|
| Thread: Former President Bush's World Just Got Smaller...A Lot Smaller. |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
friendofgunnar
Honorable
Legendary Hero
able to speed up time
|
posted February 20, 2011 09:01 AM |
|
|
|
IMHO if a president is going to authorize seriously tough measures such as waterboarding then he (or she) ought to do the deed themselves. Institutionalizing that type of thing is the absolute worst type of slippery slope to be on.
|
|
kodial79
Promising
Supreme Hero
How'd Phi's Lov't
|
|
posted February 20, 2011 10:05 AM |
|
|
Don't worry about it, Gnomes. It's all in the past now. We don't blame the American citizens for having their opinion manipulated by their former administrations. Besides you've gone and fix this fault by yourselves, by voting a Socialist for President next. Now you're like us! Let's drink some vodka, tovarisch, and drown our previous disputes in it, eh?
____________
Signature? I don't need no stinking signature!
|
|
shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted February 27, 2011 04:51 PM |
|
Edited by shyranis at 16:58, 27 Feb 2011.
|
Quote:
We should start with invading Canada because they do not recognize freedom of speech (they limit it WAY more than the US Constituion allows.)
Please do not use false statements about countries. Canada does indeed recognize free speech. There are some differences however, in Canada you can be fined for spreading hateful rhetoric detatched of any sense of reality. You can also be jailed for rallying people to commit actual acts of violence. But you know, the United States has the smith act (successor to the sedition act)... it has the exact same law! And much like in Canada, a fair amount of the time convictions are thrown out as illegal.
We do not however, have any sort of espionage law because of the many cases in other countries of it being used to execute people and stifle free speech.
Basically, both countries support free speech to the same extent. People who are liked enough in the public get to say whatever they please anyway no matter how crazy and lesser known people get arrested (and south [url=http://blog.cytalk.com/2011/01/sarah-palin-calls-for-assanges-execution/[/url]of the border, murdered).
Although, some politicians here support the American right to kill people for using free speech.
So maybe America should just invade itself first before imposing its laws on other countries. You know, for democracy and free speech.
P.S.
The US is a great country, but like all great countries it's not perfect, but you don't have to put down other countries to make yourself feel better. You'll just get people trying to teach you the truth that a lot of what is taught as 'fact' there is in fact, slightly exaggerated. I have, as always, pointed out the flaws in my own country I seek for it to improve, and any constructive criticism I give of the United States is in fact with the intention of helping the nation improve itself.
No country is perfect, but we can always strive to be better.
For more information on Canadian free speech laws see the Charter of Rights and Freedoms for example. You'll learn something.
Quote:
Rights and freedoms in Canada
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
Fundamental Freedoms
Fundamental freedoms
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
ohforfsake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted February 27, 2011 04:54 PM |
|
|
Canada is way to cold and large.
If you're gonna invade such boring parts of the world, then don't expect any support from me!
|
|
gnomes2169
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Duke of the Glade
|
|
posted February 27, 2011 08:27 PM |
|
|
Ah, Canada... The land that many look at like little America, but nicer, cleaner, quieter and far, far better... Can I move please. *Puppy-dog eyes*
Don't invade Canada. you will:
A) Get destroyed by Canada.
B) Get destroyed by every other country.
C) Get assassinated by me.
D) You won't have to. Besides Quebec, the Canadians like the US enough to have free trade of ideas and resources. What would attacking them accomplish?
____________
Yeah in the 18th century, two inventions suggested a method of measurement. One won and the other stayed in America.
-Ghost destroying Fred
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted February 28, 2011 12:57 AM |
|
|
I was actually this close to writing a lengthy and well conceived post about the hypocrisy of all these conventions which don't appear to have anything against depleted uranium bombing but get so riled up when someone spills some water over a couple of guys, of course noting that this does not in any way mean that I agree with Elodin, and that he is out of touch with both reason and morality as always, even adding a witty metaphorical anecdote about a captured soldier being forced to watch High School Musical 4 again unless he tells the agents what they want to know, when I accidentally closed the tab, attempting to open a new one and play some music on youtube.
But, anyhow, you get the point.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
gnomes2169
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Duke of the Glade
|
|
posted February 28, 2011 05:01 AM |
|
|
 
____________
Yeah in the 18th century, two inventions suggested a method of measurement. One won and the other stayed in America.
-Ghost destroying Fred
|
|
shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted April 18, 2011 03:36 PM |
|
|
I'm actually pretty surprised, but George W. Bush and Sarah Palin are both pro-choice.
They pretend to be pro-life but make constant exceptions for anybody politically convenient to them.
What's more, in Going Rogue, Sarah Palin admits to having had an abortion (but not apologetically). She could have had an emergency c-section to try to resuscitate the baby, but instead she had the doctors slice it up inside and suck it out.
Hubby and I borrowed a copy of the book (yes they exist here) and it's right there on pages 55-57.
Surprising.
note: The prolifeprofiles.com site is run by American Right to life, a Christian based pro-life group that believes all life regardless of its conception is not an 'exception'. Hence they tend to support Alan Keyes as he's not made any gaffes by sucking up to (and making exceptions) for the politically convenient. Too bad he's unelectable because not accepting those exceptions piss of just the wrong group of GOP voters... and he'd be a black man running against Obama. No party would be privy to the white racist vote that year (in most years that vote is split pretty evenly between parties. Note that said vote is still just a minority of votes, 1-4 million nationwide at most)
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 18, 2011 07:12 PM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 19:13, 18 Apr 2011.
|
I agree if Keyes ran against Obama the dems would have trouble throwing around the word "racist" every 2 seconds when someone opposes one of his socialist policies. But really, dems have called conservative blacks "Uncle Toms" and said they "aren't black enough", ect, so I'm not sure it would make that big a difference.
Obama got, what 95+% of the black vote? Is that the "black racist" vote, since you mentioned a "white racist vote"? I could certainly argue based on the democrat party history that they are the racist party if you want to go there.
Actually what I read in the article is that Palin's baby was dead in her womb so extracting it is not an abortion, at least not what anyone but her political opponents would call an abortion. To call that an abortion is very deceptive. The types of abortion the dems are almost universally supportive of are killing babies in the womb, not extracting babies who died there naturally. A baby who died in the womb naturally and is removed (naturally or surgically) is more commonly called a miscarriage.
Palin's stance on abortion is:
Clicky
Quote:
I am pro-life. With the exception of a doctor’s determination that the mother’s life would end if the pregnancy continued. I believe that no matter what mistakes we make as a society, we cannot condone ending another life.
That is quite a reasonable stance. It is wrong to murder a baby. But ii is right to defend the life of the mother, so if the baby had to die to protect the life of the mother, the mother should have that choice.
Bush would make exceptions for rape, incest, and the mother's life. I don't believe rape is a justifiable reason to murder a baby, nor is incest.
Keys, like Palin, says exception should be made only if the mother's life is in danger.
The website you posted claims Palin supports the morning after pill but when I followed the note (#3) there was no such quote on the site. Instead, upon research, I find this:
Clicky
Quote:
Palin, a mother of five children, has a pro-life voting record and has not indicated support for the morning-after pill. She is a member of the anti-abortion group Feminists for Life. The organization has warned women against "blindly accepting" morning after pills as just another artificial contraceptive method. It claims Planned Parenthood and other proponents push the medication as a way to prevent pregnancy.
"Although these supporters call morning-after pills 'emergency contraception,' the term is a misnomer, as the pills actually act as an abortifacient in many cases by preventing the implantation of an already-fertilized human embryo," a 1999 Feminists for Life newsletter stated.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Shyranis
Promising
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted April 21, 2011 01:13 AM |
|
|
There certainly is a racist vote among all racial groups. Usually the parties divide them pretty fairly.
But yes, my point was that nominating Keyes would get some people to shut their mouths about race and focus more on issues. It would also probably more evenly distribute said racist votes (a tiny fraction of total votes) among the two parties again.
____________
Youtube has terminated my account without reason.
Please express why it should be reinstated on
Twitter.
|
| |
|
|
