Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,646
Default Did you know...

http://tinyurl.com/3oepjxq
  #2   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jun 2008
Posts: 5,868
Default Did you know...

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 06:37:52 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/3oepjxq

Lots of things changed since 1789.
So?

I bet you don't really like that version of the Constitution that much
in the first place.I bet you don't get through Article one Section two
before you find something that ****es you off ;-)
You just cherry picked out the parts that make your point


The thing to note is that the changes were made by Congress and not by
judicial fiat.
  #3   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,646
Default Did you know...

On 10/21/11 12:07 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 06:37:52 -0400, X `
wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/3oepjxq

Lots of things changed since 1789.
So?

I bet you don't really like that version of the Constitution that much
in the first place.I bet you don't get through Article one Section two
before you find something that ****es you off ;-)
You just cherry picked out the parts that make your point



To me, the points were that "religion" was not something uppermost in
the minds of the founders, and that we ought not to be corralled by the
fearmongering Republicans of today.

Whether I "like" the entire Constitution or not is no more relevant a
query as is whether I like the entire Obama presidency or not. I like
Obama. He has done some good things for this country. He could be doing
more if the GOP were more interested in progress and less interested in
its agenda of "stopping" Obama. There are also some things Obama has
done or not done I don't like. But I don't expect any politician to
represent just my agenda.

Which of the three "frontrunners" in the GOP race for the nomination
represents your agenda?

1. Crazy Christian Rick Perry who singlehandedly has taken Texas further
into the dumpster than Dubya, who gets off on executions and who brags
about all the minimum wage jobs he has imported to his state by doing
away with environmental and safety regulations?

2. Herman Cain, who proudly admits he doesn't know anything, and whose
"economic proposals" would further shift the tax burden away from the
wealthy?

3. Mitt Romney, who is not half the man his father was, who is really
nothing more than a corporate raider who has fired tens of thousands of
people, and whose positions on the issues depend upon which way the wind
is blowing.


  #4   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,736
Default Did you know...

On Oct 21, 11:29*am, X ` Man wrote:
On 10/21/11 12:07 PM, wrote:

On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 06:37:52 -0400, X `
wrote:


http://tinyurl.com/3oepjxq


Lots of things changed since 1789.
So?


I bet you don't really like that version of the Constitution that much
in the first place.I bet you don't get through Article one Section two
before you find something that ****es you off ;-)
You just cherry picked out the parts that make your point


To me, the points were that "religion" was not something uppermost in
the minds of the founders, and that we ought not to be corralled by the
fearmongering Republicans of today.



Evidently Krause, they were no more against it either, but that isn't
something you would know, let alone understand
  #5   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Jul 2009
Posts: 2,581
Default Did you know...

On 10/21/2011 9:24 PM, TopBassDog wrote:
On Oct 21, 11:29 am, X ` wrote:
On 10/21/11 12:07 PM, wrote:

On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 06:37:52 -0400, X `
wrote:


http://tinyurl.com/3oepjxq


Lots of things changed since 1789.
So?


I bet you don't really like that version of the Constitution that much
in the first place.I bet you don't get through Article one Section two
before you find something that ****es you off ;-)
You just cherry picked out the parts that make your point


To me, the points were that "religion" was not something uppermost in
the minds of the founders, and that we ought not to be corralled by the
fearmongering Republicans of today.



Evidently Krause, they were no more against it either, but that isn't
something you would know, let alone understand


Fearmongering. That's funny coming from a democrat after the absolute
bull**** Biden (racist slug) has been spewing in the last few days. What
a ****ing asshole...


  #6   Report Post  
Junior Member
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Oct 2011
Posts: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by View Post
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 06:37:52 -0400, X ` Man
wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/3oepjxq

Lots of things changed since 1789.
So?

I bet you don't really like that version of the Constitution that much
in the first place.I bet you don't get through Article one Section two
before you find something that ****es you off ;-)
You just cherry picked out the parts that make your point

New York City is defined in the Federal Regulations as the United Nations. Rudolph Guiliani stated on C-Span that "New York City is the capital of the World". For once, he told the truth.
Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:45 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017