« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Down

Author Topic: The question that started it all  (Read 3618 times)

0 Members and 10 Guests are viewing this topic.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #15 on: January 15, 2011, 01:50:00 PM »
Because money is USED for speech.  When's the last time free speech was being criticized.....oh yea, that'd be via the Fairness Doctrine, and the recent aftermath of the AZ shooting
Logged
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #16 on: January 15, 2011, 01:55:25 PM »
Quote from: sirs on January 15, 2011, 01:50:00 PM
Because money is USED for speech.  When's the last time free speech was being criticized.....oh yea, that'd be via the Fairness Doctrine, and the recent aftermath of the AZ shooting

Since money=speech should the government supply money to those who don't have it, in order to protect their EQUAL right to free speech?
Logged

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #17 on: January 15, 2011, 01:58:34 PM »
No, because they're not using their money, they're using someone else's money.  I realize how you're trying to make this about some slight of hand living document only when we want it to be living.  It's not going to wash, I'm afraid
Logged
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #18 on: January 15, 2011, 02:01:17 PM »
it washed as soon as you admitted that money=speech is not in the constitution.

Logged

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #19 on: January 15, 2011, 02:06:29 PM »
Yea, and the 2nd amendment only applies to hunters.  Sorry...when money is used to promote free speech, your wash was washed away

BTW, are we going to get any clarity of if you did or didn't support the GOP's blatant and transparent opportunitism in dethroning the rightful president of the country of Iraq to impliment their own puppet regime, and take over all their oil?
Logged
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #20 on: January 15, 2011, 02:19:04 PM »
Quote from: sirs on January 15, 2011, 02:06:29 PM
Yea, and the 2nd amendment only applies to hunters.  Sorry...when money is used to promote free speech, your wash was washed away

BTW, are we going to get any clarity of if you did or didn't support the GOP's blatant and transparent opportunitism in dethroning the rightful president of the country of Iraq to impliment their own puppet regime, and take over all their oil?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Nothing about limiting the amendment to hunters.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Nothing about money=speech.

Quote
BTW, are we going to get any clarity of if you did or didn't support the GOP's blatant and transparent opportunitism in dethroning the rightful president of the country of Iraq to impliment their own puppet regime, and take over all their oil?

My position on Iraq ( or Planes, yours or BSB's) has nothing to do with whether 9-11 provided an opportunity to justify invading Iraq. Either it did or it didn't.





Logged

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #21 on: January 15, 2011, 02:30:18 PM »
It has EVERYTHING to do with my point on opportunitism.  The examples I provided were specific in taking tragedy or disasters, and pushing a political agenda, most notably in an effort to be detrimental to the opposing party (or ideological factions, if you wish).  I never stated that the GOP won't look for an opportunity to better the country, or by taking out Saddam, the globe for that matter.  They should be applauded for it.  I made clear it was referencing blatant political opportuntism where none should be.  Taking the AZ tragedy, and using a memorial largely as a 2012 campaign jump was political opportunitism at some of its worst.  

Though I have to say, the Wellstone "memorial" was even more worse
« Last Edit: January 15, 2011, 02:55:55 PM by sirs »
Logged
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #22 on: January 15, 2011, 03:08:14 PM »
Quote
it has EVERYTHING to do with my point on opportunitism.

You demanded an example and i gave one to you.

Tragedy-opportunity-result.


Logged

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #23 on: January 15, 2011, 03:55:44 PM »
<----------- . --------------<









<head>



Though of course, the problem here is really that you do get it, but have decided to be some polar arguement standard bearer.  Something along those lines.  I clearly "demanded"  ::)  an example that demonstrates a perverse political agenda from the right.  Even gave examples, when you "demanded them".  Hint, it wasn't in the vacuum of simply opportunitsm.  Then again, I think you knew that, yet went there anyway
Logged
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #24 on: January 15, 2011, 04:29:03 PM »
If only your arguments were as creative as your graffiti
Logged

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #25 on: January 15, 2011, 04:30:08 PM »
Good thing then my arguements are sound, and located outside that of a vacuum
Logged
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16143
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #26 on: January 15, 2011, 04:44:09 PM »
Unfortunately they aren't sound.

But please continue to delude yourself into thinking they are.

Logged

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #27 on: January 15, 2011, 04:58:36 PM »
Quote from: BT on January 15, 2011, 01:55:25 PM
Quote from: sirs on January 15, 2011, 01:50:00 PM
Because money is USED for speech.  When's the last time free speech was being criticized.....oh yea, that'd be via the Fairness Doctrine, and the recent aftermath of the AZ shooting

Since money=speech should the government supply money to those who don't have it, in order to protect their EQUAL right to free speech?

Does the government fill my second admendment supplies?

Maybe they should.

Where in the constitution is equality of speech garunteed?

Is the amplitude supposed to be equal? Is the quality supposed to be equal?

If we are all going to have equal quality of speech the government needs to provide a lot of creative writing classes.

If we are going to have equality of availibility the government should have given each of us a blog page.

Now for my second admendment rights I want an M-4  or an M14 with plenty of ammo.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2011, 05:11:52 PM by Plane »
Logged

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #28 on: January 15, 2011, 05:10:25 PM »
Quote from: BT on January 15, 2011, 04:44:09 PM
Unfortunately they aren't sound.

Unfortunately for you, they are.  Somehow, after all these years of seeing me post, you infer from my question about blatant opportuntism, at some of the most inappropriate locations and/or times, with clear nefarious goals of sticking it to their political opponents Democrats have, and currently are pulling, that the GOP never ever does something, when the opportunity presents itself.  You see, that's the vacuum you're drawing your questions and conclusions from

And why you keep getting called on it.  It's right up there with the notion I'm intolerant to Muslims.  Literally a rhetorical vacuum you're using to critque my commentaries and positions

I just wonder why



Logged
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: The question that started it all
« Reply #29 on: January 15, 2011, 05:12:40 PM »
Quote from: Plane on January 15, 2011, 04:58:36 PM
Quote from: BT on January 15, 2011, 01:55:25 PM
Quote from: sirs on January 15, 2011, 01:50:00 PM
Because money is USED for speech.  When's the last time free speech was being criticized.....oh yea, that'd be via the Fairness Doctrine, and the recent aftermath of the AZ shooting

Since money=speech should the government supply money to those who don't have it, in order to protect their EQUAL right to free speech?

Does the government fill my second admendment supplies?

Maybe they should.

Where in the constitution is equality of speech garunteed?

Is the amplitude supposed to be equal? Is the quality supposed to be equal?

If we are all going to have equal quality of speech the government needs to provide a lot of creative writing classes.

If we are going to have equality of availibility the government should have given each of us a blog page.

Now for my second admendment rights I want an M-4  or an M14 with plenty of ammo.

*snicker*   ;)
Logged
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4   Go Up
« previous next »