Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Current Events Current Events Forum - Latest political news and events


Thanks Tree135Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old September 13th, 2017, 10:21 PM   #271
Senior Member
 
Twisted Sister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Brown Township, Ohio
Posts: 10,492
Quote:
Originally Posted by titan View Post


"Whiney" (sic) implies complaint without valid justification.

There are only two plausible explanations for that ridiculous position.

Either spectacularly stunning ignorance.
Or flagrantly ostentatious partisanship.

Neither is justified, as Trump's most persuasive critics include Republicans and conservatives in both public & private sectors; politicians and journalists alike.

Matter of fact, following Trump's rise in the Republican party, stalwart conservative George Will left the Republican party.

Our nation is in jeopardy, because a bumbling incompetent has seized power after losing the vote, and members of BOTH parties have publicly acknowledged it.

There is no tinfoil haberdashery or bovine scatology involved.
Wow, bovine scatology means cow shit when take I take the term apart and reconstruct. Bovine means cow and scat means shit. Oye Como Va?
Twisted Sister is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 04:05 AM   #272
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
Again I am not defending the rulings, I am saying they were legal. I'm not saying they were right, but that they were made correctly according to the constitution and the law.

I'm not defending the politics of the members of the SC now or then, merely saying they were chosen as directed by the constitution and their rulings have been applied as directed by the constitution. So they were not illegal.
And I disagree. Just because the courts had the power, they most assuredly did not have the authority.

Thomas Jefferson observed in the Declaration of Independence:

"...all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

Just because the government can tell us they did something "legally" because they bent the rules or they were able to circumvent the laws with popularity votes does not make it right. But one day the same conditions that caused the people in Jefferson's era to rise up and proclaim Liberty will be necessary for you or the next generation. I just think you should give that due consideration before aiding in the complete erecting of aPOLICE STATE.
discollector is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 04:19 AM   #273
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by titan View Post
You seem to think I should take a position pro or con.
Why?
I recounted the sequential history.

Perhaps then you wonder why I did, or did not.

Simple.

The irony, and the hypocrisy. I don't have to pick a side for that.
You can't cyber-know me very well yet, as your post counter is still in double digits.
But I make some significant effort to compose, to post comments others might wish to read.

To that purpose I endeavor to not state the perfectly obvious: "water is wet!"

Nope!

I wouldn't waste my time, or yours.

Instead, I endeavor to post comments that inquire, inform, persuade, or amuse. Example:

"We did it first." t

"(which I do not believe)" dc


Then I have succeeded. Why would anyone waste their time stating the well known, the uncontested, or the insufferably uninteresting?

Want information / persuasion?
Start with an encyclopedia.

Eugenics,
idea of "improving" the genetic quality of the human species. An outgrowth of the study of human heredity, the concept became prominent during the late 19th century, supported by two widespread philosophical convictions: a belief in the perfectibility of the human species, and a growing faith in science as the most dependable and useful form of knowledge. Modern eugenics is based on the notion that the key to bettering society is proper breeding.
In 1900, with the birth of modern genetics, the undercurrents of interest in "improving" the human species were transformed into an institutionalized movement. Historically, the movement had two general aspects: positive eugenics, concentrating on increasing the breeding potential of especially "fit" individuals; and negative eugenics, emphasizing restrictions on breeding of particularly "unfit" types. From the outset the movement was closely associated with a sense of white Anglo-Saxon superiority.
In the United States the eugenics movement was reflected in state and federal legislation. By 1925, however, eugenicists were beginning to be criticized for what was seen as overt racial bias, biased evidence, and lack of scientific rigor.

Encarta® 98 Desk Encyclopedia © & 1996-97 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.


That describes it.
Want insight into the scale of our nation's legal commitment to defending it?

“It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind...
Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. in Buck v. Bell - May 2, 1927


Again:
We're quick to condemn the Nazis for their heartless inhumanity, and promotion of the aryan race.

But eugenics was practiced in the U.S. before Adolf Hitler came to power.

Thank you dc, for your expressed doubt.
It created the opportunity to review history some in the U.S. prefer to overlook.
Contrary to what you implied, I never presumed to know where you stood on the issue.

Now, whether you see eugenics as good or bad, I still don't believe that the United States was the first to practice it. China and Japan are all one people on purpose and Japan is proudly the most racist nation on the planet. North Korea is also racially homogeneous. I'm certainly no expert on eugenics, but common sense tells me the U.S. was not the first... maybe the U.S. did it before the nazis but, then again, NOBODY wants the U.S. to observe the original intent of the United States Constitution... except for maybe me.

At the end of the day, the people at the top of the heap on the build the wall bandwagon are concerned with the white race (aka Aryans.) But, their way of getting to wherever they think they're going is convoluted.

Those people think one must become a citizen in order to qualify for the Rights Thomas Jefferson called unalienable in the Declaration of Independence. So, we supposedly don't care where you're from, what you believe - even if you aren't white provided that you get piece of paper that says you have their permission and that you are working toward citizenship.

In the end, they defeat their very purpose and, worse, they destroy the LIBERTIES of the people. They are building a POLICE STATE that cannot be resisted and that will be more tyrannical than any government that has EVER existed.

Last edited by discollector; September 14th, 2017 at 04:23 AM.
discollector is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 04:50 AM   #274
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post
Your just another whiney cry baby because Trump was elected and you throw in some tinfoil bullshit.
Your crap is always wrong. You know, that has to be a gift. Nobody can be consistently wrong, yet you are.

I voted for Trump as I've never voted for Democrats and am hopeful the American people reject his nutty wall idea, first proposed by Bill Clinton. Besides that, Trump at least said he would support the Second Amendment. Hillary wanted to wage war against the NRA.

My interest in this is NOT what you think. I oppose the wall for two major reasons:

1) In building the wall, the National Socialists move us toward National Socialism and they take away our LIBERTIES. I continue to point out the atmosphere of the pee test, blood test, hair sample, MVR check, credit check, criminal background check, driver’s license, National ID Card / E Verify, Socialist Surveillance Number – ooop. “Social Security Number,” birth certificate, occupation license, credit card, firearms license, proof of insurance, DNA sample, fingerprints, and access to your social media accounts.

With this ability of the government to monitor you from the womb to the tomb 24 / 7 / 365 they can dictate what you believe, read, talk about, think, and do. There will be NO privacy and NO way to resist tyrannical forces when the government exercises complete Orwellian control over you. It's already at the point that America has more prisons than colleges and that we have over SEVEN MILLION people in the system with an additional FOURTEEN MILLION with a criminal record. Those people are LOCKED OUT of the America you take for granted and that, on its surface, is a pretext for the 780,000 new citizens the U.S. government thinks we need

2) America was founded on the premise that we are the New Jerusalem of the Bible - the land without walls ("Jerusalem will be a city without walls because of the great number of people and animals in it" - Zechariah 2: 4)

Under the original founding principles, America became the greatest nation in the annals of history. The most popular sermon ever delivered in the United States happened in 1630 by John Winthrop. It is the second most quoted piece of religious literature by political leaders throughout our history (The Holy Bible being the first most quoted.) On the eve of his presidential election in 1980, Ronald Reagan said:

"I have quoted John Winthrop's words more than once on the campaign trail this year—for I believe that Americans in 1980 are every bit as committed to that vision of a shining "city on a hill," as were those long ago settlers ...

These visitors to that city on the Potomac do not come as white or black, red or yellow; they are not Jews or Christians; conservatives or liberals; or Democrats or Republicans. They are Americans awed by what has gone before, proud of what for them is still… a shining city on a hill
."

That shining city on a hill is a reference to Matthew 5 : 14.

I think where the American politicians went wrong was to assume that meant we should be forced to become a multicultural nation and everybody forced to become a citizen. That is not supported by the Bible nor by history. But, you cannot be ignorant and free. Tamper with what made us great and you destroy the nation. ALL the build the walls guys have is that some immigration is "illegal" and, subsequently, we should destroy LIBERTY in order to achieve this false sense of safety.
discollector is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 07:46 AM   #275
Banned
 
guy39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: in that one house at that location over there
Posts: 1,455
Quote:
Originally Posted by discollector View Post
Your crap is always wrong. You know, that has to be a gift. Nobody can be consistently wrong, yet you are.

I voted for Trump as I've never voted for Democrats and am hopeful the American people reject his nutty wall idea, first proposed by Bill Clinton. Besides that, Trump at least said he would support the Second Amendment. Hillary wanted to wage war against the NRA.

My interest in this is NOT what you think. I oppose the wall for two major reasons:

1) In building the wall, the National Socialists move us toward National Socialism and they take away our LIBERTIES. I continue to point out the atmosphere of the pee test, blood test, hair sample, MVR check, credit check, criminal background check, driver’s license, National ID Card / E Verify, Socialist Surveillance Number – ooop. “Social Security Number,” birth certificate, occupation license, credit card, firearms license, proof of insurance, DNA sample, fingerprints, and access to your social media accounts.

With this ability of the government to monitor you from the womb to the tomb 24 / 7 / 365 they can dictate what you believe, read, talk about, think, and do. There will be NO privacy and NO way to resist tyrannical forces when the government exercises complete Orwellian control over you. It's already at the point that America has more prisons than colleges and that we have over SEVEN MILLION people in the system with an additional FOURTEEN MILLION with a criminal record. Those people are LOCKED OUT of the America you take for granted and that, on its surface, is a pretext for the 780,000 new citizens the U.S. government thinks we need

2) America was founded on the premise that we are the New Jerusalem of the Bible - the land without walls ("Jerusalem will be a city without walls because of the great number of people and animals in it" - Zechariah 2: 4)

Under the original founding principles, America became the greatest nation in the annals of history. The most popular sermon ever delivered in the United States happened in 1630 by John Winthrop. It is the second most quoted piece of religious literature by political leaders throughout our history (The Holy Bible being the first most quoted.) On the eve of his presidential election in 1980, Ronald Reagan said:

"I have quoted John Winthrop's words more than once on the campaign trail this year—for I believe that Americans in 1980 are every bit as committed to that vision of a shining "city on a hill," as were those long ago settlers ...

These visitors to that city on the Potomac do not come as white or black, red or yellow; they are not Jews or Christians; conservatives or liberals; or Democrats or Republicans. They are Americans awed by what has gone before, proud of what for them is still… a shining city on a hill
."

That shining city on a hill is a reference to Matthew 5 : 14.

I think where the American politicians went wrong was to assume that meant we should be forced to become a multicultural nation and everybody forced to become a citizen. That is not supported by the Bible nor by history. But, you cannot be ignorant and free. Tamper with what made us great and you destroy the nation. ALL the build the walls guys have is that some immigration is "illegal" and, subsequently, we should destroy LIBERTY in order to achieve this false sense of safety.
Congrats you voted for Trump. Then you went all tinfoil, evangelical insane. Or, you was all that before you voted for Trump. Your worried about a few skinheads and national socialism due to a wall. Ok, somehow in your mind that means registration of something or another. Yet the real enemy the communists are right in front of you who demand everything that you say you are against. Your just certifiable.
guy39 is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 07:52 AM   #276
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: California
Posts: 16,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by tristanrobin View Post
GIVE TAX BREAKS FOR OBEYING THE LAW?????

yep, that sounds like a right wing idea
You should get compensation for doing what's right and just in the first place? So, if I don't pee on your lawn or break one of your windows, I should get compensation for that? Yup, that's Liberal reasoning.
caconservative is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 08:32 AM   #277
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by guy39 View Post
Congrats you voted for Trump. Then you went all tinfoil, evangelical insane. Or, you was all that before you voted for Trump. Your worried about a few skinheads and national socialism due to a wall. Ok, somehow in your mind that means registration of something or another. Yet the real enemy the communists are right in front of you who demand everything that you say you are against. Your just certifiable.
Since your own morally bankrupt theories cannot withstand serious scrutiny, you lie about me and find fault with the things I say.

You don't like evangelicals - Christianity provided foundational principles upon which this Republic rests

A "few skinheads" did not blow over 650 BILLION DOLLARS creating the Dept. of Homeland (IN) Security

A "few skinheads" did not pass the so - called "Patriot Act" nor the National ID / REAL ID Act / E-Verify crap you worship

A "few skinheads" did not eviscerate the Fourth Amendment NOR the concept of a presumption of innocence / innocent until proven guilty

A "few skinheads" are not advocating for the government to control the jobs and production in this country

A "few skinheads" did not pass the NDAA bill of 2012 which allows for the "indefinite detention of American citizens without due process"

A "few skinheads" are not advocating for building the biggest POLICE STATE in recorded history

A "few skinheads" are not advocating for having armed drones policing the American people

A "few skinheads" are not trying to give control of jobs, labor, and production to the government

A "few skinheads" are not responsible for the seven and a half million people in the criminal justice system and the fourteen million plus more people with a criminal record who can't get a job or be a part of normal society since every minor infraction of the law and every youthful indiscretion is the basis for screwing our youth

A "few skinheads" did not wage idiotic wars that cost the real conservatives of the 1970s though early 2000s ALL of the ground they had taken against unconstitutional taxes (not ALL taxes as you LIE about) and the NEW WORLD ORDER / ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT

A "few skinheads" did not create the Orwellian atmosphere of the pee test, blood test, hair sample, MVR check, credit check, criminal background check, driver’s license, National ID Card / E Verify, Socialist Surveillance Number – ooop. “Social Security Number,” birth certificate, occupation license, credit card, firearms license, proof of insurance, DNA sample, fingerprints, and access to your social media accounts.

That is not the work of a few skinheads, but rather people like you that operate out of fear, dishonesty, and outright treason. Your positions are so weak that you cannot have a civil conversation with me and if you took all the people that bought your B.S. and turned their brains into dynamite, you couldn't get enough charge to blow one's nose.

Without spending TRILLIONS of dollars on POLICE STATE / National Socialist solutions (if you can call regression a solution) I can solve all the symptoms you complain about except one. Your whole philosophy rests on stressing that word "illegal" as if it will summon some pagan God from the depths of Hell to aid in your fight.

What that really is amounts to a smokescreen about what you're peddling on this board. You support hatemongers that would trade in every unalienable Right our forefathers fought, bled, and died for just to be able to control other human beings. When you strip everything down to its bottom line, you don't believe in a God, so you think you - and those equally deluded as you are their own idiot Gods with a mandate via mob rule to control the balance of humanity. Let me make you both a promise and a prediction: You are going to lose.
discollector is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 08:48 AM   #278
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 25,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by discollector View Post
And I disagree. Just because the courts had the power, they most assuredly did not have the authority.

Thomas Jefferson observed in the Declaration of Independence:

"...all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

Just because the government can tell us they did something "legally" because they bent the rules or they were able to circumvent the laws with popularity votes does not make it right. But one day the same conditions that caused the people in Jefferson's era to rise up and proclaim Liberty will be necessary for you or the next generation. I just think you should give that due consideration before aiding in the complete erecting of aPOLICE STATE.
And I still maintain were that so, some lawyer wanting the attention or some organization with an agenda would have started the steps to assert that in court.

The fact that this hasn't been done to a conclusion satisfactory to you strongly suggests that in fact the courts, who are the ones empowered to make those decisions, disagree with you.
RNG is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 09:30 AM   #279
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Georgia
Posts: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
And I still maintain were that so, some lawyer wanting the attention or some organization with an agenda would have started the steps to assert that in court.

The fact that this hasn't been done to a conclusion satisfactory to you strongly suggests that in fact the courts, who are the ones empowered to make those decisions, disagree with you.
You can maintain all you want, but you don't know the law. I've been involved in TWO cases that were won in the United States Supreme Court. I get plenty of feedback from plenty of people as to why common sense ideas aren't winnable in any court... legality be damned.

IF you were so right, one of John Tanton's many non-profits OR the deep pockets of Steve Bannon would have went to court and settled that "anchor baby" argument they make. So, believe what you want and let the other posters weigh out the facts. You and I are out of points and nothing left to disagree about.
discollector is offline  
Old September 14th, 2017, 09:51 AM   #280
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 25,858
Quote:
Originally Posted by discollector View Post
You can maintain all you want, but you don't know the law. I've been involved in TWO cases that were won in the United States Supreme Court. I get plenty of feedback from plenty of people as to why common sense ideas aren't winnable in any court... legality be damned.

IF you were so right, one of John Tanton's many non-profits OR the deep pockets of Steve Bannon would have went to court and settled that "anchor baby" argument they make. So, believe what you want and let the other posters weigh out the facts. You and I are out of points and nothing left to disagree about.
So your definition of legal is what you want things to be rather than what courts rule them to be. Got it. That pretty well ends all discussion.

You should ponder the old adage "common sense isn't all that common" as you delve into your prejudices.
RNG is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Current Events

Tags
built, wall



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Um. Should we be building The Big Wall around - uhm - Wall Street? tristanrobin Current Events 15 December 26th, 2016 01:32 AM
More riots built on a BLM lie coke Current Events 21 September 22nd, 2016 09:47 PM
Who built the pyramids? Sabcat Conspiracy Theories 11 October 7th, 2015 05:19 PM
Musk's Hyperloop Being Built RNG Science and Technology 4 March 2nd, 2015 06:46 AM
When We Still Built BIG THINGS!!! Medicine Man Science and Technology 16 October 5th, 2014 03:55 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.