1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Time To Go, Grampa

Paul 7440 Wrote: Aug 04, 2009 8:25 AM
PB's hypocricy is amazing! He goes on and on about the sanctity of life (which I agree with), however, this is coming from a man who has advocated every war that America has been involved in with the exception of Iraq, and only opposed that war on utilitarian, rather than moral, grounds! From Pat's POV, it is horribly wrong to deny an old person life prolonging medication, but its perfectly fine to blow hell out of some villager in a small foreign country! And when it comes to health care, he is a rabid individualist, but when it comes to foreign policy and war it's "WE" this and "WE" that. Hey Pat, get some consistency, will you?
On the upside, if this passes, we may finally rid ourselves of those obnoxious self-righteous Baby...
You people are all against Statism and Big Government and Introoosion. Until its YOUR team in office. Then it's "We must win the war on (some forms of )terrorism! We must fight against (some people's) drugs! and of course, all the attendant civil rights violations are just ducky with you Reptilians, just as long as you're using government power for YOUR ends and to kill people YOU don't like.
You Reptilians should talk. After controlling the House, the Senate, and the Presidency for six years under Bush the Lesser, you had expanded the government to monumental proportions. The Reptilians are just as bad as the Democrats. I suggest the Republicans and Democrats change the names of their parties to reflect reality: Lets call them the Socialist Party and the Other Socialist Party. We should have them adopt mottos too. The Democrat's motto could be: "It's not wasteful spending if we're doing it for the children." The Republicans could be "It's not wasteful spending if we're doing it for national defense." One is as bad as the other. Let's not cut. Let's eliminate. All of it. Whole thing, lock stock and barrel. ...
In response to:

Don't Ask, Tell or Legitimize

Paul 7440 Wrote: Oct 16, 2009 12:47 AM
I find it odd that Cal can pontificate on the immorality of gayness, yet accept as perfectly OK the slaughter of thousands of innocent humans that is modern warfare. Hey Cal, that bible you're thumping says something about CARING for widows and orphans--it does not advocate making more of them. It also has a lot to say about how God hates violence and those that live by it. Lawrence Vance is a much more consistent Christian on these issues than you, Cal.
Once again, Austin is going off half cocked. The Obama administration is not ordering banks to stop foreclosure. What he is doing is..."floating an idea to prohibit lenders from foreclosing on a home unless the borrower has been considered for the government’s Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP)." (http://www.dsnews.com/articles/obama-considers-foreclosure-ban-2010-02-26) This is hardly forbidding banks to take their property back from people who do not pay. Rather, it is an attempt to force the banks to use the $75 billion set aside to help homeowners who are under water to modify their existing loans.
As an anarcho-capitalist I do not believe in any form of government intervention into the free market, including this...
Micheal Savage has been screaming for years about keeping people out of the USA based upon their ethnicity, skin color and/or religion. I wonder how he feels being kept out of a country based on views that are just as trivial and just as ridiculous?
And I repeat my earlier question: does Savage's treatment warrant the repeal of the asinine "no-fly" lists?
Everyone here seems to agree that since Micheal Savage did no wrong, that he should be able to travel to and from where he wants without being hassled by government paper pushers. and even though I find him boorish, and find no redeeming value in his radio show, I do agree with this sentiment. (I was being sarcastic, Rob in SC).
Now in light of that fact, isn't it high time the US government got rid of its worthless "no-fly" lists that ban innocent people from travel?
Micheal Savage should not be banned from Great Britain for his political beliefs, although a strong case could be made for banning him because he is a boorish, arrogant, obnoxious person with all the grace a poise of a mountain gorilla with impacted wisdom teeth. I've listened to his show. It sucks.
Now as for alMagrahi: Several people, including one of the lead investigators of the Lockerbie crash are saying that he was railroaded. The lead investigator said the case against him was "as full of holes as Swiss cheese." Does that concern anyone here? It seems to me that the MSM is also covering up the fact that we may have jailed an innocent man for 11 years. Or are you just so consumed with vengence that justice is no longer a...
In response to:

August Anxiety

Paul 7440 Wrote: Aug 27, 2009 2:57 PM
I note that the concern for Obama's health care reform centers on affordability of the program, or its practicality. I have only seen one article about the Constitutionality (legality) of this plan, and absolutely none on its morality. Now, assuming we could make this foolish plan work, and assuming it would not break the bank, where is the constitutional authority to promulgate such a plan is the first place? The ninth and tenth amendments clearly state that those powers not delegated to the Feds are kept to the states and the individuals. Since the Constitution says nothing about health care, that's not the perogative of the Federal gun-verment.
And where is the morality of it? is it moral to force some total stranger to pay...
It should be patently obvious that Republicans are not racists. They will bomb and strafe anyone regardless of their skin color.
1 - 10 Next
Sunday, June 03 | 12:10 AM ET
Sunday, June 03 | 12:10 AM ET
Sunday, June 03 | 12:10 AM ET
Sunday, June 03 | 12:10 AM ET