Welcome to FinHeaven Fans Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.



VIP Members don't see these ads. Join VIP Now
Page 7 of 14 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 136

Thread: 32 YEARS !! Thirty-Two Years Is Enough!! VOTE FOR ROMNEY !!!!!!!

  1. -61
    poornate's Avatar
    We may die, but our actions are immortal

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2002
    Posts:
    7,337
    vCash:
    1048
    Loc:
    northern virginia
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Dolphins9954 View Post
    The ACLU would agree that Obama is no different or worse than Bush.

    http://www.salon.com/2011/09/07/liberties_3/

    You said it best with Romney. It's clear pandering that's all it is. Romney like Obama will do or say whatever to get elected. As for the "history query" there has always been presidents that oversteped their constitutional authority. It's still is no excuse to defend or ignore Obama's transgressions on liberties and the constitution.
    I just have always wondered what fantastical glorious past of originalist hegemony people want us to return to...never was, never will be... I have not line item defended any of Obama's transgressions, but a blind man should be able to see that his is a policy of continuation, not origination, in the areas that are the most egregiously offensive to the outlined parameters of his office... he will do more good in nominating two more moderate or left leaning justices than any ill that is in store for us...remember.. the constitution, in the end, and by function, only is what the court says it is... things are improving and, like Roosevelt said, I see no need to change horses midstream...
    "We make a living by what we get, but we make a life by what we give."
    Quote Quote  

  2. -62
    Scout Team

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Oct 2012
    Posts:
    84
    vCash:
    1178
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Quote  

  3. -63
    JackFinfan's Avatar
    Starter

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Aug 2010
    Posts:
    471
    vCash:
    2464
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by PhinsFreak View Post

    Too bad someone didn't warn us about Reagan.
    Quote Quote  

  4. -64
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,083
    vCash:
    6896
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by poornate View Post
    I just have always wondered what fantastical glorious past of originalist hegemony people want us to return to...never was, never will be... I have not line item defended any of Obama's transgressions, but a blind man should be able to see that his is a policy of continuation, not origination, in the areas that are the most egregiously offensive to the outlined parameters of his office... he will do more good in nominating two more moderate or left leaning justices than any ill that is in store for us...remember.. the constitution, in the end, and by function, only is what the court says it is... things are improving and, like Roosevelt said, I see no need to change horses midstream...
    A continuation, expansion and not the change he promised by the way. NDAA was his idea and he requested that power. The drone strikes has become far more gruesome with attacks on rescue workers and funerals. Patriot Act extension by his request. H.R.347 that he signed into law which made it a federal crime to protest around the president, congress and government buildings. This was in response to the occupy movement. And he's set a record for going after the most whistleblowers than any president ever. Sorry Nate but if you see this as an improvement then you're either in denial or just carrying water. I'm not in Romney's camp at all and see him for what he is. But at least I see the same with Obama. Anyone who thinks voting for either of these men will make our country better and improved is just as much part of the problem.





    "Politics is the Art of Looking for Trouble, Finding it Everywhere, Diagnosing it Incorrectly, and Applying the Wrong Remedies"
    Quote Quote  

  5. -65
    phinfan3411's Avatar
    pofo mofo

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2007
    Posts:
    2,627
    vCash:
    3782
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by poornate View Post
    I just have always wondered what fantastical glorious past of originalist hegemony people want us to return to...never was, never will be... I have not line item defended any of Obama's transgressions, but a blind man should be able to see that his is a policy of continuation, not origination, in the areas that are the most egregiously offensive to the outlined parameters of his office... he will do more good in nominating two more moderate or left leaning justices than any ill that is in store for us...remember.. the constitution, in the end, and by function, only is what the court says it is... things are improving and, like Roosevelt said, I see no need to change horses midstream...

    I can't help but feel this is a failed attempt to marginalize any attempt to discredit the President.

    I believe I can summarize your arguement as, well they have been screwing us for quite a while, what the heck is wrong with letting this guy screw us a little longer?

    Where did anyone make ANY arguement of previous leaders of this country (at least recently) working strictly inside constitutional guidelines?

    You further try to marginalize 9954 by calling him a "hardliner". That is good, maybe even accurate, so in turn I will label you a partisan, and all of your arguements should be judged with that in mind.

    If you go back a few pages another partisan made some inaccurate statements on the amount of debt that we had added under Obama. It was BS, and i corrected him, obviously i feel partisanship clouds many views.

    I will leave with one question though, you asked 9954 earlier if he really believed Obama didn't believe in human rights.

    There are honestly about a hundred ways for me to attack this statement, but i'm going to go with one of the problems that bothers me the most.

    I have always complained that our leaders cater to their special interest supporters much more than their constituents, and this is surely where Obama shows time and again he is NO different than any other.

    If he was really concerned with the plight of the common person, how come he, time after time, sides with his corporate sponsors over them?

    How come one of my favorite politicians, George Miller, has to fight virtually ALONE, in his fight to keep the financial industry from STEALING up to 30% of peoples 401k retirement funds???

    I have a feeling you will claim you do not know anything about this, so here is a link:
    http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505144_1...k-fees-hidden/

    Keep in mind, this is ONE example of probably a hundred different times that i can show Obama will always take his financial supporters over his constituents.

    Please show me where Miller was able to get ANY support from the President. Do you know how many people have 401k's?

    According to you though, his predecessors did the same thing, so we should just fall in line...I can't begin to tell you how much that bothers me, NO WE SHOULDN'T.

    Gary Johnson 2012, the candidate of us "hardliners".
    Quote Quote  

  6. -66
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    8,279
    vCash:
    30531
    Thanks / No Thanks
    A Gary Johnson presidency would mean an end of the right to privacy, which would be terrible for civil liberties.
    Quote Quote  

  7. -67
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,083
    vCash:
    6896
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by TheWalrus View Post
    A Gary Johnson presidency would mean an end of the right to privacy, which would be terrible for civil liberties.
    That's a stretch.
    Quote Quote  

  8. -68
    TheWalrus's Avatar
    1/7/14

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Dec 2011
    Posts:
    8,279
    vCash:
    30531
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Quote Originally Posted by Dolphins9954 View Post
    That's a stretch.
    How so?
    Quote Quote  

  9. -69
    Dolphins9954's Avatar
    Pro Bowler

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Apr 2005
    Posts:
    10,083
    vCash:
    6896
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Why would the ACLU give him such a high rating on civil liberties then????

    But according to you he's the enemy of civil liberties.

    One thing I like about Johnson is that he doesn't want to spy on us and actually wants us to have more privacy from the government. Especially with things like the ending the drug war, warrantless searches and the patriot act. He also supports gay marriage and has come out strong against things like NDAA, suspension of habeas corpus. Sorry Walrus Obama and Romney are the true threat to our liberties.
    Quote Quote  

  10. -70
    Scout Team

    Status:
    Offline
    WPA:
    Join date:
    Oct 2012
    Posts:
    84
    vCash:
    1178
    Thanks / No Thanks
    Ever notice how the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) seems to take on only cases that are anti-Christian - pro-sodomy, pro-abortion, anti-family, pro-pornography, pro-prostitution, pro-euthanasia, pro-homosexual, pro-infanticide, pro-crime, pro-humanism, anti-God -- and, except for atheism, anti-religion?
    It calls itself the American Civil Liberties Union, but the ACLU is not American; it is uncivil (to the unborn, which are shredded mercilessly to pieces without anesthetic); and it knows nothing of true liberty, which can only be found in Jesus Christ, when one is set free from the bondage of all the SIN this evil organization PROMOTES!
    Stated Goals
    The ACLU's founder, Roger Baldwin, stated: "We are for SOCIALISM, disarmament, and ultimately for abolishing the state itself... We seek the social ownership of property, the abolition of the propertied class, and the SOLE CONTROL of those who produce wealth. COMMUNISM is the goal." (Source: Trial and Error, by Geo. Grant)
    The ACLU is destructive to the fabric of our society. Christians must recognize Satan as the source - the instigator - when the end results of an organization's efforts are only "to kill, to steal, and to destroy." All we need to is examine the (rotten) fruit.

    Following are some of the stated goals of the ACLU, from its own published Policy Issues:
    • the legalization of prostitution (Policy 211);
    • the defense of all pornography, including CHILD PORN, as "free speech" (Policy 4);
    • the decriminalization and legalization of all drugs (Policy 210);
    • the promotion of homosexuality (Policy 264);
    • the opposition of rating of music and movies (Policy 18);
    • opposition against parental consent of minors seeking abortion (Policy 262);
    • opposition of informed consent preceding abortion procedures (Policy 263);
    • opposition of spousal consent preceding abortion (Policy 262);
    • opposition of parental choice in children's education (Policy 80)

    -- not to mention the defense and promotion of euthanasia, polygamy, government control of church institutions, gun control, tax-funded abortion, birth limitation, etc. (Policies 263, 133, 402, 47, 261, 323, 271, 91, 85).
    Following is a case in point (from David Barton's "America: To Pray or Not to Pray").

    In 1988, California was considering adopting legislation on sex education for public schools requiring that course material and
    instruction should stress that monogamous heterosexual intercourse within marriage is a traditional American value.

    The Senator promoting the bill received a letter of protest from the ACLU dated April 18, 1988 stating:

    "It is our position that monogamous, heterosexual intercourse within marriage
    as a traditional American value is an unconstitutional establishment of religious
    doctrine in public schools.... We believe [this bill] violates the First Amendment."
    Truth is, liberals are unwilling to simply let others be, but rather seek to impose their UNgodliness upon Christians. It is a mission to
    them and other atheists to pervert the freedoms of others. The ACLU does not run to the defense of those who are harmed; it aggressively
    seeks out opportunities to corrupt pure freedoms.
    Finances

    How does the ACLU pay for its activities?

    George Grant, author of "Trial and Error," puts the ACLU's annual budget (1993) at $14 MILLION (FOURTEEN MILLION DOLLARS) - much of which is "SUPPLIED BY THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER through the Federal program mandated by the Civil Rights Attorneys' Fee Awards Act of 1976. If the ACLU wins a case that involves a public institution, for instance, the organization collects the full legal fees of its attorneys even though those attorneys offered their services pro bono (without charge).
    Membership

    1993 membership in the ACLU was 250,000 members, with 70 staff lawyers, and 5,000 volunteer attorneys, handling an average of 6,000 cases at any one time.
    Quote Quote  

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 09-20-2012, 09:31 PM
  2. Thirty years ago today...
    By dirwuf in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-02-2012, 02:37 PM
  3. Vote for Camarillo for this years Super Ad
    By lipss inc. in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 12-16-2008, 07:34 PM
  4. Replies: 80
    Last Post: 10-11-2004, 10:52 AM
  5. Philly.com says Feeley deal 2 years w/ 3 option years
    By Muck in forum Miami Dolphins Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 02-22-2004, 05:49 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •