On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 12:26:57 -0500, "Buddy Beavers"
wrote:

‘Christian’ Obama Removes ‘Creator’ From US Declaration Of Independence
Speech

On 09.18.10, in Censorship, History, Regime, Religion, by Sad Hill



....File this under the pseudo-Christian column. President Obama concluded
his speech at this week’s Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute gala with,

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
endowed with certain inalienable rights, life and liberty and the pursuit of
happiness.”




The U.S. Declaration of Independence reads,

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that
among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”



Poser. Watch ‘Mr. Christian’ read it word-for-word straight from his
teleprompter gods (22:40):

http://sadhillnews.com/2010/09/18/ch...endence-speech

“…there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce
destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought
them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their
shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.” — 2 Peter
2:1-2

I was just watching Fox, showing a Texas School Textbook Committee
approving teaching that the Declaration reads "...all _people_ are
created equal..." rather than "...all _men_ are created equal..."

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

The Ground Zero Mosque IS Appropriate When Renamed...
The Obama Monument to American Impotence

On 9/19/2010 8:08 PM, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sat, 18 Sep 2010 12:26:57 -0500, "Buddy Beavers"
wrote:

‘Christian’ Obama Removes ‘Creator’ From US Declaration Of Independence
Speech

On 09.18.10, in Censorship, History, Regime, Religion, by Sad Hill



....File this under the pseudo-Christian column. President Obama concluded
his speech at this week’s Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute gala with,

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
endowed with certain inalienable rights, life and liberty and the pursuit of
happiness.”




The U.S. Declaration of Independence reads,

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that
among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”



Poser. Watch ‘Mr. Christian’ read it word-for-word straight from his
teleprompter gods (22:40):

http://sadhillnews.com/2010/09/18/ch...endence-speech

“…there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce
destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought
them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their
shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute.” — 2 Peter
2:1-2

I was just watching Fox, showing a Texas School Textbook Committee
approving teaching that the Declaration reads "...all _people_ are
created equal..." rather than "...all _men_ are created equal..."

...Jim Thompson
If they strike 5000 years ago and add some Richard Dawkins, we can
welcome them to now.

On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:50:40 -0700, Fred Abse wrote:
On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 17:08:38 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

I was just watching Fox, showing a Texas School Textbook Committee
approving teaching that the Declaration reads "...all _people_ are
created equal..." rather than "...all _men_ are created equal..."

Rewriting history.

What's next? Burning books?

Well, there's that pseudo-Xtian nut case in Florida...

Cheers!
Rich

On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:50:40 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 17:08:38 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

I was just watching Fox, showing a Texas School Textbook Committee
approving teaching that the Declaration reads "...all _people_ are created
equal..." rather than "...all _men_ are created equal..."

Rewriting history.

What's next? Burning books?

Democrats don't burn text books, they just rewrite them to suit their
own flawed dogma.

Our school systems have become the propaganda wing of the leftists :-(

I used to think that liberals/leftists/progressives were illiterate.

(For you liberals/leftists/progressives, "illiterate" means incapable
of reading and/or comprehending content :-)

But I've recently come to the conclusion that "incapable" is not the
key word... it's "unwilling".

Liberals/leftists/progressives simply don't want to hear any opposing
opinion... they're totally "unwilling" to hear anything other than the
roar in their own heads.

They'll even resort to putting their heads up their own asses to avoid
hearing.

I truly believe the 9mm probe solution is the only cure ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

The Ground Zero Mosque IS Appropriate When Renamed...
The Obama Monument to American Impotence

flipper wrote:

On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:31:41 -0700, Rich Grise
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:50:40 -0700, Fred Abse wrote:
On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 17:08:38 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

I was just watching Fox, showing a Texas School Textbook Committee
approving teaching that the Declaration reads "...all _people_ are
created equal..." rather than "...all _men_ are created equal..."

Rewriting history.

What's next? Burning books?

Well, there's that pseudo-Xtian nut case in Florida...

That's right, there is. And he's no more qualified to be President
than the current occupant is.


He's also trying to sell the building to move out of the Gainesville
area after all the problems he caused. It must be all the pot & vodka
his cult uses.


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

flipper wrote:

On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 15:50:38 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:

On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:31:41 -0700, Rich Grise
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:50:40 -0700, Fred Abse wrote:
On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 17:08:38 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

I was just watching Fox, showing a Texas School Textbook Committee
approving teaching that the Declaration reads "...all _people_ are
created equal..." rather than "...all _men_ are created equal..."

Rewriting history.

What's next? Burning books?

Well, there's that pseudo-Xtian nut case in Florida...

That's right, there is. And he's no more qualified to be President
than the current occupant is.


He's also trying to sell the building to move out of the Gainesville
area after all the problems he caused. It must be all the pot & vodka
his cult uses.

Is that to pay for the $180,000 the local police plan to 'bill' him
for 'security'?


I think it's the other way around. He doesn't want to pay that
bill. I hope they put a lien on the 'church' property. If they do, it
will wipe out almost all of their equity in the property. I'm sure
Tampa doesn't want them, which is where they said they want to move.


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

Jim Thompson wrote:

I truly believe the 9mm probe solution is the only cure ;-)


Ever wonder just WHO is pushing you to start a Civil War? You might
not like the answer.




mike

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 01:00:08 -0500, flipper wrote:

Say you plant a flag in your front yard and a bunch of kooks show up
'protesting' your support for whatever. You planning to pay the 'security
bill' for kooks showing up?

Nah, not if you're friendly with Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson. ;-)

Cheers!
Rich

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 01:00:08 -0500, flipper wrote:

I don't 'agree' with the guy, although he apparently, in the final
analysis, didn't 'do the deed', but if we get to 'banishing' everyone we
don't like then this is going to be one screwed up country.

Like all warmakers, eventually the "good guys" become indistinguishable
from the "bad guys".

Thanks,
Rich

On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 23:45:04 -0600, m II wrote:
Jim Thompson wrote:

I truly believe the 9mm probe solution is the only cure ;-)

Ever wonder just WHO is pushing you to start a Civil War? You might not
like the answer.

Oh, don't pay any attention to Thompson. He's just a rabid neocon whose
first choice is to murder anyone who doesn't toe the misogynistic anti-
choice theocrat war-addict party line.

Cheers!
Rich

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 14:04:47 -0500, flipper wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 13:50:54 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"

'Free' protection? its one thing for them to protect an individual.
it's paid for in your property taxes. It's another to knowingly create
extra work that causes the local law enforcement to pay people overtime
to take care of an event.

Get's back to 'censorship by kooks' doesn't it? All a group of kooks
need do is threaten whatever speech they dislike and police 'security'
is denied.

I'm just trying to get you to frame this as some kind of general
principle rather than picking and choosing based on who's message you
like or dislike.

I don't think Michael is capable of that sophisticated of a level of
thought.

Good Luck!
Rich

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 10:24:41 -0700, Fred Abse wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 11:31:41 -0700, Rich Grise wrote:
On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 10:50:40 -0700, Fred Abse wrote:
On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 17:08:38 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

I was just watching Fox, showing a Texas School Textbook Committee
approving teaching that the Declaration reads "...all _people_ are
created equal..." rather than "...all _men_ are created equal..."

Rewriting history.

What's next? Burning books?

Well, there's that pseudo-Xtian nut case in Florida...

I note that you wrote "pseudo".

Yeah. That's a guy who pays lip service to Jesus, while doing the
opposite of what Jesus was trying to teach.

Hope This Helps!
Rich

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:32:44 -0500, flipper wrote:

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:03:24 -0700, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Sep 2010 23:45:04 -0600, m II wrote:
Jim Thompson wrote:

I truly believe the 9mm probe solution is the only cure ;-)

Ever wonder just WHO is pushing you to start a Civil War? You might not
like the answer.

Oh, don't pay any attention to Thompson. He's just a rabid neocon whose
first choice is to murder anyone who doesn't toe the misogynistic anti-
choice theocrat war-addict party line.

Cheers!
Rich

The never ending torrent of mindless demonization drivel like that
from the left is precisely why some people come to the conclusion
there is no other alternative.

Indeed! Mindless drivel.

Rick is one sick dude.

I'm puzzled, I suspect he has no dictionary at hand, and no internal
knowledge...

"misogynistic" means hating women. I have two daughters and two
daughters-in-law, all professional women... and five granddaughters up
and coming in their academics. And I'd support Sarah for President
;-)

"anti-choice": I've declared myself pro-choice here many times. Where
has Rich been... in a drug-induced fog... likely.

BTW, I could care less what you inject, smoke or drink... just don't
endanger anyone in the process, or get in my face.

"theocrat": I'm an atheist... stated here multiple times

"war addict": Not by choice but it may be a necessity to stop the
cretins.

BTW, If our society falls apart and we _do_ end up in a civil war,
I've got first div's on Rich. I'll treat him to a nice slow death :-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

The Ground Zero Mosque IS Appropriate When Renamed...
The Obama Monument to American Impotence

flipper wrote:


Then where's the problem? He didn't 'hire' them so no bill.


Right. That's what YOU say.


I repeat, then, where's the problem? The guy didn't contract for
security so no bill.


Sigh. You have no clue, yet you run your ignorant mouth. They had
that trailer with their sign along the side of a road. The controversy
caused a lot more traffic than normal. That required police officers to
handle the rubbernecking traffic.

They had to provide more security for a college football game after
threats were made because of his stunt. As far as protecting the idiots
that started it, I doubt that was their first concern. After all, that
so called man of God bragged that he and other members of his 'church'
were carrying guns. I would think that the police were there to protect
the public from the armed nut jobs. That so called 'Church' was mostly
his family members, with a total membership around 50 people.


Get's back to 'censorship by kooks' doesn't it? All a group of kooks
need do is threaten whatever speech they dislike and police 'security'
is denied.


Of course, so you better shut the hell up. ;-)


I'm just trying to get you to frame this as some kind of general
principle rather than picking and choosing based on who's message you
like or dislike.


So, you would rather the other citizens suffer by losing 150% of
those law enforcement officers? Their budgets were cut this year, due
to Obama's economy. No paid overtime, so if they had to call people in,
it was paid for with comp time.

You must be a very proud Obamanite.


I can't find anything about a 'deportation' online so I guess that
would be 'news' to the Gainesville Sun since they didn't mention a
thing about it.


It was reported that way on several local TV stations. I think the
Gainesville Sun is a NYT newspaper, which isn't known for accurate
reporting. They have a reputation as a low grade fish wrapper. The
best part of that paper is the funny page. The only time I ever read it
is when I'm stuck at the VA hospital in Gainesville. All I ever hear
while there is how bad that paper is, and all the mistakes and
ommisions.

Also, I would think they would try to distance themselves from that
group after the threats started.




Fortunately, you aren't.

Why? Because I don't substitute words I like for what's actually
written and pretend inconvenient passages aren't there?

In my opinion it's unfortunate I'm not and you've haven't provided a
single argument to the contrary.


Your mind is closed to any argument.


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:41:24 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:


Then where's the problem? He didn't 'hire' them so no bill.


Right. That's what YOU say.


I repeat, then, where's the problem? The guy didn't contract for
security so no bill.


Sigh. You have no clue, yet you run your ignorant mouth. They had
that trailer with their sign along the side of a road. The controversy
caused a lot more traffic than normal. That required police officers to
handle the rubbernecking traffic.

They had to provide more security for a college football game after
threats were made because of his stunt. As far as protecting the idiots
that started it, I doubt that was their first concern. After all, that
so called man of God bragged that he and other members of his 'church'
were carrying guns. I would think that the police were there to protect
the public from the armed nut jobs. That so called 'Church' was mostly
his family members, with a total membership around 50 people.


Get's back to 'censorship by kooks' doesn't it? All a group of kooks
need do is threaten whatever speech they dislike and police 'security'
is denied.


Of course, so you better shut the hell up. ;-)


I'm just trying to get you to frame this as some kind of general
principle rather than picking and choosing based on who's message you
like or dislike.


So, you would rather the other citizens suffer by losing 150% of
those law enforcement officers? Their budgets were cut this year, due
to Obama's economy. No paid overtime, so if they had to call people in,
it was paid for with comp time.

You must be a very proud Obamanite.


I can't find anything about a 'deportation' online so I guess that
would be 'news' to the Gainesville Sun since they didn't mention a
thing about it.


It was reported that way on several local TV stations. I think the
Gainesville Sun is a NYT newspaper, which isn't known for accurate
reporting. They have a reputation as a low grade fish wrapper. The
best part of that paper is the funny page. The only time I ever read it
is when I'm stuck at the VA hospital in Gainesville. All I ever hear
while there is how bad that paper is, and all the mistakes and
ommisions.

Also, I would think they would try to distance themselves from that
group after the threats started.




Fortunately, you aren't.

Why? Because I don't substitute words I like for what's actually
written and pretend inconvenient passages aren't there?

In my opinion it's unfortunate I'm not and you've haven't provided a
single argument to the contrary.


Your mind is closed to any argument.

Any city that sent me a bill for exercising my Constitutional
rights... I'd kick their ass and make them appear on Greta to defend
their position.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

The Ground Zero Mosque IS Appropriate When Renamed...
The Obama Monument to American Impotence

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:41:24 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:


Then where's the problem? He didn't 'hire' them so no bill.


Right. That's what YOU say.


I repeat, then, where's the problem? The guy didn't contract for
security so no bill.


Sigh. You have no clue, yet you run your ignorant mouth. They had
that trailer with their sign along the side of a road. The controversy
caused a lot more traffic than normal. That required police officers to
handle the rubbernecking traffic.

They had to provide more security for a college football game after
threats were made because of his stunt. As far as protecting the idiots
that started it, I doubt that was their first concern. After all, that
so called man of God bragged that he and other members of his 'church'
were carrying guns. I would think that the police were there to protect
the public from the armed nut jobs. That so called 'Church' was mostly
his family members, with a total membership around 50 people.


Get's back to 'censorship by kooks' doesn't it? All a group of kooks
need do is threaten whatever speech they dislike and police 'security'
is denied.


Of course, so you better shut the hell up. ;-)


I'm just trying to get you to frame this as some kind of general
principle rather than picking and choosing based on who's message you
like or dislike.


So, you would rather the other citizens suffer by losing 150% of
those law enforcement officers? Their budgets were cut this year, due
to Obama's economy. No paid overtime, so if they had to call people in,
it was paid for with comp time.

You must be a very proud Obamanite.


I can't find anything about a 'deportation' online so I guess that
would be 'news' to the Gainesville Sun since they didn't mention a
thing about it.


It was reported that way on several local TV stations. I think the
Gainesville Sun is a NYT newspaper, which isn't known for accurate
reporting. They have a reputation as a low grade fish wrapper. The
best part of that paper is the funny page. The only time I ever read it
is when I'm stuck at the VA hospital in Gainesville. All I ever hear
while there is how bad that paper is, and all the mistakes and
ommisions.

Also, I would think they would try to distance themselves from that
group after the threats started.




Fortunately, you aren't.

Why? Because I don't substitute words I like for what's actually
written and pretend inconvenient passages aren't there?

In my opinion it's unfortunate I'm not and you've haven't provided a
single argument to the contrary.


Your mind is closed to any argument.

Any city that sent me a bill for exercising my Constitutional
rights... I'd kick their ass and make them appear on Greta to defend
their position.


You have a right to break laws? Interesting. They were refused the
required fire permits for a bonfire, yet claimed they were going to have
it anyway. They distuprted most of the city to get media attention.
Where in the constitution do you have that right?

Pull your head out of your ass, Jim. Their 'Constitutional Rights'
ended when they infringed on the rights of other people who wanted
nothing to do with their cult of hate.


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 23:17:02 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Thompson wrote:

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:41:24 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:


Then where's the problem? He didn't 'hire' them so no bill.


Right. That's what YOU say.


I repeat, then, where's the problem? The guy didn't contract for
security so no bill.


Sigh. You have no clue, yet you run your ignorant mouth. They had
that trailer with their sign along the side of a road. The controversy
caused a lot more traffic than normal. That required police officers to
handle the rubbernecking traffic.

They had to provide more security for a college football game after
threats were made because of his stunt. As far as protecting the idiots
that started it, I doubt that was their first concern. After all, that
so called man of God bragged that he and other members of his 'church'
were carrying guns. I would think that the police were there to protect
the public from the armed nut jobs. That so called 'Church' was mostly
his family members, with a total membership around 50 people.


Get's back to 'censorship by kooks' doesn't it? All a group of kooks
need do is threaten whatever speech they dislike and police 'security'
is denied.


Of course, so you better shut the hell up. ;-)


I'm just trying to get you to frame this as some kind of general
principle rather than picking and choosing based on who's message you
like or dislike.


So, you would rather the other citizens suffer by losing 150% of
those law enforcement officers? Their budgets were cut this year, due
to Obama's economy. No paid overtime, so if they had to call people in,
it was paid for with comp time.

You must be a very proud Obamanite.


I can't find anything about a 'deportation' online so I guess that
would be 'news' to the Gainesville Sun since they didn't mention a
thing about it.


It was reported that way on several local TV stations. I think the
Gainesville Sun is a NYT newspaper, which isn't known for accurate
reporting. They have a reputation as a low grade fish wrapper. The
best part of that paper is the funny page. The only time I ever read it
is when I'm stuck at the VA hospital in Gainesville. All I ever hear
while there is how bad that paper is, and all the mistakes and
ommisions.

Also, I would think they would try to distance themselves from that
group after the threats started.




Fortunately, you aren't.

Why? Because I don't substitute words I like for what's actually
written and pretend inconvenient passages aren't there?

In my opinion it's unfortunate I'm not and you've haven't provided a
single argument to the contrary.


Your mind is closed to any argument.

Any city that sent me a bill for exercising my Constitutional
rights... I'd kick their ass and make them appear on Greta to defend
their position.


You have a right to break laws? Interesting. They were refused the
required fire permits for a bonfire, yet claimed they were going to have
it anyway. They distuprted most of the city to get media attention.
Where in the constitution do you have that right?

Pull your head out of your ass, Jim. Their 'Constitutional Rights'
ended when they infringed on the rights of other people who wanted
nothing to do with their cult of hate.

Come to my bonfire, we need the fuel ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Obama, All Blow but NO Hard

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 23:17:02 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Jim Thompson wrote:

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:41:24 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


flipper wrote:


Then where's the problem? He didn't 'hire' them so no bill.


Right. That's what YOU say.


I repeat, then, where's the problem? The guy didn't contract for
security so no bill.


Sigh. You have no clue, yet you run your ignorant mouth. They had
that trailer with their sign along the side of a road. The controversy
caused a lot more traffic than normal. That required police officers to
handle the rubbernecking traffic.

They had to provide more security for a college football game after
threats were made because of his stunt. As far as protecting the idiots
that started it, I doubt that was their first concern. After all, that
so called man of God bragged that he and other members of his 'church'
were carrying guns. I would think that the police were there to protect
the public from the armed nut jobs. That so called 'Church' was mostly
his family members, with a total membership around 50 people.


Get's back to 'censorship by kooks' doesn't it? All a group of kooks
need do is threaten whatever speech they dislike and police 'security'
is denied.


Of course, so you better shut the hell up. ;-)


I'm just trying to get you to frame this as some kind of general
principle rather than picking and choosing based on who's message you
like or dislike.


So, you would rather the other citizens suffer by losing 150% of
those law enforcement officers? Their budgets were cut this year, due
to Obama's economy. No paid overtime, so if they had to call people in,
it was paid for with comp time.

You must be a very proud Obamanite.


I can't find anything about a 'deportation' online so I guess that
would be 'news' to the Gainesville Sun since they didn't mention a
thing about it.


It was reported that way on several local TV stations. I think the
Gainesville Sun is a NYT newspaper, which isn't known for accurate
reporting. They have a reputation as a low grade fish wrapper. The
best part of that paper is the funny page. The only time I ever read it
is when I'm stuck at the VA hospital in Gainesville. All I ever hear
while there is how bad that paper is, and all the mistakes and
ommisions.

Also, I would think they would try to distance themselves from that
group after the threats started.




Fortunately, you aren't.

Why? Because I don't substitute words I like for what's actually
written and pretend inconvenient passages aren't there?

In my opinion it's unfortunate I'm not and you've haven't provided a
single argument to the contrary.


Your mind is closed to any argument.

Any city that sent me a bill for exercising my Constitutional
rights... I'd kick their ass and make them appear on Greta to defend
their position.


You have a right to break laws? Interesting. They were refused the
required fire permits for a bonfire, yet claimed they were going to have
it anyway. They distuprted most of the city to get media attention.
Where in the constitution do you have that right?

Pull your head out of your ass, Jim. Their 'Constitutional Rights'
ended when they infringed on the rights of other people who wanted
nothing to do with their cult of hate.

Come to my bonfire, we need the fuel ;-)


You're just another leftist weenie.


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

flipper wrote:

Authorities tried that 'fire law' thing with flag burning too but the
Supreme Court said it didn't fly.


that has nothing to do with a pit full of burning books. Not that
uyou understand.


I.E. On what basis did they 'deny' the permit? Nothing other than not
liking the 'expression' and he isn't 'breaking laws' if they're
unconstitutional or unconstitutionally applied.


All open fires are banned. The risk of starting a large fire is
quite high in the summer, in Florida Not that you give a damn. Nothing
is allowed to be burned without a permit, due to the risk of wildfires.


They disrupted most of the city to get media attention.
Where in the constitution do you have that right?

According to the Supreme Court, freedom of expression and I'd wager
that a hefty chunk of 'freedom of expression' acts are designed to
garner media attention. Flag burning surely was because it just don't
last long enough to make decent toasted marshmallows.


Yawn. Trying to move imaginary goalposts won't cut it.


And tons of people wanted nothing to do with the flag burning 'cult of
hate' too but that didn't persuade the court either. In fact, the
explanation usually goes that speech (expression) you and the rest
'want nothing to do with' is what's protected because the stuff
everybody 'likes' doesn't need it.


Stop wrapping yourself in flag burning, unless you intend to burn
yourself with it. It has nothing to do with this situation. The
national media only reported what they wanted to, but you have no clue
as usual.


Next you'll be pontificating about the Casey Anthony trial?


--
Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 21:04:10 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 23:17:02 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
Jim Thompson wrote:

Any city that sent me a bill for exercising my Constitutional rights...
I'd kick their ass and make them appear on Greta to defend their
position.

You have a right to break laws? Interesting. They were refused the
required fire permits for a bonfire, yet claimed they were going to have
it anyway. They distuprted most of the city to get media attention.
Where in the constitution do you have that right?

Pull your head out of your ass, Jim. Their 'Constitutional Rights'
ended when they infringed on the rights of other people who wanted
nothing to do with their cult of hate.

Come to my bonfire, we need the fuel ;-)

Geez! Haven't you Neocons ever heard the word "snip?"

If the fire was under the jurisdiction of some municipality, then they
should have got a permit if it was in the ordinances. If it was out in
the boonies, on private property, then not so much.

Libertarians are not Anarchists. We DO acknowledge that a certain amount
of government is necessary, primarily to schlep your sewage and maintain
the roads. But if a bonfire in your back yard could throw off embers and
burn down your neighbor's house, then a little bit of restraint (like
getting a burning permit) is in order.

But we _do_ draw the line well before the government's (bogus) authority
to dictate what any (adult) individual may or may not put into, or take
out of, his or her own body.

And Jim, if your bonfire burned down the neighbor's house, you _should_
be responsible for the resulting costs, including the firefighters _and_
reimbursement of the guy whose house you burned down.

I think that's the primary problem with Freedom - it comes hand-in-hand
with Responsibility, a word that terrifies people so deeply that it's even
hard to write in longhand.

Thanks,
Rich

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:06:47 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 09:03:24 -0700, Richard the Dreaded Libertarian
...
Rick is one sick dude.

Oh? Which "Rick" would this be? :-

Thanks,
Rich

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 16:06:47 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:
....
And I'd support Sarah for President ;-)

Well, there you are! Jim is obviously quite insane.

Sarah Palin has been nothing but a bad joke from the get-go. If I
won the lottery, I'd pick Tina Fey over her for a running mate. At
least Fey speaks coherent English.

McCain picking her for a running mate threw the electon to Mr. Hussein
Obama as surely as Kerry threw the election to Dubya.

Thanks,
Rich

On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 09:27:31 -0700, Fred Abse
wrote:

On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:21:52 -0700, Rich Grise wrote:

And Jim, if your bonfire burned down the neighbor's house, you _should_
be responsible for the resulting costs, including the firefighters _and_
reimbursement of the guy whose house you burned down.

I'm sure Jim already has the necessary public liability insurance ;-)

Poor Rich Greasy, he doesn't have a clue about any normalities of
life.

And he claims to be a Libertarian? _I'm_ a Libertarian.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Obama, All Blow but NO Hard

On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 10:03:49 -0700, Jim Thompson wrote:

Poor Rich Greasy, he doesn't have a clue about any normalities of life.

And he claims to be a Libertarian? _I'm_ a Libertarian.

You're a dork. I have enough class to not intentionally misspell people's
names in an attempt to throw barbs.

Thompson, you wouldn't know Liberty if it jumped up and bit you in the
ass.

Libertarians don't advocate murdering people who disagree with us - we
merely try to educate the unenlightened.

But that's probably too grand a concept for whatever you're using in
place of a brain.

Thanks,
Rich

Fred Abse wrote in
news
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:21:52 -0700, Rich Grise wrote:

And Jim, if your bonfire burned down the neighbor's house, you
_should_ be responsible for the resulting costs, including the
firefighters _and_ reimbursement of the guy whose house you
burned down.

I'm sure Jim already has the necessary public liability insurance
;-)


But has he read the fine print? Most policies will not pay when the
liability is incurred because of malicious acts. Many also specify non-
payment for results of an Act of God.

And they might argue that the fire was an act of God, because Jim is a
god. He's said so himself.

--
Bob Q.
PA is y I've altered my address.

On Sat, 25 Sep 2010 19:26:39 GMT, Bob Quintal
wrote:

Fred Abse wrote in
news
On Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:21:52 -0700, Rich Grise wrote:

And Jim, if your bonfire burned down the neighbor's house, you
_should_ be responsible for the resulting costs, including the
firefighters _and_ reimbursement of the guy whose house you
burned down.

I'm sure Jim already has the necessary public liability insurance
;-)


But has he read the fine print? Most policies will not pay when the
liability is incurred because of malicious acts. Many also specify non-
payment for results of an Act of God.

And they might argue that the fire was an act of God, because Jim is a
god. He's said so himself.

Of course I'm a god... the god of kick-the-ass-of-a-liberal ;-)

One could also argue that a bon-fire, as an expression of free speech,
is NOT a malicious act.

Personally, I think you should just buy silencers while you can ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Obama, All Blow but NO Hard