US Constitution too risky for Bush...when dealing with non-terrorist related matters

bokmeow

Ned's Ninja Academy Dropout
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Posts
11,314
jethrek said:
http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20040218_leavitt.html

I can only pose this question on the Bush administration: Who are we fighting?

Because it doesn't look to me like any terrorists are involed.

Well, you know only Communists and Socialists protest against the war, and they are the seed of terrorism. Ashcroft is only stamping out the threat before it grows, who knows when the next Saddam Hussein will be born from one of them peaceful demonstrators. :loco:
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2001
Posts
4,209
Re: Re: US Constitution too risky for Bush...when dealing with non-terrorist related

bokmeow said:
Well, you know only Communists and Socialists protest against the war, and they are the seed of terrorism. Ashcroft is only stamping out the threat before it grows, who knows when the next Saddam Hussein will be born from one of them peaceful demonstrators. :loco:

Oh, I know. Half of them are developing WMD's in their BASEMENTS! It's scary.
 

Loopz

Formerly Punjab,
Joined
Aug 16, 2001
Posts
12,871
This is typical of those whose grasp on power is rooted in fear and grounded in immoral tactics. These people have no soul, no clue what America should truly be about, and about as much common sense as the Taliban, which they are the Christian equivalent of. Everyone needs to get out and vote against Bush in November to rid our country of these extremist fucks.
 

Mike Shagohod

Stray Dog Grunt
20 Year Member
Joined
May 16, 2002
Posts
13,947
Re: Re: Re: US Constitution too risky for Bush...when dealing with non-terrorist related

jethrek said:
Oh, I know. Half of them are developing WMD's in their BASEMENTS! It's scary.

Well if you can HARNESS your farts into a vaccum chamber over the next six years you'll have enough energy for a HIROSHIMA Yeild Atomic Bomb. *I shit you not on that. It was reported as fact by the D.O.D. in a news blurb that quickly got nixed off the air after 9-11. So if 8 years up the road an entire city dissapears off the map, it's probably some pissed off bloke who lost a bet on the out come of the Super Bowl or something.

MERCENARY X99
 
Last edited:

evil wasabi

The Jongmaster
25 Year Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Posts
60,434
Re: Re: Re: Re: US Constitution too risky for Bush...when dealing with non-terrorist related

Mercenary X99 said:
Well if you can HARNESS your farts into a vaccum chamber over the next six years you'll have enough energy for a HIROSHIMA Yeild Atomic Bomb. *I shit you not on that. It was reported as fact by the D.O.D. in a news blurb that quickly got nixed off the air after 9-11. So if 8 years up the road an entire city dissapears off the map, it's probably some pissed off bloke who lost a bet on the out come of the Super Bowl or something.

MERCENARY X99


Hahaha.

Kinda reminds me of the insane amount of M&Ms you could eat to give you the same high that one joint would. Something like 2000 regular size packs.
 

bokmeow

Ned's Ninja Academy Dropout
Joined
Apr 11, 2002
Posts
11,314
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: US Constitution too risky for Bush...when dealing with non-terrorist related

lithy said:
Hahaha.

Kinda reminds me of the insane amount of M&Ms you could eat to give you the same high that one joint would. Something like 2000 regular size packs.

Don't get me started on these urban legends. Remember the one about the kid who blew up because he ate pop rocks and drank carbonated soda? Whoo whee!
 

evil wasabi

The Jongmaster
25 Year Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2000
Posts
60,434
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: US Constitution too risky for Bush...when dealing with non-terrorist related

bokmeow said:
Don't get me started on these urban legends. Remember the one about the kid who blew up because he ate pop rocks and drank carbonated soda? Whoo whee!

That wasn't real? Damn I had plans for next year.
 

Mike Shagohod

Stray Dog Grunt
20 Year Member
Joined
May 16, 2002
Posts
13,947
Loopz said:
This is typical of those whose grasp on power is rooted in fear and grounded in immoral tactics. These people have no soul, no clue what America should truly be about, and about as much common sense as the Taliban, which they are the Christian equivalent of. Everyone needs to get out and vote against Bush in November to rid our country of these extremist fucks.

I didn't vote for BUSH last time, and I don't much care for him now aside from his "War Chieftian" side, but really I don't see how KERRY is much better. Plus it's been mentioned that he has a hard on for something to do with that Godless entity of the U.N. that has failed at everything it does, despite being a U.S. military veteran himself. I don't have enough info on that right now, though I'm looking for more in-depth INTEL on this subject as we speak before making my final decsion as to who to vote for, but GWB might just end up the lesser of two evils in the end. Truth be known I don't like any of the people running, but I have to vote because I always have. I just hope some of the allegations against KERRY that I've heard of are not true, cause if they are he isn't getting my damned vote. I vote for no one who's against either the 2nd Amendment being upheld, or someone who wants to further get into bed with the U.N. as we certainly don't need some fuckard in Brussels Belgium telling us how to run our damn country, or Europe further trying to disarm this nation for the U.N.'s bullshit "One World Order" shit that's been on the books since 1965. *At least BUSH told the U.N. where to stick it and took action with the IRAQ thing, for better or worse. We don't need someone in office who may very well with their liberal beliefs be a fuckin' Communist. I took an oath to do battle with those bastards and their Neo Bolshivek regurgitated Marxism ever being the standard under the guise of representational democracy... though lately even GWB has been making me wonder where his loayalties lie as well.

...some interesting times we're living in indeed. Mercenary X99 "The Mad Grizzly" will be watching.

MercX99-w-M94.jpg


MERCENARY X99
 
Last edited:

Kid Aphex

samus' love slave,
Joined
Nov 23, 2001
Posts
9,851
Mercenary X99 said:
I didn't vote for BUSH last time, and I don't much care for him now aside from his "War Chieftian" side, but really I don't see how KERRY is much better. Plus it's been mentioned that he has a hard on for something to do with that Godless entity of the U.N. that has failed at everything it does, despite being a U.S. military veteran himself. I don't have enough info on that right now, though I'm looking for more in-debt INTEL on this subject as we speak before making my final decsion as to who to vote for, but GWB might just end up the lesser of two evils in the end. Truth be known I don't like any of the people running, but I have to vote because I always have. I just hope some of the allegations against KERRY that I've heard of are not true, cause if they are he isn't getting my damned vote. I vote for no one who's against either the 2nd Amendment being upheld, or someone who wants to further get into bed with the U.N. as we certainly don't need some fuckard in Brussels Belgium telling us how to run our damn country, or Europe further trying to disarm this nation for the U.N.'s bullshit "One World Order" shit that's been on the books since 1965. *At least BUSH told the U.N. where to stick it and took action with the IRAQ thing, for better or worse. We don't need someone in office who may very well with their liberal beliefs be a fuckin' Communist. I took an oath to do battle with those bastards and their Neo Bolshivek regurgitated Marxism ever being the standard under the guise of representational democracy... though lately even GWB has been making me wonder where his loayalties lie as well.

...some interesting times we're living in indeed.

MERCENARY X99

Vote for neither...you're getting the same agenda.

Instead, go illegally arm yourself with unregistered firearms so when they begin to recall sidearms, they don't know you've got one.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2001
Posts
4,209
Mercenary X99 said:
I didn't vote for BUSH last time, and I don't much care for him now aside from his "War Chieftian" side, but really I don't see how KERRY is much better. Plus it's been mentioned that he has a hard on for something to do with that Godless entity of the U.N. that has failed at everything it does, despite being a U.S. military veteran himself. I don't have enough info on that right now, though I'm looking for more in-debt INTEL on this subject as we speak before making my final decsion as to who to vote for, but GWB might just end up the lesser of two evils in the end. Truth be known I don't like any of the people running, but I have to vote because I always have. I just hope some of the allegations against KERRY that I've heard of are not true, cause if they are he isn't getting my damned vote. I vote for no one who's against either the 2nd Amendment being upheld, or someone who wants to further get into bed with the U.N. as we certainly don't need some fuckard in Brussels Belgium telling us how to run our damn country, or Europe further trying to disarm this nation for the U.N.'s bullshit "One World Order" shit that's been on the books since 1965. *At least BUSH told the U.N. where to stick it and took action with the IRAQ thing, for better or worse. We don't need someone in office who may very well with their liberal beliefs be a fuckin' Communist. I took an oath to do battle with those bastards and their Neo Bolshivek regurgitated Marxism ever being the standard under the guise of representational democracy... though lately even GWB has been making me wonder where his loayalties lie as well.

...some interesting times we're living in indeed. Mercenary X99 "The Mad Grizzly" will be watching.

MercX99-w-M94.jpg


MERCENARY X99

The application of the Patriot Act, as well as its drafting is purely Bush administration. Kerry is unlikely to continue this particular agenda, especially since Bush's record is what the dems are going after.
 

c.t.h

Maxima's Barber
Joined
Apr 17, 2003
Posts
2,350
jethrek said:
The application of the Patriot Act, as well as its drafting is purely Bush administration. Kerry is unlikely to continue this particular agenda, especially since Bush's record is what the dems are going after.

I think Kerry voted for it.

If any of it's unconstitutional, I'm sure the courts will overturn it.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2001
Posts
4,209
c.t.h said:
I think Kerry voted for it.

If any of it's unconstitutional, I'm sure the courts will overturn it.

Voting for what was at the time a popular bill, and drafting, pushing, and applying that bill are on totally different levels cth. Bush WANTED this bill out, and pushed congress using the "war on terror" to accomplish those ends. Bush, along with his cabinet are now directly responsible for the abuses this bill has seen. Trying to claim Kerry will do the same is not only a weak argument; it even highlights how there is no defense for the Bush administration in this.

Is it not telling that the most prevalent pro-Bush argument is that "Kerry is no better than Bush"? Any reasonalby intelligent man could read between the lines to hear the words "Bush sucks".
 

c.t.h

Maxima's Barber
Joined
Apr 17, 2003
Posts
2,350
I don't like bush that much, he isn't conservative enough - socially, I think he's okay, but economically, we just keep spending.

Kerry? A huge social liberal, and if he had his way he'd practicaly dismantle the military. Have you seen his record on military spending?

I just wouldn't trust kerry to keep this country safe.
 
Joined
Feb 4, 2001
Posts
4,209
We were safe under England...

Besides, If Bush is humiliatingly defeated in 2004 there're much greater chances of an actual conservative republican coming up in 2008. As it stands, the even worse Dick Cheney would be the '08 runner.
 

Spoonman

Enemy Chaser
Joined
Jan 14, 2004
Posts
1,167
Kid Aphex said:
Vote for neither...you're getting the same agenda.

Instead, go illegally arm yourself with unregistered firearms so when they begin to recall sidearms, they don't know you've got one.

This is true....nothing gets a point across like voter apathy...
 

BoriquaSNK

His Excellency BoriquaSNK,, The Ambassador of Appl
15 Year Member
Joined
May 9, 2003
Posts
4,705
Believe me, Kerry won't touch the military except by fighting any unjust military clauses in the patriot act. It's true he voted for it, but he's had time to reflect and if he really wants to win the election he will change his mind VERY quickly. Kerry definately isn't a social liberal, he's the definition of moderate, meaning he'd let things run their course instead of legislating for or against something as either wing would do.

Mind you, I agree with very little of what Kerry stands for, but anti-military he is not.
 

galfordo

Analinguist of the Year
15 Year Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Posts
18,418
Mercenary X99 said:
I didn't vote for BUSH last time, and I don't much care for him now aside from his "War Chieftian" side, but really I don't see how KERRY is much better. Plus it's been mentioned that he has a hard on for something to do with that Godless entity of the U.N. that has failed at everything it does, despite being a U.S. military veteran himself. I don't have enough info on that right now, though I'm looking for more in-debt INTEL on this subject as we speak before making my final decsion as to who to vote for, but GWB might just end up the lesser of two evils in the end. Truth be known I don't like any of the people running, but I have to vote because I always have. I just hope some of the allegations against KERRY that I've heard of are not true, cause if they are he isn't getting my damned vote. I vote for no one who's against either the 2nd Amendment being upheld, or someone who wants to further get into bed with the U.N. as we certainly don't need some fuckard in Brussels Belgium telling us how to run our damn country, or Europe further trying to disarm this nation for the U.N.'s bullshit "One World Order" shit that's been on the books since 1965. *At least BUSH told the U.N. where to stick it and took action with the IRAQ thing, for better or worse. We don't need someone in office who may very well with their liberal beliefs be a fuckin' Communist. I took an oath to do battle with those bastards and their Neo Bolshivek regurgitated Marxism ever being the standard under the guise of representational democracy... though lately even GWB has been making me wonder where his loayalties lie as well.

...some interesting times we're living in indeed. Mercenary X99 "The Mad Grizzly" will be watching.

MercX99-w-M94.jpg


MERCENARY X99

If you like your guns, which apparently you do, I'd strongly suggest that you don't vote for Kerry.
 
Last edited:

galfordo

Analinguist of the Year
15 Year Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Posts
18,418
BoriquaSNK said:
Believe me, Kerry won't touch the military except by fighting any unjust military clauses in the patriot act. It's true he voted for it, but he's had time to reflect and if he really wants to win the election he will change his mind VERY quickly. Kerry definately isn't a social liberal, he's the definition of moderate, meaning he'd let things run their course instead of legislating for or against something as either wing would do.

Mind you, I agree with very little of what Kerry stands for, but anti-military he is not.

Kerry has consistently voted to downsize the military and to redistribute military spending on social programs. Read the following article. It's definitely a bit biased, but a direct quote is a direct quote:

http://www.chronwatch.com/content/contentDisplay.asp?aid=5786
 

BoriquaSNK

His Excellency BoriquaSNK,, The Ambassador of Appl
15 Year Member
Joined
May 9, 2003
Posts
4,705
You're absolutely right, his voting record is definately anti-military, but times have changed.

His plans on sending 40,000 more troops I truly believe would come to fruition, and in my personal opinion we should be sending no less than 60,000 more troops or enlist peacekeeping aide from NATO in Afghanistan.

Besides, any significant non-patriot act military cuts would just be wasted breath under the current congress.
 

galfordo

Analinguist of the Year
15 Year Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Posts
18,418
BoriquaSNK said:
You're absolutely right, his voting record is definately anti-military, but times have changed.

His plans on sending 40,000 more troops I truly believe would come to fruition, and in my personal opinion we should be sending no less than 60,000 more troops or enlist peacekeeping aide from NATO in Afghanistan.

Besides, any significant non-patriot act military cuts would just be wasted breath under the current congress.

I'm not quite sure what part of the Patriot Act you'd like to have cut - so I don't know quite how to respond about that. Could you elaborate?

As for Kerry - I agree that we should send more troops. Of course I'm no expert, but it makes sense to me. And if he does get elected, and makes good on that promise, then he will have earned some respect from me. However, you'll have to forgive me for being a little skeptical of him at the moment. But people can change - and if he gets elected and does things that I like - then hats off.
 

neobuyer

Master of Disguise,
Joined
Oct 7, 2000
Posts
8,083
Hey- shouldn't we be forcing Iraqi women to come to the US and become sex slaves by now?

WTF is up with that? When you win a war, to the victor go the spoils.

Hello? George Bush! WTF is wrong with you?
 

galfordo

Analinguist of the Year
15 Year Member
Joined
Mar 14, 2003
Posts
18,418
neobuyer said:
Hey- shouldn't we be forcing Iraqi women to come to the US and become sex slaves by now?

WTF is up with that? When you win a war, to the victor go the spoils.

Hello? George Bush! WTF is wrong with you?

Hmmmm .... I'd have to agree with you there sir. He really dropped the ball on that one:glee:.
 

BoriquaSNK

His Excellency BoriquaSNK,, The Ambassador of Appl
15 Year Member
Joined
May 9, 2003
Posts
4,705
galfordo said:
I'm not quite sure what part of the Patriot Act you'd like to have cut - so I don't know quite how to respond about that. Could you elaborate?

I'm primarily against the decreased regulations over issuing subpeonas, the statute that allows for nearly random wiretapping and the like, as well as allowing the FBI to monitor peaceful protests, the deregulation of torture, and the preemptive strike doctrine. There's a lot more that I really don't agree with,but I'm confident the act will be gutted and ruled unconstitutional in the next couple of years anyway if a democrat isn't elected this year.
 

Howdoin

, Le BLING-BLING!,
Joined
Jul 31, 2002
Posts
1,689
Ahhhhhhh ! The sweet taste of freedom and freespeech...

I am so glad not to live in a country where the governement spies on its citizens.

On a side note I doubt anyone will reverse all these rights the gvt obtained over people's freedom... why? Think about it, if u r the head of the most powerfull nation on earth wouldn't you want to have control over as many things as possible? It would be pretty dumb for a gvt to overturn such granted powers. After all there is a reason why there are Revolutions, they do serve a purpose of giving some power back to the people.

Fear the American Revolution 2, coming soon in a town near you.


(OK I must be on the CIA/FBI list for dissidents just for saying that)
 
Top