Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Do you always have to lie and make things up in order to have a discussion against imaginary beliefs which dont exist?
You wouldnt travel to your neighbors to spend money if the central government didnt exist to demand that you do? Odd, I think many travel to our neighbors to the north who seem to be doing quite well despite not being linked to our federal government. My god, we should just create one big world wide government becuase according to you, ONLY the federal government makes us successful.. Wait, isnt that what we were accused of doing in Iraq, and you liberals objected.. now you are saying that was positive..
Make up your mind will you!!
Ahh no.. government is there it ensure that YOU can promote your OWN life, liberty, and happiness.
I dont think I'm the one who needs to re-read the Constitution...
Well considering the fact I have a copy of both sitting on my bookshelf, I'm pretty sure I know what they each say. I like to read them once in a while to remind myself the greatness of this nation.
I actually believe you have no clue to what it is your upset with. If the central governemnt didn't exist, Massachusetts and Connecticut would be independent of each other. I would need basically a passport to cross the border.
"...Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness-that to securethese Rights, Governments are insituted among men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...."
Secure, which intently means to protect, promote and preserve those unalienable rights. According to the said document, those rights come from outside the realm of humanity-they are God given. Meaning I do not have the authority on my own terms to give unto myself rights not derived from myself in the first place. Therefore I would be unable to secure these rights to myself without Government.
The federal government is what binds us together, states and people. Every state and each person in them is bound by social contract in the form of the Constitution to the Federal Government and vice versa.
Duh! That's NOT what the reference is about. Hint: Boulder is extremely LIBERAL. You didn't know that? EVERYBODY knows that Boulder Colorado is very, very liberal. Every heard of Alan Ginsberg?
The political leaning of a city does not change the form of government that it was established under. Is this that difficult for you to understand?
Well considering the fact I have a copy of both sitting on my bookshelf, I'm pretty sure I know what they each say.
The fact that you have a copy on your bookshelf doesnt appear to be helping you much..
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin
I actually believe you have no clue to what it is your upset with. If the central governemnt didn't exist, Massachusetts and Connecticut would be independent of each other. I would need basically a passport to cross the border.
More proof you dont have a clue.. The federal government allowed for interstate transactions, that doesnt mean the federal government is there to support you.. Its there to ALLOW YOU to conduct commerce IF YOU WANT..
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin
"...Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness-that to securethese Rights, Governments are insituted among men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...."
You quoted PROOF that you are wrong.. You are quoting the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution..
But none the less, lets bold the correct relevant part shall we?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin
"...Life, Liberty and Pursuit of Happiness-that to secure these Rights, Governments are insituted among men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed...."
You have the right to PURSUE all of those things, not have the government hand them to you..
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin
Secure, which intently means to protect, promote and preserve those unalienable rights. According to the said document, those rights come from outside the realm of humanity-they are God given. Meaning I do not have the authority on my own terms to give unto myself rights not derived from myself in the first place. Therefore I would be unable to secure these rights to myself without Government.
Where on gods earth are you getting this bs from? The Bill of Rights setup the RIGHT for YOU to pursue happiness. Lets even continue this discussion to the Constitution, which does NOT say what the government can do, it LIMITS what the government CAN NOT do. Nothing in the Constitution demands the government provide ANYTHING for its citizens.. NOTHING..
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin
The federal government is what binds us together, states and people. Every state and each person in them is bound by social contract in the form of the Constitution to the Federal Government and vice versa.
Not disagreeing with you but you stated..
Quote:
Originally Posted by lmkcin
Government is instituted to promote and protect life liberty and happiness for all of its citizens, regardless of race, creed, orientation or socio-economic standing.
which is not at all true. The government again is LIMITED by the Constitution, and NOTHING in the Constitution, nor the bill of rights says the government has to promote your happiness..
Hell, I wouldnt be happy without a Lamborghini, where do I sign up to obtain one at the governments expense?
Anybody else notice something unusual in this photo? What the heck is the guy in the middle wearing on his head? It looks to be made out of aluminum foil. He's either trying to block the aliens from reading his mind or maybe using it as an antennae in the hopes that someone will beam him a coherent thought.
Upon closer inspection (me putting on my reading glasses and scootching closer to my monitor LOL) it appears to be either a punchbowl or a truncated replica of the NHL's Stanley Cup...but still quite the chuckle inducer...and notice also the gentleman in front of him, and his quaint misspelling of the word 'what' (WAT)
I wouldn't bother anymore, because obviously there is no interest in the facts. And that someone from about 1000 miles away is clearly more of an authority on what happens here than the people who actually live here are.
Every news source from the Boston area concluded that only about 5000 people came to see Saint Sarah. Most of those people were from outta town anyway. Little more than Tea Party roadies.
Boston Common is capable of hosting, oh, about 500,000 people. I mean the TPX had anticpated 10,000 people and all they could muster was half that, at least. It's all very pathetic. And the vast, overwhelming majority of Bostonians and New Englanders could care less about the little Tea Party movement. They couldn't even get Scotty Brown to show up-the poster child for the new Republican party-who by the way will not be reelected in 2012. Most Bay Staters are already pissed off at him. Why? because he's proven since the second he walked into Washington he was little more than typical Republican. And if you asked anyone in Massachusetts, a typical Republican is the worse kind of person.
And of the 5000 people there, I bet half again were only there to see Saint Sarah. It's like watching a car wreck, you wanna walk over and see it, it's a natural human reaction.
A crowd of up to 1,000 assembled in the early morning sunshine on Boston Common, just across town from Boston Harbor, where the original Tea Party occurred in 1773.
AP's earlier story is below.
A crowd of up to 10,000 was forecast Wednesday for Boston Common, just across town from Boston Harbor, where the original Tea Party occurred in 1773 among colonists upset about British taxation without government representation.
Doesn't it make you mad that the left winger lying news makes you look foolish repeating their lies? This is the result when the news media lies like the low-life dogs they are..
.... and most of those were on "work-release" status....
It would be extremely distasteful for someone to imply that Tea Party protesters were all criminals. Someone that would do that would be lower than pond scum, and a terrible, disgusting person.
It would be extremely distasteful for someone to imply that Tea Party protesters were all criminals. Someone that would do that would be lower than pond scum, and a terrible, disgusting person.
Do you know anyone like that, Mike?
Criminals in the tea party? LOL I am sure most will agree you will find the criminals, racists, bigots, sexually confused and the drug users among the hussein obama sheep. The left wingers are really getting desperate and more violent. Nothing should be put past them.
Just look how all the left winger not-news lied about this tea party.
A crowd of up to 1,000 assembled in the early morning sunshine on Boston Common, just across town from Boston Harbor, where the original Tea Party occurred in 1773.
AP's earlier story is below.
A crowd of up to 10,000 was forecast Wednesday for Boston Common, just across town from Boston Harbor, where the original Tea Party occurred in 1773 among colonists upset about British taxation without government representation.
I found it very interesting when looking for the actual number this morning since I had been seeing everything from this 1,000 up to 8,000 and found a site that said the police estimated from 10,000 to 13,000. I guess your number will be the official number for the MSM from here on. Ain't it great what one can read about Tea Party numbers? Usually much smaller from the MSM though.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hint: Boulder is extremely LIBERAL. You didn't know that? EVERYBODY knows that Boulder Colorado is very, very liberal. Every heard of Alan Ginsberg?
LOL...If You Wanna Be Technical About It...
