Political Crossfire Forums

[Patriarch]

Ozzone wrote: You know what's funny? The only thing I've seen different about the current administration's "intervention" in my life is at the airport. It takes me a little longer getting on a plane, I may have to take my shoes off, and I can't carry a suitcase full of liquids.

That's it. Everything else is the same. Seems the government did a good job of minimizing the impact on my liberty in reaction to a serious national threat.

Oh, I know that those phone calls I might make to Tehran and Islamabad, in Farsi, might get intercepted but then I'll be damned careful not to say the words nuclear and allah and other stuff like that.

Your kidding! All I hear from the left is how George Bush has is taking over the world and trashing the Constitution and taking away any and all civil liberties and and and and!

But actually when you look at it the only difference from a Clinton admin and a Bush Admin when it comes to liberties is more time spent at airport security. Of course in my case it's been exactly the same.

Thanks for being honest. Now it's the left's turn.

[mr.snruB]

Patriarch wrote: Ozzone wrote: You know what's funny? The only thing I've seen different about the current administration's "intervention" in my life is at the airport. It takes me a little longer getting on a plane, I may have to take my shoes off, and I can't carry a suitcase full of liquids.

That's it. Everything else is the same. Seems the government did a good job of minimizing the impact on my liberty in reaction to a serious national threat.

Oh, I know that those phone calls I might make to Tehran and Islamabad, in Farsi, might get intercepted but then I'll be damned careful not to say the words nuclear and allah and other stuff like that.

Your kidding! All I hear from the left is how George Bush has is taking over the world and trashing the Constitution and taking away any and all civil liberties and and and and!

But actually when you look at it the only difference from a Clinton admin and a Bush Admin when it comes to liberties is more time spent at airport security. Of course in my case it's been exactly the same.

Thanks for being honest. Now it's the left's turn.

Maybe if you broke from the massive herd of sheep that you're part of that believes anything Bush tells you then you'd have a harder time. Hitler never threw any Pro-Nazi White Germans into Auschwitz. Bush isn't Hitler, but the point still applies

[Patriarch]

callous wrote: Patriarch wrote: callous wrote: Patriarch wrote: callous wrote: Patriarch wrote: TomPaine wrote: I answered "no", but then again, I'm not a right-wing authoritarian who secretly wants the government to be run by a dictatorship so they can feel safe and protected.

Actually the last time I checked it was the Libs who want MORE government More regulations More socialism More Taxes.

Don't pull that crap on me it's the Libs who want Authoritarianism and want the govt to run their lives and raise their kids.

Except that you support an administration that is doing exactly that.

So do you understand what a liberal is?

Oh really? I wasn't aware GW was pushing bigger taxes, more welfare, bigger govt, and more intervention into businesses, and more socialism.

Oh wait he hasn't been. You were probably thinking of John Kerry the democrats nominee in '04. But no, he lost by the way.

Yes I am aware of what liberalism means. Real question is are you?

Bigger government? = Patriot Act

Intervention into business? = CAFTA

Welfare has nothing to do with this thread, and was thrown in for visual effect.

Socialism? = Centralizing warmaking powers and intelligence in the president.


There you have it, your very own political education as it applies to current events.

That was a flame thread. All opionion with no facts.

Patriot act does not make the government bigger. Can you prove that? It does however protect against terror attacks. By the way have you even read the patriot act or have you just heard about how bad it is from the left? I would guess the latter.

Cafta? How about NAFTA which was architect by who? BILLy Clinton.

Pinhead wrote: Socialism? = Centralizing warmaking powers and intelligence in the president.

Actually warmaking powers have Always been to the president, that's not a new crazy GW take over thing, I know you would like to think so. And intelligence is not a presidential power, its a separate organization called the CIA perhaps you have heard. And no GW did not "take that over," as well.

And yes welfare is a very socialistic idea. It is very relevant.

Any more smart ones?

The patriot act doesn't make government bigger? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Homeland security? 30 some-odd executive orders?

and your using clinton, an equally conservative politician to escape the argument?

Good god man, quit while your behind.

Hah I'm behind? I should quit while im AHEAD, Right pink panther.

You still didnt answer how the patriot act made the govt bigger, nor if you have ever even read it. All you did was add little laughing faces. That seems to be a common trend to liberals when they lose arguments.

Homeland security? What about it? It is to make America safer and to prevent another terrorist attack. But your against that right. You would be fine with another one aye?

Clinton was not a conservative by any means.

Good one pink.

[Patriarch]

mr.snruB wrote: Patriarch wrote: Ozzone wrote: You know what's funny? The only thing I've seen different about the current administration's "intervention" in my life is at the airport. It takes me a little longer getting on a plane, I may have to take my shoes off, and I can't carry a suitcase full of liquids.

That's it. Everything else is the same. Seems the government did a good job of minimizing the impact on my liberty in reaction to a serious national threat.

Oh, I know that those phone calls I might make to Tehran and Islamabad, in Farsi, might get intercepted but then I'll be damned careful not to say the words nuclear and allah and other stuff like that.

Your kidding! All I hear from the left is how George Bush has is taking over the world and trashing the Constitution and taking away any and all civil liberties and and and and!

But actually when you look at it the only difference from a Clinton admin and a Bush Admin when it comes to liberties is more time spent at airport security. Of course in my case it's been exactly the same.

Thanks for being honest. Now it's the left's turn.

Maybe if you broke from the massive herd of sheep that you're part of that believes anything Bush tells you then you'd have a harder time. Hitler never threw any Pro-Nazi White Germans into Auschwitz. Bush isn't Hitler, but the point still applies

If I broke from the heard and became a terrorist and started calling Al Qaeda you mean? Well then I would hope GW throws me in jail if I did that. What point are you trying to make?

Oh yes and here we go again with he whole "Bush is Hitler" thing. Hitler was very anti American you know. Shouldn't he be like an idol to you then?

[mr.snruB]

Patriarch wrote: mr.snruB wrote:

Maybe if you broke from the massive herd of sheep that you're part of that believes anything Bush tells you then you'd have a harder time. Hitler never threw any Pro-Nazi White Germans into Auschwitz. Bush isn't Hitler, but the point still applies

If I broke from the heard and became a terrorist and started calling Al Qaeda you mean? Well then I would hope GW throws me in jail if I did that. What point are you trying to make?

Oh come on now. You can't possibly think that's what I meant.

Patriarch wrote:
Oh yes and here we go again with he whole "Bush is Hitler" thing. Hitler was very anti American you know. Shouldn't he be like an idle to you then?

Did you not read my post? It's right in the third goddamn sentance, "Bush isn't Hitler"

[pete]

Absolutely not. Giving up your Liberty is asking for Tyranny!

[Patriarch]

mr.snruB wrote: Patriarch wrote: mr.snruB wrote:

Maybe if you broke from the massive herd of sheep that you're part of that believes anything Bush tells you then you'd have a harder time. Hitler never threw any Pro-Nazi White Germans into Auschwitz. Bush isn't Hitler, but the point still applies

If I broke from the heard and became a terrorist and started calling Al Qaeda you mean? Well then I would hope GW throws me in jail if I did that. What point are you trying to make?

Oh come on now. You can't possibly think that's what I meant.

Patriarch wrote:
Oh yes and here we go again with he whole "Bush is Hitler" thing. Hitler was very anti American you know. Shouldn't he be like an idle to you then?

Did you not read my post. It's right in the third goddamn sentance, "Bush isn't Hitler"

Ok then what were you saying? That since I am a conservative Bush hasn't thrown me in jail? Or that is the reason that I haven't been checked at security? Last time I was there they didn't ask about my political ideologies.

So I guess I still don't know what you are talking about.

[BobbyO]

The dane wrote: Think the point of this poll is to point out dishonesty on the part of some, more specifically anyone who vote no here yet support the patriot act or the military commissions act.


There is nothing dishonest in supporting the PA and MCA, yet also defending liberty. Indeed the two former help the latter do just that.

[thefranzkafkafront]

BobbyO wrote: The dane wrote: Think the point of this poll is to point out dishonesty on the part of some, more specifically anyone who vote no here yet support the patriot act or the military commissions act.


There is nothing dishonest in supporting the PA and MCA, yet also defending liberty. Indeed the two former help the latter do just that.

How.

[mr.snruB]

BobbyO wrote: The dane wrote: Think the point of this poll is to point out dishonesty on the part of some, more specifically anyone who vote no here yet support the patriot act or the military commissions act.


There is nothing dishonest in supporting the PA and MCA, yet also defending liberty. Indeed the two former help the latter do just that.

You defend liberty by taking it away?

[BobbyO]

thefranzkafkafront wrote: BobbyO wrote: The dane wrote: Think the point of this poll is to point out dishonesty on the part of some, more specifically anyone who vote no here yet support the patriot act or the military commissions act.


There is nothing dishonest in supporting the PA and MCA, yet also defending liberty. Indeed the two former help the latter do just that.

How.

Its a tool to be used against those who are attacking, or planning to attack, American institutions.

[BobbyO]

mr.snruB wrote: BobbyO wrote: The dane wrote: Think the point of this poll is to point out dishonesty on the part of some, more specifically anyone who vote no here yet support the patriot act or the military commissions act.


There is nothing dishonest in supporting the PA and MCA, yet also defending liberty. Indeed the two former help the latter do just that.

You defend liberty by taking it away?

liberty is not being taken away.

[thefranzkafkafront]

BobbyO wrote: thefranzkafkafront wrote: BobbyO wrote: The dane wrote: Think the point of this poll is to point out dishonesty on the part of some, more specifically anyone who vote no here yet support the patriot act or the military commissions act.


There is nothing dishonest in supporting the PA and MCA, yet also defending liberty. Indeed the two former help the latter do just that.

How.

Its a tool to be used against those who are attacking, or planning to attack, American institutions.

How dose that protect your innate rights?

[Patriarch]

BobbyO wrote: mr.snruB wrote: BobbyO wrote: The dane wrote: Think the point of this poll is to point out dishonesty on the part of some, more specifically anyone who vote no here yet support the patriot act or the military commissions act.


There is nothing dishonest in supporting the PA and MCA, yet also defending liberty. Indeed the two former help the latter do just that.

You defend liberty by taking it away?

liberty is not being taken away.

You have to understand. Securing your country at all is considered "attacking civil liberties" to liberals. Like I pointed out earlier the PA does not take away any civil liberties nor does is suspend Habitues Corpus.

Unless of course terrorist suspects using a phone is a secured liberty of the Bill Of Rights.

[agentkgb]

Patriarch wrote: You still didnt answer how the patriot act made the govt bigger,
It gives the government more powers.

[mr.snruB]

Could your avatar be filled with anymore cheesy, propaganda type faux-patriotism, Patriarch?

[JohnnyQ]

Perhaps Patriarch could explain why bush signed for a North American Union.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=14965

Don't even dare to attack my link seeing it comes from a very conservative website.

Not making the government bigger/globalization? yeah, right...

[Falconer]

Not for an essential liberty.

An unessential liberty...now there's a poll for you.

[agentkgb]

Falconer wrote: Not for an essential liberty.

An unessential liberty...now there's a poll for you.
What would you define as "essential" and "unessential"?

[LostSoul3412]

agentkgb wrote: mr.snruB wrote: agentkgb wrote: mr.snruB wrote: Would you give up Essential Liberty for Temporary Security?
No. I like my essential liberties too much.

Even with the risk of terrorism?
Even with the risk of Klingons and Romulans invading.

What about the Gorn?

Or Cardassians?

Or Dominion!?

Or Borg!?!

Oh, dear God, what about the Borg!?!