kelpdiver 2 #101 November 7, 2007 Quote Double talk? You might wanna back that up with some facts. I am of the belief you are dead wrong Did you actually read this thread? I cited proof that the guy is a weasel like everyone else. And he reminds me a bit of Ross Perot - he'll tell us his final answer after we elect him. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #102 November 7, 2007 I think you read into his answers too much. He is a constitutionalist, and respects states rights. He is against Roe vs Wade but will not ban a womans right to choose. His own personal beliefs come second to the laws of the land and that is how things should be. He is strong on the bill of rights, ALL OF THEM. I have been interested in FDT from the very start of things, I emailed him ad nauseum to get him to run. He was quite reluctant, he did not need nor want to be president. That is a stark contrast to anyone else running for POTUS. He will literally put his foot up the ass of traitors in congress. He knows who they are! Far too many things are leaked and spoil operations, to the point of our men and women in uniform are killed due to loose lips. If you want a secret to cease being secret, tell a congressmen or senator. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Shotgun 1 #103 November 7, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteDon't let his anti-abortion stance turn ya off too much. Any time I've heard him speak about the issue, he said his approach would be to leave it up to the states. I've never heard him say anything about banning abortion on a federal level. But (at the federal level) he wants to define life as beginning at conception. And I think one of the implications of this would be that abortion would then be defined as murder, so would that still be up to the states? Too much doubletalk from Thompson to believe his states rights notions. Actually, we were talking about Ron Paul. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #104 November 7, 2007 Quote Quote How about election reform? Wouldn't it would be great if no one could register or campaign before March or April of the election year? A few months for primaries, have the conventions and 3-4 months for the parties' candidates to campaign, and then we're done for three and a half years. Here you go. Your own words. What's your point? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #105 November 7, 2007 Quote I'm gonna have to snope you on that one!http://www.snopes.com/quotes/lincoln.asp Damn. I even checked a couple of sources. Must have been lousy ones. Typical political bullshit, say it enough and people think it's true. Snopes rules. I've got a few more. I'll check those out first. Thanks. Oh crap. I just admitted I was wrong. Does that make me a lib? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #106 November 7, 2007 Quote I'm gonna have to snope you on that one!http://www.snopes.com/quotes/lincoln.asp Yeah, this is a better Lincoln quote (taken from the Lincoln Library): One of Lincoln's favorite questions for his sons was, "How many legs would a dog have if you called its tail a leg?" His sons answered "Five!" But Lincoln always told them, "No, it would have only four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg." ... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #107 November 7, 2007 Quote Oh crap. I just admitted I was wrong. Does that make me a lib? Nah...puts your lib card in jeopardy, though!! Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,501 #108 November 7, 2007 Quote One of Lincoln's favorite questions for his sons was, "How many legs would a dog have if you called its tail a leg?" His sons answered "Five!" But Lincoln always told them, "No, it would have only four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg." He 'always' told them that? How dumb were they if they didn't get it the first time?Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #109 November 7, 2007 Quote Quote One of Lincoln's favorite questions for his sons was, "How many legs would a dog have if you called its tail a leg?" His sons answered "Five!" But Lincoln always told them, "No, it would have only four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg." He 'always' told them that? How dumb were they if they didn't get it the first time? Midwesterners are like that! At least it's Snope-proof.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #110 November 7, 2007 Quote Quote I'm gonna have to snope you on that one!http://www.snopes.com/quotes/lincoln.asp Yeah, this is a better Lincoln quote (taken from the Lincoln Library): One of Lincoln's favorite questions for his sons was, "How many legs would a dog have if you called its tail a leg?" His sons answered "Five!" But Lincoln always told them, "No, it would have only four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg." And that applies to so many of your analogies. I really liked your use of iPhones to explain the current rise of hangman nooses being used as expressions of racism. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,032 #111 November 7, 2007 Quote Quote Quote I'm gonna have to snope you on that one!http://www.snopes.com/quotes/lincoln.asp Yeah, this is a better Lincoln quote (taken from the Lincoln Library): One of Lincoln's favorite questions for his sons was, "How many legs would a dog have if you called its tail a leg?" His sons answered "Five!" But Lincoln always told them, "No, it would have only four. Calling a tail a leg does not make it a leg." And that applies to so many of your analogies. I really liked your use of iPhones to explain the current rise of hangman nooses being used as expressions of racism. Good, so you agree that things (whether communications technolgies or racist expressions) do not stay static in our society, and that new ways of doing things come along from time to time. I'm glad my analogy helped you to grasp this really difficult concept. That's what analogies are for.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #112 November 7, 2007 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteDon't let his anti-abortion stance turn ya off too much. Any time I've heard him speak about the issue, he said his approach would be to leave it up to the states. I've never heard him say anything about banning abortion on a federal level. But (at the federal level) he wants to define life as beginning at conception. And I think one of the implications of this would be that abortion would then be defined as murder, so would that still be up to the states? Too much doubletalk from Thompson to believe his states rights notions. Actually, we were talking about Ron Paul. See - they're all weasels! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #113 November 7, 2007 Quote Quote Quote How about election reform? Wouldn't it would be great if no one could register or campaign before March or April of the election year? A few months for primaries, have the conventions and 3-4 months for the parties' candidates to campaign, and then we're done for three and a half years. Here you go. Your own words. What's your point? You asked for some proof. Sorry if you have no answer to it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NCclimber 0 #114 November 7, 2007 Quote Quote What's your point? You asked for some proof. Sorry if you have no answer to it. Funny how some people interpret any limits placed on speech (no matter how reasonable) as an outright ban on speech. Bummer for those who can only see things in absolutes. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #115 November 7, 2007 QuoteFunny how some people interpret any limits placed on speech (no matter how reasonable) as an outright ban on speech. Even funnier how some people don't understand that "no one can campaign" is an absolute. The "no one" part is kind of a hint. Just like in CA, "no one" can buy a .50 cal gun any more. That's a ban. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
