Obama Bumper Sticker Removal Kit

[r1dermon]

That is an accurate statement...the media today in most cases pander to their owners political outlook.....Walter Cronkite and other newscasters of repute, I miss you, as there are very few left.....Citizen Kane is alive.

Douggie

ever hear of david kay johnston?

[m4a1usr]

Holy smack! What a pile of beldergarb this thread turned in to. A post based on the comedic display or freedom of expression and we see it turned in to commentary about the current administration and support of it? And the hypocrisy in using the federalist papers as some form of defense? Obviously Liam is a high school student who knows nothing about the 85 documents he quotes as some form of basis in his arguement.

Dont debate when you are uninformed of the intent and purpose of such documents especialy when you do not comprehend the very substance you use as a basis.

The federalist papers are commentaries on the EXPECTED LIMITATIONS of the federal government. The dangers of expanding powers over the 13 exisiting colonies or states. The 3 authors are very dramatic in their expressions and opinions. They say nothing about allowing expansion of social criteria to protect the populace and give preference to those challenged. The context in whole is such that it expects individual states to rise to social challenges. Not the federal government.

Take the time to read all 85 of them. Not some classroom performance to earn yourself some grade your teacher thinks you deserve. What freak'n joke!


John

[r1dermon]

i have copies of them, i can send them to you, since you clearly do not understand what their purpose is to serve.

outlayed in the federalist, are admissions of fact, that too much liberty can be a bad thing. on one front you are correct, the federalist exposed that a centralised government could not work. however, on the flip side, if too much poise was given to the states, they would (and did) quarrel and not be able to conduct business or anything effectively. the articles of confederation provided no stipulation to thwart a situation in which the states would wish to tear apart from the union.

shays rebellion was a tax protest by a farmer in MA (the cradle of liberty). the central government was so weak that they were exposed as not being able to provide for the rights of the individual when the state of MA tried to levy a tax on mr shays. after this was exposed, the birth of the US constitution rose from the ashes, and called for a STRONG central government with 3 branches (as opposed to the single congress previously). and THE FEDERALISTS APPLAUDED THE SCOPE!

[Flying Scotsman]

MA and a pissed off farmer are the craddle of liberty? time for a cup of tea

Douggie

[r1dermon]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faneuil_Hall

fourth sentence down...hey, lets make it a tea party!

[Flying Scotsman]

Laddie, the people who strove for liberty were English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish but the Africans were ignored. That is a part of your history that still has problems, so where is the liberty?

Douggie

[ozzie-crawl]

if we all just had O.S.E bumper stickers, then there would be no fighting or need for bumper sticker removal kits.
so its steves fault

[domwilson]

Laddie, the people who strove for liberty were English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish but the Africans were ignored. That is a part of your history that still has problems, so where is the liberty?

Douggie

I was watching the history channel on July 4th. They said that as many as 1/4 of the slaves fought for independence in exchange for freedom. Supposedly, Thomas Jefferson originally wanted to free the slaves in his original Declaration of Independence. But was met with great opposition from the Continental Congress. Anyhow back to the original topic....We could have used that for the last 6 or so presidencies. Rape-publicans and Democraps. In the end, we all get screwed. We're just debating on who hurts the least.

[Steven Vaccaro]

if we all just had O.S.E bumper stickers, then there would be no fighting or need for bumper sticker removal kits.
so its steves fault

Dam I knew I would some how get blamed for this.

I feel like poor George Bush.

[AndyKunz]

Laddie, the people who strove for liberty were English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish but the Africans were ignored. That is a part of your history that still has problems, so where is the liberty?

You, Douggie, have been sadly misinformed. I have an e-book at home called "Colored Patriots of the American Revolution." You can download a copy here:

http://keyboardmilitia.com/wp-content/uploads/Colored_Patriots_of_American_Rev.pdf

Download yourself a copy and start reading. It's only about 500 pages, and includes far too little detail on what each did.

Of course, it's not any more politically correct today than when it was originally published, but it certainly deserves to be read.

Andy

[r1dermon]

I was watching the history channel on July 4th. They said that as many as 1/4 of the slaves fought for independence in exchange for freedom. Supposedly, Thomas Jefferson originally wanted to free the slaves in his original Declaration of Independence. But was met with great opposition from the Continental Congress. Anyhow back to the original topic....We could have used that for the last 6 or so presidencies. Rape-publicans and Democraps. In the end, we all get screwed. We're just debating on who hurts the least.

this is correct, there were disputes within the continental congress on the issue of slavery. article 1 section 9 of the constitution was drafted in such a way as to dance around the issue at the time. remember, slavery was a normal thing back then, getting rid of it overnight was not going to happen, and getting rid of it without a fight was just impossible. section 9 of article 1 gave 20 years for importation of "slave laborers" and assigned them to the worth of 1/3rds of a person for tax reasons.

[domwilson]

this is correct, there were disputes within the continental congress on the issue of slavery. article 1 section 9 of the constitution was drafted in such a way as to dance around the issue at the time. remember, slavery was a normal thing back then, getting rid of it overnight was not going to happen, and getting rid of it without a fight was just impossible. section 9 of article 1 gave 20 years for importation of "slave laborers" and assigned them to the worth of 1/3rds of a person for tax reasons.

3/5th's for the census.