The traitor within?

[White Beard]

I never said right or left I just pointed out instances of criminality, or at minimum corruption in the Obama administration. I seriously thought it was a joke when people claim he had a scandal free administration.

I was reflecting on MY reference to left/right, not yours.

I feel I can relate: when I see “recaps” of Obama’s “crimes”, it seems like a joke. Not a funny one, but still...everything you mentioned as examples of his ‘corruption’ is a nothingburger. Only to be expected when one never weighs actual evidence and only pays attention to partisan sources.

I get that it hurts when you idols are insulted, but it's not l I'll ke these things aren't common knowledge. I will take the word of men who risked life, limb, and career to defy orders and save lives , over a politician.

Once upon a time, everyone knew the world was flat and the sky was made of crystal; that’s the kind of “common knowledge” you’re talking about.

I have no idols, you can’t insult them...I DO have intelligence, however, and you *can* insult that - or try to...but parroting frequently-debunked radio talking points won’t do it.

Take the word of men, if you like - I’ll take the public record, and evidence tested in court.

Comey is an open and closed case of allowing a government official to get away with serious security violations. Many people go to jail for what Hillary did.

Many people? Name 50. Should be easy, there are so many doing it.

Do you count GW’s deleted 2,000,000 private-server emails? Colin Powell’s private email server? Add their names when you speak of Comey’s culpability and HRC’s e-mail “crimes”.

Lois Lerner, asked to keep the court transcript sealed for her safety. If you need facts sealed for your safety you did some pretty shady shit.

Sure, I’ll bite: WHO is Lois Lerner and why do we care?

So their is no hallucination buddy. You really should open your eyes. These people wouldn't extend their special standards of justice to you. They would never know your name . While people rot in prison for doing less they make millions off of their political power.

My eyes have been wide open for a long damn time, thanks. Bark at clouds all you like; I’m sure it will save the nation....

And thanks for mentioning those who “...make millions off their political power.”
The sterling examples being Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan; Ryan has worked in government ALL HIS LIFE since college and McConnell has been in govt. since he left the military, and is now one of the richest men in Kentucky. And in Congress.

Swamp rats, we recognize you!

 

[OldSchoolGrow]

dude its a fkin article, i didnt write it..you found one sentence and them boom..

im done with your click bait instigating trump tactics

peace man ill see you at the events like i always do and you can be the same nice guy you are, the opposite of what you are online..seriously black and white..dont expect a handshake this time though, or free seeds and a smile

Your Trump Derangement Syndrome would never allow you to be nice to me ever again. Hence the reason you started to come at me sideways in the first place.

Those seeds I threw in the garbage btw. No reason for bad karma.

 

[OldSchoolGrow]

While yes it is an ammendment, it's not actually altering the constitution. The bill of Rights ammendment 1-10 were clearly a planned addition. Some of the founders didn't think it was necessary. They never imagined that half the nation would demand that their rights should be taken away. Yet here we are millions of Americans don't believe we have the right to arms, private property, illegal search and seizure, free speech and religion. It's almost funny if it wasn't so terrifying that citizens demand to be treated as subjects, so they can ask the government to take away the people's rights they disagree with.

Fortunately they as a group realized the tyranny is the inevitable outcome of government. To prevent tyranny, a bill of individual rights would be a strong deterrent.

edit.

 

[Water-]

The Decleration of Idepedence- 1776,

Then the Constitution - 1789

then the first 10 amendments to the Constitution make up the Bill of Rights., which was finally ratified by the final state, Virginia , in 1791

 

[OldSchoolGrow]

The Decleration of Idepedence,

Then the Constitution

then the first 10 amendments to the Constitution make up the Bill of Rights.

all the first laws of the United States, right?

 

[Cannavore]

Tell me who has succesfully invaded or conquered the USA since 1776?

Corporate fascism and oligarchy conquered this country decades ago.

 

[HBF]

The argument is that the people will have to revolt and kill a bunch of government employees and take back over their nation after thieves who don't believe in the Republic try to change it.

Dead Tyrants no longer tyrannize.

Sleepy Hollow, an absurdly entertaining new show recasting Ichabod Crane as a time-traveling Revolutionary War hero who fights evil with George Washington's Bible, took some time near the end of its first season to address gun rights.

"Crane, remind me to later have a chat about what your founding friends were thinking when they crafted our rights to bear arms," police lieutenant Abbie Mills tells the aforementioned Ichabod.

"There was concern among us that it could lead to perverse consequences," he concedes.

Did it ever. About 32,000 Americans are killed each year using guns (murder or suicide), and a mountain evidence makes it increasingly clear that the wide availability of firearms in the United States bears a great deal of blame.

There is no longer any defensible argument for a constitutional right to own a firearm, if there ever was.

Let's bracket the notoriously confusing text of the Second Amendment, and pretend we were writing the thing from scratch. Why would you want a gun rights proviso? I can think of three reasons, broadly speaking.

1. Guns protect liberty. Citizens have the right to rebel against a tyrannical government, and they need guns to do that.

2. Citizens have a right to defend themselves however they'd like. Gun rights enable self-defense and, thus, save lives.

3. People enjoy guns, and millions of reasonable gun owners shouldn't be deprived of something they love because other people abuse it.

Each of these arguments depends on indefensible factual and/or moral assumptions. I'll take them in turn.

The "right to rebel" argument assumes that armed revolt is the last option available if the American government ever goes Full Weimar. Not only has that never happened in a consolidated democracy like the United States, but that kind of paranoid thinking is itself profoundly corrosive of democratic politics.

What's more, it's wrong. Political scientists Erica Chenoweth and Maria Stephan's book Why Civil Resistance Works puts together compelling statistical evidence that non-violent protest is more likely to attract mass participation and topple governments than its armed twin, especially in the modern era. Protecting gun ownership, it turns out, is a terrible way to facilitate rebellions against the state. That goes double when the weapons protected are handguns rather than automatic rifles, RPGs, and anti-aircraft batteries.

The second argument in favor of untrammeled gun ownership, a right to self-defense, is equally incoherent. For starters, there's no reason that, in a civil society, the right to defend yourself implies the right to defend yourself however you'd like. A basic part of government's job is to limit our ability to hurt others; assuming the absolute right to self-defense constitutes, in Alan Jacobs' evocative phrasing, "the absolute abandonment of civil society."

And indeed, the evidence is very clear that a government that fails to adequately regulate guns is failing in its duty to protect its citizens. A recent study found that, after Missouri repealed its background check law, the murder rate spiked by 16 percent; the researchers tracked many of the killings back to newly purchased guns. Conservative writer Robert VerBruggen double-checked the data, and concluded that "the state's murder rate indeed soared the year after a gun law changed, and there's no other obvious explanation."

It's not just that background checks save lives, however: Guns take them. Contrary to what you may have heard, there just isn't that much scientific controversy about whether easy access to guns helps more than it hurts. Two recent, methodologically rigorous studies confirmed that high levels of gun ownership lead to both more murders and more suicides. A recent survey of the best research on guns confirmed that those two studies spoke for the consensus of gun researchers.

So there's one argument left: the idea that because people deeply enjoy firearms and gun culture, it's wrong for the federal government to restrict it. This is easily the most serious of the three arguments. There's more than a whiff of disdain for "rifle-toting rubes" in the anti-gun argument, and it's terribly immoral to use the power of the government to restrict people's rights merely because you find their subculture unpleasant.

Still, this isn't nearly good enough to defend a constitutional right to gun ownership. The rights you protect in a constitution — rights to free speech and against arbitrary discrimination, for instance — are fundamental rights, to be protected absolutely. They deserve that status because they are so essential to the functioning of a democracy that no majority should be permitted to override them.

Gun rights don't rise to that status. The basic principle of a liberal democracy is that, for laws to be legitimate, majorities must enact them. Setting aside the basic rights protections necessary for majority rule to function fairly, any other determinations about the scope of lesser rights should be set by Congress and state legislatures. Gun rights, then, shouldn't be constitutionally protected.

Instead, they should be regulated like another dangerous thing many Americans enjoy: drugs. People who deeply enjoy alcohol, marijuana, and other drugs should be free to use them — drug prohibition is monstrously illiberal. But that doesn't mean that they should be able to get wasted while driving, on the job, or when underage.

Likewise, the fact that there's a liberty interest in allowing gun ownership doesn't mean guns should be easy to get. Background checks are a no-brainer, but beyond that, it should be much harder to purchase guns and the penalties for abusing them should be much more serious. For instance, Japan's onerous gun regulations have almost wiped out gun crime. Many of these rules, like requiring that gun owners regularly undertake the equivalent of a driver's test for guns, can be borrowed without imposing a full handgun ban.

"Having a gun now is like having a time bomb," one Yakuza (Japanese mafia) boss told The Japan Times' Jake Adelstein. "Do you think any sane person wants to keep one around the house?"

Our Yakuza don is, much like Ichabod Crane, an unexpected source of wisdom. While it's probably impossible to eliminate the Second Amendment today, and not worth the resources it would take to find out, one thing is clear: The Founding Fathers of the Sleepy Hollow universe were right to worry. There are thousands of "perverse consequences" every year that vindicate their hesitation.

 

[White Beard]

While yes it is an ammendment, it's not actually altering the constitution. The bill of Rights ammendment 1-10 were clearly a planned addition. Some of the founders didn't think it was necessary. They never imagined that half the nation would demand that their rights should be taken away. Yet here we are millions of Americans don't believe we have the right to arms, private property, illegal search and seizure, free speech and religion. It's almost funny if it wasn't so terrifying that citizens demand to be treated as subjects, so they can ask the government to take away the people's rights they disagree with.

Fortunately they as a group realized the tyranny is the inevitable outcome of government. To prevent tyranny, a bill of individual rights would be a strong deterrent.

Just read “The Anti-Federalist Papers”, it’s not expensive. It covers the debate over the then-new constitution that led to the bill of rights. You’re getting a crappy education in this stuff from your preferred sources (just sayin’).

 

[Water-]

all the first laws of the United States, right?

you are proven wrong and then you erase and then change what you wrote?

first you wrote that Packer was wrong and that the Bill of Rights exitested before the USA.

well, you are somewhat right:

"The Bill of Rights, also known as the English Bill of Rights, is an Act of the Parliament of England that sets out certain basic civil rights and clarifies who would be next to inherit the Crown. It received the Royal Assent on 16 December 1689 and is a restatement in statutory form of the Declaration of Right presented by the Convention Parliament to William III and Mary II in February 1689, inviting them to become joint sovereigns of England. The Bill of Rights lays down limits on the powers of the monarch and sets out the rights of Parliament, including the requirement for regular parliaments, free elections, and freedom of speech in Parliament. It sets out certain rights of individuals including the prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment and reestablished the right of Protestants to have arms for their defence within the rule of law. Furthermore, the Bill of Rights described and condemned several misdeeds of James II of England.[1]

These ideas reflected those of the political thinker John Locke and they quickly became popular in England.[2] It also sets out – or, in the view of its drafters, restates – certain constitutional requirements of the Crown to seek the consent of the people, as represented in Parliament.[3]

In the United Kingdom, the Bill of Rights is further accompanied by Magna Carta, the Petition of Right, the Habeas Corpus Act 1679 and the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 as some of the basic documents of the uncodified British constitution. A separate but similar document, the Claim of Right Act 1689, applies in Scotland. The Bill of Rights 1689 was one of the inspirations for the United States Bill of Rights.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689

 

[HBF]

When you don't have anything intelligent to say: cartoons time.

View Image

 

[HBF]

Islamic murderers killed almost all those people.

It there'd have been no Islamic warmongering, there wouldn't have been any of that.

When the United States won the Civil War against the Democrats there was no mass murder. Because Democrats realized their asses were whipped, s.t.f.u. and started playing half-ass ''thank you for not exterminating us'' civilian ball.

Same thing in WWI
Same thing in WWII
Same thing in every war we've had recently.

The difference in Iraq?

ISLAM.

End of story.

They're legendary murderers and that's what they did in Iraq.

T.O.D A.Y,

they're plotting, and MURDERING.

If you don't like that, change the story. Oh that's right, you did.

You lied and said Bush and the Americans killed those people.

Being part of Islam killed those people,

just like being part of Islam killed every other one some Islamic murderer

decided to purge.

Your wacko beliefs are as despicable and filled with the urge to self injure as the rest of these Demonic Rat liars.

Bush killed a million civiliions in a war he started with lies.

History will not be kind to him.


Trump will be known as a buffoon but the Bushes and Clintons orechestrated mass murder.


Im not defending Trump as a human being or his military action record so far. I know he is scum.

I just think the Bushes are getting a free ride by the corporate media and their backers that benefited from all their wars.

 

[HBF]

Clearly you're just into lying. It was why they wouldn't invade the phrase ''behind every blade of grass is a gun'' was something they said.

When you get some evidence for your fantasy life you'll no longer be caught lying through your teeth like any other common Democrat.

That's what happens when your handlers send you to wikipedia to educate yourself because they're too busy molesting students and indoctrinating them to become government employee union pawns who graduate nearly a third behind home schooled Ozarks fundies, teaching themselves to read at their kitchen table.

''Wik uh peedia ar my collidge!''

Wikipedia told you a magical gassiness makes the cold light blocking nitrogen atmosphere is a heater too.

LoL

See HE'S quoting from HISTORY CLASSES.

YOU'RE the one in here who didn't TAKE any HISTORY classes and got your education on Wikipedia.

You should change that to ''Clearly Brother nature never attended a history class in YOUR life.

Clearly you've never attended a history class in your life...

 

[HBF]

You just failed, and miserably. A bunch of circular DemonicRatSpeeK to justify barking that winning nearly every war in two hundred years ''means nothing to me'..

More Demonic Rat science darkening attempts to re-write history.

First off, when have we 'kicked' the British's asses outside of the 'revolutionary war'? As far as I can see we still work pretty well with the pommies my friend. But America has been attacked for a long time and there's only a very few asses who we've 'kicked'.



I don't see the point in getting into the genocide of the American Indian because we definitely kicked their asses. However, we got our asses kicked in the Thornton Affair, which lead to the Mexican-American war and yeah we got some shit out of that, but at what cost? We had the War of 1812, and according to your perspective, we either won or lost that one. Then, we get to the fucking civil war, the war between, umm, Americans and other Americans. Who won there? There's been a few since then too, but I'll bring up Vietnam as we really didn't kick any ass there. If you recall as well, the entire reason we went into WWII was because the Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor. Us nuking the fuck out of them doesn't really seem like a win to me, but hey, different strokes and all. We'll fast forward past the domestic terrorism and the ignorance of the first world trade center attack to Sept 11 where we very much got our asses handed to us by those we trained and ignored. Sure, we got Bin Laden, but was Al-Qaedas ass kicked for good??


I'm sure Trump has defeated all this evil in the world though and we're edging closer and closer to world peace.

 

[bigtacofarmer]

Islamic murderers killed almost all those people.

It there'd have been no Islamic warmongering, there wouldn't have been any of that.

When the United States won the Civil War against the Democrats there was no mass murder. Because Democrats realized their asses were whipped, s.t.f.u. and started playing half-ass ''thank you for not exterminating us'' civilian ball.

Same thing in WWI
Same thing in WWII
Same thing in every war we've had recently.

The difference in Iraq?

ISLAM.

End of story.

They're legendary murderers and that's what they did in Iraq.

T.O.D A.Y,

they're plotting, and MURDERING.

If you don't like that, change the story. Oh that's right, you did.

You lied and said Bush and the Americans killed those people.

Being part of Islam killed those people,

just like being part of Islam killed every other one some Islamic murderer

decided to purge.

Your wacko beliefs are as despicable and filled with the urge to self injure as the rest of these Demonic Rat liars.

Actually it goes back way furthur than Bush. But he is the most recent.

I think you have a problem with Islam. If I remember correct, less than 20 men killed a few thousand innocent, with a few hundred in plane tickets. Yup thats sucks. But everyone of those billions of dollars spent on the war of terror also kill innocent. Killing anyone is killing. Bombing homes of people is still killing. Not going to make a christian joke.

If all of Islam is out to get us then when? This is crap. This type of thinking about other humans makea me ashamed to be murican.

 

[HBF]

Which is exactly what the Democrats have done to California and are trying to do to the entire United States.

when a person's immune system weakens, small infections it could have dealt with became life threatening
Rome at its end had become a semi abandoned ruin
most of the hordes were migrations of people looking for a better living space
nothing lives forever

 

[HBF]

I gave you that thumbs-up for recognizing what Democrat rule is.

Which is exactly what the Democrats have done to California and are trying to do to the entire United States.

 

[HBF]

I have a tremendous problem with Islam, they've never reformed, and everywhere you see Islam, you see lack of freedom and horrible tyranny.

I think you have a public school education that told you Islam is good,

Christianity is bad,

and that your parents are the devil,

because they use the devil weed

and don't believe a magical gassiness makes the cold nitrogen atmosphere a heater.

If you had just a few minutes' reading on the history of Islam you'd have known they've NEVER changed their religion's most salient point: enslave everyone under Sharia.

Bush didn't kill all those people in Iraq, his armies did a superb job of protecting infrastructure and there was little human life lost.

The ISLAMICS however, caused nearly a million people to die.

Keep spinning it all in circles til you run to the bathroom and drink rubbing alcohol like Dukakis' wife.

Thinking like a nation hating Democrat generally leads to mental problems and it's easy to see why. Look at the stuff you people say and don't say.

You people didn't even educate American children properly about other nations' religions in the school you went to, or you'd know, that

Islam has a problem with EVERYONE.

It's why they're invading England, invading Germany, Invading the U.S. to the degree they can, invading France, trying to invade Russia.

Why don't American kids understand the goal of Islam is to install Sharia?

The entire reason for many of the West's laws about religion is to stop Christianity from functioning like Sharia.

Nah, you're completely clueless, you've got your eye on inviting some Islamic people to live in your home.

So they can rob and rape your neighbor.

Because your neighbor doesn't understand Islam.

What you talk like is a brainwashed ISIS punk. ''I think you have a problem with Islam.''

I think it's very f***g odd you DON'T.

It's like you love anything that degrades America and Western Civilization.

Actually it goes back way furthur than Bush. But he is the most recent.

I think you have a problem with Islam. If I remember correct, less than 20 men killed a few thousand innocent, with a few hundred in plane tickets. Yup thats sucks. But everyone of those billions of dollars spent on the war of terror also kill innocent. Killing anyone is killing. Bombing homes of people is still killing. Not going to make a christian joke.

If all of Islam is out to get us then when? This is crap. This type of thinking about other humans makea me ashamed to be murican.

 

[Water-]

I have a tremendous problem with Islam, they've never reformed, and everywhere you see Islam, you see lack of freedom and horrible tyranny.

I think you have a public school education that told you Islam is good,

Christianity is bad,

and that your parents are the devil,

because they use the devil weed

and don't believe a magical gassiness makes the cold nitrogen atmosphere a heater.

If you had just a few minutes' reading on the history of Islam you'd have known they've NEVER changed their religion's most salient point: enslave everyone under Sharia.

Bush didn't kill all those people in Iraq, his armies did a superb job of protecting infrastructure and there was little human life lost.

The ISLAMICS however, caused nearly a million people to die.

Keep spinning it all in circles til you run to the bathroom and drink rubbing alcohol like Dukakis' wife.

Thinking like a nation hating Democrat generally leads to mental problems and it's easy to see why. Look at the stuff you people say and don't say.

You people didn't even educate American children properly about other nations' religions in the school you went to, or you'd know, that

Islam has a problem with EVERYONE.

It's why they're invading England, invading Germany, Invading the U.S. to the degree they can, invading France, trying to invade Russia.

Why don't American kids understand the goal of Islam is to install Sharia?

The entire reason for many of the West's laws about religion is to stop Christianity from functioning like Sharia.

Nah, you're completely clueless, you've got your eye on inviting some Islamic people to live in your home.

So they can rob and rape your neighbor.

Because your neighbor doesn't understand Islam.

What you talk like is a brainwashed ISIS punk. ''I think you have a problem with Islam.''

I think it's very f***g odd you DON'T.

It's like you love anything that degrades America and Western Civilization.

.

 

[bigtacofarmer]

I have a tremendous problem with Islam, they've never reformed, and everywhere you see Islam, you see lack of freedom and horrible tyranny.

I think you have a public school education that told you Islam is good,

Christianity is bad,

and that your parents are the devil,

because they use the devil weed

and don't believe a magical gassiness makes the cold nitrogen atmosphere a heater.

If you had just a few minutes' reading on the history of Islam you'd have known they've NEVER changed their religion's most salient point: enslave everyone under Sharia.

Bush didn't kill all those people in Iraq, his armies did a superb job of protecting infrastructure and there was little human life lost.

The ISLAMICS however, caused nearly a million people to die.

Keep spinning it all in circles til you run to the bathroom and drink rubbing alcohol like Dukakis' wife.

Thinking like a nation hating Democrat generally leads to mental problems and it's easy to see why. Look at the stuff you people say and don't say.

You people didn't even educate American children properly about other nations' religions in the school you went to, or you'd know, that

Islam has a problem with EVERYONE.

It's why they're invading England, invading Germany, Invading the U.S. to the degree they can, invading France, trying to invade Russia.

Why don't American kids understand the goal of Islam is to install Sharia?

The entire reason for many of the West's laws about religion is to stop Christianity from functioning like Sharia.

Nah, you're completely clueless, you've got your eye on inviting some Islamic people to live in your home.

So they can rob and rape your neighbor.

Because your neighbor doesn't understand Islam.

What you talk like is a brainwashed ISIS punk. ''I think you have a problem with Islam.''

I think it's very f***g odd you DON'T.

It's like you love anything that degrades America and Western Civilization.

Lol. His sheep did it. My parents were very much christian and also support the erasing of another human under the same bullshit religious excuse. Get rid of anyone from any religion that supports killing. At all. The people left regardless what they believe in, are a good group of humans.

 

[xavier7995]

Lol, quite the nuanced view from the democrats=kkk guy. Good luck in that world you exist in.