Posted on 09/04/2002 12:22:02 PM PDT by dead
Fair enough. The exaggerations are improper, I agree. I just hate having to admit that a liberal is on the right side of an issue.
What amazes me is that I'll bet most of these people would have screamed loudly, demanding armed insurrection if this had been proposed under Clinton/Reno.
Mr. Franklin, we failed to keep our Republic. Our deepest apologies to you and every individual who gave his life in defense of the ideal to which you and the rest of the Founding Fathers gave birth. We have killed it.
Nossir. All you are reading is the total RINO-ization of this forum. JimRob still has the control and power to take it back from the RINOs. But if not, FR will be endorsing and applauding the likes of Olympia Snowe and John McCain, in time.
What amazes me is that I'll bet most of these people would have screamed loudly, demanding armed insurrection if this had been proposed under Clinton/Reno.
Absolutely -- but not because of love of Constitution, only for partisan gain. You have to understand, it was not a Freedom/Slavery thing, it was a Republican/Democrat thing. I didn't understand until recently.
Since about 5 or 6 months ago, the RINO's were given free reign here, and the Conservatives were not backed by moderator and forum owner alike.
It happens. Things change. So be it.
Funny.
You sure loved him when he was stridently criticizing Clinton.
Sounds like your position has moderated a little in the last few days.
Good.
RIGHT! How simple that is!!
(fast forward six years)
President Hillary Clinton: "Now that the War On Guns has been launched, all gun owners, or those who have ever argued for firearms ownership rights, are enemy combatants, and will be interred indefinitely without being charged with a crime. So if you see a gun, or know of a so-called 'second amendment' supporter, call 1-800-TYRANNY today!"
Funny.
You sure liked him when he was severely critical of President Clinton.
If you now admit that Hamdi and Padilla are getting there Habeas Corpus rights I guess you have learned something.
That's good.
To the contrary! I found his views on past presidents,(which he does for a living) objectionable for the most part. I have watched him on C-span programs numerous times. His views about WWII and people of that era are also flawed. I have seem him taken to task several times.
I don't even recall what he said if anything about Clinton. I did not see that.
This, then, would be consistent with the Declaration, even though the Declaration doesn't carry with it the force of law.
WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Break down your post. If your rights are granted by the government they can be taken by said government - therefore they are not protected by said government.
With the utmost respect, I disagree with the second part of your post as well, which clearly ignores the plain English of part three of your post:
WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness -- That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Let's look at portions of this quote:
Life, Liberty and the Pusuit of Happiness - These principles are embodied in the First Eight Amendments of the Bill of Rights. The right to speak and worship freely. The Right to bear Arms. The right to the privacy of your home and to refuse access to agents of the state. The right to be free from unwarranted intrusions into your home, your papers and your privacy. The right to acquire property in your name and be free from self-incrimination. The right to counsel and to be tried by your peers, not the government.
...deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,... - Such principles are emobodied in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments - where it was specified that any powers not specifically delegated to the US Government were retained by the individual States (if enumerated in their individual Constitutions) or to the people. (if not)
Don't ever make the mistake that the Constitution grants you anything other than the ability to assert against your government the Rights given to you by virture of your existance. The ONLY legal right the Constitution grants you is the Right to assert your inalienable Rights against the Government. The BOR is merely an enumeration of some of those Rights. The Constitution itself is the grant of certain limited authority to the Federal Government by the individual States - no more.
God gave you your Rights according to the individuals that started this Country.
I think we're like two blind men at opposite ends of an elephant, and being asked to describe it. We have different descriptions, but we're talking about the same thing.
The rights enshrined in the Constitution are indeed God-given and unalienable. But to secure these rights, that's where government comes into play. The rest I was sure everyone knew.
The problem is that he is a liberal. There is no way a liberal can talk very long without pissin me off.
That is all there is to it.
Tonight, UNSPUN with AnnaZ and Mercuria!
6pm pdt/9pm edt
THE CULTURE WAR: WHAT ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO DO TO WIN IT?
with special guest, reluctant culture warrior,
Master Sergeant Giddens, USAF
Plus...
BONEHEADED LIE-BERAL QUOTES
COMMIE RAT BA$TARD OF THE WEEK
Click HERE to LISTEN LIVE while you FReep!
Click HERE for the RadioFR Chat Room!
Miss a show? Click HERE for the RadioFR Archives!
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.