Ask Me Help Desk - Our president

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, Steve:

So, THAT'S where you think the founders listed who the "people" are and who they're not?

Nahh. What they were doing is listing the people who were WRITING the Constitution. The complete sentence says: "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

That was the correct place to list who the authors were.

In the Bill of Rights, however, where our rights were specified and enumerated, these same men COULD have listed, like they did earlier, "the people of the United States" as the only people these rights apply to. But, they didn't.

So, are you saying, that anyone who is NOT a citizen is NOT entitled to ANY of our Constitutional protections???

excon

Ill make it clearer. Anyone who is a non citizen or persons not being documented to be here. If you are on visa or permit or visiting here then because you're here by permission then you may have protection under our "rights" as established by law. But anything else and you fall under a different category. Or may fall under international law like the Geneava Convention.

Face the facts ; that the FISA rules were amended by Congress in 2008 to make the very surveillance in question statutory compliant means that at most the Bush program was in conflict with the stautory language and not the constitution...

Or are you saying the FISA act is unconstitutional itself ? I can make that argument that FISA was unconstitutional because of its infringement on the inherent authority of the CIC to conduct foreign surveillance. The fact that the enemy is waging war on American soil is besides the point and irrelevant.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tomder55

Face the facts ; that the FISA rules were amended by Congress in 2008 to make the very surveillance in question statutory compliant means that at most the Bush program was in conflict with the stautory language and not the constitution....

Hello again, tom:

So, the illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL wiretapping that went on BEFORE 2008 is just so much chopped liver. I understand. Well, I got news for you.

excon

So "We the People of the United States... do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

Thanks for making my point.

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

So, the illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL wiretapping that went on BEFORE 2008 is just so much chopped liver. I understand. Well, I got news for you.

All that hopenchange is here now, though...

Obama 'Even Worse' Than Bush On Secret Wiretapping Case, Says S.F. Lawyer

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello:

Those of us who supported Obama thought he was going to bring about the change he campaigned on. Those of you who opposed him thought he would too.

We were both wrong.

excon

Quote:

Originally Posted by speechlesstx

Obama 'Even Worse' Than Bush On Secret Wiretapping Case, Says S.F. Lawyer

Hello again, Steve:

By embracing the specious legal arguments Bush employed, he IS worse. It least you expect it from a right winger.

excon

The states secrets argument seems sound to me... even if it causes the government to lose the case.

What this tells me is that both sides of the political divide see the rationale .It is extremism that argues for constitutional rights to the enemy under some universal application.

Since "we the people" are free to leave this country if we so wish and live under different laws, that means that the Constitution only covers those who VOLUNTEER to be governed by it.

I can't see how you can stretch it to govern anyone who doesn't want to live under it.

If we say that our Constitution should govern everyone in the world, then would we not be obligated to ENFORCE that on all people?

Quote:

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, tom:

So, the illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL wiretapping that went on BEFORE 2008 is just so much chopped liver. I understand. Well, I got news for you.

excon

This happened well before 2000 FYI... I know democrats have trouble grasping the fact they lost in 2000 and 2004... and Al Bore lost his mind as a result... but this dates back well before 2000... so get over it already.

And State Secrets should remain secrets... after all, they are far more important than say... Obamas School records are which the left isn't calling to be made public.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothy

Obamas School records are which the left isn't calling to be made public.

Once he posts them, you will say, "Thank you, kind sir! That's exactly what we wanted to see. We are satisfied. Now we will move on to our other requests and concerns."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Once he posts them, you will say, "Thank you, kind sir! That's exactly what we wanted to see. We are satisfied. Now we will move on to our other requests and concerns."

We await the revelations with bated breath!

Quote:

Originally Posted by galveston

We await the revelations with bated breath!

But you do promise to let it go and move on to some other complaint once you've seen his official records. Right?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Once he posts them, you will say, "Thank you, kind sir! That's exactly what we wanted to see. We are satisfied. Now we will move on to our other requests and concerns."

Once he releases his "Records" which apparently are state secrets... the only question that could be posed is "Why did it take so long". And we are entitled to know as the American Public... WHY they were being withheld at this point as well.

This issue is of his own making. Why does the left think he is so special nothing that applied to every other President doesn't apply to him. He's NOT the Messiah.

I seem to remember the left screaming when Bush didn't get his out fast enough to suit them... but ignored the fact John Kerry refused to release his until months after he lost.

Double standards for everything... badmouth Bush and make slanderous statements earns Herohood to the left... but get visciously indignant if someone won't accept Obamas word as gospel.

And the idiots on the far left claiming anyone who disagrees with Obama is a rascist.

Bullsh*t. I suppose all the Bush bashers were rascist too. Particularly the non-white ones.

Disagreeing with a black man on anything makes you a rascist in the eyes of a left winger. But a Black person, Hispanic person etc... isn't rascist if they disagree with anyone NOT a lefty.

Sorry... I'm entitled to disagree with the "dear leader"... the first amendment thing, remember.

At least dumbo is starting to grasp the fact... he's been in office the last 15 months... not Bush. He wanted the job... time to man up and accept the responsibility that goes with it. I haven't heard the man-child blame Bush for something for at least a week now.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothy

Double standards for everything .....badmouth Bush and make slanderous statements.....but get visciously indignant if someone won't accept Obamas word as gospel.

But... but... but... ummmmm... erm... isn't that what makes U.S. politics so... so.. um... fun and keeps us all so sharp and current, and since both sides do it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

But...but...but...ummmmm...erm...isn't that what makes U.S. politics so...so..um...fun and keeps us all so sharp and current, and since both sides do it?

Difference is... nobody has proven Bush lied about anything. And yeah... haven't you heard the adio and video recordings of every major Democrat who actually saw the same reports that said SH HAD what was claimed... in their own voices that pretended otherwise later?

Nobody has proven Obama has been truthful about anything... in fact... the CBO has proven the claims as false on the Health care destruction agenda.

I have a MAJOR bug up my azz with the halfwits in the DNC calling anyone who disagrees with "The Mesiah" is a rascist. Those are fighting words. Usually tossed around by people that ARE rascists themselves, and thus think everyone else is too.

I want to put my foot so far up the behind of those idiots that I will dislodge their eyeballs from behind with the toe of my shoes.

Calling me or anyone a rascist just because "The Dear Leader" is black is the biggest load of crap since the Western-Pacific hauled a trainload of Manure to California.

We all know Jimmy Carter was an incompetent boob when he was in office... now he's a demented old boob today... his problem can be attributed to dementia, he IS advanced in years... not so with the younger democrats doing that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

But...but...but...ummmmm...erm...isn't that what makes U.S. politics so...so..um...fun and keeps us all so sharp and current, and since both sides do it?

This is what makes politics so fun. A bunch of idiots running the country.

Score one for the Dems.

YouTube - 3-25-2010_Hank_Johnson_Guam_Tip_Over.wmv

Quote:

Originally Posted by smoothy

just because "The Dear Leader" is black

Black? I thought he was white. Wasn't his mother white?

Quote:

Originally Posted by califdadof3

This is what makes politics so fun. A bunch of idiots running the country.

And McCain-Palin would be doing what for the country right about now?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Black? I thought he was white. Wasn't his mother white?

Half Black/ half white... at least he can legitimately claim to be African-American. Most blacks can trace their roots back 4 or 5 generations or more in the in the USA. I can't even do that. Yet I'm NOT European-American.

Doesn't matter if he was Cherokee. He's dark skinned. Hell I know Latinos as dark as him, and some Indians even darker.

I don't care what color he is... I hate his agenda. Idiots come in a rainbow of colors, and so do racists.. Look at Rev. Jeramiah Wright, Louis Farakhan... it isn't just the Klan.

Many in that comminity cry rascism any time a black gets arrested... or if anyone dissagrees with Obama... the fact #1 the 1st amendement grants us that right... and you don't have to be a rascist just because you disagree with anyone on anything. Unles of course, you are white and a conservative. Then you are automatically a rascist if you disagree with a Black Democrat. And Democrats allow people like that to be party spokesmen, or speakers of the house.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

And McCain-Palin would be doing what for the country right about now?

It doesn't matter what I think they would be doing. The point is that this person IS in there and doing it to us.