Police state, ho!

Razormouth.com ^ | 6/28/04 | John Whitehead

[Protagoras]

Take your meds. And get back to your room before your nurse finds out you have escaped to post on the internet again.

[Corin Stormhands]

Hide your guns.

What guns? Nobody around here owns any guns...

[ksen]

Please post my post that you responded to and your response together so that everyone can see how your response bears no relationship to what I posted.

Sure it does. Look:

Your #19:

He was too busy telling the cop that his truck was not parked in the road! View the video. Skid marks and skewed parked truck, but it was off the road!

My response:

So are you perfectly comfortable with a potential President Hillary exercising the powers the government has currently taken for itself?

Your #19 looked like a defense of the ruling saying Hiibel had to produce his name. So I merely asked if you were comfortable with a President Hillary exercising the powers you currently seem to be defending.

[ksen]

Another day and another socialist 9th CC ruling overturned. Seems to be a trend forming. Two for Two last week. Doesn't look good for the medical marijuana scam case coming forward.

Please excerpt the opening post and show how your comment has anything to do with the topic at hand.

[cinFLA]

Your #19 looked like a defense of the ruling saying Hiibel had to produce his name. So I merely asked if you were comfortable with a President Hillary exercising the powers you currently seem to be defending.

Nowhere does my post even infer anything related to the ruling. It only points out that Hiibel was preoccupied with telling the cop that his truck was off the road and legally parked. Please.

[ksen]

Too many folks run around acting as if the Founders never intended for national security issues to allow curtailment of rights. And that simply isn't true.

Ok, and where did the Founders ever say that they believed there were situations where our inalienable rights, as codified in the Bill of Rights, could be alienated?

[ksen]

They don't want to solve the problems, they want to dump the Patriot Act, Bush and Ashcroft.

Oh, you can read minds?

You don't see any cause to be concerned?

[cinFLA]

Your #19 looked like a defense of the ruling saying Hiibel had to produce his name.

No way. You are distorting my post.

[inquest]

And how many of the judges leading the charge towards a police state were appointed by Republicans?

Excellent point.

[ksen]

What guns? Nobody around here owns any guns...

Ha!

[cinFLA]

Oh, you can read minds? You don't see any cause to be concerned?

Again, I make a post and you don't respond to my post, you only make allegations. Do you agree or disagree with my post and please give reasons.

[ksen]

No way. You are distorting my post.

Then I apologize for misreading your post.

[dirtboy]

Ok, and where did the Founders ever say that they believed there were situations where our inalienable rights, as codified in the Bill of Rights, could be alienated?

Once again, I am addressing a claim in the article:

In fact, it is common to hear both our elected officials and citizens state rather bluntly that it’s time to relinquish some of our freedoms in order to feel more secure. This kind of sentiment was completely foreign to those who founded this country.

I am saying that claim is false, as witnessed by Article 1, Section 9. If you think the Patriot Act is a serious infringement of rights, then make your case - but realize that the typical sound-byte points uttered by the alarmists aren't going to cut it here. And offer concrete proposals as to what is good, bad, and ugly, and how to fix things, or else you're just making noise.

[Protagoras]

I don't know who the "alarmists" are or what you concider alarming.

I do know that the government didn't have the guts to declare war, and that the suspension of rights will never go away. The "war on (some) terror" will never be over as long as politicians can derive power and control from it.

[ksen]

You're wrong this time CF. You attributed motives about Bush and Ashcroft that no one here has said.

I'll ask again, Do you see anything we should be concerned about?

[cinFLA]

Oh, you can read minds? You don't see any cause to be concerned?

You believe in hyperbole and alarmism rather than reasoned debate?

[Dog Anchor]

"WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THINGS AWAY FROM YOU ON BEHALF OF THE COMMON GOOD." - hillary clinton

[Dog Anchor]

"WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THINGS AWAY FROM YOU ON BEHALF OF THE COMMON GOOD." - hillary clinton

[Dog Anchor]

"WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THINGS AWAY FROM YOU ON BEHALF OF THE COMMON GOOD." - hillary clinton

[cinFLA]

You're wrong this time CF. You attributed motives about Bush and Ashcroft that no one here has said.

Please show me where I am wrong.