Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: metmom

Wrong again. I don’t work for the TSA, don’t know anyone that does, and only fly about twice a year.

Why can’t you accept - with Occam’s Razor logic - that there is a decently-sized group of very conservative FReepers that want aggressive airline security and, if there is error, it’s on the side of safety? Rather than adopt the longterm DU/ACLU mentality that you have only lately embraced? Or come up with a cockamamie conspiracy idea that I would disavow everything that I “really, wink wink” believe in, just in order to infiltrate to annoy on a rather tangential topic?


122 posted on 11/23/2010 12:19:03 PM PST by qwertypie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies ]


To: qwertypie; metmom; little jeremiah; xzins; P-Marlowe; trisham; Darkwolf377; Responsibility2nd; ...
there is a decently-sized group of very conservative FReepers that want aggressive airline security and, if there is error, it’s on the side of safety?

ALL of us what aggressive airline security, that has never been a question.

Can you name other members of this "decently-sized group" of FReepers who support groping like you do? Can you name even one?

Rather than adopt the longterm DU/ACLU mentality that you have only lately embraced?

See troll, that's where you're off course.

The left is fine with the groping. What they oppose is PROFILING even though it's proven to work.

125 posted on 11/23/2010 12:27:04 PM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]

To: qwertypie
Why can’t you accept - with Occam’s Razor logic - that there is a decently-sized group of very conservative FReepers that want aggressive airline security and, if there is error, it’s on the side of safety?

For one things, there isn't a decently -sized group of very conservative FReepers who support this. There are just a few RINO trolls who support it.

But to answer your question, because that kind of aggressive *security* doesn't work, isn't going to stop the next terrorist attack, gives the government too much power, violates the fourth amendment, and is NOT a conservative stand.

You can't be as conservative as you claim to be and support that kind of tyrannical, flagrant trashing of the Bill of Rights.

126 posted on 11/23/2010 12:29:47 PM PST by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]

To: qwertypie
You are not a real conservative if you support this junk with the TSA people. What don't you get about the 4th amendment? If we give away our freedoms, that will just make it easier to take over this whole country and yet, you are for this. Wow.
127 posted on 11/23/2010 12:30:26 PM PST by MamaB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]

To: qwertypie

zot


135 posted on 11/23/2010 12:48:35 PM PST by Jim Robinson (Rebellion is brewing!! Nuke the corrupt commie bastards to HELL!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson