Still justifying killing, I see. Pathetic, flawed logic.
"A lot of things that are alive don't have heartbeats. A lot of things that have heartbeats aren't human beings."
Yeah, Bob, plants, trees , cars vs. Humans, sea life, pets? Which would you save first?
Your obsession with analogies, and ridiculous comparisons truly suck. |
|
"Victim is a person."
Who says? You? The various dictionaries don't, they say that some victims are people, others are animals, institutions, even abstract concepts. ("Creationism has been the victim of our increasing understanding of evolution.") I notice you were quite willing to recognize the authority of dictionaries when you were quoting only part of their entries.
"Ask Scott Peterson how that kiling a fetus is working out for him."
That court ruled that Peterson was guilty of first degree murder with special circumstances for killing his wife, and the much lesser charge of second degree murder for killing her unborn son. Why the difference if they're both equivalent human beings?
It has been suggested that the jury included the second murder conviction because that was the only way they could insure that Peterson would never go free. The only way that you don't eventually become eligible for parole under California law is if you're convicted of TWO first or second degree murders with special circumstances. And, of course, juries don't make laws. |
|
Victim is a person. Laws have been passed by congress to protect unborn persons. Your assertion that the unborn victims (people) are not acknowledged by government as such by "the law of the land" is wrong. It doesnt get easier than that. If you can't understand the most basic of premises, then we are all wasting our time responding to you.
Ask Scott Peterson how that kiling a fetus is working out for him....
|
|
"you and the wingbut's contention is that the fetus is not any kind of living creature"
I've never said that a fetus isn't living or a living creature. Pretty much everything we're talking about is living, including the sperm and egg before conception. (That's why I reject "life begins at conception.") What I have said is that a fetus isn't a human being. The laws of the land agree with me.
"your definition just made my case for me and debunked your own."
My definition affirmed your contention that a fetus is a human being? How in the world do you come to that conclusion from what I said? Or are you trying to change your argument in midstream? |
|
|
Each one of your definitions include "LIVING CREATURE" when you and the wingbut's contention is that the fetus is not any kind of living creature, but a mere mass of tissue, your definition just made my case for me and debunked your own....Thanks dude. |
|
"vic·tim /'v?kt?m/ [vik-tim]"
Another dictionary:
"1. (original sense) A living creature which is slain and offered as human or animal sacrifice, usually in a religious rite"
The Oxford English dictionary:
"1. a living creature killed and offered as a sacrifice to some deity or supernatural power"
Webster’s New International Dictionary:
"1. a person or living creature injured, destroyed or sacrificed, in pursuit of an object, in the gratification of a passion, at the hands of another person, from disease, accident or the like."
The fact that some victims are human beings doesn't mean that anything that is a victim is a human being. A dog could be the victim of an auto accident. A bank could be the victim of a robbery. Several hospitals, hedge funds, and charities were the victims of Maddof's ponzi scheme; are charities human beings? |
|
I have female dog in heat slapped you on this point previously...
The government has set a precedent that an unborn human is a human or person. Remember conress passing the "Unborn Vicitims of Violence Act"? (and 32 states have as well)
vic·tim /'v?kt?m/ [vik-tim]
–noun 1. a PERSON who suffers from a destructive or injurious action or agency: a victim of an automobile accident.
Your logic is flawed. Your position is demontrably wrong. Yet you keep coming back for more...
|
|
"I was born at 24 weeks. Should my mother have just let me die or had I grown past the stage of parasite in your eyes?"
The woman should be the one to decide that, right up to the point of birth. If a woman decides that a first-trimester fetus is a human being and shouldn't be killed, that's the way it is. If she decides that a 36-week fetus that she's carrying is not a human being and should be aborted, that's the way it is. It's the woman's choice; I don't get to make that decision, you don't get to make that decision. I may personally believe that it's not a human being, you may believe that it is, but neither one of us has the right to force our opinion on the woman.
At birth, the situation changes and the mother no longer has absolute rights. The state has to be able to protect children from their parents, because parents will sometimes injure or kill their children.
"Like I said, a heartbeat is life, it may not have all its parts but it's a life."
A lot of things that are alive don't have heartbeats. A lot of things that have heartbeats aren't human beings. |
|
You justify murder any way you want Bob, old boy. Knock yourself out. I was born at 24 weeks. Should my mother have just let me die or had I grown past the stage of parasite in your eyes?
Frankly those who advocate abortion advocate the killing of the child at any time. What do I mean?
Well, a baby is born not able to live w/o intervention. It breastfeeds or bottle feeds. Should I kill it because it can't live on its own? Said baby grows and It still depends on me for food, shelter, comfort and assswiping. Damn, kinda like a parasite. I should kill it. It goes off to college,still needs my money, mental support, love. Shitt, still a parasite, but able to hold its own. Damn, I should kill it, because think what I could do with that college tuition I'd save.
Like I said, a heartbeat is life, it may not have all its parts but it's a life. |
|
"Chickens are not humans"
A human fetus is not a human being; it is not a person. Like Teri Schiavo in 2005, it has no sentience nor capability for sentience. It's a mass of tissue. |
|
Chickens are not humans and I already said no matter the analogy good or bad, according to you, that I don't murder humans.
Like a typical liberal you attack rather than debate when you don't like what it said.
It is my opinion that you think it's okay to murder humans and I do not. Enough said. |
|
"So does an unhatched chicken embryo. That doesn't mean it's a human being. Some human beings, midway through a heart transplant, don't have a beating heart. That doesn't mean that for that brief period of time they aren't human beings.
Your logic is appallingly bad. "
What kind of nonsense is this.
A fetus with a beating heart can only be a person, it's not a chicken or a walnut.
Your arguments are as usual so convoluted and inane as to be irrational. |
|
"government small enough to drown in a bathtub"
"When: the last eight years"
Are you serious? Government got small enough to drown in a bathtub after eight years of Bush?
Unhinged.
"People died in far greater numbers of disease, bad food and water, unsafe working conditions, etc"
Small government didn't cause these deaths.
When injury occurs due to negligence or fraud, the injured party should have recourse in the courts to determine guilt.
"Who says they would?"
Some wouldn't. So what? Here comes that evil word again: tolerance. To be tolerant, you must deal with the fact that some folks don't want a nanny-state. Are you tolerant enough to allow me the right to live in a state with a minimal government?
"the state government was significantly less competent than the US government."
Stop! You're killin' me! |
|
"When? Where? And under what circumstances did it fail?"
When: the last eight years.
Where: The US of A.
What circumstances: The circumstances are basically that anyone limited enough to believe it is incompetent to govern.
"Significantly smaller government didn't kill us then, why would it now?"
Sure it did. People died in far greater numbers of disease, bad food and water, unsafe working conditions, etc.
"And who says that state and local governments wouldn't pick up the slack should the Feds not mandate a particular course of action?"
Who says they would? How is a state government intrinsically any different from the federal government? It's a bunch of people, with all the human foibles and weaknesses. I've lived in nine states, from Rhode Island to Texas to California, and in every one of them the state government was significantly less competent than the US government. |
|
"Most of us want to live in a civilized society, not in anarchy."
Don't confound society with government. Government gets authority from the consent of the governed. Not the other way around. With a well-armed populace, this is the way it always is and should be.
|
|
"So your assertion that socialism is coercive is just a tautology?"
In a way. All governments are necessarily coercive. When we get into the different types of governments are where the distinctions lie. Our government was established with checks, balances, and enumerated powers to limit the authority of government as well as 50 percent plus. See Federalist 10. Violence of faction = mob rule or tyranny of the majority.
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa10.htm
All of these things were done because as an institution of coercion, increasing government necessarily means decreasing individual liberty. It's a zero-sum game; liberty and tolerance lose with every compromise, and every increase in the scope of government.
"Do you agree with it? Are such countries socialistic?"
I don't know. Let me do some reading about their history and current events.
"Most of us want to live in a civilized society, not in anarchy."
You know better. "Small government" is not "no government".
"The political philosophy of "government small enough to drown in a bathtub" has been an abject failure."
When? Where? And under what circumstances did it fail?
A century ago Americans worked until the end of January to pay their total tax burden. Now it is in May, and in some places, June.
A century ago saw the greatest number and most profound technological innovations and scientific discoveries in the history of the world, right here in the USA.
Significantly smaller government didn't kill us then, why would it now? And who says that state and local governments wouldn't pick up the slack should the Feds not mandate a particular course of action? Are state and local legislators too ignorant, ill-informed, or stupid to see a need and then address it?
|
|
"Like a Fetus has a beating heart, so does a grown human being."
So does an unhatched chicken embryo. That doesn't mean it's a human being. Some human beings, midway through a heart transplant, don't have a beating heart. That doesn't mean that for that brief period of time they aren't human beings.
Your logic is appallingly bad. |
|
Talk about Nuts!!
apples to apples
oranges to oranges
Citrus is to grapefruit as nuts are to walnuts.
But No standardized test analogy that you deem credible would make me kill or commit murder as a remedy to my carelessness, nor convenience either.
Like a Fetus has a beating heart, so does a grown human being. Cut yours out and let me know how it's working for you. |
|
"You can compare a human to a walnut???"
Have you ever taken any kind of a course in logic or rhetoric, or read a book on logical thinking? Have you taken any kind of standardized tests like the SATs?
"Walnut is to walnut tree as fetus is to grown human being" is a simple analogy, a form understandable by children who have barely achieved literacy. It says nothing about the relationship of walnut to fetus.
I really find it hard to believe that your thought processes are a muddled as you make them out to be. |
|
You can compare a human to a walnut???
A heartbeat means it is a living breathing person, Bob, temporarily supported by it's mother.
A Walnut doesn't have a beating heart. Tell me, Bob are you an animal lover? Do you support animals the way that you support abortion?
How was your life so miserable during the BUsh admin? How did it PERSONALLY affect you? |
|
"And yes, there is coercion. That is the nature of government, all government"
So your assertion that socialism is coercive is just a tautology?
"I've never said that."
Do you agree with it? Are such countries socialistic?
"The only thing that makes a government less coercive is less government."
Most of us want to live in a civilized society, not in anarchy. The political philosophy of "government small enough to drown in a bathtub" has been an abject failure. (Please try to avoid the cliché excuse for such: "it wasn't REALLY tried.") |
|
"But you also claim that countries like Norway and Switzerland are raging socialistic states."
I've never said that.
And yes, there is coercion. That is the nature of government, all government, be it a dictatorship, monarchy, democracy, or like the US, a constitutional republic.
Hiding behind a ballot doesn't make a government benevolent, altruistic, or less coercive. The only thing that makes a government less coercive is less government. |
|
Conservatives won't condemn you for admitting the folly of your current ideology as being coercive and evil. Most of us will sing your praises.
I know it doesn't "feel" right because it [personal responsibility] seems uncharitable. But rationally, if what you really hope to accomplish is tolerance toward your fellow man, then you must be willing to allow your fellow men the right to live their lives in the way they see fit. That means they must be free from coercion.
The velvet glove which covers the iron fist doesn't eliminate the iron fist, it merely disguises it behind words like "compassion" and "empathy". |
|
"socialism is coercion. Socialism exists only at the point of a gun"
But you also claim that countries like Norway and Switzerland are raging socialistic states. Having lived in several such countries, I can state with some authority that there's no coercion whatsoever. The people created the government they wanted because they were certain it was the best government for them to have, and they're happy with the results. |
|
Which "arguments" do you refer? It appeared to me that you intentionally misread my comment, pulled part of it out of context, then made a juvenile jab.
Let me help, socialism is coercion. Socialism exists only at the point of a gun, regardless of the hand (left or right) which holds it. |
|
[If you were at all familiar with The Constitution you would find that "law enforcement and the military" is pretty much all the federal government was designed to do]
So you're arguing that because a function is designated within the Constitution that the government or bureaucrats executing that function are no longer prone to waste, lobbying, corruption, and general incompetence?
Your logic is lacking, friend. |
|
"Bob, you are starting to become unhinged."
When you can't attack the arguments, attack the arguer. |
|
"How many of the 15 involve christianity?"
Christians are the cannon fodder in most instances. So, most.
"So for you, shooting is better than talking?"
Bob, you are starting to become unhinged. It's understandable though. You are starting to become aware of the tyranny inherent in socialism. That the means which must be employed to achieve your aims (social "justice", equality of outcomes, etc) are in fact not altruistic, but coercive. The oxymoron of your ideology will eventually become clear, and repugnant, to you.
Don't worry about this though, Bob. Opening your mind to accept liberty, tolerance, and personal responsibility is much easier than telling fellow socialist friends that you've accepted tolerance as a way of life. |
|
"Bob believes 6 week old fetuses who have heartbeats are not babies. Maybe he'd like to test what it would be like to take his heart out?"
So in your logic, a walnut is the same thing as a 20-foot walnut tree, and they're equally edible.
"Why can't you freaking people ever be happy about anything?"
But we are. We're happy that the idiot has gone back to his Texas village. We're VERY happy that we now have a president who has made a good start on cleaning up the idiot's messes. |
|
|
After Bush spoke about the mid-east problems everyone was worried he would attack some one.Now that Obama has addressed the problem everyone is worried they will attack us.I know,I know just give peace a chance,Iran is such a small country of insignificance they would never dare attack any of our 57 states |
|
"12 of the top 15 bloodiest conflicts in the world today involve Islam."
How many of the 15 involve christianity?
"Talk is cheap when you can just end the discussion once and for all with a bullet."
So for you, shooting is better than talking?
"Evil people those Mormons ... they're a cult."
So are Lutherans. |
|
Bush used the excuse of imminent danger to increase the size of the police-state, Barak Obama is using the excuse of the economic crisis to increase the size of the welfare-state, do you see the same similarities as I?
Given than the only thing that differentiates govt from any other institution in a free society is the legitimate ability to coerce compliance, and given the definition of liberty is freedom from coercion, the obvious similarity is less liberty, is it not?
|
|
"Trying to defang the truth by claiming we've been "safe" since 9/11 never addresses the fact that 9/11 was the pinnacle of unsafe circumstances,"
I never say that.
9-11 would not have happened under my watch as I've actually taken the time to read the Koran and supplemental texts. Islam is incompatable with Western liberalism. I view the threat posed by Islam as little more than an immigration issue.
Of course, Islam is no more a threat to Western liberalism as Barak Obama and the Democrat Party. |
|
There's a reason conservatives stopped donating money to the GOP: they [conservatives] DID start taking a hard look at Bush and the GOP. Conservatives want smaller government. Bush and the GOP did the opposite.
"Daddy's too harsh, let's go to Mommy." Bush was a "daddy-state" socialist. BO is a "mommy-state" socialist.
By the end, Bush was a single parent playing both roles. Neither role makes government smaller.
Question: mommy-state socialists just straddled a few more generations with massive debt to "solve" a temporary, self-correcting fluctuation in the market, Social Security is a Ponzi Scheme which will very soon pull a Madeoff (sp), how will Democrats, who'll most likely still be in power in 20 years,...
Oh never mind. I know the answer: raise taxes. |
|
I just have one question for all of you. Besides hating every action of the Bush administration for eight years, please tell me how your personal life was affected as it seems you are all suddenly able to breathe again? Please tell me what it was that caused you to wake up feeling such doom and gloom day in and day out. Was everything you did affected by what The former President did?
I'm just curious.
You see, now I wake up every day with a President i didn't vote for and so far, whose policies I completely disagree with.
But alas, the sun still comes out, we have not been attacked, yet and I can still pay my bills.
Oh, yes, I still my religion, guns and I cling not to bitterness like you people still do. I have four healthy kids and a great spouse. I might file for bankruptcy at some point, but it won't be the government's fault and yet, I can still find the good in all of it.
Why can't you freaking people ever be happy about anything? |
|
All of the monkeys here are convinced that terrorism doesn't exist. Thankfully, we do know better, as did Bush. Unfortunately, as I have said from the get-go, we will be attacked again. It is simply a matter of time.
The fact that the rose-colored glasses the Monkeys wear are triple strength will only serve to delay the reality, if it ever sets in.
As i am sure you have noticed, Munck, ohairy, (monkey girl), vampire et al never seem to address the facts and prefer to spew. Bob believes 6 week old fetuses who have heartbeats are not babies. Maybe he'd like to test what it would be like to take his heart out?
And Monkey Girl's chronic BDS will never move her forward. She'll probably contribute to the suicide rate. Vampire? His name speaks for itself. |
|
Ahmadinejad is a hard case, and to suggest that Obama's ideas have no value because he didn't assume a submissive position immediately is ridiculous.
|
|
Don't act surprised. Your boy ran on weakness. Rather than tell me he's not a wimp, you should be extolling wimpiness as a virtue. You can start by telling me how the world loves again.
And Bob? 12 of the top 15 bloodiest conflicts in the world today involve Islam. There is nary a Muslim country without a bloody border. Utopia ain't an option, but some sort of "order" is. And you cannot have world "order" without recognizing the destabilizing influence of Islam.
In essence, Bush is following the same practice, vis-a-vis Islam, as Clinton did vis-a-vis Waco: eliminating the threat to "order" posed by a fundamental belief in something other than government.
Clinton got it. Bush got it. Talk is cheap when you can just end the discussion once and for all with a bullet. I find it incredible that you think that you (or Obama) are so much different than Bush (except for Obama's lack of testicles).
To: The Socialists of All Parties,...
heh, heh, heh
PS: Maybe BO could prove his manhood by raiding some Mormon outpost. Evil people those Mormons: happy, clean...white. By Janet Reno's definition, they're a cult. |
|
'"Those three little points are all you could manage" is your best comeback?'
It wasn't a comeback, it was literary criticism.
Come to think of it, though, I really shouldn't equate Ahmadinejad to our domestic wingnuts. Even though he's well behind Khamenei, Ahmadinejad does have real power in his country. The right-wing here doesn't. |
|
"Those three little points are all you could manage" is your best comeback?
Barack Hussein is the one who said he would run the most honest, transparent administration ever. He set the bar high, he is the one who can't live up to his own standards. We are just glad to point it out to you.
As an aside, Bubba Clinton said the exact same thing we he came into office...how did that work out for the harasser in cheif? |
|
"You seem a little touchy"
Nah, just pointing out that foreign enemies and domestic traitors often think alike. Neither of you can distinguish between true strength of character, as characterized by Obama, and pseudo-macho posturing, as characterized by Bush and pretty much the whole right-wing foreign policy since Reagan.
"We're irrelevant, haven't you heard?"
Well, sure, everybody knows that. So is Ahmadinejad. |
|
You seem a little touchy about the fact that BO is a wimp...and that that is how he's perceived not only by Ahmadinejad but by a few of us "anti-American, right-wingnuts".
Why do you care if we think your president is a p*ssy? We're irrelevant, haven't you heard? |
|
"Bob Munck - stop selling Hussein"
Those three little points are all you could manage? Come on, even foxmustard did better just a couple of comments back, and he's borderline illiterate. You didn't mention Ayers, Rezko, multiple reversals of Bush policies, killing womb babies, or his being born in Kenya. Don't you have text you can cut-and-paste, like everybody else? |
|
|
Maybe Obama should have had a couple of rock bands on before he spoke.This is for real now and Obama has showed his hand.Pathetic. |
|
His action since taking the oath are a good sign that he is the weakest president we have had in a long time. In case you still want to sell the 'change we can believe in' stupidity, stop doing it here. Obama's cabinet is full of law breakers and compromised politicians. Let's review
1. Geither is a tax evader who will be managing the economy. After his confirmation with a 2/3rds of the senate, he quickly hired a Goldman Saks lobbyst to be his 'chief of staff'. This is what we call a kabala of thugs.
2. Daschle the health czar is also a tax evader. At least he owned up before he was caught. At this rate the 'honest tax evasion' mistakes in Obama's cabinet will make it difficult for the IRS to use precedence as a reason to put anyone in jail for tax evasion. Gambini family would be proud.
3. Clintons are now in charge of our foreign policy. The middle easterners who make up 80% of our foreign policy problems have donated over 100 million to Bill's library. Does this look like a stacked deck for disaster when making foreign policy decisions? According to Obama, the Clintons are well qualified to lead our nations without compromising it's security. Who knew 100 million could buy so much national security for americans.
This man you keep praising is a cheap thug from chicago and our nation will be set back so far back the titanic will sound like a great story of rescue.
STOP SELLING HUSSEIN MADNESS - and keep the change! |
|
"It was 53% for Pete's sake."
So did you make these same noises when Bush was crowing about his massive 50.7% mandate victory in 2004 and all the "political capital" that he got from it?
"Obama is an inexperienced weakling"
That's what Ahmadenijad said, too. Is there a contest to see who can be more anti-American, right-wingnuts or Ahmadenijad? |
|
for Obama's administration.
First you had Bill Richardson forced out as the SecCommerce nominee because of a "pay to play" scheme he was involved in, in New Mexico.
Eric Holder, our new Attorney General, was the assistant A.G. under Clinton. He was the major force in getting Marc Rich, 2 Weather Underground terrorists, and 16 FALN Puerto Rican terrorists pardoned. Rich was under indictment for, among other things, doing business with the enemy, before he fled the country. BTW, his wife was a MAJOR contributor to Slick Willie's presidential library. Coincidence??? Not hardly!!
Rahm Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, likely involved in another "pay to play" scheme with now impeached Ill. Gov. Blago.
Tim Geithner, now the SecTreasury, a tax cheat and employer of a woman with an expired "green card". And he's now running the IRS and ICE, no less. You can't make this sh*t up!!!!
And now another tax cheat, Tom Daschle, new nominee for SecCommerce, also a tax cheat. He "just happened to remember" all his his tax irregularities as Obama is nominating him. SURE!!!
Wait 'til next week........there'll be some more crooks surface. Add these to Obama's former posse: Rev Wright, Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers, ACORN, etc. Quite a pattern!!!
|
|
|
and completely true. I wish more Americans would open their eyes to what SOME of us can see plain as day. Ronna |
|
The election of Obama was not some incredible sweeping mandate that just roared across the nation and delivered the biggest margin on earth. It was 53% for Pete's sake. That means 47% of the folks voted for SOMEONE ELSE. In some neighborhoods, winning by the kind of margin would be considered the skin of one's teeth.
This kind of change of power -- 52% vs 48%, 54% vs. 46% -- happens all the time in America. At least it has happened since I have been alive and voting, although I seriously suspect that with Obama at the helm, America as I know it may not have much of a future.
Mr. Obama's little extension of diplomatic courtesy to Iran garnered EXACTLY what we knew it would: insult upon insult, demand for apology upon demand for apology, etc etc. Obama is an inexperienced weakling with ZERO credentials and ZERO experience in anything substantive(who just happens to appoint tax-cheating politicians to his cabinet, by the way), and he is going to be the main reason why this great is attacked again by Islamic terrorists. Some people would say, he's the reason why they are gonna' bury us, or try anyway. But, far be from me...
Maybe not next month, maybe not this year. But anyone with half a brain knows -- it won't be long. That's inevitable when there's a rank novice at the helm and he's bending over extending his hand to the enemy. |
|
"
It doesn't make anyone in the US safer. "
And you know this because?
See that's why the rest of the world thinks conservatives are inbred, because people like you make inbred statements.
Do you have any science, facts, study or any kind of proof at all other than your saying so?
Nope.
Inbred.
|
|
the white house. You LIBTARDS all go ahead and ignore the article from my post above if you want, but Obama is about to face several more challenges regarding his "UNAVAILABLE" 'VALID' Hawaiian BIRTH CERTIFICATE.
When the Congress, and or the Supreme Court Justices finally face the reality of properly upholding the Constitution and admit the fact that he Hussein is not a Natural Born Citizen of the United states of America, and do their job by removing his fraudulent, nefarious, lying a$$ from office, I will dance until I drop. |
|
"Iran has responded by characterizing the friendly overture as a sign of weakness."
So did you guys. Is there a contest to see who can be more anti-American, right-wingnuts or Ahmadenijad? |
|
Camberlainesque = Chamberlainesque
|
|
If you listen closely you can hear the mullahs and Ahmadinejad laughing. Osama is declaring America a paper tiger once again.
We will pay for Obama's Camberlainesque naiveté. |
|
-----We spend more on 'defense' than the entire world combined, we can afford to trim their budget.----
We spend 4-5% of our GDP on Defense. Would you like to know what percentage we spend on leftist boondoggles? |
|
Iran is about to ask him to start dancing.
"This request [Obama's hand/fist comment] means Western ideology has become passive, that capitalist thought and the system of domination have failed," Gholam Hossein Elham was quoted as saying by the Mehr news agency."
"Negotiation is secondary, the main issue is that there is no way but for (the United States) to change," he added."
"After nearly three decades of severed ties, Obama said shortly after taking office this month that he is willing to extend a diplomatic hand to Tehran if the Islamic republic is ready to "unclench its fist"."
"In response, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad launched a fresh tirade against the United States, demanding an apology for its "crimes" against Iran and saying he expected "deep and fundamental" change from Obama."
Will Obama take his own advice and pick himself up, dust himself off, and not let Ahmadinejad pop him on the nose again?
Bush told Ahmadinejad to go sit in the truck. Obama should have adopted the same attitude toward the tyrant from Tehran. |
|
yet. Look at "today's" latest suit brought against "Congress."
OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
Congress sued to remove
prez from White House
'Defendants had to ensure
the Constitution is upheld'
Posted: January 31, 2009
12:00 am Eastern
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
A new lawsuit is challenging Barack Obama's eligibility to be president, and this one targets Congress as a defendant for its "failure" to uphold the constitutional demand to make sure Obama qualified before approving the Electoral College vote that actually designated him as the occupant of the Oval Office.
The new case raises many of the same arguments as dozens of other cases that have flooded into courtrooms around the nation since the November election.
It is being brought on behalf of Charles F. Kerchner Jr., Lowell T. Patterson, Darrell James Lenormand and Donald H. Nelson Jr. and names as defendants Barack Hussein Obama II, the U.S., Congress, the Senate, House of Representatives and former Vice President Dick Cheney along with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born American" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 193,000 others and sign up now!
The site, go there if you dare!
http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87622 |
|
|
SO OUR ENEMY UNCLINCHES ITS FIST THEN GOES IN FOR THE SUCKER PUNCH!SNAKES BITE!SO CARRY A BIG STICK!AND BEWARE OF THE AXIS OF EVIL!W WAS RIGHT,THE EVIL DOERS ARE EVIL! |
|
It's that simple. If Obama's approach didn't completely change Iran's behavior immediately, then the tactic should be abandoned.
I'm mean come on. Let's get serious. |
|
Like many liberals, this argument assumes that conserevatism has failed, which is totally wrong. The out of control spending in Washington was a combined effort of Republicans and Democrats.
While there are many conservatives still in the GOP, for the most part, the party has strayed from conservative priciples. Until, and unless, they get that back and until they stop trying to out liberal the liberals, they will continue as the minority party.
The left always seem to confuse conservatives with Republicans. They aren't synonymous. |
|
|
America signalled weakness when it elected Obama. When we get hit again, few Obama voters will admit they voted for the pu$$y. Funnny how the defense dept. is the only one being asked to cut its budget. Actually, not funny at all. |
|
|
America signalled weakness when it elected Obama. When we get hit again, few Obama voters will admit they voted for the pu$$y. Funnny how the defense dept. is the only one being asked to cut its budget. Actually, not funny at all. |
|
|
and yet you still wine. It's amazing, you had presidency and congress for 6 years and used the position to bankrupt the nation morally and financially..... now change comes and you harken for the good ol policies that drove the nation awry..... truly classless! |
|
|
When does the love fest we were promised kick in? |
|
|
If you were at all familiar with The Constitution you would find that "law enforcement and the military" is pretty much all the federal government was designed to do. |
|
can present some interesting juxtapositions even if we don't see a yellow stripe on Old Glory.
Consider this:
I was just looking at the cover on a container of Trader Joe's feta cheese, a product of Greece.
There is a small blue and gold symbol, made to look like a seal, upon which is written: Protected Designation of Origin. Look at it yourself: http://tinyurl.com/croq74
This symbol is issued by the EU and is done to indicate quality assurance. You can see the various categories at their web site: http://tinyurl.com/dngwtj
Now look at the Obama logo: http://tinyurl.com/5otkyn
Aside from the different colors (EU blue and yellow, Obama red and blue) some of the other design elements are inexplicably similar. Is the similarity intentional? Is there something else going on here? Inquiring minds want to know. |
|
|
You left out the word Cowards! |
|
We spend more on 'defense' than the entire world combined, we can afford to trim their budget.
It is amazing how Republicans think that government is wasteful and spendthrift with our money, except for law enforcement and the military.
(If you're wondering why I would put quotes on defense, consider that despite spending arguably over a trillion dollars on defense, we don't inspect all of the cargo at our ports or guard our borders effectively.) |
|
It never changes once the brain fried, LSD trippers get control, they always weaken our defenses, it's in their DNA. They didn't have the guts in their student days to support our military regardless of the reasons for the war;
and they don't have the guts today in a much more dangerous world. They are still singing
Kumbayah and We want the world to sing..and they'd have our military shoot flower bulbs instead of ammo. I'm surprised they don't paint a yellow stripe across Old Glory. |
|
|
|