Ooops! There Goes Another Freedom!

[Uncensored2008]

There is no evidence that the government is seeking to ‘deny’ anyone his free speech. This thread is clearly ignorant partisan idiocy.

You misspelled "overwhelming."

There is overwhelming evidence that this administration is using the IRS to intimidate and harass political foes in retribution for criticism of said administration.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Helen, you have Wry all wrong!

He has no lawn, he lives in a Condo in an association, with a communal lawn that has very strict rules on use. He doesn't chase kids off the lawn, he informs on them to the Homeowners Association. He spends his days looking on his neighbors patios to see if there is a potted plant out of place or they hung curtains. or some other infraction he can report to the association.

Don't need to do any of that of late, we have hired our own George Zimmerman, he has a holstered .45, and struts his stuff throughout the complex. Yesterday he found a kid with ice tea and candy, kicked the little punks ass right good. His cub scout uniform was all bloody and the hood on his sweatshirt was coated in his tears and snot he cried so hard. Serves the little shit right, he cut through Mrs. Chamberlain's flower bed. Little bastard, never could understand why they let black kids into the cub scouts, that's un-American.

When the fuck did this guy gain possession of a sense of humor?

Are they giving those out with food stamps now?

Damned if I know.

I had to pos-rep him for that post.

Damn near killed me...

 

[Wry Catcher]

Helen, you have Wry all wrong!

He has no lawn, he lives in a Condo in an association, with a communal lawn that has very strict rules on use. He doesn't chase kids off the lawn, he informs on them to the Homeowners Association. He spends his days looking on his neighbors patios to see if there is a potted plant out of place or they hung curtains. or some other infraction he can report to the association.

Don't need to do any of that of late, we have hired our own George Zimmerman, he has a holstered .45, and struts his stuff throughout the complex. Yesterday he found a kid with ice tea and candy, kicked the little punks ass right good. His cub scout uniform was all bloody and the hood on his sweatshirt was coated in his tears and snot he cried so hard. Serves the little shit right, he cut through Mrs. Chamberlain's flower bed. Little bastard, never could understand why they let black kids into the cub scouts, that's un-American.

When the fuck did this guy gain possession of a sense of humor?

Are they giving those out with food stamps now?

Rumor has it, and some people are saying, Wry Catcher is a highly paid agent provocateur. The sources of payment to him are secret and Fox News Reported (Reported? Well, echoed another Fox talking head, so we suppose that's 'reporting') he is not of this earth. In fact he was not heard from until the Internets and forums such as this were developed by the U.S. National Security Agency for the purpose of National Security, aka, spying.

His roots have been traced by investigative reporters from the Washington Times under the leadership of Road's Scholar Sarah Palin (a Road's Scholar is one who attended at least five Jr. Colleges and finally secured a baccalaureate degree from a small four year college which accepted all units from said Jr. Colleges, thus granting her Senior Standing. Needing only three more units she earned them in a seminar on Propaganda and You in the New Century) who determined his first appearance coincided with the explosion of a Planet with a Red Sun.

As for his sense of humor, Prof. Palin determined it was purchased (essentially) when records showed Mr. Catcher was a reader of MAD Magazine and collected all known videos of Monty Python.

There is, however, no evidence he received food stamps for buying any of these items, though Blue Chip Stamps did allow him to get his first and only computer - a Commadore 64.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You have no evidence whatsoever that Obama did. A fact cannot be so without evidence to establish it as fact, therefore you are wrong.

I guess if you lie about it, it never happened, right?

The long line of conservatives targeted by the IRS - Washington Times

 

[manifold]

Don't need to do any of that of late, we have hired our own George Zimmerman, he has a holstered .45, and struts his stuff throughout the complex. Yesterday he found a kid with ice tea and candy, kicked the little punks ass right good. His cub scout uniform was all bloody and the hood on his sweatshirt was coated in his tears and snot he cried so hard. Serves the little shit right, he cut through Mrs. Chamberlain's flower bed. Little bastard, never could understand why they let black kids into the cub scouts, that's un-American.

When the fuck did this guy gain possession of a sense of humor?

Are they giving those out with food stamps now?

Rumor has it, and some people are saying, Wry Catcher is a highly paid agent provocateur. The sources of payment to him are secret and Fox News Reported (Reported? Well, echoed another Fox talking head, so we suppose that's 'reporting') he is not of this earth. In fact he was not heard from until the Internets and forums such as this were developed by the U.S. National Security Agency for the purpose of National Security, aka, spying.

His roots have been traced by investigative reporterd from the Washington Times under the leadership of Road's Scholar Sarah Palin (a Road's Scholar is one who attended at least five Jr. Colleges and finally secured a baccalaureate degree from a small four year college which accepted all units from said Jr. Colleges, thus granting her Senior Standing. Needing only three more units she earned them in a seminar on Propaganda and You in the New Century) who determined his first appearance coincided with the explosion of a Planet with a Red Sun.

As for his sense of humor, Prof. Palin determined it was purchase (essentially) when records showed Mr. Catcher was a reader of MAD Magazine and collected all known videos of Monty Python.

There is, however, no evidence he received food stamps for buying any of these items, though Blue Chip Stamps did allow him to get his first and only computer - a Commadore 64.

However, in spite of all his academic accolades, Wry Catcher still never learned the valuable lesson to quit while you're ahead.

 

[OldUSAFSniper]

I've said before that there is currently no evidence to support Barry's DIRECT complicity in the use of the IRS to target conservative groups. Even though it is painfully apparent that the IRS did use its authority to target those groups and some individuals. Congressional testimony from agency heads and members confirm that they targeted those individuals and groups based upon their political ideology.

None of the testimony in the House has indicated that Barry directed or had knowledge of the activities of the IRS. However, Barry has side-stepped one of the principals of an earlier President that was from the Democratic party. A principal parroted by every President since that time. Harry Truman's sign that resided on his desk, "The Buck Stops Here," is now nothing more than a catchy phrase that means absolutely nothing to this administration or to their choir.

As chief executive of the Executive Branch of this government, the IRS falls directly under his authority. The question then begs to be asked, as the Chief Executive of the Executive Branch, is Barry responsible when agencies under his direct control misuse or abuse their authority?

According to Wry Catcher and NYcarbineer, Barry is not responsible for the action of agencies and personnel directly under his control. Innocent until proven guilty is the mantra! Ronald Reagan will be very glad to hear that you have acquitted him of any complicity or responsibility in the Iran-Contra affair. Case closed.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Why is it you are never able to respond to any of the OPs?

Did you meant to ask why he was unable to respond to any of YOUR OP's? I suppose, if I may speak for another, that all of your threads can be summarized in this way: "Ain't (Obama, W. Wilson, Clinton, Carter, liberals, progressives, Democrats) awful (Commies, Marxists, Stalinists, Maoists, brain dead)....


Could it possibly be related to this incident....

Remember the first thing you heard the paramedics say after your accident…”there must be another cerebral hemisphere around here somewhere…”
Sorry they couldn’t come up with it.

...and you always defend your threads with a personal attack on anyone who doesn't bow down and praise you for being erudite. Of course you're not, for anyone learned or scholarly and armed with a great deal of knowledge is rarely as dogmatic as you; most intelligent men and women have open minds and the ability to see and understand the opinions of others from their perspective without defaulting to ad hominem attacks.

First...you are correct that I have and will continue to attack the 'awful' Liberal/Progressive/communists.....

You know what I stand for, and I promise never to hide same:
I, the individual...you, the collective.


'To embrace tolerance is to cease to believe in anything.'
Chesterton



Now, once you have revealed the reason for our disagreements....

...how seriously should I take ' a personal attack on anyone who doesn't bow down and praise you for being erudite..."

Y' think?



Ready?


You're so dumb your dog teaches you tricks.

Finally a true statement. I applaud you. Yes, Roxy does teach all of us in the family new tricks. She is adept at sock stealing and can learn new tricks within three trials. She is half Border Collie and half Cattle Dog and (I'm not being overly proud) the smartest dog at the Dog Park on any given day, and the cutest. I could go on and on with examples of her skills and abilities, but I wish not to bore you (though you should be made to reap what you sow).

You're not dumb, nor am I, we see the world differently and that's healthy. The great difference being you are a true believer with a mind closed to alternative views, and threatened by them.

 

[Wry Catcher]

When the fuck did this guy gain possession of a sense of humor?

Are they giving those out with food stamps now?

Rumor has it, and some people are saying, Wry Catcher is a highly paid agent provocateur. The sources of payment to him are secret and Fox News Reported (Reported? Well, echoed another Fox talking head, so we suppose that's 'reporting') he is not of this earth. In fact he was not heard from until the Internets and forums such as this were developed by the U.S. National Security Agency for the purpose of National Security, aka, spying.

His roots have been traced by investigative reporterd from the Washington Times under the leadership of Road's Scholar Sarah Palin (a Road's Scholar is one who attended at least five Jr. Colleges and finally secured a baccalaureate degree from a small four year college which accepted all units from said Jr. Colleges, thus granting her Senior Standing. Needing only three more units she earned them in a seminar on Propaganda and You in the New Century) who determined his first appearance coincided with the explosion of a Planet with a Red Sun.

As for his sense of humor, Prof. Palin determined it was purchase (essentially) when records showed Mr. Catcher was a reader of MAD Magazine and collected all known videos of Monty Python.

There is, however, no evidence he received food stamps for buying any of these items, though Blue Chip Stamps did allow him to get his first and only computer - a Commadore 64.

However, in spite of all his academic accolades, Wry Catcher still never learned the valuable lesson to quit while you're ahead.

Aha, the theory of holes. Never subscribed to it. How might one find gold or diamonds (or the occasional dead body) if they quit in the middle of a project?

 

[hunarcy]

If you don't need the federal government to enforce your rights, why is it that gun rights advocates run to the Supreme Court every time they believe some state or local government has passed a law taking away their gun rights?

I think it's obvious that the dispute in this thread is that you don't seem to know what the word enforce means and are, therefore, using it incorrectly.

 

[hunarcy]

So why did the city of Chicago pass a law banning handguns?

Because some people don't want to respect the rights of others. Because we are a nation of laws, when we have such a situation, we allow the courts to arbitrate the dispute.

 

[Wry Catcher]

So why did the city of Chicago pass a law banning handguns?

Because some people don't want to respect the rights of others. Because we are a nation of laws, when we have such a situation, we allow the courts to arbitrate the dispute.

As did the Supreme Court in Dred Scott v. Sandford?

 

[PoliticalChic]

...and you always defend your threads with a personal attack on anyone who doesn't bow down and praise you for being erudite. Of course you're not, for anyone learned or scholarly and armed with a great deal of knowledge is rarely as dogmatic as you; most intelligent men and women have open minds and the ability to see and understand the opinions of others from their perspective without defaulting to ad hominem attacks.

First...you are correct that I have and will continue to attack the 'awful' Liberal/Progressive/communists.....

You know what I stand for, and I promise never to hide same:
I, the individual...you, the collective.


'To embrace tolerance is to cease to believe in anything.'
Chesterton



Now, once you have revealed the reason for our disagreements....

...how seriously should I take ' a personal attack on anyone who doesn't bow down and praise you for being erudite..."

Y' think?



Ready?


You're so dumb your dog teaches you tricks.

Finally a true statement. I applaud you. Yes, Roxy does teach all of us in the family new tricks. She is adept at sock stealing and can learn new tricks within three trials. She is half Border Collie and half Cattle Dog and (I'm not being overly proud) the smartest dog at the Dog Park on any given day, and the cutest. I could go on and on with examples of her skills and abilities, but I wish not to bore you (though you should be made to reap what you sow).

You're not dumb, nor am I, we see the world differently and that's healthy. The great difference being you are a true believer with a mind closed to alternative views, and threatened by them.

What the heck has happened to you????

A nascent sense of humor???

Even handed????



I want the old human piñata back!!


Oh....wait....the last sentence: ".... a mind closed to alternative views, and threatened by them."

That's better.....now I can go back to kickin' the stuffin' out of you!



What with the Christmas holiday coming up, perhaps we should get your intellect it's own chair.
I think we have some doll-house furniture around here somewhere.

 

[Wry Catcher]

I've said before that there is currently no evidence to support Barry's DIRECT complicity in the use of the IRS to target conservative groups. Even though it is painfully apparent that the IRS did use its authority to target those groups and some individuals. Congressional testimony from agency heads and members confirm that they targeted those individuals and groups based upon their political ideology.

None of the testimony in the House has indicated that Barry directed or had knowledge of the activities of the IRS. However, Barry has side-stepped one of the principals of an earlier President that was from the Democratic party. A principal parroted by every President since that time. Harry Truman's sign that resided on his desk, "The Buck Stops Here," is now nothing more than a catchy phrase that means absolutely nothing to this administration or to their choir.

As chief executive of the Executive Branch of this government, the IRS falls directly under his authority. The question then begs to be asked, as the Chief Executive of the Executive Branch, is Barry responsible when agencies under his direct control misuse or abuse their authority?

According to Wry Catcher and NYcarbineer, Barry is not responsible for the action of agencies and personnel directly under his control. Innocent until proven guilty is the mantra! Ronald Reagan will be very glad to hear that you have acquitted him of any complicity or responsibility in the Iran-Contra affair. Case closed.

President Obama maybe 'responsible' under the mantra of "The Buck Stops Here" but is he culpable? But that is not the first question I have, did the IRS ONLY target conservative groups? I understand they did not.

As for President Reagan, I've always suspected his "I don't recall" statements were tantamount to President Clinton's, "I didn't have sex with that women".

 

[Wry Catcher]

First...you are correct that I have and will continue to attack the 'awful' Liberal/Progressive/communists.....

You know what I stand for, and I promise never to hide same:
I, the individual...you, the collective.


'To embrace tolerance is to cease to believe in anything.'
Chesterton



Now, once you have revealed the reason for our disagreements....

...how seriously should I take ' a personal attack on anyone who doesn't bow down and praise you for being erudite..."

Y' think?



Ready?


You're so dumb your dog teaches you tricks.

Finally a true statement. I applaud you. Yes, Roxy does teach all of us in the family new tricks. She is adept at sock stealing and can learn new tricks within three trials. She is half Border Collie and half Cattle Dog and (I'm not being overly proud) the smartest dog at the Dog Park on any given day, and the cutest. I could go on and on with examples of her skills and abilities, but I wish not to bore you (though you should be made to reap what you sow).

You're not dumb, nor am I, we see the world differently and that's healthy. The great difference being you are a true believer with a mind closed to alternative views, and threatened by them.

What the heck has happened to you????

A nascent sense of humor???

Even handed????



I want the old human piñata back!!


Oh....wait....the last sentence: ".... a mind closed to alternative views, and threatened by them."

That's better.....now I can go back to kickin' the stuffin' out of you!



What with the Christmas holiday coming up, perhaps we should get your intellect it's own chair.
I think we have some doll-house furniture around here somewhere.

How one determines intelligence is insightful. You seem to believe (notice, I did not write think) that anyone who disagrees with you is less intelligent than you, and you are therefore entitled to attack them personally. I believe because you have such an attitude, it suggests a number of characteristics detailed in DSM-IV (R) [I have not looked at a copy of DSM-V, but suspect these characteristics are still around]. 'Character disorders' which an intelligent person - not one clinically afflicted - would recognize and correct, for it has nothing to do with the efforts of them to convince others of the correctness of their thinking/ideology.

Alas, you do not, which suggests a certain elitism - not quite narcissistic, but not to be ruled out either, and one which inflames a discussion/debate. Knowing that is your intent ... well, we'll leave that for another time.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Finally a true statement. I applaud you. Yes, Roxy does teach all of us in the family new tricks. She is adept at sock stealing and can learn new tricks within three trials. She is half Border Collie and half Cattle Dog and (I'm not being overly proud) the smartest dog at the Dog Park on any given day, and the cutest. I could go on and on with examples of her skills and abilities, but I wish not to bore you (though you should be made to reap what you sow).

You're not dumb, nor am I, we see the world differently and that's healthy. The great difference being you are a true believer with a mind closed to alternative views, and threatened by them.

What the heck has happened to you????

A nascent sense of humor???

Even handed????



I want the old human piñata back!!


Oh....wait....the last sentence: ".... a mind closed to alternative views, and threatened by them."

That's better.....now I can go back to kickin' the stuffin' out of you!



What with the Christmas holiday coming up, perhaps we should get your intellect it's own chair.
I think we have some doll-house furniture around here somewhere.

How one determines intelligence is insightful. You seem to believe (notice, I did not write think) that anyone who disagrees with you is less intelligent than you, and you are therefore entitled to attack them personally. I believe because you have such an attitude, it suggests a number of characteristics detailed in DSM-IV (R) [I have not looked at a copy of DSM-V, but suspect these characteristics are still around]. 'Character disorders' which an intelligent person - not one clinically afflicted - would recognize and correct, for it has nothing to do with the efforts of them to convince others of the correctness of their thinking/ideology.

Alas, you do not, which suggests a certain elitism - not quite narcissistic, but not to be ruled out either, and one which inflames a discussion/debate. Knowing that is your intent ... well, we'll leave that for another time.

1. "...and you are therefore entitled to attack them personally."
Refer to first amendment, United States Constitution.
And note: First thing I do when I get up is brush my teeth and sharpen my tongue.



2. " I believe because you have such an attitude, it suggests a number of characteristics detailed in DSM-IV (R)"
Modesty prevents me from listing all of the reasons for said characteristics.
Did you notice that ‘awesome’ ends with ‘me,’ and ‘ugly’ begins with ‘u.’



3. "I have not looked at a copy of DSM-V, but suspect these characteristics are still around."
I expect to have my very own chapter.....



4. "'Character disorders' which an intelligent person - not one clinically afflicted - would recognize and correct, for it has nothing to do with the efforts of them to convince others of the correctness of their thinking/ideology."
You have the same grasp of on the English language as you had in the fourth grade….
Please refer to a series of Style Manuals & Writing Guides before you compose your next sentence.



5. "...which suggests a certain elitism - not quite narcissistic,..."
Hey....what's with the 'not quite,' buster????
You better be wearing the Hurt Locker outfit…



6. "... and one which inflames a discussion/debate."
You're gettin' warm.
Bet you missed the pun....




So....after all that....what is the take-away from your brilliant post?
Not much.

But please, don't stop: I love when posts are entirely about me.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

...you are correct that I have and will continue to attack the 'awful' Liberal/Progressive/communists.....

In which case you’ll succeed only in continuing to exhibit your ignorance and hate – for example: liberals and progressives have nothing to do with ‘communists.’

You know what I stand for…

Yes, indeed we do.

You stand for ignorance and fear common among conservative reactionaries, you disdain diversity and expressions of individual liberty, where you seek to expand the power and authority of the state at the expense of individual liberty.

We know you well, as did the Framers, who created the Constitution and its case law to protect all persons from the fear, hate, and ignorance you embrace.

 

[hunarcy]

You stand for ignorance and fear common among conservative reactionaries, you disdain diversity and expressions of individual liberty, where you seek to expand the power and authority of the state at the expense of individual liberty.

Wow, has there ever been a more blatant example of projecting your faults on another?

What you call "ignorance and fear common among conservative reactionaries" is actually showing a reverence to the principles that are the foundation of the society of the United States. Conservatives celebrate diversity in by supporting freedom and individual rights and liberty. Conservatives want to limit the power and authority of the state as a protection to individual liberty. It is the Left that seeks to limit individual choices, from health care to employment and who seeks a uniformity of thinking that stifles the individual.

Honestly, if you were limited to telling the truth, you'd never post again!

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

enforce them, not change them.

In order to enforce the protection of our rights, the federal government has to have the power to determine what they are exactly.

Power? To read the constitution? It's pretty cut and dried.

The Constitution exists only in the context of its case law, where the courts are authorized by the Constitution to determine what the Constitution means.

One of course is entitled to his own opinion as to what the Constitution means; he is not, however, entitled to his own facts of Constitutional jurisprudence.

One is also at liberty to disagree with Supreme Court rulings, and to seek to have rulings overturned through the political process, such as amending the Constitution to nullify a given ruling, this was the case with regard to Dred Scott, rendered null and void by the 14th Amendment.

But until such time as a ruling is overturned, or nullified by an amendment, it remains the original intent of the Framers, and the supreme law of the land.

 

[PoliticalChic]

...you are correct that I have and will continue to attack the 'awful' Liberal/Progressive/communists.....

In which case you’ll succeed only in continuing to exhibit your ignorance and hate – for example: liberals and progressives have nothing to do with ‘communists.’

You know what I stand for…

Yes, indeed we do.

You stand for ignorance and fear common among conservative reactionaries, you disdain diversity and expressions of individual liberty, where you seek to expand the power and authority of the state at the expense of individual liberty.

We know you well, as did the Framers, who created the Constitution and its case law to protect all persons from the fear, hate, and ignorance you embrace.

"In which case you’ll succeed only in continuing to exhibit your ignorance and hate – for example: liberals and progressives have nothing to do with ‘communists.’ "


OK...you've inspired me, C_Chamber_Pot


Today's OP will document exactly that.


Hope you have the guts to confront it.



OK....here it is......
http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/328413-what-s-wrong-with-liberalism.html#post8264812



Take your best shot.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If you don't need the federal government to enforce your rights, why is it that gun rights advocates run to the Supreme Court every time they believe some state or local government has passed a law taking away their gun rights?

I think it's obvious that the dispute in this thread is that you don't seem to know what the word enforce means and are, therefore, using it incorrectly.

If the Supreme Court strikes down an unconstitutional state law, that decision becomes federal case law,

and is thus enforceable by the federal government, is it not?