Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 114
  1. #81  
    Quote Originally Posted by 063_xobx View Post
    I personally feel that the bill of rights applies to everyone citizen or not but would love to hear anyones arguments for/against this.
    Personally, I don't think it makes sense to extend amendments 2, or 9 to non-citizens. Even those here legally.

    To those that are here illegally, I would also take away 4, 6, and 7. But that's after thinking about it for less than 30 seconds, so I could easily be persuaded on that...
  2. #82  
    Quote Originally Posted by NathanS View Post
    Your premises are incorrect. I'm not fine with our country blowing trillions of dollars to build weapons that have little use than to **** with people. I think in the event that we don't waste such exorbitant sums of money we would be more prosperous and the people of NK or Iran might be more interested in our way of life. Instead we give an example to them, build up your military, **** off all your neighbors, and when someone dissents, put a bullet in their head.

    I'd rather be a liberal than a statist tool.
    Yes, you must be right. You clearly learned in history class that all countries will never invade or harm another successful and prosperous country as long as they promise not to have a strong and capable military. No country would ever bother or invade a country that can't defend itself or it's resources. If we just disarm, we would all be friends. Yep, in all of recorded history that's how it went until the mean old USA decided to blow a bunch of money on weapons...

    Thanks for setting us straight.
  3. #83  
    Quote Originally Posted by NathanS View Post
    Taxation without representation comes to mind.
    Thats it? Thats the best youve got?
    Where do we have that?
    “There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order.”
    — Ed Howdershelt
    "A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have."- Thomas Jefferson
  4. #84  
    Quote Originally Posted by NathanS View Post
    Taxation without representation comes to mind.
    Then you clearly opposed Obamacare, because that is going to cost trillions of tax dollars and I didn't get my point of view "represented" by either party. So you are saying I should be allowed to stop paying taxes without consequesnce? Cool.
  5. d.moss's Avatar
    Posts
    541 Posts
    Global Posts
    582 Global Posts
    #85  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    Excellent. I will let Obama know that he can send all the remaining GITMO prisoners to live in your town. I'm sure they won't cause any trouble.

    In fact, if I can go where I choose, I think I'd like to live in your house. Please clean up the spare room so I can hang up my things.
    this is for finally pre and woof as well.. great comeback guys (not). think about what you say before you say it.. if they're a prisoner, they can't go anywhere cause they're in prison.. if they've gotten out of prison.. by all means let the move to wherever they choose.. haven't they suffered the consequences for their actions. do you consider the reason people commot crimes.. people rob and steal because they feel they don't have the opportunity to do the right thing. they feel opressed so they commit crimes out of anger.. they don't just say.. oh.. i'm from mexico... let me go stab some random person.. there's always a motive and it need to not continue to be ignored.

    i think americans are scared that foreigners are gonna take their jobs.. well hey.. step your game up..

    to let someone move int your house is completely different from someone moving into a country.. you can build your own house.. but no one can build a piece of land.. so if a convicted felon has the money to move into my neighborhood then by all means do so..
  6. #86  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    Yes, you must be right. You clearly learned in history class that all countries will never invade or harm another successful and prosperous country as long as they promise not to have a strong and capable military. No country would ever bother or invade a country that can't defend itself or it's resources. If we just disarm, we would all be friends. Yep, in all of recorded history that's how it went until the mean old USA decided to blow a bunch of money on weapons...

    Thanks for setting us straight.
    Now, now. He may only taken level 101 in those classes. You don't need to know the higher levels for a basket weaving degree. We need to understand this and allow him to speak. This land does allow freedom of that.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  7. #87  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    Then you clearly opposed Obamacare, because that is going to cost trillions of tax dollars and I didn't get my point of view "represented" by either party. So you are saying I should be allowed to stop paying taxes without consequesnce? Cool.
    I absolutely agree.
  8. #88  
    Quote Originally Posted by Woof View Post
    Thats it? Thats the best youve got?
    Where do we have that?
    For one, spending trillions of dollars and passing it off on people who can't vote or aren't even born.
    Last edited by NathanS; 04/07/2010 at 11:12 AM.
  9. #89  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    Now, now. He may only taken level 101 in those classes. You don't need to know the higher levels for a basket weaving degree. We need to understand this and allow him to speak. This land does allow freedom of that.
    Graduating with a degree in electrical engineering. The ad hominem argument seems to be strong with this crowd.
  10. d.moss's Avatar
    Posts
    541 Posts
    Global Posts
    582 Global Posts
    #90  
    Quote Originally Posted by mvpilot172 View Post
    They should not, however the US needs to make it easier to become a legal citizen.
    i agree.. every country should make it a hell of a lot easier to become a citizen.. as in proof of residence with some type of family member or friend.. and the type of work they're looking for.. then give em an i.d.
  11. #91  
    Quote Originally Posted by NathanS View Post
    Graduating with a degree in electrical engineering. The ad hominem argument seems to be strong with this crowd.
    Congrats on going for the Electrical Engineering degree. So do you mean ad hominem in the explicit or implicit sence?
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  12. #92  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    Congrats on going for the Electrical Engineering degree. So do you mean ad hominem in the explicit or implicit sence?
    Explicit sense
  13. #93  
    Nathan asked me to post this link for him. Being fair minded I will here for him.
    Why no one invades Switzerland
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  14. #94  
    Quote Originally Posted by NathanS View Post
    Seriously you are a complete tool. Yea, I'm in college, great argument. You are old, dumb, and probably stuck in a job you hate that pushes you to argue with 20 somethings on the internet.

    The constitution is words on a piece of paper. It has no power unless enforced. Enforcement requires interpretation. Because it has been twisted to the bidding of dumb midwestern union rabblerousers like you who hate anyone with different colored skin does not constitute an argument.

    What if "highly valuable" people skipped the process and just came here? Wouldn't that be more valuable? Waste less money and time going through the process? What value does the process add?

    It doesn't add any. It's a great way for idiots like you to parrot economic fallacies that have been around for hundreds of years. You attempt to use a document designed to protect people from those like you for your own purposes.
    Wow, my guess is you are majoring in philosophy and smoking a lot of pot.

    You don't know me, and you have no idea what you are talking about regarding who/what I am.

    And if you are so liberal, why would you make a derogatory inference about unions? Unions and liberals are close allies. And you are wrong, I am not in a union. Nor did I make any statement about skin color - not yours, mine, or anyone else's. And I like my job because it affords me the time to set young people straight before they become leaders that make stupid decisions that will screw things up for the next generations. Such as believing that the last few hundred years of economic "fallacies" haven't produced the wealth and freedom that makes the internet possible (thanks to AL Gore), and makes it possible for you to speak such nonsense as if you have a clue. The emptier the barrel, the louder the noise. The less you know, the stronger your opinion. That's how oppression emerges... read up on WW-II... when Germany decided that "a particular race must be bad, so let's put them all in concentration camps and incinerate them." You have to agree that they were ignorant in their strongly held belief. And they got to decide which laws were ok. They decided that murder was ok as long as they were murdering another race.

    Now, you should study up on the word Narcissist. It explains why you think you can be selective about which laws apply to you.

    Then, be sure you sign up for a logic class and join the debate team. Here are some items you will need to learn about:


    Package-deal fallacy: consists of assuming that things often grouped together by tradition or culture must always be grouped that way. (because Ithink laws apply to everyone, I must be stupid, old, racist union member)

    Red Herring: also called a "fallacy of relevance." This occurs when the speaker is trying to distract the audience by arguing some new topic, or just generally going off topic with an argument. (you don't think illegal immigration should be illegal, so let's talk about politics and national defense spending and policy)

    A red herring is an argument, given in response to another argument, which does not address the original issue. See also irrelevant conclusion

    Ad hominem: attacking the person instead of the argument. A form of this is reductio ad H*tlerum. Notice why that fallacy is named after such an intelligent thinker and humanitarian?


    Psychologist's fallacy: occurs when an observer presupposes the objectivity of his own perspective when analyzing a behavioral event ("I know I'm right because I'm right. I know you are stupid because you aren't me. But, if stupid people like you were in my shoes, you would instantly see how right I am. There is no way that I could be missing information of perspective, or that my bias could possible effect my objectivity the way all your experience and education has clearly made you a bigot and a fool")
    Last edited by Cantaffordit; 04/07/2010 at 11:28 AM.
  15. #95  
    NathanS - I would have to say that even though I think your view are all over the map and not more refined, I like how you are keeping your side of the debate going. It shows that you are at the very least attempting to understand or tolerate others views and not just sit back and be an *****.
    Sprint: 2-TouchPad 32g, Frank.-Pre-2, Pre-, MiFi & 1-LG Lotus with Xlink tied to home handsets. Backups: 650 & 700wx

    HP Please release the CDMA Pre3 phones!
    We want them!!!
  16. #96  
    Quote Originally Posted by NathanS View Post
    Graduating with a degree in electrical engineering. The ad hominem argument seems to be strong with this crowd.
    Please don't take any jobs designing bridges, sewage or water treatment, pharmaceuticals, buildings, or anything that could kill people if your flawed logic actually contributes to the design or manufacturing of said items.

    And yes, you have used "ad hominem" to attack us, our founding fathers, our constitution, etc. No point in worrying about history, facts, civility or reason. Must be a fine school you are graduating from. Mom must be proud.
  17. #97  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    NathanS - I would have to say that even though I think your view are all over the map and not more refined, I like how you are keeping your side of the debate going. It shows that you are at the very least attempting to understand or tolerate others views and not just sit back and be an *****.
    Hey, I took a 'backseat/lurker' position on this thread a couple of hours ago.

    Uh-oh... I hope you don't think i'm a .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
  18. #98  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    Wow, my guess is you are majoring in philosophy and smoking a lot of pot.

    You don't know me, and you have no idea what you are talking about regarding who/what I am.

    And if you are so liberal, why would you make a derogatory inference about unions? Unions and liberals are close allies. And you are wrong, I am not in a union. Nor did I make any statement about skin color - not yours, mine, or anyone else's. And I like my job because it affords me the time to set young people straight before they become leaders that make stupid decisions that will screw things up for the next generations. Such as believing that the last few hundred years of economic "fallacies" haven't produced the wealth and freedom that makes the internet possible (thanks to AL Gore), and makes it possible for you to speak such nonsense as if you have a clue. The emptier the barrel, the louder the noise. The less you know, the stronger your opinion. That's how oppression emerges... read up on WW-II... when Germany decided that "a particular race must be bad, so let's put them all in concentration camps and incinerate them." You have to agree that they were ignorant in their strongly held belief. And they got to decide which laws were ok. They decided that murder was ok as long as they were murdering another race.

    Now, you should study up on the word Narcissist. It explains why you think you can be selective about which laws apply to you.

    Then, be sure you sign up for a logic class and join the debate team. Here are some items you will need to learn about:


    Package-deal fallacy: consists of assuming that things often grouped together by tradition or culture must always be grouped that way. (because Ithink laws apply to everyone, I must be stupid, old, racist union member)

    Red Herring: also called a "fallacy of relevance." This occurs when the speaker is trying to distract the audience by arguing some new topic, or just generally going off topic with an argument. (you don't think illegal immigration should be illegal, so let's talk about politics and national defense spending and policy)

    A red herring is an argument, given in response to another argument, which does not address the original issue. See also irrelevant conclusion

    Ad hominem: attacking the person instead of the argument. A form of this is reductio ad H*tlerum. Notice why that fallacy is named after such an intelligent thinker and humanitarian?


    Psychologist's fallacy: occurs when an observer presupposes the objectivity of his own perspective when analyzing a behavioral event ("I know I'm right because I'm right. I know you are stupid because you aren't me. But, if stupid people like you were in my shoes, you would instantly see how right I am. There is no way that I could be missing information of perspective, or that my bias could possible effect my objectivity the way all your experience and education has clearly made you a bigot and a fool")
    Sarcasm fails you.
  19. #99  
    Quote Originally Posted by Cantaffordit View Post
    Please don't take any jobs designing bridges, sewage or water treatment, pharmaceuticals, buildings, or anything that could kill people if your flawed logic actually contributes to the design or manufacturing of said items.
    I'll get to work on those electrical bridges

    And seriously, **** you. Your generation ruined this country if anything.
  20. #100  
    Quote Originally Posted by Finally Pre View Post
    NathanS - I would have to say that even though I think your view are all over the map and not more refined, I like how you are keeping your side of the debate going. It shows that you are at the very least attempting to understand or tolerate others views and not just sit back and be an *****.
    No, it shows he is trolling and trying to instigate further discussion to be entertained by how passionately people respond to his inconsistent and silly statements.

    He isn't consistent at all. First he slams the constitution as being worthless paper, then he praises the founding fathers for writing the constitution so that slavery could later be abolished by amendment. He proposes that everyone should be able to go where they want, but opposes Obamacare to take care of them. He opposes tax burden and debt being left for our children, but slams the very freedo that produced enough wealth for something like Obamacare to even be possible. This guy is just trolling.

    From the Urban Dictionary:

    Troll: One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of ad hominem attacks (i.e. 'you're nothing but a ******' is a popular phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the essence of the issue.
    Last edited by Cantaffordit; 04/07/2010 at 11:47 AM.
Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions