PDA

View Full Version : Must watch LOL



Qtec
02-12-2010, 09:35 AM
jon stewart (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/12/its-a-trap-stewart-mocks_n_459766.html)


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">With President Obama inviting Republicans to a televised summit on health care, many GOP leaders have been reluctant, <u>thinking it's an elaborate trap.</u> This logic didn't sit well with Jon Stewart... or Admiral Ackbar.

Stewart jokingly agreed with the Republican sentiment, explaining that having a televised, bipartisan conversation on health care is so reasonable that it's actually an ingenious trap.

Minority Leader John Boehner expressed concern, worried about having to <u>"walk into who knows what." To this Stewart responded: "It's a public dialogue about important legislation. Not Little Big Horn."</u>

Stewart then called Boehner's bluff:


<span style='font-size: 20pt'> "The only way this health care meeting is a trap is if Boehner's got nothing. It's like a paper bag is only a trap if you can't punch your way out of it." </span></div></div>

See also Hawaiian healthcare.

Q /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

pooltchr
02-12-2010, 09:49 AM
While I can see your point, I must also think that the real reason healthcare stalled is because the Dems can't seem to agree on anything. The house dems don't like the senate bill, and the senate dems don't like the house bill. And the fact that all the discussions last year were held behind closed doors, and reps were excluded would indicate that they stopped themselves. The reps weren't even in the mix. Now that Mass is gone, Obama decides he will make a very public show of involving the reps. He didn't think he needed them when he had 60 votes. So from a political standpoint, he has to get the reps on record so they have something to twist around come November.

The healthcare issue has become a poison pill, with the majority of Americans opposed to anything congress has come up with so far. There is absolutely nothing to be gained by the reps from this meeting, but the dems would love to have the reps attached to this whole mess. So far, the dems have kept them out of the loop. Now that they see the writing on the wall, they seem very anxious to take down a few reps with them.

Steve

Qtec
02-12-2010, 10:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While I can see your point, I must also think that the real reason healthcare stalled is because the Dems can't seem to agree on anything. </div></div>

The Dems had 51 votes to pass the HC they wanted. One including a public option.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The house dems don't like the senate bill, </div></div>

Of coarse they don't. Its a Rep bill, one that the Reps, after getting most of what they wanted, refuse to vote for!


Its very simple, Obama is TIRED of the GOP and the RW media distorting the issues and the facts.

The simple fact is he is calling them out and they don't like it. They have no solutions except masive tax cuts for the rich and deregulation. [ and we know how that turned out.]

Q

pooltchr
02-12-2010, 10:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Of coarse they don't. Its a Rep bill, one that the Reps, after getting most of what they wanted, refuse to vote for!



Q </div></div>

Q, up until last month, the Senate didn't need the Reps, if they could have agreed among themselves. They had the numbers to completely bypass the Reps.

Now, tell me specifically, which Republicans were involved in helping write the bill. I can tell you which Dems had to be bribed to vote for it if you like. (start with Lousiana)

Steve

Qtec
02-12-2010, 12:06 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Appearing on CNNís Larry King Live yesterday, Vice President Biden ó who serves as the constitutional President of the Senate ó called out the Republican abuse of the filibuster:

I was a senator for 36 years. I got there when I was 29 years old. So Iíve been through seven presidents ó eight now. And Iíve never seen a time when the operating norm to get anything passed was a super majority of 60 votes. No matter what ó no matter what the bill is, <u>itís filibustered. Itís required to get 60 votes.</u>

You canít rule by a super majority. You canít govern if you require a super majority. And I think itís getting to the point where itís been abused, this idea of the filibuster or the threat of extended debate.

And I think the public is taking it out ó the ó the Congress as a whole, Republicans and Democrats, are ó are extremely low on the polls, in the Congress. </div></div>

Q

pooltchr
02-12-2010, 12:31 PM
Of course, Biden will blame the Reps....that's what Dems do. But the fact remains that they did have that "super majority" and still couldn't get it passed. That's gotta say something about the quality of the bill itself.

Had the Dems actually involved the Reps in a true bi-partisan effort, they might have been able to pick up enough Reps to offset whatever dems didn't buy into the plan.

If you exclude 40% of the potential votes from the very beginning, it's going to be next to impossible to pass anything.

Steve

eg8r
02-13-2010, 08:28 PM
qtip, answer this honestly please, why do you think Obama would prefer to have a televised summit on healthcare with the Reps INSTEAD of honoring his promise to have open televised healthcare discussions in Congress? Why is getting in front of the cameras so important NOW when he PROMISED to do it during the ENTIRE PROCESS???

eg8r

eg8r
02-13-2010, 08:30 PM
Isn't it funny this idiot in his first statement states the Dems had all the votes they needed and then in the second sentence he tells us the Dems laid down and did everything the Reps asked for? He will hold the "village idiot" crown for ever.

eg8r

eg8r
02-13-2010, 08:34 PM
Yes, now the silenced one wants to have a backbone and act like he stands up for something. LOL, I find it ironic the author chooses to mention he is the "constitutional President of the Senate". /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif No one in their right mind will ever compare the Dem leadership as caring at all about the Constitution. Anyways, now that he no longer can hide behind the 60 votes he used to have he is trembling in his boots at failure because he cannot force anything down our throats any more. LOL, there is a reason Obama keeps a muzzle on Biden.

eg8r

Qtec
02-14-2010, 06:16 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">qtip, answer this honestly please, why do you think Obama would prefer to have a televised summit on healthcare with the Reps INSTEAD of honoring his promise to have open televised healthcare discussions in Congress? Why is getting in front of the cameras so important NOW when he PROMISED to do it during the ENTIRE PROCESS???

eg8r </div></div>

Obama already addressed this.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <u>Look, the truth of the matter is that if you look at the health care process -- just over the course of the year -- overwhelmingly the majority of it actually was on C-SPAN, <span style='font-size: 14pt'>CHECK it out</span> (http://www.c-span.org/search.aspx?For=congressional%20hearings%20healthc are) because it was taking place in congressional hearings in which you guys were participating. I mean, how many committees were there that helped to shape this bill? Countless hearings took place.</u>

Now, I kicked it off, by the way, with a meeting with many of you, including your key leadership. What is true, there's no doubt about it, is that once it got through the committee process and there were now a series of meetings taking place all over the Capitol trying to figure out how to get the thing together -- that was a messy process. And I take responsibility for not having structured it in a way where it was all taking place in one place that could be filmed. How to do that logistically would not have been as easy as it sounds, because you're shuttling back and forth between the House, the Senate, different offices, et cetera, different legislators. But I think <u>it's a legitimate criticism.</u> So on that one, I take responsibility. </div></div>

This time he is not going to make the same mistake so, just as the GOP have demanded, the talks will be televised.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> why do you think Obama would prefer to have a televised summit on healthcare with the Reps </div></div>

The GOP have no solutions only critique. Let them try their 'death panel' / 'Govt takeover' Luntz crap to his face.

Basically the plan is to have an open frank debate, ie give the Republican 'No' Party a length of rope to hang themselves. Then everyone will see them for what they are, traitors. <u>They would bring the country to its knees for political gain.</u>

Q

sack316
02-14-2010, 06:27 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">qtip, answer this honestly please, why do you think Obama would prefer to have a televised summit on healthcare with the Reps INSTEAD of honoring his promise to have open televised healthcare discussions in Congress? Why is getting in front of the cameras so important NOW when he PROMISED to do it during the ENTIRE PROCESS???

eg8r </div></div>

tap tap tap.

Regardless of what q-tip says, I've actually tuned into C-Span a few times over the previous months, and seen relatively little on the HC discussions.

Now, I also go to the c-span website, where they do a fairly significant job of archiving footage, so if he would care to share links to the many bipartisan HC discussions over previous months I will gladly revoke my "tap tap tap" to you. But I know, and you know, he only read the opinion elsewhere, and repeated it like a parrot. I certainly hope he will prove me wrong and place my foot in my mouth, though.

Sack

Qtec
02-14-2010, 06:32 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Yes, now the silenced one wants to have a backbone and act like he stands up for something. LOL, I find it ironic the author chooses to mention he is the "constitutional President of the Senate". /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif No one in their right mind will ever compare the Dem leadership as caring at all about the Constitution. Anyways, now that he no longer can hide behind the 60 votes he used to have he is trembling in his boots at failure because he cannot force anything down our throats any more. <u>LOL, there is a reason Obama keeps a muzzle on Biden.</u>

eg8r </div></div>



Joe slaps Cheney (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/14/joe-biden-dick-cheney-meet-press_n_461717.html)


LOL


<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No one in their right mind will ever compare the Dem leadership as caring at all about the Constitution. </div></div>

Give me one, just one example that shows that this Admin doesn't care about the USCON.

Lets compare what you have to this.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 20pt'><u>The president claims an inherent power to imprison American citizens whom he has determined to be this countryís enemies without obtaining a warrant,</u> letting them hear the charges against them, or following other safeguards against wrongful punishment guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Under his administration, <u>the government has engaged in inhumane treatment of prisoners that amounts to torture, and when Congress passed legislation to ban such treatment, he declared he would simply interpret the law his own way.</u> Although <u>the Constitution says treaties are the ďsupreme law of the land,Ē the president has abrogated them on his own</u>. And, we now know, <u>he ordered a secret program of electronic surveillance of Americans without court warrants.</u></span> </div></div>

That's just for starters.

Q....who is the Fascist? The Tyrant?

pooltchr
02-14-2010, 07:38 AM
Q. What a wonderful job of repeating the dem talking points. Obama would be proud of you!

"But I think it's a legitimate criticism. So on that one, I take responsibility. "

I wonder why you didn't choose to put this statement in a big font.

Steve

Qtec
02-14-2010, 08:45 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Regardless of what q-tip </div></div>

WTF is this Q-tip $hit. Are you bringing yourself down to eg8r's level? ie, a detatched moron who calls people names and pretends to be an adult?

If you have seen everything, please show me the clip where the Republicans object to their own ammendments. I can't find but I posted it here before the site crashed.

Q........just Q.......on the other side I am Qtec. Its pretty simple..................../forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

Qtec
02-14-2010, 09:04 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Q. What a wonderful job of repeating the dem talking points. Obama would be proud of you!

"But I think it's a legitimate criticism. So on that one, I take responsibility. "

I wonder why you didn't choose to put this statement in a big font.

Steve </div></div>

WOW. You have totally brought me over to the dark side. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/grin.gif

I give you facts,videos and quotes to make my point and all you can do is complain about the font size. You cannot be serious.

Obama apologised and is now trying to make it up by televising the upcoming debate. What more can he do?

<span style='font-size: 26pt'><u>Did GW Bush or Dick ever apologise for their mistakes? </u></span>The Iraq war maybe? <span style='font-size: 20pt'>They told us all the intelligence was solid. There was no doubt.</span> [Big font just for you.]
Yeah rrrrrrrrrright....... We all know how that turned out.

If Obama says white the GOP says black.
Tax cuts are good but Obama tax cuts are bad.
They all went along with the bank bailout but now its all Obama's fault, even when he was a lone Senator.

I have given you the links, do your own research. Facts don't lie.
Q

Qtec
02-14-2010, 09:10 PM
link (http://www.c-span.org/Watch/Media/2009/06/23/HP/A/20066/House+Education+Labor+Cmte+Hearing+on+Health+Refor m+Draft+Proposal.aspx)

Here is just one of hundreds of tapes, knock yourself out. <span style='font-size: 20pt'>The whole thing is more than 3 HOURS.</span>
much to watch...........pretty boring tho (http://www.c-span.org/search.aspx?For=congressional%20hearings%20healthc are)

The GOP base are Fox viewers who have an attention span of 20 seconds. [Funnily enough that is just about the same amount of time I can watch Glenn Beck before having seizures.]



Q

hondo
02-14-2010, 10:29 PM
Back to the name-calling, I see. Well, it was nice while it lasted and I guess you did try. SIGH!

eg8r
02-16-2010, 12:52 PM
He is addressing it with a lie. CSPAN even called him out prior to him making this speech. You surely are a goofball.

eg8r

eg8r
02-16-2010, 12:54 PM
LOL, I told you, I do tend to slip up from time to time. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

eg8r

eg8r
02-16-2010, 12:56 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Give me one, just one example that shows that this Admin doesn't care about the USCON.
</div></div>Better yet, show us just one example of what Obama has tried to do since his inauguration that would be in step with the Constitution.

eg8r

Qtec
02-16-2010, 06:53 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">LOL, I told you, I do tend to slip up from time to time. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif

eg8r </div></div>

Pants on fire? Show me one post in the last 6 months where you used my screen name,Q or Qtec...............should be easy if its not your HABIT to be childish and call names. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Q

Qtec
02-16-2010, 06:54 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Give me one, just one example that shows that this Admin doesn't care about the USCON.
</div></div>Better yet, show us just one example of what Obama has tried to do since his inauguration that would be in step with the Constitution.

eg8r </div></div>

ie, I CAN'T. I WILL JUST CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

Pathetic.

Q

pooltchr
02-16-2010, 10:25 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Give me one, just one example that shows that this Admin doesn't care about the USCON.
</div></div>Better yet, show us just one example of what Obama has tried to do since his inauguration that would be in step with the Constitution.

eg8r </div></div>

ie, I CAN'T. I WILL JUST CHANGE THE SUBJECT.

Pathetic.

Q </div></div>

How about granting the rights of American citizens to foreign terrorists, ie Miranda?


Steve

Qtec
02-17-2010, 04:18 AM
Actually that's a prime example of Obama following the Constitution.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A Miranda warning is a warning given by police in the United States <u>to criminal suspects in police custody, or in a custodial situation,</u> before they are interrogated. A custodial situation is one in which the suspect's freedom of movement is restrained (judged by the "free to leave" test), even if he is not under arrest. </div></div>

Anyone arrested in the USA has the same rights and protections afforded all Americans.

Q

pooltchr
02-17-2010, 08:31 AM
Actually, it's not. Foreign terrorists who have declaired war on this country (isn't that what jihad means?) http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/jehad
are not criminals, and thus are not expected to be treated as such. They are enemy combatants, and are subject to treatment as such when captured. That does NOT include miranda rights.

Steve

eg8r
02-17-2010, 08:59 AM
Well I guess you are right. However, if I was to just say Q then that would be the same as changing it to qtip. I think qtip is much more relevant to your posts. LOL, funny you would refer to name calling as childish. I guess you do have a fair amount of experience in that arena so you should be able to define your own activities as you wish.

eg8r

eg8r
02-17-2010, 09:00 AM
Exactly, you can't.

eg8r

Qtec
02-18-2010, 08:21 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: pooltchr</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Actually, it's not. Foreign terrorists who have declaired war on this country (isn't that what jihad means?) http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/jehad
are not criminals, and thus are not expected to be treated as such. They are enemy combatants, and are subject to treatment as such when captured. That does NOT include miranda rights.

Steve </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">The meaning of Jihad today has been clearly transformed from the original one

Islam Jihad today is like Christian Crusade yesterday. As explained in a text below by an Arab scholar, Jihad didn't mean Holy War but only an inner struggle against one's own evil (In Occident, James Conrad did also talk about our inner evil). So Jihad has been ceased by Politicians as a pretext to mystify their people or rather a group of religious extremists to launch a Holy War.

Islam by itself should not be responsible of this but the people who let interpret Religion in this evil manner: the arab politicians and the arab terrorists of course but also the atheists who are prompt to take for granted the false interpretation.

Below is an essay on inner Jihad found on an islamic site I visited for that purpose (I do not endorse the website as a whole as I didn't read the rest of their materials). </div></div>
link (http://hubpages.com/hub/Jihad)

A criminal is someone who has committed a crime. Did the undy bomber commit a crime?
Usually we let a jury decide that, not a bunch of paranoid -lets scare old ladies shtless- bunch of girlyboys!
obama wantsd to kill you (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/08/06/healthcare/)

Common sense from a comedian.
disgusting.............LOL (http://tpmtv.talkingpointsmemo.com/?id=3247119)

Some said, "terrorists are not 100ft tall."

The shoe bomber and the undy bomber are a world away from the planning and execution of the 9/11 attack! Makes you think.

link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8521246.stm)

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> UK 'determined' over passport row

Britain is determined to "get to the bottom of" how fake UK passports were used by the alleged killers of a Hamas commander, the foreign secretary says.

David Miliband described the use of six British passports as an "outrage".

Dubai's police chief has said he is 99% sure of the involvement of Israeli agents in Mahmoud al-Mabhouh's death, but Israel says there is no proof.

Its UK ambassador said he was "unable to add additional information" after he met the UK diplomatic service's head.

Diplomatic tensions have mounted since the killing at a luxury Dubai hotel last month, which police said allegedly involved 11 European passport holders.

'Tough questions'

The Irish Republic has called in Israeli ambassador Zion Evrony, and France has also demanded explanations over the use of a false passport.

Mr Miliband said he "hoped and expected" Tel Aviv would co-operate fully with the investigation announced by Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

The inquiry will seek to explain how passports bearing the names of six British-Israelis, who are not the men pictured, came to be used.

ď If there was proof Israel had used British passports... relations between the UK and Israel would be in a crisis Ē
Jeremy Bowen

Israel's secret service, Mossad, has been accused of involvement in the killing in Dubai on 20 January.

Mr Miliband refused to reveal what was said in the 20-minute meeting between Israeli Ambassador Ron Prosor and Sir Peter Ricketts, the head of the UK's diplomatic service.

He said: "It's very very important that we don't make accusations until we know that they're well founded."

But Mr Miliband said the case was being taken "extremely seriously" and the integrity of the British system was "critical".

Mr Prosor told journalists after his meeting that it is "not the usual way to talk about what happens in those meetings".

In Ireland, Israeli ambassador Zion Evrony also insisted he knew nothing about the killing of the Hamas commander.

British Conservative leader David Cameron called for Israel's ambassador to the UK to be asked "some pretty tough questions".

Meanwhile, shadow foreign secretary William Hague has urged the Foreign Office to confirm when it first knew about the fake passport claims.

UK diplomats said they had received details of the British passports a few hours before Dubai released details on Monday.

However, Mr Hague told BBC Radio 4's Today programme it was "entirely possible" the government had been alerted to their use in January.

"There have been reports in the Gulf, including one in the Gulf News, right at the end of January, that the head of police in Dubai had contacted consulates and embassies for assistance with this investigation into the suspects," he said.

The BBC's Middle East correspondent Jeremy Bowen said if there was proof Israel had used British passports "for some nefarious uses of its Mossad service - as they have in the past with Canadian and New Zealand ones", then relations between the UK and Israel would be "in a crisis".

The Serious Organised Crime Agency has confirmed photographs and signatures on the passports used in Dubai do not match those on passports issued by the UK.

The men whose names appeared on the passports have dual British and Israeli citizenship.

They are Melvyn Adam Mildiner, Paul John Keeley, James Leonard Clarke, Stephen Daniel Hodes, Michael Lawrence Barney and Jonathan Lewis Graham. They all deny involvement in the killing.

The details of the suspects and their passport photos were released by officials in Dubai earlier this week.

The Republic of Ireland government has said Irish passports used by three people believed to have been involved in killing a Hamas member had genuine numbers.

However, authorities said while the numbers were legitimate, they did not match records for the names which had been used - Gail Folliard, Evan Dennings and Kevin Daveron.

Dublin's Department of Foreign Affairs said officials were urgently trying to contact the three citizens who hold or have held passports with these numbers.

France and Germany have both reportedly raised doubts over the identities of two suspects who used a French and a German passport.

France's foreign ministry Bernard Valero said he was "demanding explanations" from the Israeli embassy in France about the circumstances of the use of a false French passport in the Dubai killing.

Reports have suggested the Hamas commander was in Dubai to buy weapons for the Palestinian Islamist movement, Hamas.

Two Palestinian suspects were being questioned about the murder. Police said they had "fled to Jordan" after the killing and have not released their names.

Officials in Dubai, who have issued arrest warrants, said the team appeared to be a professional hit squad, probably sponsored by a foreign power.

"It is 99%, if not 100%, sure that Mossad is standing behind the murder," Dubai police chief General Dahi Khalfan is quoted as saying by an Abu Dhabi-based English-language paper. </div></div>

Q

Qtec
02-18-2010, 08:30 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Exactly, you can't.

eg8r </div></div>

It gets pretty tiring trying to explain to you what you said.

I said,
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><span style='font-size: 20pt'>Give me one, just one example that shows that this Admin doesn't care about the USCON.</span> </div></div>

Your answer should have been,

<span style='font-size: 20pt'>"blah blah blah, this....that.....how many examples do you want?</span>

Instead, you IGNORE my Q and come back with a Q of your own. Answer my Q and I will reply civilly. I asked you first. If you can't back up your claims then just say so and we can move on.



Q

Qtec
02-18-2010, 08:36 AM
For the record, the gist of the USCON is that anyone under US jurisdiction is entitled to be treated as a human being with inherent rights.

Simple Q, if you are invaded, is it a crime to fight the invaders?



Q

pooltchr
02-18-2010, 10:46 AM
Q. Enemy combatants do not fall under the jurisdictian of the USCON. For that matter, if a member of our military is arrested for a crime, they don't even have miranda rights. People who have rights granted by the constitution are citizens of the US. Foreign terrorists don't fall into that catagory.

Steve

eg8r
02-18-2010, 02:05 PM
My question to your question was my answer to your question. /forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smile.gif At this point you have way too many times answered someone's question with a question of one of your own. Every time Obama opens his mouth he backs up my claims.

eg8r

eg8r
02-18-2010, 02:06 PM
You are the last person on this planet that I have any intention on hearing the "gist" of the Constitution.

eg8r

eg8r
02-18-2010, 02:07 PM
You can refer to enemy combatants till you are blue in the face but you have to remember all of q's history on this board...He comes across as more an appeaser than anything else. He would not consider them enemy combatants but rather tourists.

eg8r