posted on December 5, 2006 11:39:21 AM
I did answer that quite awhile ago....Bachman is a lightweight that I pay little attention to, she won't do much but get her pearls polished and pray.....
And while I agree Pawlenty is a moron, he wasn't voted out nor is he a Democrat.
How does it feel for YOU to live in a COUNTRY that voted overwhelmingly for Democrats!???
posted on December 5, 2006 12:25:11 PM
And yet, Pawlenty took our great state out of the RED that was caused by the demomoron policies and brought us into the black WITHOUT raising our taxes.
Yep, your a moron alright. Your buddy Dean Johnson, Demomoron leader WAS voted out, that anti family idiot. Happy to see him go too...
And as far as Michelle Bachmann goes, she is one hot and very smart woman.
posted on December 5, 2006 03:25:38 PM
Anyone notice how the War on the War on Christmas starts earlier and earlier each year? This year I started noticing it in mid November.
I can see it now... O'Reilly blathering about his war on the War on Christmas on Holloween, except he of course ignores the fact that Holloween is a Pagan Holiday and how we really miss the true spirit and meaning of Samhain.
posted on December 5, 2006 06:12:42 PM
posted on December 5, 2006 04:25:19 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh....put on your big girl panties and just deal with it!!!
"""
What the hell does THAT mean??? Put on you big girl panties !!?!?!
linduh is getting more bizarre and vulgar by the post !!!!!!!
Lordy those dry drunks do something awful to her brains...linduh just have a driink....you'll feel better...
posted on December 5, 2006 06:59:46 PM
I find it amusing that on one hand, one can type, "NO GAY MARRIAGE!! PEOPLE VOTED!! THE MAJORITY HAS SPOKEN LOLOLOL!!"
And on the other hand, "THOSE WHO DON'T WANT THEIR HANDGUNS TAKEN AWAY ARE BEING FORCED TO BY A VOTING MAJORITY!!"
Funny how the same act, individuals voting on a particular issue on their own home turf, can result in both reactions.
Hmmm.
---Skorpio
Overheard at the mall: "A fish is NOT a pet. It's a decoration that happens to be alive."
posted on December 5, 2006 07:08:15 PM
SkorpioGal, you may find it amusing, but surely you don't find it hard to understand?
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on December 5, 2006 09:25:43 PM
I understand, skorpiogirl, confusion is rampant with liberals.
Seems you too can't tell the difference between gay marriage NOT BEING a constitutionally guaranteed RIGHT....and one that IS....gun ownership.
Sorry you liberals are so easily confused. I'm used to seeing it though.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on December 5, 2006 10:13:29 PM
Linda: Much of our constitution and bill of rights has had to be interpreted to meet changing times. The founding fathers couldn't possibly have anticipated the handguns and the AK 47s, etc., all of which are used 99.99% of the time in the commission of crimes. They had in mind the long guns that citizens used for hunting and that were used to fight the British.
The founding fathers weren't stupid, and if they could have looked into a crystal ball, they would have put some conditions into that amendment. Don't tell me you can read their minds retroactively.
posted on December 6, 2006 09:14:07 AM
There are no known rights binding on the states as part of this (2nd) Amendment. The Second Amendment has NOT been incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment. This means two things: the right of the people to keep and bear arms is not a fundamental personal right; and state and local governments are free to devise any sort of gun law they choose.
The Second Amendment contains two clauses, the Militia Clause (A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State) and the Right to Arms Clause (the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed). It's customary in Constitutional Law to point out that the second clause is controlled by the first clause.
The above quotes come from this link:http://faculty.ncwc.edu/TOConnor/410/410lect11.htm
The Second Amendment has always been subject to interpretation, but here are a couple of logical(IMHO)statements on it.
posted on December 6, 2006 11:42:32 AM
Well of course that's the kind of opinion YOU'D agree with coincoach. After all, North Carolina Wesleyan College is a recognized bastion of LIBERAL/progressive/socialist thought/opinion.
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on December 6, 2006 12:00:18 PM
LOL....at all of you who support allowing our constitutional RIGHTS to be taken away....by LIBERALS....who refuse to honor our constitution.
=======
roadsmith....yea, sure, let's see some stats that 99% of all crimes committed in the US were with 'other than handguns'. LOL LOL LOL
And maybe an explaination of WHY THEN, would HAND GUNS be what the anti-gun supports TOOK AWAY from the citizens of DC, S.F and Chicago. I've GOT to hear THIS story.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on December 6, 2006 12:04:30 PM
Another thing I note here is that NONE of our liberals have commented on the ACLU being formed by COMMUNISTS. Yep....you'd rather NOT discuss THAT FACT. I sure understand why that would be LOL
Guess that's okay...and some think all of a sudden ALL communinsts just DESERTED the ACLU??? LOL
I don't. They're ALIVE and well, imo. And it shows by their constant work to remove ALL religious traditions from public life.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on December 6, 2006 01:52:37 PM
Why would anyone comment on it Linda? Communists were banned from membership in the ACLU and the leaders either renounced communism or were thrown out in 1940. It hasn't been an issue for a long long time.
I'm beginning to think you're one of those John Birch people, still seeing communists under the bed.
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
I was going to refrain from responding, since your immediate implication that I am a liberal (which is not a pejorative in my view, nor does it apply to me) would ensure that any attempt at communication would be fruitless.
However, I felt that I had to give you information on how the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment was used in the case of Loving v. Virginia, decided in 1967.
The Supreme Court struck down the interracial marriage law of Virginia, and in its finding, held that "Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival. (Skinner v. Oklahoma) ...To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discriminations. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State."
I hope this explains things for you. The Virginia law, which was upheld at trial initially, had the trial judge say, "Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."
If you cannot see an analagous argument between laws prohibiting interracial marriage between American citizens, and laws prohibiting marriage between adult American citizens of the same gender, I really have nothing further to type on the matter.
posted on December 6, 2006 03:13:27 PM
Sure....skorpio gal...you WEREN'T going to respond to me??? LOL
But you DID.
No where in our constitution are gays given the right to marry. NO WHERE.
Anyone can argue that ALL adults should be allowed to marry....using your false logic. lol
There ARE limits on those who can marry. Not everyone is allowed to. NOR are gays.
And most of the US states have now voted AGAINST allowing anything other than ONE man ONE woman to marry. All except the state where the liberals WOULDN'T allow the voters to vote. Yep...that's REAL American. NOT!!!
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on December 6, 2006 05:37:49 PMNo where in our constitution are gays given the right to marry. NO WHERE.
So tell us Linda, where, exactly, in the constitution is ANYONE given the right to marry?
By your "logic", NOBODY should be allowed to marry....unless of course you can quote us the constitutional right to marry, that is. We'll stand corrected I'm sure, if you can.
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on December 6, 2006 06:52:39 PM
No where in the Constitution does it say gays can't marry either. Geez, Linda, do you check the Constitution before you go to the john?
posted on December 6, 2006 08:01:15 PM
Don't let the 'small' things upset you so much.
Life's too short to get SO upset.
I've never argued that our constitution DOES get any one the right to marry.
But what you've repeatedly seen me argue is that it DOESN'T give gays that constitutional right.
Twisting what I've said...won't work, profe.
It's been the pro-gay marriage supporters position THAT IT DOES....when it doesn't...and that's ALL I've ever said.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on December 6, 2006 08:04:55 PM
I'm not twisting what you said Linda, I quoted you exactly. I'm just following what for you passes as logic, to it's logically absurd end.
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on December 6, 2006 08:05:35 PM
Yep...you're probably right....I'm just SURE roadsmith is search frantically for proof of her most recent statement of FACT
AND her answer to why then did Chicago, San Francisco and DC TAKE AWAY the HANDGUNS of their citizens.
Maybe she's STILL searching.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on December 6, 2006 08:08:19 PMIt's been the pro-gay marriage supporters position THAT IT DOES....when it doesn't...and that's ALL I've ever said.
Big time back-pedaling. If it doesn't give gays, or ANYONE the right to marry, where does it DENY those rights to anyone?
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on December 6, 2006 08:11:23 PM
Sure you were profe.
And by some strange chance do you believe there are NO communists active in the US today? LOL I sure hope not....they have their own US party and all. And they support YOUR side of the political aisle. lol
Communists were almost always atheists...and since the ACLU is STILL working to remove all mention of religion or God from the public arena...then yes, I will continue to believe there are currently communists in the ACLU....my right based on THEIR ACTIONS.
The aclu is NOT the civil rights protector they once were. They've grown into another radical anti-religious bigoted group that many liberals support.
shame shame
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on December 6, 2006 08:20:04 PM
I'll make it REAL simple for those I've discussed this issue with at least a hundred times IF not more than that. Rather than dealing with each and every twist of what I say.
Gays have NO right to marry. PERIOD. And since this has become their agenda to PUSH it down the throats of everyone..to SEEK the right to marry.... the states ALL [believe] now have voted making gay marriage unlawful. With the exception of Mass....which didn't allow their voters to decide. Instead a liberal judge did. NOT the American way.
AND where it stands today....the USSC NOR our congress has voted to MAKE gay marriage legal.
Live with it. That's the way it has always been and remains today.
They can marry IF they can find someone to marry them.....it's just the FEDERAL gov. doesn't RECOGNIZE gay marriages.
Problem with that? Not my problem...I'm quite happy the way the states have voted in the last few years.
Marriage between heterosexuals is NOT illegal...and is allowed.
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on December 6, 2006 08:21:20 PM
If it (the constitution) doesn't give gays, or ANYONE the right to marry, where does it DENY those rights to anyone?
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
posted on December 6, 2006 08:30:20 PM
My animals are spooked by something. I'm siging off now to load up and go out to see what I can shoot tonight. I'll check back tomorrow to see what kind of foolishness I missed.
____________________________________________
May 1, 2003, America brings "democracy" to Iraq. November 7, 2006, Iraq brings democracy to America.
