StarDestroyer.Net BBS

oh dear.

Must be borrowing it from the Democrats...

I'm suprised he could use both white-out and pens.

He missed a spot.

Am I the only (edit:moderate) Republican here that is outraged by this?
What is GWB doing against the constitution?

Sorry for being angry, but srriously, please explain the humour.

Straha wrote:Am I the only (edit:moderate) Republican here that is outraged by this?

What is GWB doing against the constitution?

Sorry for being angry, but srriously, please explain the humour.

Darth Wong wrote:

Straha wrote:Am I the only (edit:moderate) Republican here that is outraged by this?

What is GWB doing against the constitution?

Sorry for being angry, but srriously, please explain the humour.

You do understand the Congress is the body that passes laws right?

Yes, but IIRC the Executive branch has the power to use agencies such as the CIA, FBI, and the new Ministry of Truth in order to enforce said laws.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:

Straha wrote:Am I the only (edit:moderate) Republican here that is outraged by this?

What is GWB doing against the constitution?

Sorry for being angry, but srriously, please explain the humour.

You do understand the Congress is the body that passes laws right?

You do realise that Congress is currently a Republican dominated body that votes along partisan lines?

Straha wrote:Am I the only (edit:moderate) Republican here that is outraged by this?
What is GWB doing against the constitution?

Sorry for being angry, but srriously, please explain the humour.

I'm a Republican.

I really just don't care.

weemadando wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote:

Darth Wong wrote:

You do understand the Congress is the body that passes laws right?

You do realise that Congress is currently a Republican dominated body that votes along partisan lines?

Even so called part line votes generally have a 10-20 defectors in the House, quite a signficant thing when the Repbulican majority was 17, and when this past the Senate had two Independents in it, in a total part line vote they could have swung it either way.

As it was the Homeland Defense Bill passed by a significant margin, Both sides supported it and the detail that delayed it was not the limited IOA program.


In any case, for now I don't really care if they do a limited trial of this system. Article IV protects against unreasonable searches, but if connections between information and terrorists can be drawn then I think it is reasonable. Weather or not that’s the case is the whole point of what's currently been approved.

I find it interesting that you say "I'm a Republican" or "I'm a Democrat", rather than picking positions and then selecting whichever politician suits them at the time. Is party affiliation a lifelong attachment? I would be very interested in seeing how many people consistently vote for the same party in every single election.

Sea Skimmer wrote:Even so called part line votes generally have a 10-20 defectors in the House, quite a signficant thing when the Repbulican majority was 17, and when this past the Senate had two Independents in it, in a total part line vote they could have swung it either way.

As it was the Homeland Defense Bill passed by a significant margin, Both sides supported it and the detail that delayed it was not the limited IOA program.

And I suppose it doesn't occur to anyone that any President is normally associated with major policy decisions when he's in power? Do we argue that FDR had nothing to do with America declaring war on Japan in 1941 for these kinds of nitpicky reasons? If George Bush publicly opposed any of the reductions in personal rights over the last year, please feel free to point it out.

Darth Wong wrote:I find it interesting that you say "I'm a Republican" or "I'm a Democrat", rather than picking positions and then selecting whichever politician suits them at the time. Is party affiliation a lifelong attachment? I would be very interested in seeing how many people consistently vote for the same party in every single election. ~emphasis mine

Yup. Sickening, isn't it? As for the sentence after the one I highlighted, I'd say ~90%. Can you say SHEEP?

Darth Wong wrote:

Laura only allows him to use crayons.

Darth Wong wrote:I find it interesting that you say "I'm a Republican" or "I'm a Democrat", rather than picking positions and then selecting whichever politician suits them at the time. Is party affiliation a lifelong attachment? I would be very interested in seeing how many people consistently vote for the same party in every single election.

Because spelling out your views themselves would take a paragraph or six, and saying "I'm Conservative" depends heavily on what country you're actually in. Much simpler to identify which party best reflects your views.

Sea Skimmer wrote:Because spelling out your views themselves would take a paragraph or six, and saying "I'm Conservative" depends heavily on what country you're actually in. Much simpler to identify which party best reflects your views.

Your views are "staying in power at any cost, by rampant cronyism and pandering to our special interests?" If so, I believe it is possible for you to find a party that best reflects your views (ie- either of them). Otherwise, you should be going independent

weemadando wrote:You do realise that Congress is currently a Republican dominated body that votes along partisan lines?

[sarcasm] Yes, but when the Democrats control Congress, they look out for everyone's interests instead of voting along partisan lines...[/sarcasm]

If Al Gore were in power and he was doing the same things, do you think I would go any easier on him?

Darth Wong wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote:Because spelling out your views themselves would take a paragraph or six, and saying "I'm Conservative" depends heavily on what country you're actually in. Much simpler to identify which party best reflects your views.

Your views are "staying in power at any cost, by rampant cronyism and pandering to our special interests?" If so, I believe it is possible for you to find a party that best reflects your views (ie- either of them). Otherwise, you should be going independent

Any politician who gets in power gets in power by playing the system. Independents just have more freedom in who they become a whore for. Unless you dont vote or vote for people who don't actually run campaigns and do nothing beyond registering as a candidate you can't claim otherwise.

Total information awarness. keeps a catolog of what we buy, our e-mails, every trandsaction we make. That is unconstitutional. The bill of rights protected us from scrutiny of emails and personal documents such as credit reports, bank statements, and purhases, this is changing. It used to be that a court order was necessary for such searches. evidence that we where commiting a criminal act was required. Now, the governmet can look inyto our private lives without evidence

Hell they can even imprison us without due processs, and enter our homes without notice.

Do you understand now? I know I am probably not structuring my resonse very well, and will try to write a better one later/

Alyrium Denryle wrote:Total information awarness. keeps a catolog of what we buy, our e-mails, every trandsaction we make. That is unconstitutional. The bill of rights protected us from scrutiny of emails and personal documents such as credit reports, bank statements, and purhases, this is changing. It used to be that a court order was necessary for such searches. evidence that we where commiting a criminal act was required. Now, the governmet can look inyto our private lives without evidence

Hell they can even imprison us without due processs, and enter our homes without notice.

Do you understand now? I know I am probably not structuring my resonse very well, and will try to write a better one later/

Please point out where keeping a log of transactions is against the US Constitution. Private companies and Citzens are already subject to examinations of there credit reports, bank statments and perchases BTW, its called a tax audit.

Darth Wong wrote:I find it interesting that you say "I'm a Republican" or "I'm a Democrat", rather than picking positions and then selecting whichever politician suits them at the time. Is party affiliation a lifelong attachment? I would be very interested in seeing how many people consistently vote for the same party in every single election.

I vote across party lines now and then. Id vote for Republican canidates, ie governor, more often but here in California the Republican party keeps nominating people who cater to the far right side.

California could have a Republican governor instead of Davis, but the Republican party will not support the more moderate members of their party.

I would vote for John McCain for president over Al Gore or Hillary even though I am a Democrat.

Im more issue oriented than party driven. I think like most people you initially sign up for the same party as your parents.

TrailerParkJawa wrote:I think like most people you initially sign up for the same party as your parents.

I've found that to be very uncommon these days.