What's new

Bachman say the ACLU is running the CIA

tom barry

Veteran
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
863
Reaction score
127
Bachman was a Bit OVERDUE to arrive at her "True North" with that doozie of a statement !

Seriously, "Who in thier Right Mind" would Ever want a person who thinks like that Anywhere Near the POTUS or VPOTUS job, and the " N Button " !!!!!!!

Sara Palin part II .
 
Bachman was a Bit OVERDUE to arrive at her "True North" with that doozie of a statement !

Seriously, "Who in thier Right Mind" would Ever want a person who thinks like that Anywhere Near the POTUS or VPOTUS job, and the " N Button " !!!!!!!

Sara Palin part II .


Maybe you ought to research Leon Panetta's past.
 
Perhaps someone should make a reservation at Bellevue for her?
 
I thought it had to do with international law. That fact that it has been shown to be ineffective is an entirely separate issue.
 
Its about being PC when torturing people who want us dead.


Curious to wonder what that NUT JOB(bachman) thinks about TERRORISTS like that guy Eric Rudoplh/Atl olyimpics or that TERRORIST in Amherst NY who shot a DR. through his living room window or that TERRORIST who took out an ol' guy INSIDE his CHURCH in the midwest.

For security reasons, maybe she would support "measures: to get valuable info out of them, which we NEVER DID. I'm sure the above mentioned good Christians didn't act alone !!

Bachman is a Hypocrit and "soft as a sneaker Full of Shet" !

dell, you and she CAN'T have it one way, but Not the other.
 
Curious to wonder what that NUT JOB(bachman) thinks about TERRORISTS like that guy Eric Rudoplh/Atl olyimpics or that TERRORIST in Amherst NY who shot a DR. through his living room window or that TERRORIST who took out an ol' guy INSIDE his CHURCH in the midwest.

For security reasons, maybe she would support "measures: to get valuable info out of them, which we NEVER DID. I'm sure the above mentioned good Christians didn't act alone !!

Bachman is a Hypocrit and "soft as a sneaker Full of Shet" !

dell, you and she CAN'T have it one way, but Not the other.

The war mentality and the pervasive fear of an unidentified enemy allows for a steady erosion of our liberties, and, with this, our respect for self-reliance and confidence is lost. Just think of the self-sacrifice and the humiliation we go through at the airport screening process on a routine basis. Though there is no scientific evidence of any likelihood of liquids and gels being mixed on an airplane to make a bomb, billions of dollars are wasted throwing away toothpaste and hair spray, and searching old women in wheelchairs.

Our enemies say boo, and we jump, we panic, and then we punish ourselves. We are worse than a child being afraid of the dark. But in a way, the fear of indefinable terrorism is based on our inability to admit the truth about why there is a desire by a small number of angry radical Islamists to kill Americans. It is certainly not because they are jealous of our wealth and freedoms.

We fail to realize that the extremists, willing to sacrifice their own lives to kill their enemies, do so out of a sense of weakness and desperation over real and perceived attacks on their way of life, their religion, their country, and their natural resources. Without the conventional diplomatic or military means to retaliate against these attacks, and an unwillingness of their own government to address the issue, they resort to the desperation tactic of suicide terrorism. Their anger toward their own governments, which they believe are coconspirators with the American Government, is equal to or greater than that directed toward us.

These errors in judgment in understanding the motive of the enemy and the constant fear that is generated have brought us to this crisis where our civil liberties and privacy are being steadily eroded in the name of preserving national security.

We may be the economic and the military giant of the world, but the effort to stop this war on our liberties here at home in the name of patriotism is being lost.
 
The war mentality and the pervasive....
plagiarism:

According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, to "plagiarize" means

to steal and pass off (the ideas or words of another) as one's own
to use (another's production) without crediting the sourceP

to commit literary theft
to present as new and original an idea or product derived from an existing source.
In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward.

But can words and ideas really be stolen?

According to U.S. law, the answer is yes. The expression of original ideas is considered intellectual property, and is protected by copyright laws, just like original inventions. Almost all forms of expression fall under copyright protection as long as they are recorded in some way (such as a book or a computer file).

Welcome to all comers!

I did not quote it so you could have an opportunity to give credit to the one who wrote/spoke it.

Of course, plagiarism may not be one of those so-called Libertarian beliefs? Once it's out there, it is everybody's to use? 🙄
 
plagiarism:



Welcome to all comers!

I did not quote it so you could have an opportunity to give credit to the one who wrote/spoke it.

Of course, plagiarism may not be one of those so-called Libertarian beliefs? Once it's out there, it is everybody's to use? 🙄

Bugger Off, I looked in the ToS and it doesn't require me to cite a source of the the portion of the speech made by Dr. Ron Paul Before the U.S. House of Representatives, May 22, 2007. It's in the Congressional Record.

So if/when I feel the urge cite sources I will do so.

Another typical "Can't Refute the argument so attack the person making it!" Mean time KMA
 
Bugger Off, I looked in the ToS and it doesn't require me to cite a source of the the portion of the speech made by Dr. Ron Paul Before the U.S. House of Representatives, May 22, 2007. It's in the Congressional Record.

So if/when I feel the urge cite sources I will do so.

In other words:

"I will only give credit when I am called out as a plaigarizer."

TOS does not trump copyright law. Of course you may have permission from Ron Paul. In that case, you would still give him credit.

Being in the congressional record does not absolve you of the obligation to cite the source.
 
In other words:

"I will only give credit when I am called out as a plaigarizer."

TOS does not trump copyright law. Of course you may have permission from Ron Paul. In that case, you would still give him credit.

Being in the congressional record does not absolve you of the obligation to cite the source.


Well I'm pretty certain Dr Paul wouldn't object and the Congressional Record is public record.

Here's the deal. When you sign my paycheck you can give orders.
 
OK-OK-OK my fellow "coolers". But what does this squabble have to do with Bachman being a friggin' NUT JOB ?

(anyone want to bet $ 5 that my ol' right wing pal......delldude will be the next one to reply) ? 😛
 
Back
Top