2007 11:45:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: NorthernGent Try the "Purpose of the State and the Social Contract" thread for some ideas. No thanks. Your obtuse answer to a simple question; "I only point to it as a response to the quote you used, and to ask if you have it as a general reference to Locke or a point of your position." is answer enough. Thanks for confirmation and clarifying.

domiguy -> RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment! (3/26/2007 11:48:23 AM)
I agree our right to bear arms must always be protected and I can understand the NRA's fight against any form of "banning" weapons from assault rifles on down the list to "cop killer" bullets...If you give an inch they will take a mile...And it won't be long till they are coming after your handguns and hunting rifles.

Real0ne -> RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment! (3/26/2007 6:25:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy I agree our right to bear arms must always be protected and I can understand the NRA's fight against any form of "banning" weapons from assault rifles on down the list to "cop killer" bullets...If you give an inch they will take a mile...And it won't be long till they are coming after your handguns and hunting rifles. well interestingly the costitution specifically states arms.... heh heh... therefore we can have a bazooka if we want or an f16 by strict definition. LOL

FirmhandKY -> RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment! (3/26/2007 7:01:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy I agree our right to bear arms must always be protected and I can understand the NRA's fight against any form of "banning" weapons from assault rifles on down the list to "cop killer" bullets...If you give an inch they will take a mile...And it won't be long till they are coming after your handguns and hunting rifles. well interestingly the costitution specifically states arms.... heh heh... therefore we can have a bazooka if we want or an f16 by strict definition. LOL I've seen the same arguments, R0, and they sound pretty good with me as well. Although, they couldn't quite get the private ownership of nuclear weapons fitted it .... [:D] FirmKY

Real0ne -> RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment! (3/27/2007 6:50:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: domiguy I agree our right to bear arms must always be protected and I can understand the NRA's fight against any form of "banning" weapons from assault rifles on down the list to "cop killer" bullets...If you give an inch they will take a mile...And it won't be long till they are coming after your handguns and hunting rifles. well interestingly the costitution specifically states arms.... heh heh... therefore we can have a bazooka if we want or an f16 by strict definition. LOL I've seen the same arguments, R0, and they sound pretty good with me as well. Although, they couldn't quite get the private ownership of nuclear weapons fitted it .... [:D] FirmKY yeh and i dont think i could fit one in my garage either.

SirDiscipliner69 -> RE: Sure you been in the same century as most of Us? (3/31/2007 2:17:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse Why didn't Bill Clinton go under oath to explain his firing of all 93 prosecuters?? Talk about a double standard. My question to you is why do the Bush administration fear BEING under oath to testify? It seems the tip of the iceberg is being seen and the administration is steaming full speed toward it. Some never seem to learn from history. Ross ©º°¨¨°º©

SirDiscipliner69 -> RE: What is George Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica (3/31/2007 2:19:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: SirDiscipliner69 Might you then explain this: Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article1495077.ece If that is not hypocracy showings what might be? Your ease of assuming facts not in evidence is what is showing. Just what is it again that I am assuming here? When someone admits to something or it is proven how might that be an assumption? Some of the Republicans at least had the decency (or fear to be found ourt) to sep aside as they were also guilty of such hedonistic pleasures. Ross ©º°¨¨°º©

SirDiscipliner69 -> RE: latest emails relating to the firings of U.S.RE: George Bush's Watergate and the numerous cover-ups. (3/31/2007 2:21:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Transdromeda quote: ORIGINAL: SirDiscipliner69 quote: ORIGINAL: pahunkboy bush and nixon in the same post? egads. Last night, the Justice Department released the latest emails relating to the firings of U.S. Attorneys. They appear to further implicate Karl Rove and Alberto Gonzales in the affair. Read the Karl Rove email http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/doj/smpsnwh105emails.html actual copy of it Ross ©º°¨¨°º© what affair??? the president has the right to fire any us attourny he wants to at any time for any reason like Clinton firing all 93 attorneys. That is his power according to the constitution. He has the right to have his attourneys on board with his priorities. there is no scandal here. His mistake is trying to explain something that needs no explanation. The same way he can fire any of his cabinet or generals. Six days later and do you still feel the same now that things are starting to come to light? What about that little thing call testifying under oath? Ross ©º°¨¨°º©

SirDiscipliner69 -> RE: If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him...and as f (3/31/2007 2:25:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Transdromeda quote: ORIGINAL: SirDiscipliner69 [If you remember your history th election was stolen from us...we did not really elect him... the election was not stolen. the ballots were designed and approved by democrats. if the people voting knew there was a problem with their vote they would have revoted. the butterfly ballot has been used succesfully in thousands of other precints and elections. I used it once i just made sure the hole and the line went to the person i meant it to and that was before 2000 i was smart enough to check that. The supreme court stepped in because there was a standard way of interpreting ballots that the florida supreme court was trying to change in the middle of an election. If that was allowed to stand no future election would be safe from changing rules and every election would end up in court. The democrats tried to deny the absentee military ballots from being included and when Gore got his recounts he didnt recount the whole state just the counties that would be beneficial to him. which is an illegal recount. later there were found errors in bushs favor in counties favorable to him which erros in Gore's favor didnt offset. No. It was stolen. Misappropriated. Messed with. The only reason it did not go to court and be dealt with in the correct maner is the country would have experienced termoil and discorse that would have been far worse than to have the election stolen. Ross ©º°¨¨°º©

FirmhandKY -> RE: What is George Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica (3/31/2007 12:33:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirDiscipliner69 quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: SirDiscipliner69 Might you then explain this: Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica [long url removed] If that is not hypocracy showings what might be? Your ease of assuming facts not in evidence is what is showing. Just what is it again that I am assuming here? When someone admits to something or it is proven how might that be an assumption? Some of the Republicans at least had the decency (or fear to be found ourt) to sep aside as they were also guilty of such hedonistic pleasures. Perhaps too much time has gone by, and you don't remember the actual conversation. It would help if you actually quoted what I said, and not attempt to redact the actual point I made, nor the point of yours that I was refuting. In my post 19, addressing FB: It's a show trial. Just as the Plame hearings were show trials. Your response in post 76: Might you then explain this: Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica [long url removed] If that is not hypocracy showings what might be? My full quote in post 100 is: Your ease of assuming facts not in evidence is what is showing. Of course that was a show trial as well. It was wrong then. It is wrong now. The criminalization of political dissent is one of the worst things to happen to our republic in the last 50 years. You are attempting to say I was a hypocrite, because of the Republican attempts to impeach Clinton Administration, involving the Lewinsky affair. Your "ease of assuming facts not in evidence" error is in assuming that I think that those attempts would not be considered "show trials". I think they were as well. Any questions? FirmKY

caitlyn -> RE: What is George Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica (3/31/2007 1:51:18 PM)
Stop these deflection tactics FirmhandKY ... tell us what we really want to know. Who exactly was craving power to the point that they were willing to have an affair with Newt Gingrich? [;)][;)]

farglebargle -> RE: What is George Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica (3/31/2007 4:11:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn Stop these deflection tactics FirmhandKY ... tell us what we really want to know. Who exactly was craving power to the point that they were willing to have an affair with Newt Gingrich? [;)][;)] RUSH LIMBAUGH

luckydog1 -> RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment! (3/31/2007 5:44:30 PM)
Technically the F16 is a vehicle right? You can take the weopons off of it, and just fly it around. I am not sure we have the right to any sort of vehicle we want. Sure, lets make bazookas legal, though lets have the death penalty for misuse/negligence.

Sinergy -> RE: HEY - Screw the 17th Amendment! (3/31/2007 6:06:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckydog1 Technically the F16 is a vehicle right? You can take the weopons off of it, and just fly it around. I am not sure we have the right to any sort of vehicle we want. Sure, lets make bazookas legal, though lets have the death penalty for misuse/negligence. Who defines "misuse" and "negligence?" It is a slippery slope. Give the power to define "misuse" and "negligence" to the Government (or anybody else) and you have restrictions on weaponry which are specifically prohibited by the second amendment. Not saying it is necessarily wrong, or that I have an answer. I am just not all that convinced that when an armored tank unit drives up your driveway because you failed to pay $200 for a gun, that your assault rifle is going to be much help. Which is pretty much the reason that a non-gun-owning peacenik like myself votes against people who propose bans on assault rifles. A gun is only as dangerous as the nut behind the trigger. Prevent nuts from having assault rifles, and they will kill people with rat poison or a Ford Taurus. Sinerg

SirDiscipliner69 -> RE: What is George Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica (4/1/2007 9:08:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY You are attempting to say I was a hypocrite, because of the Republican attempts to impeach Clinton Administration, involving the Lewinsky affair. The only difference I see between Nixon and Bush between Watergate and Viet Nam Bush has not used National Guard to shoot student protestors like Nixon did at Ohio State. "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses." Ross ©º°¨¨°º©

SirDiscipliner69 -> RE: What is George Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica (4/1/2007 9:12:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn Who exactly was craving power to the point that they were willing to have an affair with Newt Gingrich? [;)][;)] Power and the lust of power makes for a powerful aphrodisiac.... Many women have been lured to politicians like a moth to a flame.... "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses." Ross ©º°¨¨°º©

FirmhandKY -> RE: What is George Gingrich had affair while hounding Clinton over Monica (4/3/2007 12:51:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SirDiscipliner69 quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY You are attempting to say I was a hypocrite, because of the Republican attempts to impeach Clinton Administration, involving the Lewinsky affair. The only difference I see between Nixon and Bush between Watergate and Viet Nam Bush has not used National Guard to shoot student protestors like Nixon did at Ohio State. "Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses." And this has what to do with what I said? Quite running around in your head, SirD. Many of us don't suffer from the same dementia. Or are you so blind to your own partisan viewpoint that you can't handle it when someone agrees with you about a point? FirmKY

Page: << < prev 8 9 10 [11] 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875