SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Another insulting and outrageous remark from an MSNBC reporter...

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Another insulting and outrageous remark from an MSNBC reporter... (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=189110)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buddahaid (Post 1776630)

How did you quantum leap to that question? If you mean by choosing one party over the other you decide if your for or against the constitution, I find that way too white hat verses black hat. I vote for who or what seems to best follow my interpretation of said document as neither party is very good at following it when inconvenient to their cause de jour.

As for being created equal under the eyes of our lord, that is in the Declaration of Independence.

The Declaration of Independence: A Transcription
IN Subsim.Com, Right here right now, October 29, 2011.
The unanimous Declaration of the 50 united States of America, and a few drunken sub simmers
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness....

Well you took the time to type all of that out ain't it an inspiriting thing to read, but you took the quantum leap right over my last post, I'll ask it again what right does any man have to rule over or enslave another with out one's consent I didn't know a political party mattered. That whenever any form of government becomes, destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or ablolish it, makes pretty good reading doesn't it, remember you posted it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yubba (Post 1776639)

You never explained how my stating I call myself neither Republican, or Democrat, is related to if I believe in the constitution and all men created equal in the eyes of our lord etc. You just repeated your question.

Ok, just call me stupid, I'll make it simple, so I and who ever reads this will know where you stand, and remember you asked for it no pressure, do you or don't you believe in the Constitution of the United States of America, and what it stands for.???? And of course you didn't answer my question, does any man have the right to rule or enslave another.???????also meaning, banks, governments,and other agencies with unfair practices.

I hate too say it your silence is deafening, no man has the right, too rule or enslave another, without ones consent. I don't care what krotch of what tree you think you fell out of, you don't have the right.

Silence isnt necessarily deafening. People have lives outside of this forum. Just because you didn't get an answer in an hour means nothing.

You would almost think so, crap it's saturday nite, I should be pursue-ing my unaleinable rights, but I got into this debate, and guess what no one wants to anwser this question, Who has the right, too rule or enslave another without one's concent. Here's another who has the right to take from one and give to another.

I just got here. Obviously the answer is No One. My question is, when you ask a question like that you seem to be accusing someone of doing that. Who are you accusing, and why? Just because no one answers your question doesn't mean they don't have an answer. It could just be that you ask it for no apparent reason, which implies you have an ulterior motive but are waiting to spring it on someone if they actually reply.

So, if no one answers you can accuse them of being afraid to, but if someone does you can spring some cunning (to you anyway) trap. I'd say this comes under the category of playing games, which removes you from the arena of honest debate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yubba (Post 1776672)

I haven't answered your question because you failed to answer mine first as I indicated once already. You simply repeat your question to me about my belief and don't explain yourself.

Never mind, if you choose to orate on your own be my guest.

I stated I vote for who, or what, best supports my interpretation of the Constitution, and don't say it's not subject to interpretation as it gets interpreted constantly. As for who has a right to limit your freedom, we all do if in the act of exercising your freedom you impinge on others exercising their freedom. This is why we have laws and incarcerate people.

Well at least in some amount you do support the founding papers, to what extent is still to be seen, you say you'll vote for the person or persons that best interperts the Constitution the best, wrong you vote for people to repesent you, not to figure out, how to get around the constitution that is why we are in the mess we are in now, what is it, that you can't understand, seems to be pretty straight forward unless you are a communist, Marxist, or a Facist, it almost took 100 years for the liberals to figure out the 2nd amendment, what part of not to be infringed upon don't you understand, what part of freedom and liberty don't you understand.

I stand for the Constitution enough to ask you what right you have to stand in judgement of what I believe in. The funny part is you have me pegged as on the far left.

What I want you to explain to me is how my describing myself only as a voter relates to if I stand for the Constitution or not, regardless if it is as our forefathers wrote it. That's the quantum leap I referred to.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CCIP (Post 1776231)

What's so ironic about that again?

Even if you're a total pacifist, you're wise to study the mechanics of war before you decide to hate it. Checking beliefs is pretty smart. I see some people think that it's too ironic to even consider, though...

It's called a ball bust..... not to be taken literally but as encouraging our own selves to lighten up. I went with soopa's self denigrating description and ran with it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1480 (Post 1776738)

It's called a ball bust..... not to be taken literally but as encouraging our own selves to lighten up. I went with soopa's self denigrating description and ran with it.

:D

You should see my steam window... All war games in some sort or another. WH40K, Mount and blade, modern warfares, Total wars, Paradox games. etc

Quote:

Originally Posted by soopaman2 (Post 1776910)

:D

You should see my steam window... All war games in some sort or another. WH40K, Mount and blade, modern warfares, Total wars, Paradox games. etc

Mine also. Love the total war series and play 40K, but I play WHFF on table top, keeps me out of the taverns, and forces me to keep a steady hand.

Quote:

Originally Posted by yubba (Post 1776722)

Well at least in some amount you do support the founding papers...

The founders themselves disagreed about what sections of the Constitution meant, and fought over it. The sooner you learn that your own opinion of the Constitution is just an interpretation, the better prepared you'll be for the real world.