Oh good gravy....Sedition??

[Plane]

Ah, so everyone has rights, but only U.S. citizens deserve to have their rights protected.

Well said.



There are universal human rights , which are rights wrong for anyone to disrespect.

Yet these rights require some sort of mutual contract between persons in order to be useable in a society.

WE the People of the United States of America have generated such a contract , do we dare demand that all the world abide by it?

[Universe Prince]

Your version of lie Prince, as it relates to me and the topic of immigration, is when you opine 2+2 = 4, and I infer you said 1+2+1 = 4

No, it isn't like that at all. It's more like I say 'macaroni and cheese is good' and you then claim I meant something like 'cheese is unfit for sandwiches.'

You have a few options here
- to demonstrate how I said one thing but knew it to mean something else, thus making it a "lie"
- while I have consistently been answering your questions, ignore my sarcasm & hyperbole that I HAVE used, to answer the question(s) I've posed
- ignore my posts all together.  Save yourself the high heartrate

You should not assume responding to you affects my heart rate.

Demonstrate how you said one thing but knew it to mean something else? That would be about you lying about what you meant to say. I have no idea if you've done that. I only know you have lied about what I said. I say one thing, and you claim I said something else. How do you not know what I said? Are you claiming you don't know what I say? Demonstrate it. Okay, use eminent domain abuse to illustrate that the phrase in the Arizona immigration law against racial profiling was basically meaningless, and you claimed I meant eminent domain and illegal immigration, and I quote, "they're largely identical, because Prince says so" even though I never made that claim. Let's see... I argued against the idea of private ownership of the country, not against sovereignty, and yet you said, "I'm still amazed though at your idea that someone has the right to enter any country they want, sovereignty be damned, if they reeeeaaaaaally need to better their lives." That isn't even remotely what I said or an idea I ever expressed. You lied. The record of what I said is there. You only need to read it. How could you not know what I said? I realize you will do now as you did before and claim you didn't lie. You'll claim these complete falsehoods you attempt to blame on me are really just you saying 1+2+1=4, but it's more like you claiming I said 2+2=7, and that isn't what I said at all.

Answer the questions you've posed? Repeatedly you have taken any answers I give and insist I said something I did not say. That is strong disincentive to answer your questions.

[Universe Prince]

WE the People of the United States of America have generated such a contract , do we dare demand that all the world abide by it?

No. Who said anything about making the world abide by the Constitution? Where do you guys get this stuff?

[sirs]

Sorry Prince, it doesn't fly.  My analyis of your 2+2, is pretty damn accurate, just embelished at times with some hyperbole, to make a point.  Kinda the way Cosby exaggerates his jokes.  Your minimization of border enforcement of simply a health check and background check, nice to meecha, move along, being a recent example.  So no, I'm not lying about what you said, since I'd have to know you were saying something else, as I referenced my points.

Your providing justification for folks to enter illegally, runs completely counter in respecting the sovereignty of this nation and respect for its laws.  Your bogus conclusion that supporting the one primary function of Government is tantamount to supporting bigger and a more controlling government is truely disengenuous, just as flipping the criticism you were trying to level on me, back atcha, and that's tantamount to lying

So, keep right on ducking the pertinent questions, and claim 2+2 = 5, so that if I were to correct you, you could claim I lied about that as well.  Problem is, your falling into Tee's land of claiming racism and nazi so often, that the true meaning of trying to incorrectly claim lying loses its credibility as well

[Plane]

WE the People of the United States of America have generated such a contract , do we dare demand that all the world abide by it?

No. Who said anything about making the world abide by the Constitution? Where do you guys get this stuff?

Then there is a deep disadvantage to being a citizen of the US , we the people of the US must uphold the constitution while we the people of the world , (includeing those who are not at all obliged to support it financhially or with loyalty ) may benefit from it.

[Universe Prince]

Sorry Prince, it doesn't fly.  My analyis of your 2+2, is pretty damn accurate, just embelished at times with some hyperbole, to make a point.  Kinda the way Cosby exaggerates his jokes.  Your minimization of border enforcement of simply a health check and background check, nice to meecha, move along, being a recent example.  So no, I'm not lying about what you said, since I'd have to know you were saying something else, as I referenced my points.

I knew you were going to do this. You say demonstrate that you lie, so I do, and then you sit there and say you didn't lie because your "analysis" is accurate. Basically, you get to say whatever you want about what I say and what I mean, and somehow I'm just supposed to accept that you know better than I do what I say and what I mean. You arrogance is extraordinary.

Your providing justification for folks to enter illegally, runs completely counter in respecting the sovereignty of this nation and respect for its laws.

I have provided some justification, but my justifications amount to arguments as to why the law should be changed, not that people should continually be allowed to break the law.

Your bogus conclusion that supporting the one primary function of Government is tantamount to supporting bigger and a more controlling government is truely disengenuous,

You can try to spin that one however you like, but the truth is strict control of the border is not a primary function of government, and strict control of the border does, in fact, require a bigger and more controlling government.

just as flipping the criticism you were trying to level on me, back atcha, and that's tantamount to lying

Another lie. I explained at least twice already (though in another thread), Sirs, that I did not say the criticism was a lie. I simply pointed out that you lied about what I said. You know I said this to you. For you claim this third time I said something else, it cannot be else but a lie.

Problem is, your falling into Tee's land of claiming racism and nazi so often, that the true meaning of trying to incorrectly claim lying loses its credibility as well

I don't claim someone lied unless they did. That you insist on lying so often about what I say is not my fault. You lie, I call you on it. I used to not call you on it. But no amount of explaining about my position or what I said ever made any difference to you. You had this or that reaction to what I would say, and you would insist that initial reaction of yours was absolutely the one and only way to understand what I said. You want to be so arrogant that you think you know what I mean better than I do, fine. When that results in you lying about what I said, I'm going to call you on it. If you don't like that, too damn bad. I'm not here to cater to your goddamned arrogance.

[Universe Prince]

Then there is a deep disadvantage to being a citizen of the US , we the people of the US must uphold the constitution while we the people of the world , (includeing those who are not at all obliged to support it financhially or with loyalty ) may benefit from it.

Other people in the world might benefit from our government not infringing on their rights. This is a bad thing because...?

[Plane]

Then there is a deep disadvantage to being a citizen of the US , we the people of the US must uphold the constitution while we the people of the world , (includeing those who are not at all obliged to support it financhially or with loyalty ) may benefit from it.

Other people in the world might benefit from our government not infringing on their rights. This is a bad thing because...?

Because it is a free lunch.

[Universe Prince]

And it is a free lunch because...?



(must not say TANSTAAFL.... must not say TANSTAAFL.... oh darn...)

[Plane]

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,and all our neighbors and anyone elese on Earth whether they are interested in helping  maintain this social convention or not because all human beings deserve to get something like this for nothing ,do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


There is no such thing as a free lunch, if you have rights , someone has paid the price.

[Universe Prince]

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity,and all our neighbors and anyone elese on Earth whether they are interested in helping  maintain this social convention or not because all human beings deserve to get something like this for nothing ,do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

That goes back to the notion of making the world abide by the Constitution. No one is arguing that should occur. Nor is anyone arguing that the U.S. is to defend and secure the blessings of liberty for everyone else in the world. The argument I made is that the Bill of Rights does not establish rights but rather establishes limits on the U.S. government to prevent it from infringing on the rights people already have. For example, the Bill of Rights does not say everyone or just U.S. citizens has/have a right to freedom of speech. It says Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech. Notably, it also does not say, Congress shall make sure freedom of speech is protected everywhere in the world, which what would be required for your secure the blessings of liberty for everyone in the world bit of silliness.

There is no such thing as a free lunch, if you have rights , someone has paid the price.

Oh? So do you believe rights are given and taken away?