anyone going to the inauguration?

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2922635
As to the "separation of church and state". Show me that line in the Constiution. Libs pull this out of some writings by Jefferson, yet it is not in the Constitution. They give this non-right more power than an explicit right spelled out in the second amendment.
What do you expect? They give more value to a womans emotions than the life of a child...

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2922635
As to the "separation of church and state". Show me that line in the Constiution. Libs pull this out of some writings by Jefferson, yet it is not in the Constitution. They give this non-right more power than an explicit right spelled out in the second amendment.

The supreme court ruled on the meaning of this already many decades ago. Doesn't matter what any says it means, it has been ruled upon.

 

[fish master]

hey, obama has made some really important decisions. what kind of dog, what the dogs name is going to be, how they are going to decorate the white house, what kind of food they will stock. keeping his blackberry. those are very important decisions. the hard part is over.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
http:///forum/post/2922524
Did President Obama live through Lincoln's administration? He sure has talked a lot about it the past week.
None of us lived through slavery, but we all can agree it was a horrific thing.
You haven't been to Iraq, yet you sure talk a lot about it.
None of us experienced WW2, yet I think we can agree we all know facts about the war.
You accuse someone of not getting a broad education Bionic, yet time and again you've admitted you haven't studied the topics at hand.
To say you have to live through something to discuss it severely limits what we can discuss...

Obama references Lincoln simply because of the 'black thing'. I don't agree with it at all.
No I haven't been to Iraq, and will never in my life go there. I have more sense than that. The only thing I talk about Iraq is that we never should have been over there in the first place. The topic continually comes up because you think that's all there is in life. Personally they could nuke the entire area and I'd have no problem with it.
My father lived through WW2 and the Depression. The experiences he lived through were told to me in a way I could've imagined being there. I didn't have to read some book about it to understand what happened in that era.
My 'studying' is my personal life experiences. What has been affected in my life during the tenors of the various president's you seem to know so intimately about. You base all your experience of any subject on mear facts in a book. Sorry, but history has shown what's on written paper isn't 100% accurate. Again, it's what some individuals have interpreted from information they gathered about the event. You seem to take every written page as accurate, and if someone disputes it, you just say 'look it up' or 'show me proof of the contrary'. Anyone can spew historical facts from a book or online media. Doesn't mean they're true.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2922777
You seem to take every written page as accurate, and if someone disputes it, you just say 'look it up' or 'show me proof of the contrary'. Anyone can spew historical facts from a book or online media. Doesn't mean they're true.
I find it ironic, that you say Journey just spewing inaccurate historical accounts. When you quote what dems say in the media.
The simple fact is, you can go back and read what the founders wrote first hand. But yeah, they really didn't say that...

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2922635
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Let's look at this little bit of prose. What does it say? "THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED." Where is there a need to interpret that? The "preamble" of the second amendment may be up for discussion, bit the meat of the amendment is clear, as is the intent. I guess if you are a Clinton, and insure what "is" is, then you would have a hard time understanding "shall not be infringed".
As to the "separation of church and state". Show me that line in the Constiution. Libs pull this out of some writings by Jefferson, yet it is not in the Constitution. They give this non-right more power than an explicit right spelled out in the second amendment.
The problem with your logic is you're taking the punctuation out of the entire sentence to prove your point. Did our Founding Founders intend to not infringe on our rights to bear arms explicitly, or was it in relation to being in a 'well regulated Militia' that you had the right to bear arms? If they wrote the line the way you did, by omitting the comma between 'Arms' and 'shall', then I would completely agree with you. But that's not how it's written, ergo why it's up for interpretation.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2922787
The problem with your logic is you're taking the punctuation out of the entire sentence to prove your point. Did our Founding Founders intend to not infringe on our rights to bear arms explicitly, or was it in relation to being in a 'well regulated Militia' that you had the right to bear arms? If they wrote the line the way you did, by omitting the comma between 'Arms' and 'shall', then I would completely agree with you. But that's not how it's written, ergo why it's up for interpretation.
Fortunately for gun owners, the supreme court doesn't buy your argument...

 

[oscardeuce]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2922777
Anyone can spew historical facts from a book or online media. Doesn't mean they're true.
HAAAAAAA!
More rewriting of history!
I guess facts like this are not true?
December 7, 1941
June 6, 1944
August 9 1945
September 11, 2001
That's right we take the facts and spin them a bit:
12/7/41
The Imperial States of America were gloriously defeated by the forces of Japan following the orders of God on Earth, the Emperor of Japan. If only America had given up their claim to Hawaii, Midway, and the Phillipines, they would not have suffered this terrible defeat and loss of life.

 

[gypsana]

I can honestly say from reading these past post that some people base their opinions on very little substance.
I do not trust Obama. Anyone who reads beyond there beliefs will find so much dirt and discrepancies it is mind boggling. I give everyone a chance to prove themselves, but I really find it hard to take when someone is trying to argue a point that they really do not know all the facts. Research is very important, and that is not just reading print or listening to bias news that supports your view points. To be truly educated you have to know all sides. That goes for religion and politics.
Obama has proven nothing! His appointed cabinet is a mess and some of them are not even qualified to sustain the positions they were appointed to. Also many are rehashed Clintonites. What kind of change is that?
All this junk about Bush destroying the USA in 8 yrs is crap! You give one man an awful amount of power to even make that sort of statement. Clinton was also in for eight years and can you say that he was a savior? People educate yourselves in the power of Congress.
My grandfather came here as a child from Italy(legally!). He had great respect for this country and so much so that he did not speak Italian to his children. If I have to explain why this is important then you just do not get it.
Drinking Starbucks and basing your ideas of of very little information does not make you a scholar.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by oscardeuce
http:///forum/post/2922865
HAAAAAAA!
More rewriting of history!
I guess facts like this are not true?
December 7, 1941
June 6, 1944
August 9 1945
September 11, 2001
That's right we take the facts and spin them a bit:
12/7/41
The Imperial States of America were gloriously defeated by the forces of Japan following the orders of God on Earth, the Emperor of Japan. If only America had given up their claim to Hawaii, Midway, and the Phillipines, they would not have suffered this terrible defeat and loss of life.
I'm not saying historical facts are being 'spun'. However, what occurred during those events and how those events are portrayed in history are based on personal accounts of people who were there. Some data is 100% factual - the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. But how about the conspiracy theory behind the illustrious telegram that Washington received prior to the bombing of Pearl Harbor informing the US of an impending attack? Did that actually occur, or it it hearsay based on personal accounts of individuals who were there?

 

[salty blues]

Since this seems to be an official Obama thread I am posting my comments regarding his signing this morning of among others, an executive order that all future interrogation of terrorist suspects be done according to the army field manual. IOW, no waterboarding or other forms of "torture".
I am fearful that this touchy feely approach is not going to serve us well. We shall of course see. I certainly hope and pray that Obama will be able to match W's record for keeping the country safe since 9-11. However, I do not for a minute believe that extremists bent on destroying us will match Obama's nice guy gestures. Stay tuned.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by gypsana
http:///forum/post/2922883
I can honestly say from reading these past post that some people base their opinions on very little substance.
I do not trust Obama. Anyone who reads beyond there beliefs will find so much dirt and discrepancies it is mind boggling. I give everyone a chance to prove themselves, but I really find it hard to take when someone is trying to argue a point that they really do not know all the facts. Research is very important, and that is not just reading print or listening to bias news that supports your view points. To be truly educated you have to know all sides. That goes for religion and politics.
Obama has proven nothing! His appointed cabinet is a mess and some of them are not even qualified to sustain the positions they were appointed to. Also many are rehashed Clintonites. What kind of change is that?
All this junk about Bush destroying the USA in 8 yrs is crap! You give one man an awful amount of power to even make that sort of statement. Clinton was also in for eight years and can you say that he was a savior? People educate yourselves in the power of Congress.
My grandfather came here as a child from Italy(legally!). He had great respect for this country and so much so that he did not speak Italian to his children. If I have to explain why this is important then you just do not get it.
Drinking Starbucks and basing your ideas of of very little information does not make you a scholar.

The only way you obtain 100% hard substantial facts is by sitting down with the individual and getting it straight from their mouths. Anything else is conjecture. I believe about 20% of the rhetoric that is written about Obama. I can't pass judgement on the guy until he's been in the office for at least a year. You're basing your beliefs about Obama based on this 'dirt' that is written about him, instead of letting him prove himself. You've let the media make up your mind already, and you've shut the door for giving Obama any chance to change your mind. As far as Bush, I go by my life experiences over the last 8 years and how his decisions affected me personally to guage my attitudes about him. Sorry to say, they ain't fond memories.

 

[bionicarm]

Originally Posted by salty blues
http:///forum/post/2922915
Since this seems to be an official Obama thread I am posting my comments regarding his signing this morning of among others, an executive order that all future interrogation of terrorist suspects be done according to the army field manual. IOW, no waterboarding or other forms of "torture".
I am fearful that this touchy feely approach is not going to serve us well. We shall of course see. I certainly hope and pray that Obama will be able to match W's record for keeping the country safe since 9-11. However, I do not for a minute believe that extremists bent on destroying us will match Obama's nice guy gestures. Stay tuned.
Don't give Bush that much credit about keeping this country safe the last 7 years. It's called Homeland Security Act, enacted after the 9/11 attacks. If you want to credit our safety to Bush, then ask why he didn't implement this act PRIOR to the attack. And please don't tell me he didn't have intelligence reports knowing about Al-Qaeda movements before 9/11 happened.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2922931
The only way you obtain 100% hard substantial facts is by sitting down with the individual and getting it straight from their mouths. Anything else is conjecture. I believe about 20% of the rhetoric that is written about Obama. I can't pass judgement on the guy until he's been in the office for at least a year. You're basing your beliefs about Obama based on this 'dirt' that is written about him, instead of letting him prove himself. You've let the media make up your mind already, and you've shut the door for giving Obama any chance to change your mind. As far as Bush, I go by my life experiences over the last 8 years and how his decisions affected me personally to guage my attitudes about him. Sorry to say, they ain't fond memories.
you can't use your experiences any more than I could use mine... I got a college degree, found a well paying job, got married, moved into a nice apartment. My experience was really good. Even now, our salaries are increasing significantly.
But you can't take 1 person's experience as a sample for how the U.S. is doing as a whole.
Although that is a common flaw in liberal logic. They go out and find one person with a sob story, then cast it off as a common place.

 

[gypsana]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2922931
The only way you obtain 100% hard substantial facts is by sitting down with the individual and getting it straight from their mouths. Anything else is conjecture. I believe about 20% of the rhetoric that is written about Obama. I can't pass judgement on the guy until he's been in the office for at least a year. You're basing your beliefs about Obama based on this 'dirt' that is written about him, instead of letting him prove himself. You've let the media make up your mind already, and you've shut the door for giving Obama any chance to change your mind. As far as Bush, I go by my life experiences over the last 8 years and how his decisions affected me personally to guage my attitudes about him. Sorry to say, they ain't fond memories.
Quite arrogant of you to tell me how I base my belief on Obama. BTW you are not correct. Like I said I research, a lot!
So basically what you are saying is in theory you should give a criminal a room in your house for a year to prove that he is either innocent or guilty. I guess that is why there are no guns left on the shelves.

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by gypsana
http:///forum/post/2922946
Quite arrogant of you to tell me how I base my belief on Obama.
What do you expect, the whole liberal ideology is arrogant.
I know what is best for you, and I'm going to pass legislation that makes you do it.
That is what all these rules and regulations do. They get involved in how you run your business, they take your money through taxes and redistribute it. They don't want me to handle my own healthcare, they want to run it. You've gotta be arrogant to think humans are changing the the earths entire temperature. The list goes on and on.

 

[gypsana]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2922951
What do you expect, the whole liberal ideology is arrogant.
I know what is best for you, and I'm going to pass legislation that makes you do it.

 

[aquaknight]

Originally Posted by stdreb27
http:///forum/post/2922943
you can't use your experiences any more than I could use mine... I got a college degree, found a well paying job, got married, moved into a nice apartment. My experience was really good. Even now, our salaries are increasing significantly.
But you can't take 1 person's experience as a sample for how the U.S. is doing as a whole.
Although that is a common flaw in liberal logic. They go out and find one person with a sob story, then cast it off as a common place.
Dude, if it's that well paying, why an apartment? The minimum, would be renting a house like I'm doing. Wouldn't trade it for the world, never an apt. again

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by AquaKnight
http:///forum/post/2922977
Dude, if it's that well paying, why an apartment? The minimum, would be renting a house like I'm doing. Wouldn't trade it for the world, never an apt. again

I'm actually very happy with the apartment, quiet, sound proof, 2 miles from work, and I'm more mobility. Although I tend to agree, I'm not an apartment fan at ALL, but this place has actually overcome my typical objections.
But buying a house is in the works.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by bionicarm
http:///forum/post/2922777
Obama references Lincoln simply because of the 'black thing'. I don't agree with it at all.
No I haven't been to Iraq, and will never in my life go there. I have more sense than that. The only thing I talk about Iraq is that we never should have been over there in the first place. The topic continually comes up because you think that's all there is in life. Personally they could nuke the entire area and I'd have no problem with it.
My father lived through WW2 and the Depression. The experiences he lived through were told to me in a way I could've imagined being there. I didn't have to read some book about it to understand what happened in that era.
My 'studying' is my personal life experiences. What has been affected in my life during the tenors of the various president's you seem to know so intimately about. You base all your experience of any subject on mear facts in a book. Sorry, but history has shown what's on written paper isn't 100% accurate. Again, it's what some individuals have interpreted from information they gathered about the event. You seem to take every written page as accurate, and if someone disputes it, you just say 'look it up' or 'show me proof of the contrary'. Anyone can spew historical facts from a book or online media. Doesn't mean they're true.
So you've never been to Iraq but know enough about it to come to the conclusion that we should never have been there. The topic doesn't come up because I bring it up, rather because many here continue to propagate lies regarding our involvement there.
You don't believe that history books and research can be trusted, yet apparently your father had an infallible and completely objective memory.
Originally Posted by bionicarm
...Sorry, but history has shown what's on written paper isn't 100% accurate.
Reread that sentence. You managed to write one of the best paradoxical statements I've read in quite a while. History has shown you can't trust what is written about history?

Bionic, what's your end game here. Are you trying to argue Socialism has worked in the past but historians had covered it up? Are you subtly arguing that the Constitution and early papers written by the founding fathers are not accurate.
Please explain where I've gone wrong. You say you base your knowledge on life experience. I'd politely say even the most traveled and oldest person alive on this planet cannot hope to live long enough in enough places to get a grasp of what is going on in the world. If we only believe what we personally see and feel we're about to enter into a truly dark age.