Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
I know exactly whats in the patriot act. VERY familiar with it. Still waiting to here what civil liberties you have given up and possibly how it has affected your life?
Why would anyone think they know more about government than Jefferson?
Because something doesnt affect me personally than that makes it right? Wow that would make the Holocaust right. Didnt affect me or my family.
BTW I listed ones that affect me. The Department of Education and its affects, affect me personally and every American.
Imminante Domain is another right the federal government has that the COnstitution doe snot allow.
How about the fact that the executive branch can go to war with whomever he wants? The constitution forbids that. There is a reason the founding fathers did not want one man with that power. They called a man with that power "King" and didnt want one. Thats why these wars are considered illegal. Congress has not authorised war.
In fact since 1945 the UN has authorized the US to go to war more than Congress. Scary.
So many more. Shane you are where I was a year back. A lot of study, listening, and reading since then. Take the time to look into this stuff as well.
There is a great story about Davey Crickett going into the country prior to reelection and meeting a man he said he would not vote for him because he voted to give a women who lost her husband 20 thousand dollars. "That money was not your to give". You should look that up. Meanwhile our federal government illegally gives our money to whatever whim they have.
Did you know the federal government limits the amount of sugar that is imports to keep prices high? There are not many sugar farmers here so a few get a whole lot of money while the price is paid by millions of Americans which only amounts to 50$/year for each American. Not enough to fight against but theft just the same.
The true Rebulican party stood for a smaller and less powerful US Governemnt. Republicans were voted in to stop Korea, to stop Vietnam. Anti-war has been the Republican party platform much longer than this pro war stance.
Anyway I wont respond to anymore of your posts. You can pursuade those that dont want to leanr or try to understand. Its one of the reasons Paul isnt winning. Most americans are lazy and just follow what the talking heads tell them.
As Paul said we shouldn't be arguing over the amounts spent on various programs we should be debating whether or not those programs should even be in existance.
Obabma, Clinton, McCain, your essentially voting for the same person with just a monor difference here or there.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
__________________
Goal for 2008: Half as many penalties.
Last edited by swd1974; May 20th, 2008 at 03:53 PM.
Because something doesnt affect me personally than that makes it right? Wow that would make the Holocaust right. Didnt affect me or my family.
BTW I listed ones that affect me. The Department of Education and its affects, affect me personally and every American.
Imminante Domain is another right the federal government has that the COnstitution doe snot allow.
How about the fact that the executive branch can go to war with whomever he wants? The constitution forbids that. There is a reason the founding fathers did not want one man with that power. They called a man with that power "King" and didnt want one. Thats why these wars are considered illegal. Congress has not authorised war.
In fact since 1945 the UN has authorized the US to go to war more than Congress. Scary.
So many more. Shane you are where I was a year back. A lot of study, listening, and reading since then. Take the time to look into this stuff as well.
There is a great story about Davey Crickett going into the country prior to reelection and meeting a man he said he would not vote for him because he voted to give a women who lost her husband 20 thousand dollars. "That money was not your to give". You should look that up. Meanwhile our federal government illegally gives our money to whatever whim they have.
Did you know the federal government limits the amount of sugar that is important to keep prices high? There are not many sugar farmers here so a few get a whole lot of money while the price is paid by millions of Americans which only amounts to 50$/year for each American. Not enough to fight against but theft just the same.
The true Rebulican party stood for a smaller and less powerful US Governemnt. Republicans were voted in to stop Korea, to stop Vietnam. Anti-war has been the Republican party platform much longer than this pro war stance.
Anyway I wont respond to anymore of your posts. You can pursuade those that dont want to leanr or try to understand. Its one of the reasons Paul isnt winning. Most americans are lazy and just follow what the talking heads tell them.
As Paul said we should be arguing over the amounts spent on various programs we should be debating whether or not those programs should even be in existance.
Obabma, Clinton, McCain, your essentially voting for the same person with just a monor difference here or there.
Most americans are lazy and just follow what the talking heads tell them.
For some reason this tact of yours really bothers me, SWD. Just because someone doesn't support Paul or believe in his platform doesn't make them less smart or a "sheep." It means they don't agree with him. That's okay, too.
I'm a huge Paul supporter, but his message isn't SO good that if you aren't buying you're some kind of head-in-the-sand republican or democratic robot.
__________________ America cannot have an empire abroad and a Republic at home.
The true Rebulican party stood for a smaller and less powerful US Governemnt. Republicans were voted in to stop Korea, to stop Vietnam. Anti-war has been the Republican party platform much longer than this pro war stance.
I think it's interesting that the party philosophies has flipped. To remain consistent, Democrats should be in favor of government involvement abroad (because they obviously have a belief that government programs at home should work), while republicans should have the tact that less government is the way to go abroad (as it is here at home).
I know those lines even at home have become very muddy, but I still think in the theoretical sense it's pretty interesting.
__________________ America cannot have an empire abroad and a Republic at home.
Indeed it does... though IMO, I think over time we'll see that there were more similarities between McCain and Hilary, and Obama will become more exposed as a more radical lefty... but I could be wrong...
Indeed it does... though IMO, I think over time we'll see that there were more similarities between McCain and Hilary, and Obama will become more exposed as a more radical lefty... but I could be wrong...
I'd love to hear them if you'd care to list them for us all. I guess we need the similarities and how Obama's difference makes him more "radical lefty".
I'd love to hear them if you'd care to list them for us all. I guess we need the similarities and how Obama's difference makes him more "radical lefty".
Hard to do at this point... As I said, "over time" I believe Obama will prove to be much further left than Hilary... much... But then again, I could be wrong...
See, contrary to what the Obama "...pers" believe, Obama has not been vetted nearly enough to warrant serious consideration for the most powerful position on the planet. In relative terms, we really don't know the guy at all...And what has surfaced thus far has many people rattled...
Contrary to what many on the left would like everyone to believe, McCain is not your average, every day Republican. Hilary is much further center than Barack, and McCain is one of the more centrist Repubs that exist today.
Therefore, I see Hilary and McCain as being much closer - politically - than Obama would be to either of them. But again, I could be wrong and 4 years from now, Obama might prove otherwise. Guess we'll all know soon enough...
Hard to do at this point... As I said, "over time" I believe Obama will prove to be much further left than Hilary... much... But then again, I could be wrong...
See, contrary to what the Obama "...pers" believe, Obama has not been vetted nearly enough to warrant serious consideration for the most powerful position on the planet. In relative terms, we really don't know the guy at all...And what has surfaced thus far has many people rattled...
Contrary to what many on the left would like everyone to believe, McCain is not your average, every day Republican. Hilary is much further center than Barack, and McCain is one of the more centrist Repubs that exist today.
Therefore, I see Hilary and McCain as being much closer - politically - than Obama would be to either of them. But again, I could be wrong and 4 years from now, Obama might prove otherwise. Guess we'll all know soon enough...
On the other side, I think McCain is too vetted. I think he is too old for the job, and his temper might get the best of him. I think he'd be too quick with his trigger finger.
On the other side, I think McCain is too vetted. I think he is too old for the job, and his temper might get the best of him. I think he'd be too quick with his trigger finger.
Hard to do at this point... As I said, "over time" I believe Obama will prove to be much further left than Hilary... much... But then again, I could be wrong...
See, contrary to what the Obama "...pers" believe, Obama has not been vetted nearly enough to warrant serious consideration for the most powerful position on the planet. In relative terms, we really don't know the guy at all...And what has surfaced thus far has many people rattled...
Contrary to what many on the left would like everyone to believe, McCain is not your average, every day Republican. Hilary is much further center than Barack, and McCain is one of the more centrist Repubs that exist today.
Therefore, I see Hilary and McCain as being much closer - politically - than Obama would be to either of them. But again, I could be wrong and 4 years from now, Obama might prove otherwise. Guess we'll all know soon enough...
So, there is no way to tell if Obama is actually far more left than the centrist Clinton and McCain but you're going to tell us exactly that by referring to them as such?
Is there any reason for this other than because you want to label them? Seriously I'd like to know your reasoning in specifics if you don't mind.
So, there is no way to tell if Obama is actually far more left than the centrist Clinton and McCain but you're going to tell us exactly that by referring to them as such?
Is there any reason for this other than because you want to label them? Seriously I'd like to know your reasoning in specifics if you don't mind.
Sorry dude... don't have the time to do this one justice...
1.) Of all the Dem candidates that ran, is it really a stretch to suggest that Hilary was closest to center of them all (note - I am not calling her a "centrist")?
2.) Of all the Repub. candidates than ran, is it really a stretch to suggest that McCain was the closest to center of them all?
3.) Obamski? Who knows...
Linear Mode
