Posted on 12/10/2014 5:03:48 PM PST by Bettyprob
Nothing surprises me anymore, Bobby.
Not one damn thing.
Boehner growing a spine... now THAT would surprise me.
Yes, contrived dishonest phony and self aggrandizing. Reading comprehension isn’t really your strong suit I see. I’ll try to use smaller words. You don’t like what I said and I don’t care. Everything else you’ve posted (that I’ve bothered to read) has been sputtering nonsense. You’re wasting your time on me, troll. My mind was made when we started.
Actually, he chose his words carefully. He criticized the report as biased and characterized the Obama administration as ‘everything, everything, blame George W. Bush’. While it’s not a complete refutation of the report, I guess I’m willing to overlook that because it indicates to me that he’s running in 16.
Buzz off troll and take your love for Dianne Feinstein, and her gutless anti-America ‘RAT Torture bull crap, back to the DUmp.
The quote you used (”that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added”) doesn’t in any way claim that non-citizens are eligible for the same Constitutional rights that citizens are given, such as voting and so forth. Liberals certainly wish they were, however.
Unfortunately for both you and liberals, the Supreme Court (which DOES determine the intent of the Constitution) has ruled numerous times that the Bill of Rights does NOT apply to non-citizens. Illegal aliens don’t have the right to own guns, either. Cry me a river:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2012/12/court-illegal-aliens-dont-have-2nd-amendment-rights/
Yes. Yes, He is. He is also watching the Israel-hating, Jew-murdering Islamists who are the subjects of our discussion. Being God in the flesh, He was and is in complete agreement with those OT wars in which God directed and protected Israel so that they could wipe out those pagans who stood between them and their inheritance.
In view of that reality, do you really think the Lord minds us dripping water on the heads of Jew-haters, or whatever else was necessary?
That was a long-winded screed. You sound bothered.
I am leaning towards supporting him in 16 - and would never change for this - I only think he said some things that allowed his headline words to be used by the very people he was disagreeing with. Unforced error.
Well, if that's the case, what have you been yammering about? You've just admitted you're a forum Tom Clancy like the rest of us!
Good. I knew there was hope for you.
Yep! (See post #300). Hypocrites can’t keep track of their own positions most of the time.
It’s not dripping water on their heads.......and yes, I do think He minds..
You buzz off bobby 23, you are out of line
T.B.Y.S.P.P.
oooooooooo secret code, sorry I don’t have my decoder ring
Not secret at all.
Again, we know God's views of those who hate the Jews. Muslims have perfected Jew hatred.
Knowing that God sanctioned and, in fact, personally directed righteous war against Israel's enemies, why would He mind our efforts to save our own people from these demons? He knows we only resort to it when necessary.
Sorry, it just doesn't make any sense.
Good. They deserve worse.
It is gratuitous violence since it doesn’t produce good information. War against our enemies, fine. Just not torture.
The CIA, the intelligence community, and Dick Cheney all agree that good information resulted from the efforts in question.
It's true the the Constitution/Bill-of-Rights gives some rights (voting, like you cite), others it does not but reaffirms preexisting rights.
The right to the Grand Jury determining whether or not to prosecute, for example, is/was a preexisting right inherited from England's common law.
The right to really own property and not have government barge in and simply take it also was a preexisting legal right. (And it has been argued is philosophically a human right.)
The right to have a stable set of rules, not turning at the chance-whim of whoever happened to be in authority, was also preexisting in English jurisprudence.
All three of the items listed are affirmed in the Fifth Amendment; as these are legal rights and declared to be available to any person
, does it stand to reason that this restriction on government legal procedure is applicable only to Citizens? Do non-citizen residents [or nationals, or visitors] not have the right to have the Grand Jury determine if they should be prosecuted? Is their property freely available to the government should they covet it? Is it ok to change the rules of the proceedings during the proceeding [violating due process] because they are not citizens? — Since the Fifth says No person shall be […] deprived of life […] without due process of law
and you say that non-citizens are not eligible for constitutional rights, does this mean that it's a-ok to simply kill non-citizens without cause? If so, would such be murder? If not, why not?
And that's only the fifth amendment.
Unfortunately for both you and liberals, the Supreme Court (which DOES determine the intent of the Constitution) has ruled numerous times that the Bill of Rights does NOT apply to non-citizens. […] Cry me a river:
Ah, so the strict procedure for putting someone to death outlined in the fifth amendment constrains the government when the person in question is a citizen? It's good to know that no person
really means no person that we don't accept as having these rights
— man, what would the founders say to this?
"in questions of power then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution"
— Thomas Jefferson"We find, in the rules laid down by the greatest English Judges, who have been the brightest of mankind; We are to look upon it as more beneficial, that many guilty persons should escape unpunished, than one innocent person should suffer. The reason is, because it’s of more importance to community, that innocence should be protected, than it is, that guilt should be punished; for guilt and crimes are so frequent in the world, that all of them cannot be punished; and many times they happen in such a manner, that it is not of much consequence to the public, whether they are punished or not. But when innocence itself, is brought to the bar and condemned, especially to die, the subject will exclaim, it is immaterial to me, whether I behave well or ill; for virtue itself, is no security. And if such a sentiment as this, should take place in the mind of the subject, there would be an end to all security what so ever."
— John Adams"Arbitrary power is most easily established on the ruins of liberty abused to licentiousness."
— George Washington
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.