What Does This Mean??

[Tom Clancy]

He must be talking about armed revolution and anarchy.

buncha racists.

I was watching you know who tonight.. obie wan's station they are definitely going to brand Mr. Paul as a racist. Wait for it.

There's already a Thread about him being a Racist.

But no link, or anything of that sort..

 

[Rinata]

"I have a message from the Tea Party that is loud and clear and doesn't mince words: We've come to take our government back."

-- Kentucky GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul

To me that sounds very ominous and threatening. Am I wrong??

Being the blinded Obamabot that you are... you are indeed wrong on a regular basis.. and this is no exception

It's not that I don't appreciate your very gracious response, but it was of no value. Like most things that come out of your mouth as a result of your right wing distorted thought process. Jerk.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

"I have a message from the Tea Party that is loud and clear and doesn't mince words: We've come to take our government back."

-- Kentucky GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul

To me that sounds very ominous and threatening. Am I wrong??

When we see your loony party destroying the country it SHOULD be viewed as "ominous and threatening". You left wing tards are seeing the beginning of you being sent back into the woodwork....your grand experiment in socialism will be officially branded a failure.

 

[Rinata]

Yeah it's more of that "verbal violence"

Give me a ******* break.

And to answer your question: Yes you are wrong.

How kind of you to respond. But I'm sorry to say that I really did not want responses from right wing lunatics. You have no objectivity and you're not very bright. But thanks anyway, dirt bag!!!

 

[Rinata]

Wasn't that the same motto for the Libs back when the '08 Election was going on?

How witty!!!

 

[Rinata]

"I have a message from the Tea Party that is loud and clear and doesn't mince words: We've come to take our government back."

-- Kentucky GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul

To me that sounds very ominous and threatening. Am I wrong??

Of course you're wrong.

You are retarded.

No, I'm not. You're just an ass.

 

[rightwinger]

"I have a message from the Tea Party that is loud and clear and doesn't mince words: We've come to take our government back."

-- Kentucky GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul

To me that sounds very ominous and threatening. Am I wrong??

When we see your loony party destroying the country it SHOULD be viewed as "ominous and threatening". You left wing tards are seeing the beginning of you being sent back into the woodwork....your grand experiment in socialism will be officially branded a failure.

The current government was overwhelmingly elected by "We the people"..

We had eight years of your political system implementing the form of government that they promised would reform America. Instead...they destroyed the economy, started two wars and diminished the once proud reputation of America around the globe.

There is nothing being done today which remotely constitutes socialism. Just because your side is no longer calling the shots does not constitute "ominous and threatening"

 

[Big Black Dog]

"I have a message from the Tea Party that is loud and clear and doesn't mince words: We've come to take our government back."

-- Kentucky GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul

To me that sounds very ominous and threatening. Am I wrong??

It means that if you are one of the lying, dip-shit, politicians that do not follow the will of the folks who elected them into office, or if you are in politics just to have a self-serving power base for yourself, most likely your days in office are numbered cause you're going to come up a little short in the ballot box come election day. That doesn't sound too ominous and threatening to me. Sounds like democracy in action.

 

[Tom Clancy]

Wasn't that the same motto for the Libs back when the '08 Election was going on?

How witty!!!

So, you won't admit it?

I see..

 

[Shorebreak]

"I have a message from the Tea Party that is loud and clear and doesn't mince words: We've come to take our government back."

-- Kentucky GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul

To me that sounds very ominous and threatening. Am I wrong??

To me it sounds like a breath of fresh air.

Imagine a government that keeps its nose out of your business?

Imagine a government that keeps its nose - and our tax dollars - out of the business of foreign countries?

Imagine a government that begins to hold itself accountable for following Constitutional guidelines?

Imagine a government that no longer listens to the demand and/or bribes of private interests and corporations?

Imagine a government that returns issues and responsibility to the state level, thereby giving people a more direct representative system and enabling states to act as they were designed, autonomously, with the exception of those area's that are legally defined in our Constitution.

To me, that is not a threat. It's a return of control over our lives from a federal government that has built itself up in spite of the Constitution, rather than in alignment with it.

Surely there are federal programs that are beneficial to some. But surely a Constitution-oriented leadership can find ways to hand those reigns over to the residents of each State, thereby allowing our federal government to re-focus on it's legally mandated mission, rather than it's current scope which is to micro-manage and find access into every possible aspect of our individual lives.

When I see someone who is determined to undertake this task, and take our government back from the private interests who have bastardized the meaning of government, I get warm and fuzzy's. What scares me is when people are so far removed from wanting a Constitution based government that they feel threatened when a good person decides to go after it. It demonstrates how effective our education system and media have been in working to tear it down.

 

[Liability]

The present government was lawfully elected by the American people....what is he talking about?

The present government is acting in violation of our Constitution and in violation of their oaths to comply with the Constitution.

It is crystal clear what he is talking about.

We want OUR government back, meaning the limited one permitted by the Constitution.

This isn't even tough stuff, ya dipsticks.

The current Government was elected by a wide margin by "We the People". Nothing they have done is even remotely unconstitutional

Just because your side was hounded out of office doesn't make it unconstitutional

The dispute is not whether the current government got voted in by the majority. That's already acknowledged.

The dispute is as to your second contention which is patently false.

The claim you make that "Nothing they have done is even remotely unconstitutional" is facially false and patently ridiculous.

There is not legitimate Constitutional authority for the actions taken by this hideous government. They have violated the Constitution in numerous ways at numerous times and at various junctures. It is startling that guys like you cannot admit it.

What Constitutional authority can POSSIBL
Y justify the horrendous law that would compel me to buy not just health insurance but health insurance of THEIR ******* liking? **** them. Unconstitutional.

What is the ******* Constitutional authority for putting us into debt that is beyond the ability of even the next generation to pay? None. It is a violation of the precept of a limited government that runs so deep that it cannot be justified on ANY valid Constitutional principle.

Where in our Constitution did WE give to the Federal Government the right to outright OWN any industry or corporations? Yet this ******* Administration screwed the GM bond holders in a startling abuse of power and took literal control over GM.

Not even "remotely" unConstitutional? You are ******* crazy or tragically retarded. What it is not even remotely is Constitutional.

What Constitutional justification can their POSSIBLY BE to give the voters of DC a Congressional representative? But the Obama Administration, a bunch of ass-clowns, supports that crap, too.

What are the CONSTITUTIONAL bases for all the appointed "czars" in Comrade President's Administration? Quick answer: NONE.

What about the BAILOUTS? Are you gonna try to pretend that there's a valid Constitutional BASIS for that bullshit? Take a peek at the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7.

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law . . . .

 

[Liability]

"I have a message from the Tea Party that is loud and clear and doesn't mince words: We've come to take our government back."

-- Kentucky GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul

To me that sounds very ominous and threatening. Am I wrong??

Of course you're wrong.

You are retarded.

No, I'm not. You're just an ass.

No. You really ARE retarded. AND you are an asshole. Sorry I left that out, you retarded asshole.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yeah it's more of that "verbal violence"

Give me a ******* break.

And to answer your question: Yes you are wrong.

How kind of you to respond. But I'm sorry to say that I really did not want responses from right wing lunatics. You have no objectivity and you're not very bright. But thanks anyway, dirt bag!!!

For those of you who are incapable of thinking outside of the two party, right or left, Dumbocrat Repugnantcan paradigm because of some type of mental limitation, I find it comical that you claim others have no objectivity.

For those of you think that a simple statement by a politician like "We want to take our government back" is somehow ominous and threatening because of some knee jerk involuntary reflex that you might want to think about why you are so fearful that you believe everything to be some sort of threat.

Stop reacting and start thinking.

 

[Si modo]

"I have a message from the Tea Party that is loud and clear and doesn't mince words: We've come to take our government back."

-- Kentucky GOP Senate nominee Rand Paul

To me that sounds very ominous and threatening. Am I wrong??

Damn!

 

[sweetie]

....apparently some stoooopid teabaggers are unaware 'we' have never had 'our government' in the first place!!

...(apparently some t-bag pinheads pine for 'the good ol' daze' of stinking ronald reagan!!)

...the rest of you, have a good day!..

 

[Si modo]

"Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battle-field of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.

But, in a larger sense, we can not dedicate -- we can not consecrate -- we can not hallow -- this ground. The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract. The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here, but it can never forget what they did here. It is for us the living, rather, to be dedicated here to the unfinished work which they who fought here have thus far so nobly advanced. It is rather for us to be here dedicated to the great task remaining before us -- that from these honored dead we take increased devotion to that cause for which they gave the last full measure of devotion -- that we here highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain -- that this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom -- and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth."

Lincoln said that at Gettysburg. FYI for the morons.

 

[rightwinger]

The present government is acting in violation of our Constitution and in violation of their oaths to comply with the Constitution.

It is crystal clear what he is talking about.

We want OUR government back, meaning the limited one permitted by the Constitution.

This isn't even tough stuff, ya dipsticks.

The current Government was elected by a wide margin by "We the People". Nothing they have done is even remotely unconstitutional

Just because your side was hounded out of office doesn't make it unconstitutional

The dispute is not whether the current government got voted in by the majority. That's already acknowledged.

The dispute is as to your second contention which is patently false.

The claim you make that "Nothing they have done is even remotely unconstitutional" is facially false and patently ridiculous.

There is not legitimate Constitutional authority for the actions taken by this hideous government. They have violated the Constitution in numerous ways at numerous times and at various junctures. It is startling that guys like you cannot admit it.

What Constitutional authority can POSSIBL
Y justify the horrendous law that would compel me to buy not just health insurance but health insurance of THEIR ******* liking? **** them. Unconstitutional.

What is the ******* Constitutional authority for putting us into debt that is beyond the ability of even the next generation to pay? None. It is a violation of the precept of a limited government that runs so deep that it cannot be justified on ANY valid Constitutional principle.

Where in our Constitution did WE give to the Federal Government the right to outright OWN any industry or corporations? Yet this ******* Administration screwed the GM bond holders in a startling abuse of power and took literal control over GM.

Not even "remotely" unConstitutional? You are ******* crazy or tragically retarded. What it is not even remotely is Constitutional.

What Constitutional justification can their POSSIBLY BE to give the voters of DC a Congressional representative? But the Obama Administration, a bunch of ass-clowns, supports that crap, too.

What are the CONSTITUTIONAL bases for all the appointed "czars" in Comrade President's Administration? Quick answer: NONE.

What about the BAILOUTS? Are you gonna try to pretend that there's a valid Constitutional BASIS for that bullshit? Take a peek at the U.S. Constitution, Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7.

No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law . . . .

You would present more of a sincere argument if not for the fact that you claim every action by the Obama administration is unconstitutional. It makes it clear that the right believes that just because their disgraced policies are no longer respected that whatever the newly elected government does is unconstitutional.

Another falacy of your argument is that you leave out the "in my opinion....it is unconstitutional" or "May be unconstitutional" In fact, it is up to the courts to decide...not message board posters. The laws passed muster with the Congressional Legal staff so untill such time as a court of law disallows them, they are within the bounds of the Constitution

Healthcare- being challenged, but is still the law of the land
Debt- Nothing unconstitutional about debt, if so, Reagan and Bush would have been impeached
Czars- another name for advisors...shows how petty you are becoming
Bailouts- Been done before and there is nothing preventing it from being done again

 

[NYcarbineer]

The present government was lawfully elected by the American people....what is he talking about?

The present government is acting in violation of our Constitution and in violation of their oaths to comply with the Constitution.

It is crystal clear what he is talking about.

We want OUR government back, meaning the limited one permitted by the Constitution.

This isn't even tough stuff, ya dipsticks.

Funny stuff.

 

[rightwinger]

The present government was lawfully elected by the American people....what is he talking about?

The present government is acting in violation of our Constitution and in violation of their oaths to comply with the Constitution.

It is crystal clear what he is talking about.

We want OUR government back, meaning the limited one permitted by the Constitution.

This isn't even tough stuff, ya dipsticks.

Funny stuff.

Agreed...it would be funny if not for the fact that they take themselves seriously

The idea the government stopped evolving once the Constitution was ratified. The idea that if the founding fathers did not envision it......it cannot be done.

The first President rode around in a horse and buggy....current Presidents use Air Force One

That is the same level of advancement that running a government today compares to running a government in the 18th century

 

[Skull Pilot]

The present government is acting in violation of our Constitution and in violation of their oaths to comply with the Constitution.

It is crystal clear what he is talking about.

We want OUR government back, meaning the limited one permitted by the Constitution.

This isn't even tough stuff, ya dipsticks.

Funny stuff.

Agreed...it would be funny if not for the fact that they take themselves seriously

The idea the government stopped evolving once the Constitution was ratified. The idea that if the founding fathers did not envision it......it cannot be done.

The first President rode around in a horse and buggy....current Presidents use Air Force One

That is the same level of advancement that running a government today compares to running a government in the 18th century

it's funnier how you think that just because a bare majority elected some asshole that people can't voice dissatisfaction or criticism of said asshole.