gatlingun6 wrote:[quote="GS78 I don't believe what the media and feds are putting out .
gatlingun6 wrote:GS78 wrote:gatlingun6 wrote:[
Gat6
I think we get by now that you would be happy if every Muslim in America either left the country or converted to Christianity. (Jim tell me how the Muslim community is trying to assimilate into American culture.)
I still don't get why you castigate this administration for not following the Constitution when you don't believe in the Constitution.
(?)
Initially I thought you were an Anti-Federalist because that's the position you display whenever you write about the Constitution.
(what do you think the purpose of the Federal Government is jim?)
What camp is a person in when they are neither a Federalist nor an Anti-Federalist? That's puzzling
(Have you stopped beating your wife jim?)
Gat6
gatlingun6 wrote:Your silence is deafening. I have respectfully asked you a series of questions. They were not trick questions, or designed to trip you up. They are a sincere attempt to find out what sources are driving your opinions on the Hutaree Militia, The Muslims around Red Post, and your views on specific parts of the Constitution. In answer to sincere questions what do I get in return? An outpouring of commentary that has nothing to do with any of my questions and with ever increasing anger and stridency in tone.GS78 wrote:against govt jimmie? no I am not against govt, that would make me equivilent to those snot faced liberal punk anarchists we always see crying about climate change, and brown leaves on trees........asked and answered jimbo.gatlingun6 wrote:[ What on earth is the real source of your over arching anger at government??
Gat6
funny you would write something like this the same day that the leftwing media,also known as the dinosaur media and the alphabet media, are beginning to change their mantra from " that christian militia..........to that anti-government milita"..... very telling, looks like you got the memo huh jamie. The problem I have is that this administration is the most corrupt since 1972. This administration and congress are actually working against the American people. My copy of the Constitution says thats when its time to change the form of government we have, not simply because our president is more comfortable with communism than he is with free market capitalism, I mean c'mon jay-jay, he took a sabaticle to write his book in Indonesia, why? as his wife said " We needed to find a place where barrack felt comfortable".....
In the most recent post you wrote this: "this administration is the most corrupt since 1972". That is a stark statement with little wiggle room. In 1972 the President was Richard Nixon. Will you explain with specifics why that's a true statement, a statement of fact.
OK jimmie, in 1972, we had a president who was a long time opponent of COMMUNISM in 2008 we got a long time advocate of COMMUNISM
America has a long history of opposing communism jim.
What is your standard for corruption? Is it simply your opinion?
Is it based on criminal prosecutions?
It is probably some of all, jimbo. I don't think it is reasonable to say that corruption only exists in the event of prosecutions though, do you? in that case there would be no corruption if the criminal was not caught.
corrupt;
Lacking in integrity....polls show that this administration and this congress are overwhelmingly lacking in integrity. Obama who has a different message depending opn which america he is talking down to,has proven to be lacking in integrity.Congress approval ratings last I looked were in the 10% range.
Not straight; dishonest or immoral or evasive.... You would be hard pressed to show one thing this administration has accomplished without being dishonest, evasive or immoral, most notably the healthcare debacle.
Make illegal payments to in exchange for favors or influence....see the healthcare debacle.
You are measuring President Obama's administration against what historians have said is one of the most if not the most criminal in history. The Nixon's administration engaged in burglaries,
saying that the Nixon administration engaged in burglaries is equivilent to saying that the Obama administration engaged in.. man on man nude shower intimidation, because his chief of staff seems to be more comfortable when naked himself with other men.
The President Orchestrated a cover up of criminal activity
So did Clinton, but you fail to mention that. Give it time Obama will catch on
he authorized a massive campaign to sabotage his political opposition,
Obama has orchestrated a massive campaign to do the same, his response to americans who oppose him, see tea partys = racists and klan members...
he used the IRS to go after an enemies list he had created,
Obama just signed a LAW into effect that will use the IRS to go after citizens who oppose his power grabs.
While you are at it. How can you say the President and the Congress are going against the American people?
Perhaps you weren't paying attention this last YEAR. 73% of Americans said they opposed Obamas' and this DEMOCRAT congress healthcare plan since its inception. Those numbers coupled with the largest number of widespread protests in this country since the Vietnam War. This administration and congress found a way to ram through a "plan" without the mandate of the American voter, simply to gain more political strength for their party in future elections, masked as healthcare reform, a "new welfare entitlement" was created.
The President of the United States is elected to do what is best for the country.
Wrong jimmy, the President of the United States is elected to REPRESENT the PEOPLE of the United States, and to strictly adhere to, and protect and DEFEND the Constituion of the United States. He is NOT elected to do whats best for the United States in HIS OPINION.
We do not elect Presidents to simply obey some poll. Did President Bush follow the will of the American people when he didn't follow get out of Iraq?
The thing you liberals always leave out is that by going into Iraq, Bush, with all his warts, drew the enemy into a centralized killzone, and boxed him in. I realize that big picture viewing is beyond most of your side, but hey you still have code pink with you.
Your comment about communism is not worthy of any question. Why ask a question when the accusation shows that you lack even the most basic understanding of communism.
My comment about communism as it pertains to Obama is very clear jim, our president was raised by communists. His mentors were communists, most of his friends in school(higher ed, not grade school) were communists, marxists, and other radicals and most likely wore che t-shirts like some of the idiots who voted him into the whitehouse. His mother made a point to shack-up with communists. He proudly claims in his books that he "sought out marxists and other such radicals as friends and professors during his college years.(HIS WORDS JIMMY) He , OBAMA, has surrounded himself with communists, and has even gone as far as to place them inside his most trusted advisors in the whitehouse. As for my understanding of communists jim, I have had communist brain tissue in my hair. I understand them very well.
Finally, it's irrelevant where he went to write his book. I don't know where he went and like most Americans who made it a best seller they don't care either.
Now who's being disingenuous ?Gat6
...and this morning, this is exactly what their lawyer has stated." There was no law broken, all the govet has is a bunch of guys who dressed in camo, talk to much and play army....GS78 wrote:viiiball wrote:I'm sorry but you don't need the media to show that this group was very much on the fringe. Their very own web site states that they are here to fight against the anti-christ. I know that can be left open to a lot of interpretation but folks in the main stream don't have web sites with soldier rankings and videos of military style training.
what I am saying, and I know to be true, is that the US government 's expertise in crafting a storyline that most people believe is second to none in the world. If they have to they will bring in steven speilberg to direct the show....as far as we know these kooks are guilty of talking to much while playing army......
oh he will someday, thats what this group was practicing for.....OakRidgeStars wrote:
Taking the side of American citizens who have not been charged and convicted of a crime is siding with the enemy? I guess I keep forgetting that for all your talk about the Constitution that's all it is empty rhetoric! You are indeed an anti-Federalist who would be much more comfortable with total majority rule and nothing but contempt for any and all minorities!GS78 wrote:Why do you always take the side of enemies of the USA? not that I care really jimmy, I just wonder. Did you not recieve the parade you thought you deserved for some imagined accomplishment?gatlingun6 wrote:Vahunter wrote:WildBill did you know they patrol the perimeter in Red House carrying AK's ? And a couple of them were arrested after 911 for supplying firearms to terriosts. Plus the main road in was named after the terriost that ordered Daniel Pearle beheaded.
As long as the weapons had no automatic capability, what's the problem? Isn't it just law abiding citizens patrolling their property? Shouldn't you all be supporting their right to do that? Can anyone please point me to the indictments, and the subsequent trial information on the 2 who sold firearms to terrorists? Is the main road private or public? If it's private why would you support the government coercing the owner to change the name of something on his property. If it's a State road, VA does not need a reason they can just change it as far as I know.
Back to a private road. Doesn't the owner have a 1st Amendment right to name the road whatever he wants? Btw what is the address of this place and the name of the road in question.
Gat6
What's telling is you either could not answer a few simple questions, or you were too embarrassed to let others see what you really think of the Constitution!GS78 wrote:against govt jimmie? no I am not against govt, that would make me equivilent to those snot faced liberal punk anarchists we always see crying about climate change, and brown leaves on trees........ funny you would write something like this the same day that the leftwing media,also known as the dinosaur media and the alphabet media, are beginning to change their mantra from " that christian militia..........to that anti-government milita"..... very telling, looks like you got the memo huh jamie. The problem I have is that this administration is the most corrupt since 1972. This administration and congress are actually working against the American people. My copy of the Constitution says thats when its time to change the form of government we have, not simply because our president is more comfortable with communism than he is with free market capitalism, I mean c'mon jay-jay, he took a sabaticle to write his book in Indonesia, why? as his wife said " We needed to find a place where barrack felt comfortable".....gatlingun6 wrote:[ What on earth is the real source of your over arching anger at government?? Were you this angry at every President from Reagan to Obama? Do you believe in or reject Article VI to the Constitution? Please can you give an unequivocal answer to the following question: As an American citizen what rights did you have on 1 Apr 2008 that you no longer had on 1 Apr 2010.
Gat6
Jim, you really help everyone here see that liberals are indeed name calling sniveling jerks. Cant you post anything without being overly critical of another person's belief's. And before you point out how everyone else here is so critical of the current administration think that most of us also engage in other meaningful conversation. You don't sport.gatlingun6 wrote: What's telling is you either could not answer a few simple questions, or you were too embarrassed to let others see what you really think of the Constitution!
Gat6
After reading this whole thread there seems to be a lot of finger pointing and a lot of tit for tat going on. Now for those that have read my post's I think you can tell very easily where I stand and I make no excuses for it. The Constitution is a gift given to us from our founding fathers, and they did the best that they could in giving the rights to the people and not the government. With that said, unless you came across the borders illegally we are all Americans and the Constitution protects us all. The Constitution does not care about religion it does not care about race or even what color your underwear are, but it does care that you are an American and it will protect us all under the rule of law. I have my own prejudices and have served my time for this great country, been shot at in defense of peace and seen what happens when extreme radicals (in this case they were Muslim) blow up the embassy and barracks that my friends were in. and yes I have seen enough to make me prejudice, but would I fight tooth and nail to defend the rights under the Constitution of any American what ever race or background they may be. The answer is Hell Yes. As far as this Militia story goes we need to wait and see, and i am just glad it did not turn into another Ruby Ridge or Waco. Look up the history on those if you really want to see why a lot of folks here distrust the Feds and the media as they have not always been on the up and up with us. Ever see that person in the conversation that is quiet and just has that smirk on his face. Ever wonderd what the heck are they grinning at? Now before you go off the deep end, I would advise you to just stay on under the proch, and not go there.gatlingun6 wrote: What's telling is you either could not answer a few simple questions, or you were too embarrassed to let others see what you really think of the Constitution!
Your allegation is completely baseless, and more than a little troubling. There are hundreds of thousands on the no fly list most of them of Middle Eastern descent, or with Arabic sounding names. I personally have a friend who works for the Federal Government, carries Federal Identification and he is still singled out for extra screening whenever he travels. This despite showing a U.S. Government issued ID to TSA personnel.zephyp wrote:@gatlingun6 - there are no indictments against the muslim brothers in Red House. Why not? My guess is our government in all of their infinite wisdom dont want to get slammed with a profiling accusation. By our government in that context I mean since they've been there to include left and right. Regarding the current administration I am convinced they have elevated the rights of muslims over simple Americans....
I answered every question you posed jimmy, the fact is you didn't appreciate my answers. You are a lightweight.gatlingun6 wrote:What's telling is you either could not answer a few simple questions, or you were too embarrassed to let others see what you really think of the Constitution!GS78 wrote:against govt jimmie? no I am not against govt, that would make me equivilent to those snot faced liberal punk anarchists we always see crying about climate change, and brown leaves on trees........ funny you would write something like this the same day that the leftwing media,also known as the dinosaur media and the alphabet media, are beginning to change their mantra from " that christian militia..........to that anti-government milita"..... very telling, looks like you got the memo huh jamie. The problem I have is that this administration is the most corrupt since 1972. This administration and congress are actually working against the American people. My copy of the Constitution says thats when its time to change the form of government we have, not simply because our president is more comfortable with communism than he is with free market capitalism, I mean c'mon jay-jay, he took a sabaticle to write his book in Indonesia, why? as his wife said " We needed to find a place where barrack felt comfortable".....gatlingun6 wrote:[ What on earth is the real source of your over arching anger at government?? Were you this angry at every President from Reagan to Obama? Do you believe in or reject Article VI to the Constitution? Please can you give an unequivocal answer to the following question: As an American citizen what rights did you have on 1 Apr 2008 that you no longer had on 1 Apr 2010.
Gat6
Gat6
Sure you sure could, that is what I would expect!zephyp wrote:@Jay - the trolls in question is really only one. He (or she) can be dealt with quite easily, but that would be no fun...and regarding such punitive action I must recuse myself from that for reasons which should be obvious....until such time that someone (other than me) takes such action some will continue to respond...to said trolls.
Btw, this has inspired me to write a novel...The Gatling Saga: A Troll is Born...
"Indeed..." he uttered as he rubbed his clawed hands together in glee..."indeed..."
Well your reply is very illuminating so let's go down the list one by one:zephyp wrote:Uh, the right not to buy health insurance?gatlingun6 wrote: Please can you give an unequivocal answer to the following question: As an American citizen what rights did you have on 1 Apr 2008 that you no longer had on 1 Apr 2010.
Gat6
Is that the correct answer? Did I win a prize...
Uh, ok, another one...the right to uh call someone a dirty name without committing a federal crime?
Is that the correct answer? Did I win a prize for that one...
Ok. One more...the uh right to uh redress grievances to the government without being called a Nazi or Racist or extremist?
Is that the correct answer? No prize yet huh? Ok...lemme think about this....hmmmm...
The fact that I'm a veteran and not an extremist or terrorist?
Is that the correct answer?
You getting the picture yet Jimbo...
Edit #1: Since you, of course, know that I match you wit for wit you wont respond....yet you might wait with "baited breath..."
Edit #2: or is it with "bated breathe..." sorry...
Edit #3: Jimbo, "your silence is deafening"...cant you answer a simple question? Did I win a prize for providing the right answer?
Aaah more revisionist history from the master revisionist historianGS78 wrote:The Nixon's administration engaged in burglaries,The President Orchestrated a cover up of criminal activity, he authorized a secret war in Cambodia, He illegally wiretapped reporters and government employees, he authorized a massive campaign to sabotage his political opposition, he used the IRS to go after an enemies list he had created, he fired government employees to cover up his crimes, he lied to the American people and the Congress about the war and his involvement in the Watergate cover-up. Finally he resigned rather than be impeached. If he had not resigned Republicans and Democrats were poised to do just that. So we await your evidence that the current President exceeds all this.
As if jim didn't know, most of that was in Obama's healthcare debacle...
At least Nixon, once caught in his crimes, resigned. Your affirmative action communist sympathizer, who was elected by morons who thought if they vote for him they would no longer have to put gas in their cars or pay their mortgages not only will NOT resign for his crimes against the american people, he will push for more radical extremism, and continue to alienate the american public, and even challenge them, the majority of which are firmly against him now. No jim, you , like usual don't have a clue what you are talking about.
I will ask though ,when you say "we are waiting " who exactly is 'WE'? I was questioned one time for 23 days. YOU are no match for me james.
. You make it seem as if President Nixon said, oh golly gee you caught me so I'm resigning. The man fought tooth and nail to hang on. He attempted to fire everyone over at DOJ opposing him and more. It was only when the leadership in Congress sat him down and told him resign or be impeached. Then and only then, like a cornered rat with no way out, he resigned. The difference little jimmy, is experience. You watch TV and read wikapedia for yours.[/quote]GS78 wrote:gatlingun6 wrote:[quote="GS78 I don't believe what the media and feds are putting out .
In closing if you are not relying on others then you are uninformed and that accounts for much of what you say.
Gat6
GS78 wrote:Vern, there is a reason jim responds with the invective he does. It's an age old tactic . Disparaging debate puts the other party immediately on the defensive . Used proficiently it allows those with the weaker argument to gain the illusion of superiority, but only to the uninformed observer. That is also why it is a favorite technique of the leftwing in this country, as most of their base is extremely uninformed.
I remember 83.
Sorry Z if you didn't hold Bush to the same standards you are holding Obama, it's perfectly legitimate to ask why or why not!zephyp wrote:@gatlingun6 - please dont bring bush into the conversation. He is gone and this discourse is about obama.
