You know, people will keep on robbing banks, too. Why lock the money up in a safe? Robbers have torches and such to break in. Just leave the money out and make it easy for them. It's less likely someone will get shot, too.

Buffalo bob

Look. I said "POOP". heheheheheh

beavis and buffalo butthead

This is a toughy---It says that politicians(sorry) were involved in this project---Maybe that not such a toughy after all.

Solutions are simple!-rethink the whole project with out the interference of politicians(sorry. The solution will likely jump out at you.

Comes the revolution, politicians(sorry) will be the second ones either up against the wall or feeding the goldfish at the bottom of the Mariana Trench.

goatman

dude

hahah do you really think the border fence will do for the borders what the safe has done for money??

hahahhahahaha

you serious?
wow

Goatman

I didn't say that nothing should be done, or nothing could be done. I said a Fence is probably the stupidest idea of all the options. I think a Fence is the most expensive and least effective way to control the borders.

I think with all the Satellites we have up there another geosynchrous orbit would add too much more space debris. Couple that with model airplane sized planes with cameras mounted on them, ground movement and heat detection devices and the results would be much more effective and much less costly. Is that the best method? Probably not--but any method I have heard so far is better than the Fence.

But your straw man was pretty good--for me to POOP on.

;-)

I think a Fence is the most expensive and least effective way to control the borders.

And you also think there are smokestacks on the moon. So much for your thought process.

A Fence is way too expensive. Just dig out the Grand canyon to a depth of 20 feet and populate it with Crocs and Gators. Then if one Illegal comes over and actually makes it we give Him or Her instant citizenship. No green card necessary.

Larry Mohr

The governmnt knows how to guard the border, it takes man power which costs money. Money though is scarce because we are spending so much in Iraq.

I prefer a Great Wall approach personally, but if they are getting around the fence it is time to start using land mines and motion activated machine guns.

Cheers,
Walt

Money though is scarce because we are spending so much in Iraq.

You something Danni, as much as I support the war, I support defending our homeland more. So if it was agreed upon that at least half the money we spend in Iraq went to building the most advanced border wall money could buy and manning it with at least 60,000 of the troops that would otherwise be sent to Iraq, I would actually agree that we should immediately end the war in Iraq.

(Oh and they would also have to agree that the other half of the money would not go to socialist medicine or research on global meltdown)

Cheers,
Walt

We could use the other 60,000 troops to find all the illegals that are already here and throw them over the wall.

What is so wrong with the Government taking care of it's citizenry?? A Country A State A City A Neighborhood A Family is only as strong as how it takes care of it's weakest citizenry.

Larry Mohr

What is so wrong with the Government taking care of it's citizenry??

Nothing, if you are talking about defending the borders and protecting US citizens from the hundreds of thousands of crimes committed by illegals every year.

If you are trying to make a case for socialist medicine, then I would have to point out that it is not the governments job to provide free health care and the money would not be coming from the government, it would be coming from you and me. Personally, I have enough money stolen from me as it is.

Cheers,
Walt

You forgot the part that says to provide for the General Welfare of it's citizenry. I would declare that having a healthy populace be part of the National Security of this great Country.

Larry Mohr

Oh and the Government IS You and Me or did You forget that little tidbit??

Larry Mohr

I think with all the Satellites we have up there another geosynchrous orbit would add too much more space debris.

What do geosync satellites have to do with this? They are used strictly for communications, not visual surveillance. They are much too far away for that.

Besides, at those altitudes, "space debris" (no, not the stuff between your ears, bOoB) is not an issue.

"another geosynchrous(sic) orbit"

There's more than one?
Who knew?

"another geosynchrous(sic) orbit"

There's more than one?
Who knew?

The bOoB. Newtonian physics do not apply to him. He made that quite clear on one of his "man did not land on the moon" threads.

Building the fence is a great idea! They're going to need help, lots of it, and they're going to want to pay them as little as possible. Anyone know where I can find a shit ton of people who are willing to do a bunch of shit work in the heat for a small wage?

In a few years when everyone sees what a miserable failure it is they're going to need another large group of people who will work for next to nothing to tear it down, I wonder where they're going to come up with them . . . . . . . . .

Bring our troops home from the Korean border and put them on our border.

Oh course. The US does not want to enforce the border. Bush and Sutton are involved somehow. You see what happens to border guards that shoot at known drug dealers crossing the border.

Free Ramos and Campean!

some progress is better than none...
here in phoenix, i've heard of some tales from restaurant workers and the like that someone's brother was caught and deported... leading the other brother to return as well.
two for the price of one.
excellent.
it might not be what i want... it isn't nearly enough, though it is a step in the right direction.
a step in the right direction?
how few times i say that about our government.
seems as though the headline in recent times has always been something like.... 'hey america, you're not going to believe this one.... you're fucked again.'

all the best

I prefer a Great Wall approach personally, but if they are getting around the fence it is time to start using land mines and motion activated machine guns.

Cheers,
Walt

Posted by Walt

But DO NOT prosecute the WH war criminals !

"But DO NOT prosecute the WH war criminals !"

is it treasonous not to protect the countries borders at a time of war?
that is a war crime that must be pursued.

if something blows up that has made itself over the us/mexican border... even into the next president's term, w's legacy will be complete.

all the best

I say let all the serial killers live within a 5 mile distance of the border.. tell them anything coming north is fair game but hunting north of the 5 mile mark will get you dead.

dig out the Grand canyon to a depth of 20
Larry-the Grand Canyon is already several hundred feet deep. Even using it as a border means kissing a lot of the southwest adios.

Oh Jesus fucking Christ I meant the Rio Grande NOT the Grand Canyon. Lordy have mercy.

Larry Mohr

When an employer hires an illegal, the said employer
should (by law) have his financial dick knocked
in the dirt.

Employers would be reluctant to hire ilegals.
The incentive (jobs) for illegals would go away.

The illegals would 'self-deport'.

It works well on a smaller scale in several cities
in the US.

I say annex Mexico, we are taking care of it anyway

But DO NOT prosecute the WH war criminals !

Posted by YoMeLIB at 2008-04-12 08:02 PM | Reply | Flag

WTF!!!

For what these politicians have allowed on the Southern Border they all be prosecuted, jailed, impeached and hanged (twice if need be).

Anyone that supports illegal immigration should be jailed as well.

Cheers,
Walt

This is yet ANOTHER prime, perfect example of how ignorant and spineless democrats are.

If the country tries to do ANYTHING and it becomes hard, what do they do every single time?

They surrender. Every time.

Illegal immigration has become a hard problem, so what do they do?

They give up, and admit defeat. Because the democrat way is that if you can't fix it fast, then just accept it, and live with it.

I will just say right now. Anyone who supports illegal immigration should pay 30% more in taxes, and that money should go to all the 10's of THOUSANDS of victims families from all the people murdered by them which far, far exceeds the 4,000+ deaths in iraq. For the same time frame we been in iraq, illegal immigrants have killed 5+ fold americans.

Its all out war. If you all woke up from a coma you were in for 20 years, and somebody came up to you and said "20,000+ Americans have been killed by illegal aliens in the last 6 years" you would be either a liberal or insane (no difference)to not declare war on the problem immediately.

#1 job of the government: Protect its people.

The government, Bush, and Congress FAIL MISERABLY at this, and people need to be brought up on charges, and jailed like no tomorrow.

Damn, wake up. People die every day to Illegals, and hundreds of thousands are victims of their crimes.

Kuma

And to Larry Mohr, I have this to say.

he says the fence is too expensive.

He is basically saying his family is worth less money than the fence, because they could die any moment from an illegal. Just like 10's of thousands of people already have died.

I wonder if those families think the fence is too expensive? nah, don't need a fence, my wife dying is a worthy sacrifice.

Stupid libs, your the 2nd lowest form of life. The lowest is people that kill innocent people. The 2nd lowest is people that accept innocent people being killed.

And your that libs. you accept it, and your all lowlife scumbags.

Kuma

Kuma

You should have read the thread. No one said do nothing. The only thing sais was that a fence is probably the stupidest "solution" to the problem. The fence is the most expensive and least effective option available.

Here is an option already suggested:

I think with all the Satellites we have up there another geosynchrous orbit would add too much more space debris. Couple that with model airplane sized planes with cameras mounted on them, ground movement and heat detection devices and the results would be much more effective and much less costly. Is that the best method? Probably not--but any method I have heard so far is better than the Fence.

Now let's see your logic

"The lowest is people that kill innocent people."

We've killed a lot of innocent people in Iraq---Are our soldiers and government the lowest life forms to you? How about yourself since you supported the killing of those innocent people?

"The 2nd lowest is people that accept innocent people being killed."

I don't see you upset about the innocents killed in Iraq or in Darfur. I guess you accept innocent people being killed.

Oh yeah---those things don't apply to you--only to libs. The blood on YOUR hands doesn't count.

;-)

kuma

Don't be so frightened. Thay have Depends no for pants pissers like yourself. Its a new world!!!

;-)

BB,


Probably not--but any method I have heard so far is better than the Fence

I propose land mines and motion activted machine guns.

Cheers,
Walt

Walt

Land mines only get one, and can be countered with simple metal detectors, and the machine guns would end up in Bogata. I guess you expect somebody else to clean up the mess. Maybe some illegals would do it.

;-)

The process of clearing land mines is slow, pain staking, and of course dangerous. In fact, using a metal detector, it takes one person roughly a week to clear a 100 square metre area of mines.

Walt

BUt I guess this is another example of the left throwing up their hands.

Fence - wont work, forget it
Mines - wont work, forget it
guns - wont work, forget it
walls - wont work, forget it
Army - can't do it, forget it
anything else - too expensive, forget it

Cheers,
Walt

Posted by Walt at 2008-04-13 02:05 AM |


Kuma

You should have read the thread. No one said do nothing. The only thing sais was that a fence is probably the stupidest "solution" to the problem. The fence is the most expensive and least effective option available.

Here is an option already suggested:

I think with all the Satellites we have up there another geosynchrous orbit would add too much more space debris. Couple that with model airplane sized planes with cameras mounted on them, ground movement and heat detection devices and the results would be much more effective and much less costly. Is that the best method? Probably not--but any method I have heard so far is better than the Fence



It was first said here:

I think with all the Satellites we have up there another geosynchrous orbit would add too much more space debris. Couple that with model airplane sized planes with cameras mounted on them, ground movement and heat detection devices and the results would be much more effective and much less costly. Is that the best method? Probably not--but any method I have heard so far is better than the Fence.

But your straw man was pretty good--for me to POOP on.

;-)

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-04-11 08:13 PM


I guess this is just another instance of you talking out your as again. We should be used to it by now

;-)

In addition, I would suggest punishing the employers who hire the illegals. Big fines would stop the traffic---they are the ones bringing the ilegals here---they should pay for the problem--and not with my tax dollars on a stupid fence.

But the right thinks its OK for employers to hire illegals---they just don't want them in the country after working hours. And they think they are logical.

;-)

For what we spend per day in Iraq we could hire over 2000 new border guards.

"For what we spend per day in Iraq we could hire over 2000 new border guards."

Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2008-04-13 02:39 AM


That's some expensive border guards there Lou.

Couple that with model airplane sized planes with cameras mounted on them, ground movement and heat detection devices and the results would be much more effective and much less costly.

BB, you really are a tard.

How about coupling your ideas with a physical barrier?

UAVS are great tools but without Border Patrol agents to back them up they are useless. So are cameras and motion detectors.

Your idea alone is useless.

Try this:

A great big huge honking Great Wall of China set 1 mile back from the border. 1/2 a mile in front of that is a series of signs in every language that says "Do not proceed any further or you will Die". Right behind those signs are dispersed countless anti-personnel mines. Mounted on top of the wall are motion activated machine guns which are programmed to shoot anything that moves and stop when they stop moving. Add to that roughly 30,000 soldiers with shoot to kill orders fairly evenly spaced along the top of this gigantic wall.

Of course you would need ground penetrating radar to detect tunneling activities and you could use the UAVs to locate large gatherings of people seeking to invade.

That would work.

Cheers,
Walt

Fence - wont work, forget it

Agreed.


Mines - wont work, forget it
guns - wont work, forget it

Land mines and motion activated machine guns on our border really gives me the creeps, call me a pamphlet puking liberal if you must.


walls - wont work, forget it

Of course a wall will work, if it's large enough. It's probably logistically impossible to build though.

Army - can't do it, forget it
anything else - too expensive, forget it

The army is the most reasonable option for guarding our border. We already have one and it's well trained and equipped. Along with drones and more surveillance equipment, this is the only way I believe we can effectively guard the border.

Land mines and motion activated machine guns on our border really gives me the creeps, call me a pamphlet puking liberal if you must.

It should give you the creeps. Hopefully it will give the Mexicans the creeps as well and they wont want to venture into that zone.

Well it is almost lunch. I really should do something this morning.

Later.

Cheers,
Walt

Walt

Pay attention

The physical barriers don't work. Maybe you should read the artucle

duMmy

;-(

A Fence won't work cause they will tunnel under it. Same with a Wall. Land Mines and Automatic Machine Guns have the potential of killing Your own besides the fact that that is barbaric and Inhumane. My idea of digging out the RIO GRANDE and installing Crocs and Gators is barbaric and inhumane. We need regular beefed up patrols on the border but You won't find Republicans NOR Democrats going for it because that is where their Corporate Pimps get their cheap labor from. It's a calamity that is for certain.

Larry Mohr

The only way to stop the illegals is to stop the reason for them to come here. Jobs. Its a lot easier and more effective to toss the employers in jail than all the illegals.

I see rebuttals for the wall and the machine guns etc that list their negatives, and show them to be pretty much stupid. Like 50 years from now when the border is no longer an issue but the mines are still killing people.

But where are the rebuttals for the focusing on the employers? Why do they get a pass and why aren't the conservatives talking about that solution.

Secondary to that I think the use of satellites and model drone planes with cameras with mobile squads coveing the border is a much more effective fence than billions upon billions for a fence that we already know won't work. How do we know? Read the article. Where is the rebuttal for that?

There's somethiing about a saying where insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome. Building a fence falls into that category. Same with voting republican.

;-)

Lets see what Buffalo Bob says when his entire family is killed by an Illegal alien.

Then lets see him come on and talk shit like nothing works.

Listen up dumbfuck Bob. 5x+ more AMERICANS have been killed by illegal aliens than we lost in iraq since war.

DO YOU UNDERSTAND?

why don't you test out the 7 degrees rule of who you know. I bet a whole chain of people you know probably 2-4 layers down have had a family member die to an illegal.

not to mention all the drugs that come in.

No fence, no planes, nothing can work according to libs.

And B-Bob in my first post on this topic, a few threads back I said start tossing entire companies executives in JAIL.

And read up on special order 40. Here in LA, we call it "special treatment to gang bangers"

Every single liberal on the LA board favors illegals over dead americans.

You listen to the city council hearing yet on Jamiel Shaw?

Listen to that. After you listen to it, and your still a democrat, your a fucking dumbshit.

Don't cry when your family is killed by an illegal if that happens. After all, your families lives can't be saved according to liberals, nothing can be done!

No fence, nothing. Right idiot?

Kuma

Kuma

Several options have been given. None of the liberals have said nothing should be done. You say you suggested throwing employers in jail as I suggested at the same time you say liberals want to do nothing. You are simply a punk assed liar. It's pants pissers like yourself who have gotten 4000 of our brave soldiers killed in Iraq for nothing. Move to Idaho. They don't have illegals there and your family will be safe. Or do you think we need to spend billions to protect your weak-bladdered family? You pants pissers seem to be breeding like rats. The brave die in wars for your cowardly asses and you honor their memory by pissing all over yourself in fear. Now put a nipple on a baby bottle of STFU and let the big people talk.

;-)

BUFFALO BOB'S SUGGESTIONS FOR STOPPING ILLEGAL ALIENS FOR THOSE WHO WERE TOO STUPID TO SEE IT THE FIRST THREE TIMES THEY WERE POSTED

1.Throw the employers in jail instead of the illegal aliens. It is much easier and will be much more effective if backed up with serious fines and jail time.

2. Dedicate a geosynchrous satellite to monitor concentrations of people near the border. Couple that with model airplane sized planes with cameras mounted on them, ground movement and heat detection devices and the results would be much more effective and much less costly.

CAN YOU SEE IT YET???

BB,

What part of your plan would prevent them from coming to the US and sending their kids to our schools for free? What part of your plan would prevent them from swarming the ERs? All your plan accomplishes is that they will be coming here to leech off us but without jobs.

How many more Border Patrol agents would your plan require?

What changes would be made to the way we deal with the ones we do somehow catch?

How does your plan prevent vehicles from entering the US?

What exactly do your "Heat Detection Devices" do that GEN II FLIR doesn't do?

How do your "Ground Movement" devices differentiate between man and beast and how do they prevent false alarms which could cause agents to be out chasing every deer along the border?

Who is going to fly all these "model airplane sized planes" 24/7? (I assume you mean UAVs) How many of these UAVs do you propose?

The only positive thing that has come out of this discussion is that at least you realize that something should be done. Now if you could get over yourself and realize that while a fence may not stop 100% of the people, it will for damn sure stop a lot of them. What do you think would happen to those hacksawing Mexicans if the fence was electrified? What do you think those blow torches would do to a fucking great wall of China?

How many of those Mexicans would head north thru a field of marked and unmarked land mines to attack a wall manned with US forces with shoot to kill orders?

This is a war people. This is not the time for PC bullshit or dancing around the issue. We are being invaded and we must defend ourselves with the full resources of the US military. We need to militarize the Southern Border and start defending the fucking country.

Cheers,
Walt

Well to B Bob its not a war until his family is killed probably.

Because he has no freaking clue whatsoever.

And B-Bob, and the do nothing, surrender thing that me and walt hit you on?

Thats about Border security, not employers.

your clueless. Your suggestions are worthless without border security.

Watch, when the libs get pissed off, they will be the ones with guns on the border.

People can only take so much. Your lucky your family is still alive.

Kuma

Well to B Bob its not a war until his family is killed probably.

Because he has no freaking clue whatsoever.

Hopefully he wont have to figure it out the hard way.

We are a nation of absolute fools.

How many Americans have died this year alone from drunk driving illegal Mexicans?

How many people have had their homes broken into?

How many have been raped?

How many have been stabbed, mugged, beaten or killed?

How many illegal Mexican criminals have we released from jail back into the United States?

How many people have lost their jobs due to illegal Mexicans?



We need to wake the fuck up!

Kudos to WALT

Every hit was a grand slam.

Right out of the ballpark.

Hey Twin,

You are up early/late.

Maybe you could talk some sense into BB.

He sure won't listen to me or Kuma.

"What part of your plan would prevent them from coming to the US and sending their kids to our schools for free? What part of your plan would prevent them from swarming the ERs? All your plan accomplishes is that they will be coming here to leech off us but without jobs."


I would say the part that says you can't rent to illegal aliens, or provide medical care or education to them. I would say the part thatsays as soon as they are dicovered they go on a bus back to Mexico. I would say the part with the no jobs and satellites and increased vorder personnel and electronic surveillance on the bordeer would drastically cut down on their ability to get to the ER. Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?




"How many more Border Patrol agents would your plan require?"

Probably twice as many as now or about one ten thousandths the cost of a fence. Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?




"What changes would be made to the way we deal with the ones we do somehow catch?"

Send their ass back--why complicate things. Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?



"How does your plan prevent vehicles from entering the US?"

I would say the majo=r roads are covered--what kind of vehicle are you talking about and how would your plan be any better? Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?


"What exactly do your "Heat Detection Devices" do that GEN II FLIR doesn't do?"

I don't care what they use. I'm sure they have stuff neither of us heard of. Use your imagination just a bit. The point was---use electronic surveillance--lots of it and all you have. Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?




"How do your "Ground Movement" devices differentiate between man and beast and how do they prevent false alarms which could cause agents to be out chasing every deer along the border?"

Even the weenie alarms people have in their houses can tell the difference between an animal and a person. I don't think the government would have that problem, and that is what the planes are for. They are cheap and 20-30 of them per 20 mile stretch could report a visual easily to a base. Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?

"Who is going to fly all these "model airplane sized planes" 24/7? (I assume you mean UAVs) How many of these UAVs do you propose?"

They can be programmed to fly a pattern, and have an override control if necessary. Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?

"The only positive thing that has come out of this discussion is that at least you realize that something should be done."

I realized it long ago.


"Now if you could get over yourself and realize that while a fence may not stop 100% of the people, it will for damn sure stop a lot of them."

The fence will stop none of them DID YOU READ THE FUCKING ARTICLE???

"What do you think would happen to those hacksawing Mexicans if the fence was electrified?"

I think they'd throw watere on the fence and short it out. They aren't as stupid as you to just sit there and get shocked time and time again. Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?


"What do you think those blow torches would do to a fucking great wall of China?"

The Great Wall Cost more than it saved. More lives were lost in building the thing than ever stopped any invasion. I guess that looks like a good example to you. Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?



"How many of those Mexicans would head north thru a field of marked and unmarked land mines to attack a wall manned with US forces with shoot to kill orders?"

I guess you think they would just stroll on through instead of sending a cow or a child through to mark the way. Too bad the world isn't as stupid as you. Your plans would be genius. I guess you think the Mexican government would think nothing of an army on their borders--just like we wouldn't mind a troop build-up on Canadas borders. Troops are cheap anyway aren't they. Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?


"This is a war people. This is not the time for PC bullshit or dancing around the issue. We are being invaded and we must defend ourselves with the full resources of the US military."

Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?


"We need to militarize the Southern Border and start defending the fucking country."

Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?


Cheers,
Walt

Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?

;-)

WALT

Naw . . . he's a lost cause.

I am amused, however, by the number of people who rise to the bait.

If I want to waste my time I have better ways . . . like watch the grass grow or search the net for something positive to say about Barack Obama.

I want to be fair to the man, however, so lately I've been on the web trying to find a silk purse made out of a sows ear but I'm not having any luck.

Twin,

A very timely post.

I don't get the sow ear thing though.

BB,

The problem is that there are jobs, schools, and medical care.

And there will always be people supporting them who are here legally.

I would rather be poor in the US than poor in Mexico.

Sometimes you can be reasonable, clearly this is not one of those times.

And although I should be working, I am going to watch Top Chef. (Good part about being the boss)

Cheers,
Walt

WALT

I don't get the sow ear thing though.

It was just an analogy about Obama.

There's an old saying . . . "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear."

I remember my grandmother saying that when the town loafer wanted to run for political office.

Idioms: can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear
Sponsored LinksKhmer Music Ringtones
Send Complimentary Ringtones to your cell.
BestTones4U.info

Be unable to turn something ugly or inferior into something attractive or of value, as in No matter how expensive his clothes, he still looks sloppy--you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. This expression was already a proverb in the mid-1500s.



------------------------------
------------------------------
--------------------

Walt

The point is--take away the jobs.

Get it?

Take away the reason they are coming here.

Get it?

The wall is stupid

Get it?


The wall doesn't work.

Walt: Let's build a wall.

The wall doesn't work.

Walt: Let's build a wall.

The wall doesn't work.

Walt: Let's build a wall.

The wall doesn't work.

Walt: Let's build a wall.

The wall doesn't work.

Walt: Let's build a wall.

The wall doesn't work.

Walt: Let's build a wall.

I wonder why this isn't working. Maybe we need another wall. They worked so well in China and on castles and the Germans had a great defensives wall on D-Day--what was it called again? I don't know what we can do. What do you think Walt?

Walt: Let's build a wall.

The wall doesn't work.

Walt: Let's build a wall.

The wall doesn't work.

Walt: Let's build a wall.

My solution--take away the jobs--throw anyone who hires illegals in jail--throw anyone who rents to illegals in jail, no hospital service, no education. That is a lot cheaper than walls.

Attack the problem--not the symptom. The problem is we are offering them better jobs, health care, and education. Then we wonder why they want to come here.


Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?

;-)

LARRY

My grandmother had a ton of these one-liners.

She also used to say "Give 'em a book and all he does is gnaw on the cover" when she thought somebody was below her standards.

I'll bet you know a few yourself.

Yeah I know a few like You are talking like a man with a paper asshole. Or You can't get blood out of a turnip but You can ruffle up it's greens. Or You gotta make hay while the sun shines. Or My Father's Favourate You can't expect to amount to anything sitting on the couch. Or My Grandmothers one You can get great motivation out of cast iron.(She used a number 10 cast iron skillet across My head one time GREAT Motivational device) There are tons out there.

Larry Mohr

LARRY

I remember the story about the farmer who was chastized for hitting his mule between the eyes with a 2 X 4.

The farmer said "the first thing you have to do is get his attention."

You guys have been beating BOB with a 2 X 4 lo these many months and nobody's got his attention yet.

BOB is like the mule.

He just ain't never gonna pull that plow.

Yeah Buffalo Bob would be the one about You're talking like a man with a paper asshole.

Larry Mohr

Twinpack

And you are like a seahorse

You ain't never gonna fly a spaceship.

Gee that made as much sense as your post.

Got a comment on the thread, or do you want to build a wall too?

I guess you think throwing the people who give them jobs in jail is a bad idea, but can't say why until somebody tells you what you think.

LOL BOB

Got a comment on the thread, or do you want to build a wall too?

No, but I think there's some money to be made selling 13' ladders.

BB,

You plan amounts to not much more than a big revolving door. They come in, we kick them out. We put this guy in jail, we let him out.

I support parts of your plan 100% Hell yeah, lock up employers who hire these people, lock up people who rent to them too. Don't let them in school, great. Don't let them in hospitals, fine by me.

But you have to have a GD wall to stop them from even having the ability to get here. You build a wall and man it and it means they can either slingshot themselves over it or dig under it.

So unless the Mexicans start hauling a bunch of Tunnel Boring Machines to the border, which we would easily see them do, they would have to dig all the way under the wall, which is pretty easy to detect, if you are listening with the right equipment.


Cheers,
Walt

No, but I think there's some money to be made selling 13' ladders.

Posted by Twinpac at 2008-04-13 06:55 AM

You mean like they had at the Alamo that did such a good job of keeping the Mexicans out with those great walls? Let's hope the Mexicans never see the movie.

OK BOB

I'll agree to throwing all those employers, their dependants, their employees and their dependants, all their vendors and their dependants into those secret Halliburton consentration camps.

But only if you agree to foot the grocery bill.

Deal?

Walt

You fail to answer a simple question. Time and time again. Let's try again.


Why are they coming here if there are no jobs schools or medical care?

;-)


Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-04-13 06:08 AM

So unless the Mexicans start hauling a bunch of Tunnel Boring Machines to the border, which we would easily see them do, they would have to dig all the way under the wall, which is pretty easy to detect, if you are listening with the right equipment.


Cheers,
Walt

Posted by Walt at 2008-04-13 07:00 AM | Reply


Not if You use hand shovels and such.

Larry Mohr

Hey Bob a Hospital can not turn anyone away at the Emergency Room. If they do they can be sued. So if You tell Hospitals they can not take care of the illegals and one of them is gravely hurt and the hospital refuses service then guess what that Illegal will sue the Hospital and will win.

Larry Mohr

Larry Mohr

All rights come the government. The rules you state come from the government. If the government says illegals get no medical care--guess what.

Walt

Geez--you just don't get it. The wall doesn't work. It has been proven. WTF is your problem? How many times do you have to be told? How many times must it be explained? It just doesn't work. Read the article. What part don't you get?

Jesus fucking christ Buffalo Bob. Our rights do NOT come from the Government. We are Born with those rights at the very begining. It isn't the Job of the Government to grant rights. It's Job is to PROTECT rights. For fuck sakes. If Our Government is Of the People By the people For the people how can the people give rights to each other if we already retain them.

Larry mohr

I'll agree to throwing all those employers, their dependants, their employees and their dependants, all their vendors and their dependants into those secret Halliburton consentration camps.

But only if you agree to foot the grocery bill.

Deal?

Posted by Twinpac at 2008-04-13 07:09 AM

Absolutley--after you subtract all the money we are currently spending for arresting and feeding illegal aliens, and the cost of the wall, and give me the change.

Jesus fucking christ Buffalo Bob. Our rights do NOT come from the Government. We are Born with those rights at the very begining. It isn't the Job of the Government to grant rights. It's Job is to PROTECT rights. For fuck sakes. If Our Government is Of the People By the people For the people how can the people give rights to each other if we already retain them.

Larry mohr

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-04-13 07:32 AM


Horseshit--answer the question. If the government says illegal aliens get mo medical care---what would happen?

The rights you claim are worthless. Absolutely worthless without government--and government doesn't have to give them to you, and they can be taken away at any time.

Answer the question. If the government says illegal aliens get mo medical care---what would happen?

lol mo medical care=no medical care.

Did you mean to say:

"All rights come from the government"?

AAAAKKKKKKKK.

Does that mean if the government disappears today we all have to just hang out and wait for a new government to come along before we can do anything? I suppose that also means that for centuries before there were governments the people here sat about with their thumbs up their asses waiting for your politician gods to come along and give them their rights.

You need some help man, check yourself into AA -- Authoritarians Anonymous -- immediately. For fuck's sake, a person who makes statements like that would more than likely throw their neighbors into an oven if a politician told them to.

2. Dedicate a geosynchrous satellite to monitor concentrations of people near the border.

Geosync satellites aren't be used for visual surveillance, bOoB. They are too far away. Surveillance cameras are generally in low polar orbit.

The Illegals would still get medical care Buffalo Bob.

Larry Mohr

Oh and Buffalo Bob The Government can't take Our rights away without Our consent. If they are taking rights away that We do not consent to we have the power to change it by trowing out the people that are SUPPOSED to represent us with someone who WILL protect those rights. Our Government is set up with the consent of the Governed(WE THE PEOPLE)

Larry Mohr

Geosync satellites aren't be used for visual surveillance, bOoB. They are too far away. Surveillance cameras are generally in low polar orbit.

Posted by goatman at 2008-04-13 07:43 AM | Reply


As far as you know. If you need three satellites get three satellites. If you need 20 satellites, get 20 satellites. It is still cheaper than a fence that doesn't fucking work.

;-)

BOB

Oh, no, no, no.

According to you, once the all the employers, etc. are thrown into jail there won't be any more illegals so there won't be any more expenses or fences.

Of course that means you'll have to feed all these employers, etc. for the rest of their lives so the illegals won't come back.

You'll have to pay for those three squares a day because I'm sure as hell not going to.

As far as you know. If you need three satellites get three satellites.

A thousand geosync satellites won't work. They are too far away. Read, bOoB, read.

Idiot

"The Illegals would still get medical care Buffalo Bob."

Larry Mohr

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-04-13 07:46 AM |


Sure--just like abortions would still go on even if they were made illegal. But the incentive to get here for that kind of medical care would be minimal. It would be like women trying to sneak into a state to get an abortion when abortion was illegal in that state. It wouldn't make much sense to go through the effort.

At any rate--the bill would be off the taxpayers back, and that's the point isn't it? It's not the lives saved, it is the money that upsets conservatives so much. Listen to them bitch about it.

Taxpayers would still get the bill Buffalo Bob. God how did I wind up in Your tractor Beams this early SUnday morning. Somebody shoot Me.

Larry Mohr

A thousand geosync satellites won't work. They are too far away. Read, bOoB, read.


Idiot

Posted by goatman at 2008-04-13 07:52 AM | Reply


I guess you never heard of Google Earth, they seem to be doing a pretty good job. I guess you missed the briefings about troop movements from satellite reconnaissance during the first Gulf war. I guess you know everything there is to know about satellites and the capability of the US government.

The bOoB likes to tell everyone that something that partially works won't work, and wants to replace it with something that has never worked and can't no matter what.

LOL

Taxpayers would still get the bill Buffalo Bob. God how did I wind up in Your tractor Beams this early SUnday morning. Somebody shoot Me.

Larry Mohr

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-04-13 07:56 AM


How are taxpayers going to get the bill dummy? I need a laugh. Tell me how stupid you are. Are they going to bill the government for illegal work? Maybe doing that is illegal and they get thrown in jail for trying to defraud the government. Tell me your magic billing system.

;-)

I guess you never heard of Google Earth, they seem to be doing a pretty good job. I guess you missed the briefings about troop movements from satellite reconnaissance during the first Gulf war. I guess you know everything there is to know about satellites and the capability of the US government.

Those satellites are not in geosync orbit, idiot. It is impossible to do visual surveillance from geosync orbit. Surveillance satellites are generally in low polar orbit.

Oh and Buffalo Bob The Government can't take Our rights away without Our consent. If they are taking rights away that We do not consent to we have the power to change it by trowing out the people that are SUPPOSED to represent us with someone who WILL protect those rights. Our Government is set up with the consent of the Governed(WE THE PEOPLE)

Larry Mohr

That's a nice piece of civics class brainwashing right there. Politicians are not your servants, they are your masters. They tell you what to do and when to do it, you comply, they are happy. Your absolutely right that rights do not come from ANY politician, but you're just as dillusional as the other fuck up.

I guess you know everything there is to know about satellites and the capability of the US government.

Nope. But I do know that visual surveillance (at to the resolution to see people) is impossible from geosynchronous orbit. Anyone with an IQ higher than an artichoke knows that -- which explains why you don't

How are taxpayers going to get the bill dummy? I need a laugh. Tell me how stupid you are. Are they going to bill the government for illegal work? Maybe doing that is illegal and they get thrown in jail for trying to defraud the government. Tell me your magic billing system.

;-)

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-04-13 07:59 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

When Hospitals do work on patients and they can't pay or won't pay their bills the hospital is recouped for their losses and it comes from the Federal Government through TAX DOLLARS. Try and get SOME education about You Buffalo Bob. If some dumb fuck hayseed knows You should.

Larry Mohr

That's a nice piece of civics class brainwashing right there. Politicians are not your servants, they are your masters. They tell you what to do and when to do it, you comply, they are happy. Your absolutely right that rights do not come from ANY politician, but you're just as dillusional as the other fuck up.

Posted by NoGov4Me at 2008-04-13 08:03 AM | Reply


They ARE our servants. We Hired them to represent our interests. We are THEIR BOSSES but they forget that little tidbit along the way.

Larry Mohr

Oh and Buffalo Bob The Government can't take Our rights away without Our consent. If they are taking rights away that We do not consent to we have the power to change it by trowing out the people that are SUPPOSED to represent us with someone who WILL protect those rights. Our Government is set up with the consent of the Governed(WE THE PEOPLE)

Larry Mohr

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-04-13 07:49 AM


If the government says you are a murderer--guess what--you go to jail as a murderer. It happens often to innocent people. The government you cite could just as easily have been a monarchy. The people had absolutley nothing to do with its formation. zero. The government document was written by the government--not the people.

And we have those rights because we have this government. Other people don't have these rights because they don't have our government. That's why the rights you claim aren't woth a flying fuck to a frog. You would claim a corpse in Darfur has the right to life--the government just didn't protect those rights. I tell you that you are stupid and full of shit. Take your rights to Darfur and explain them to the guys with the guns. They will confirm my diagnosis in a more meaningful fashion.

;-)

And we have those rights because we have this government.

He says right after he says we have surveillance satellites in geosynchronous orbit! One good lie deserves another.

LOL

I wish the "government" would lock both of you psychos up, there are people in mental institutions who aren't as crazy as you are.

"The rights you claim are worthless. Absolutely worthless without government--and government doesn't have to give them to you, and they can be taken away at any time."

That's why we insisted the government not "infringe" our right to bear arms.

They ARE our servants. We Hired them to represent our interests. We are THEIR BOSSES but they forget that little tidbit along the way.

Larry Mohr

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-04-13 08:06 AM


LOL

talk about believing the bullshit. If we are their bosses--how can they forget it?

I guess that little bit of logic eludes you.

;-)

If we are their bosses--how can they forget it?

I guess that little bit of logic eludes you.

;-)

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-04-13 08:11 AM | Reply

Because we allow them to forget because this Country has become such lazy fucktards over the Years. If We would do Our part and govern the Government better they would not forget.

Larry Mohr

talk about believing the bullshit.

You mean like surveillance satellites in geosynchronous orbit?

Goatman

I mean like believing we landed on the moon. I mean like believing that hundreds of pilots, police officers, former Presidents, presidential candidates, miltary personnel, and astronauts are lying about seeing alien craft or they're too stupid to tell the difference between Venus and a fast moving craft.

Because we allow them to forget because this Country has become such lazy fucktards over the Years. If We would do Our part and govern the Government better they would not forget.

Larry Mohr

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-04-13 08:14 AM


What good are your rights in countries that don't recognize them

Answer--NOTHING

I GIVE UP. You are 5 cans and the plastic holder short of a 6 pack.

Larry Mohr

Believing in stuff like geosync satellites that are used for surveillance does mean they exist. Why do you lie so much?

That's why we insisted the government not "infringe" our right to bear arms.

Posted by jestgettinalong at 2008-04-13 08:10 A


I guess you just don't know what the word "infringe" means. Why would you use a word when you don't know its meaning? It makes you seem very very stupid.
Let's take a look at the word "infringe"

1. to commit a breach or infraction of; violate or transgress: to infringe a copyright; to infringe a rule.
verb (used without object) 2. to encroach or trespass (usually fol. by on or upon): Don't infringe on his privacy.

It seems that any type of gun registration is certainly infringing on my rights--yet there are gun registration laws. I would say that having to have a permit in infringing on my right to bear arms--yet there are laws where you have to have a permit to carry a weapon. I would say that not being able to carry a weapon into open court infringes on my right to bear arms--yet such laws exist.

Seems you don't know WTF you are talking about.

;-)

Goatman

Ever seen Google Earth Dummy? I think they can come up with something, and if they can't, BFD. The suggestion was valid even without the satellites.

Larry Mohr

GTFO and come back when you can explain the value of those rights we are all born with to the people of Darfur. I'm sure they would be glad to hear about how valid their rights are just before they get shot.

Ever seen Google Earth Dummy? I think they can come up with something, and if they can't, BFD. The suggestion was valid even without the satellites.

You are the dummy. If you read about the data sources for Google earth, you'd find that a lot of that data comes from surveillance aircraft. What did come from satellites did NOT come from geosynchronous satellites. Geosync satellites cannot do visual surveillance no matter how many times you repeat that they can.

They can not. They are used for telecommunications, not surveillance. You are wrong. (as usual)

dummy. Wanna prove your ignorance some more and keep on telling me geosync satellites can be used for surveillance, dummy? probably so, but I promise to laugh at you anyway.

This argument happened between the Founders, too. That's why Amendment 9 was added.

This argument happened between the Founders, too.

The surveillance capabilities of satellites? *big grin*

Yav

You mean the part of the Constitution that tells us what rights we have?

Goatman

Forget the satellites, dUmMy, build a fucking wall and STFU. Simple isn't it.

;-)

Simple isn't it.

What? Your mind? Yes, it is.

"(Oh and they would also have to agree that the other half of the money would not go to socialist medicine or research on global meltdown)"

Goatman what if we agreed to use the other half for research on alternative energy??? BTW, it wouldn't take half of the money we have pissed away in Iraq, 10% would do nicely. That would leave 90% for alternative energy research and development. We could gaurd our country and eliminate the need to be in Iraq at the same time. A win/win situation.

Oh and they would also have to agree that the other half of the money would not go to socialist medicine or research on global meltdown)"

I did not write the quoted text, Danni

But on that issue, would there be any money left after everyone with their hands out got theirs?

Almost everyday on this forum you read, "If we used the money we spend in Iraq on __________". (Fill in the blank with the topic du jour) That money can only be spent once.

"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."

Bob just doesn't believe in the sentiments described in the Dec. of Independence. He has that Creator given right to disagree.

Danni

That is a government document. To say I don't believe in those words shows that your stupidity is as great as I've heard. I went to war for those words. I went to war for the government that gives those rights. I was willing to give my life for the government that gives those rights. To say you were born with those rights is an insult to every person who ever died for the government that gives you those rights.

Now--tell me the value of those rights to the people of Darfur, or STFU. Weren't they born with those rights too?

;-)

I went to war for the government that gives those rights. I was willing to give my life for the government that gives those rights


Hahahaha

What a lie. The b00b shit his pants in Vietnam and the stink has never left him.

"I guess you just don't know what the word "infringe" means. Why would you use a word when you don't know its meaning? It makes you seem very very stupid."

I used it (in quotes,) BOOBalo, because I took it directly from the Second Amendment. (See below.)

"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."

"It makes you seem very very stupid."

Really? It makes me wonder who is REALLY stupid here, VERY, VERY stupid. Don't you have some work to do proving the moon landing was fake? You should get back to it and leave the discussions involving "rights" to the sane people.

When Hospitals do work on patients and they can't pay or won't pay their bills the hospital is recouped for their losses and it comes from the Federal Government through TAX DOLLARS. Try and get SOME education about You Buffalo Bob. If some dumb fuck hayseed knows You should.

Larry Mohr

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-04-13 08:03 AM


Can you understand that it would be illegal to treat illegal aliens? Any hospital reporting such treatment would be subject to prosecution for those involved in the treatment, and the hospital itself could lose accreditation.. Do you think German doctors treated Jews during Hitlers time? Same rules. No treatment for illegals. Just like everyone bitches about. Now everyone can STFU. Simple isn't it.

Jestgetinalong--I guess you missed the part where I showed that the second amendment was invalid since it had already been breached by being infringed---and gave several examples of infringment on the right to bear arms. I guess you missed that, huh.

Can you understand that it would be illegal to treat illegal aliens? Any hospital reporting such treatment would be subject to prosecution for those involved in the treatment, and the hospital itself could lose accreditation.. Do you think German doctors treated Jews during Hitlers time? Same rules. No treatment for illegals. Just like everyone bitches about. Now everyone can STFU. Simple isn't it.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-04-13 09:18 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Ok since You claim to be so smart How is the Hospital supposed to tell Who is illegal when they seek medical care Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Especially at the Emergency Room.

Larry Mohr.

OzarkAnnie--I bet you believe in Jesus and supporting the troops too don't you--why don't you tell the ones who disagree with you what pants shitters they are too. Tell them Jesus told you they were pants shitters. Of course they aren't real soldiers--they're Phony Soldiers aren't they. Just like me. Thank you for your support and supporting the concept of free speech and an honest exchange of ideas. Your view seems to be Fuck Americans who can't afford medical care--you shouldn't have any problem turning away bleeding illegal immigrants either. McCain 4 four more? Is that you?

:-)

Nope. But I do know that visual surveillance (at to the resolution to see people) is impossible from geosynchronous orbit. Anyone with an IQ higher than an artichoke knows that -- which explains why you don't

Posted by goatman at 2008-04-13 08:03 AM | Reply | Flag

Damn!

I didn't know that either.

Cheers,
Walt

"Jestgetinalong--I guess you missed the part where I showed that the second amendment was invalid since it had already been breached by being infringed---and gave several examples of infringment on the right to bear arms. I guess you missed that, huh."

No, I didn't miss anything, BOOBalo. Are you aware that some of those "infringement" issues are before the Supreme Court as we speak? Is the law against shouting "FIRE" in a crowded an infringement on the right of free speech also? Come on, BOOB, spread all the pepper out on the sheet and see if you can find any fly shit in it.

Ok since You claim to be so smart How is the Hospital supposed to tell Who is illegal when they seek medical care Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Especially at the Emergency Room.

Larry Mohr.

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-04-13 09:24 AM


ID cards--no ID cards--no life. Maybe a nice Magnetic strip implanted with 666 on it just to freak out the whackos. Lots of options. If we lose a few Americans, its worth it to save those bucks saving illegal alien lives. We lose Americans everyday.

Are you on something BB?

This is so not worth the hassle anymore. Live in Your "World" Buffalo Bob. I'll live in REALITY.

Larry Mohr

Jestgetinalong

"Shall not be infringed" is pretty specific and direct. I see no confusion in the phrase. Let's see if they get rid of the infringements. Let's see what rights the government says we have.

;-)

I'll live in REALITY.

Larry Mohr

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-04-13 09:34 A


Bullshit. You have yet to explain the rights you were born with to the people in Darfur.

Here is the answer again, and take it with you and watch that the door doesn't hit you on the way out.

The value of the rights you claim people are born with to the people of Darfur:

Answer: NOTHING

Which coincidently matches your answer.

;-)

Walt

Have you stopped fucking goats?

Have you stopped fucking goats?

Quit projecting.

Cheers,
Walt

Biffalo Bob When people stop being afraid and start standing up for their rights then they will continue to be afraid. This isn't a perfect world Bob. it never will be.

Larry Mohr

Thank you for your support and supporting the concept of free speech and an honest exchange of ideas.

You rank as the most dishonest and disputatious poster on this blog.

Apollo Missions faked? Neil Armstrong a liar? Smoke stacks on the moon? Bugs? Two Americas?

You're fraud, a liar, a coward, and you didn't fight for this country.

Biffalo Bob When people stop being afraid and start standing up for their rights then they will continue to be afraid. This isn't a perfect world Bob. it never will be.

Larry Mohr

Posted by LarryMohr at 2008-04-13 09:44 AM | Reply

I missed the part where you told me the value of the rights we are all born with to the people of Darfur. Here is the answer in case you need some help.

Answer: NOTHING

Are you on something BB?

Yes he is -- an alternate reality

You're fraud, a liar, a coward, and you didn't fight for this country.

Posted by OzarkAggie at 2008-04-13 09:45

Yeah, you an Walt live in a fool's world where you can't tell the difference between your country and the political elites. It takes a fool to risk his life for the elites. They are the true enemy whose actions are destroying this country.

OzarkAnnie

You have no concept of America, or American values. You shouldn't be an American. You belong to another country. I am not proud to have to call you a citizen of my country. I am ashamed America has millions like you in it now. You need your own country. You can even elect Bush again.

As to the rest. I have made my statements and you have proven none of them mistaken.

As to fighting for my country, you are mistaken. However, I wouldn't fight for your country.

I missed the part where you told me the value of the rights we are all born with to the people of Darfur. Here is the answer in case you need some help.

Answer: NOTHING

You got that right -- finally. But just because they are worth nothing there does not mean they do not exist, bOoB.

What is th worth of uncle's reading glasses to him now that he is blind?

Answer: NOTHING

But guess what, bOoB. He still has them. You are under the erroneous assumption that one cannot have what one does not use. You are wrong (as usual)

I have made my statements and you have proven none of them mistaken.

Again: Wrong.

I've posted the following before, but like anything that people choose to present to you that makes sense, you ignore it and pretend you didn't see it.

What a loser.

Inherent Rights are part of the nature of mankind as sentient beings with free will. The source of these rights is a matter of individual belief and therefore beyond the scope of this document. It doesn't matter, because regardless of where these rights come from or why we have them, we all agree that we have them and that these rights are inherent to our very nature. Because of this, they cannot legally be taken away or violated. They cannot even be given away, because they are part of our very being. Declining to enforce a right is not the same as giving it away. An inherent right cannot even be delegated, loaned, sold, or contracted out. An individual can delegate or grant a privilege or a contract right to another, but not an inherent right.

Goatman

I missed the part where the rights that document describe have value to the people of Darfur. I'm sure they appreciate the words, but don't really see the value when they are on their knees about to be shot. Here is a flaw in your document:

"because regardless of where these rights come from or why we have them, we all agree that we have them and that these rights are inherent to our very nature"

The people with the guns disagree. That makes the statement false. Not everyone agrees. The people with the guns make their point better than you.

The value of the rights described in your document to the people of Darfur:

NOTHING

Get it yet? Got another answer? This is the question:

What is the value of the rights described in that document to the people of Darfur?

The answer is:

NOTHING

If you need more help with that, let me know.

;-)

I missed the part where the rights that document describe have value to the people of Darfur.

Of course you did. That's because you fail to use this little button on your keyboard I am always suggesting you use, PGUP. Use it right now and go to my 9:56 post.

Honestly, bOoB, how many times do I have to keep telling you about this magical key before you actually use it?

If you need more help with that (the PGUP key), let me know.

Have you stopped fucking goats?

In Walt's defense, it was a camel, and no one told him he was supposed to ride the camel ... to town.

aw crap. That was for Goatman wasn't it.

Cheap joke opportunity flubbed.

Inherent Rights are part of the nature of mankind as sentient beings with free will. The source of these rights is a matter of individual belief and therefore beyond the scope of this document. It doesn't matter, because regardless of where these rights come from or why we have them, we all agree that we have them and that these rights are inherent to our very nature. Because of this, they cannot legally be taken away or violated. They cannot even be given away, because they are part of our very being. Declining to enforce a right is not the same as giving it away. An inherent right cannot even be delegated, loaned, sold, or contracted out. An individual can delegate or grant a privilege or a contract right to another, but not an inherent right.

No, you got it right, Yav. bob originally said it to Walt who replied. I never was in the goat-fucking loop except eponymously

The people with the guns disagree. That makes the statement false.

It's that easy? Well, shit, why didn't you say so? Everything is settled now.

I have guns. I disagree with everything you say about faked moon landings. That makes your statements false.

Good ol' Ray-Gay who serves no one but himself drops in to push another strawman about military training in hopes that he can mask his cowardice.

Who do you work for Ray-Gay? The impoverished? NO, you work for elites that you resent. They're probably Christians. Haha. They tell when to show up, what to do, and tell you how much they'll pay you to be their dog.

Your bitterness is evident but not justified. You can't make it on your own so you denigrate those who feed you scraps from the table.

Sit up and bark Ray-Gay. It's all you can do.

In Walt's defense, it was a camel, and no one told him he was supposed to ride the camel ... to town.

Posted by YAV at 2008-04-13 10:17 AM | Reply | Flag

FUck. I can't catch a break around here.

LOL

Cheers,
Walt

Goatman

"they cannot legally be taken away or violated."

Of course they can. The jews in Germany are proof of the flaw in that statement. The Cambodians of the Killing Fields are proof of the flaw in that statement. The Russians of the Gulags are proof of the flaws in that statement. The people of Darfur are proof of the flaw in that statement. The dissidents of China are proff of the flaw in that statement. The Native Americans of our own country are proof of the flaw in that statement. On and on and on---how much do you need?

Just because something is written down and sounds pretty and you'd like to beliefve it is true, don't be so gullible as to believe it even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. All those mentioned had their rights legally taken away.

The rights you describe are worthless. As worthless as those glasses to the blind man you described. Yes, he has glasses, but they are worthless. The same as the rights you describe. No value.

NOTHING

"Declining to enforce a right is not the same as giving it away".

Blah Blah Blah. It is still worthless. Still without value. Worth less than a fart in a hurricane when you are on your knees with a gun about to show you its function.

Get it yet? So what if you have rights if they are worth less than a paper ring from a cigar band? BFD. Whoopee do. They are worthless to the people mentioned. They only have value here because our government enforces these rights. Without our government, we are Darfur.

;-)

Goat,

Why are you doing this to yourself?

Are you on something?

I have guns. I disagree with everything you say about faked moon landings. That makes your statements false.

Posted by goatman at 2008-04-13 10:33 AM


No, it doesn't, and your logic is flawed as usual. Just because a gun can make a statement about rights false, doesn't mean a gun can make all statments false. It must be tough to learn new things with such poor logic and comprehension skills. You are lucky you got a well paying job.

;-)

"they cannot legally be taken away or violated."

Of course they can.

The jews in Germany are proof of the flaw in that statement.

You can prove they were not allowed to exercise their rights, but you cannot prove that they were taken away.

Got a link that says inherent rights can be taken away? If not, you lose, I win. I provided a link that says they can't be. You confuse civil or contract rights with inherent rights. It was the inherent rights that the founding fathers spoke of in the DoI.

Individuals and organizations can delegate or grant "contract rights" or privileges (but not inherent rights)

Walt

Do the women over there have the right to drive and wear what they like? Can they vote and own property? Can they walk around freely and go where and when they please? Can they work at all professions?

Why are you doing this to yourself?

ennui. Passing time while cooking and waiting for my dinner guests to arrive.

Goatman

I will concede all that, if you will concede that the rights you mention aren't worth a flying fuck to a frog.

;-)

Or simply tell me what value they have to the people of Darfur. Try dealing with reality for a bit instead of your philosophical rights that have no value.

The rights you describe are worthless.

There is a difference between not owning something and owning something that is worthless, bOoB.

I'm still waiting for you link that says some people do not have inherent rights or that they can be taken away.

" regardless of where these rights come from or why we have them, we all agree that we have them and that these rights are inherent to our very nature."

That's a huge assumption.

"You can prove they were not allowed to exercise their rights, but you cannot prove that they were taken away."

Exercise implies choice, taken implies force. The Holocaust was certainly the latter.

I will concede all that, if you will concede that the rights you mention aren't worth a flying fuck to a frog.

PGUP, bOoB. *sigh*

Danforth

Those people had the right to life that could not be taken away. Just ask Goatman to explain it to you.

Or simply tell me what value they have to the people of Darfur

I have a love letter my wife wrote to me long before we were married. It won't keep me from getting shot, it won't get me a cup of coffee at Denny's, and it certainly won't guarantee a goddammed thing on this planet.

But you cannot convince me it is without value.

Goatman

You haven't said anything ever worth paging up for. Copy and paste or STFU. Simple isn't it.

;-)

Do the women over there have the right to drive and wear what they like? Can they vote and own property? Can they walk around freely and go where and when they please? Can they work at all professions?

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-04-13 10:49 AM | Reply | Flag

Right to drive = Yes, and they are no better than the ones in the States

wear what they like = Yes, but many choose to Ninja Up

Can they walk around freely and go where and when they please? = Yes, I see many of them. See my blog, I have pictures.

Can they work at all professions? = No. I doubt they could be male prostitutes. Nargis (F) gives me daily reports on the status of bids we have submitted. Miriam (Mary) designs all the electrical works in AutoCADD

Cheers,
Walt

Goatman

A love letter isn't a right.

dUmmy.

Chronic wars are a time honored way by which nations destroys themselves.

My definition of coward is on who rather die than think for himself. He's got no guts to break from group-think. That fits you, Oz.

I'm an atheist in a land of Christians. I work for myself and family above all else. It sounds like you haven't been reading my posts on the state of our economy and how I deal with it.

This country is getter ever closer to becoming a military dictatorship and is sinking into a serious economic Depression. You're right, Oz. There is nothing I can do but bark at fools. You deserve what you ask for.

You haven't said anything ever worth paging up for.

How do you know if you won't page up to look?

idiot

A love letter isn't a right.

As usual, the bOoB misses the point, or ignores it in a vain, straw-grasping attempt at deflection.

Those people had the right to life that could not be taken away

That's twice you got it right on one thread, bob! Congratulations! Their right to life was not taken away just because their life was.

If I get robbed, does my right to those possessions go with them? No. Only the possessions.

BTW, I'm still waiting for a link that says that inherent rights can be taken away from somebody. I produced a link that said they could not. Just so you know the score until you provide that link, it is:

Goatman: 1
Buffy bOoB: 0

Link, please?

I'm still alive Ray-Gay, and every man in my father's line since the Civil War has served in the military and not a one of them has been killed or even shot.

The fact is that the military teaches self preservation. Dead soldiers can't win a battle.

hmmm...how hard would it be to electrify that fence to keep people from going through it/over it? not hard I'd wager.

I'm still alive Ray-Gay, and every man in my father's line since the Civil War has served in the military and not a one of them has been killed or even shot.

The fact is that the military teaches self preservation. Dead soldiers can't win a battle.

Posted by OzarkAggie at 2008-04-13 11:14 AM | Reply | Flag


OA,


Impressive.

You have to carry on the tradition.

Cheers,
Walt

what is your blog site, Walt?

"...Ray-Gay..."

~Mo-zark Faggy

Be Well.

never mind. I found it. duh.

Oz an Walt

You two think I'm a coward who refused to fight for his country. I think you two are stupid fools who risked life and limb for elitist swine. The future will judge who is right. I'm very comfortable with that.

he fact is that the military teaches self preservation.

You're telling that to a man who is almost 66 with no health problems. Don't make me laugh.

The US Government should hire some old East Germans if they really want a good wall.

I wouldn't be surprised if the Mexicans start cutting it down and selling the metal as scrap. Probably make more money that way than picking tomatos.

The Toad

Don't make me laugh.

Posted by Ray at 2008-04-13 11:44 AM

You always did strike me as someone who does not like to laugh much, Ray. Too busy hoarding shiny play pretties to enjoy life. What a shame.

It's hard to enforce border security when the inarticulate buffoon in the white house has some alterior motive to open the borders. Another shrowd of secrecy before the American tax payers.

Resolution...shoot on sight. High-powered rifles w/ scopes. Fewer will die in the long run when they understand the consequences. We offer the American dream....but, ya gotta do it our way. Why no Mexican dream?

Goat

The more I learn about you, the more ignorant you show to be.

The time it has taken me to hoard my "shiny play pretties" adds up to a few hours. They are safely tucked away, leaving me to relax while the simple allow themselves to be fleeced by the Wall Street and Washington establishment.

There is no fun in life to being poor and in ill health. You are half way there and you never saw the warning signs. Nature has no sympathy for ignorance.

"Resolution...shoot on sight. High-powered rifles w/ scopes. Fewer will die in the long run when they understand the consequences. We offer the American dream....but, ya gotta do it our way. Why no Mexican dream?

Posted by BusyB at 2008-04-13 01:06 PM"

Speaking from experience, I'm glad your policy wasn't in effect when I was working near (less than 5 miles) of the US/Mexico border (and, it was at night!).

On a pragmatic level: how do you propose to (effectively) patrol 2000 miles of border with armed guards?

I suspect no solution will be 100% effective. I also suspect it will be quicker, cheaper, AND more effective to address the reasons for illegal immigrants.

There is no fun in life to being poor and in ill health. You are half way there and you never saw the warning signs. Nature has no sympathy for ignorance.

Fallout shelters. Same argument. Same chicken little attitude. And I heard this 20 years ago, too. Glad I didn't listent then. Stock market has historically beat precious metals hands down. I've (as most every other investor) made many times over with stock the last 30 years than I possible could've with gold.

But I'm laughing and enjoying life nonetheless.

The more I learn about you, the more ignorant you show to be.

Good thing you invest in the goatman perception funds. Too bad I don't.

time to start using land mines and motion activated machine guns.

Cheers,
Walt

Posted by Walt at 2008-04-12 07:49 AM |

We're being invaded and it's time to take the kind of measures that Walt suggests. Now it's jusyt a game and revolving door. If someone broke into my house, I'd shoot them. So if someone breaks into my Country, why shouldn't I do the same?

Briwo

The land mines and motion activated machine guns have already been discounted. What about the other alternatives offered? Do you have an opinion on them, or are you just one of those people who think "something should be done" with no idea as to what should be done.

I'm still alive Ray-Gay, and every man in my father's line since the Civil War has served in the military and not a one of them has been killed or even shot.

The fact is that the military teaches self preservation. Dead soldiers can't win a battle.

Posted by OzarkAggie at 2008-04-13 11:14 AM

Neither can cowards. Sounds like a lot of luck for such a long line of soldiers. I suspect the only target they ever presented was their backside as they were leaving the field. Their posterity sure seems like a pants pisser. No reason to think they had any more guts than you. I'm sure they thought it was their right to run away as their friends fought and died. I doubt they were even on Americas side. I bet ol' Great great grandad ran away for the Confederate side. Not many Americans in the family even today.

;-)

Stock market has historically beat precious metals hands down.

Not since 2001. Times change.

But I'm laughing and enjoying life nonetheless.

It is impossible to create wealth out of paper money. I'm content to let the future decide who gets the last laugh.

"So if someone breaks into my Country, why shouldn't I do the same?"

Posted by briwo at 2008-04-13 02:40 PM


That seems to be the view in Iraq too.

Ask Israel to come and launch some of its remaining cluster bombs on the border, like the million that landed on Lebanese soil when a cease-fire had already been agreed to

Walt --

This is being written with all politics aside and is just my humble opinion --

I happened to read on your blog you were offered better job opportunities but it would mean going back to Iraq. Do you have to go back there? Maybe you should give it more consideration before you sign on. What does your family say?

Things aren't going to get much better in Iraq and probably even more dangerous -- if that's possible. Leaving personal politics aside for a minute -- you really need to consider the reality of there maybe being a McCain presidency and, if so, the then real possibility of our taking on Iran. Iraq would not be the best place to be if that happened.

Maybe you ought to think of staying in Afghanistan or at least transferring anywhere else BUT Iraq? Not to cast a raincloud on good job opportunities coming your way but promotions and good bucks won't do you much good if you're not around to enjoy them. Take time to think about it.

Sounds like a lot of luck for such a long line of soldiers

Sounds like you don't understand numbers and statistics, bOoB. Wow. Am I ever surprised!

I suspect the only target they ever presented was their backside as they were leaving the field.

Says the guy who suspects there are smokestacks on the moon.

Briwo

The land mines and motion activated machine guns have already been discounted. What about the other alternatives offered? Do you have an opinion on them, or are you just one of those people who think "something should be done" with no idea as to what should be done.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-04-13 03:18 PM


I am for anything that puts a stop to the invasion of this Country, all options are on the table as far as I'm concerned.
If you would like to disccuss it, please call my radio show today as that's one of the thigns I'll be talking about.

Neither can cowards. Sounds like a lot of luck for such a long line of soldiers. I suspect the only target they ever presented was their backside as they were leaving the field. Their posterity sure seems like a pants pisser. No reason to think they had any more guts than you. I'm sure they thought it was their right to run away as their friends fought and died. I doubt they were even on Americas side. I bet ol' Great great grandad ran away for the Confederate side. Not many Americans in the family even today.

;-)

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-04-13 03:25 PM


What kind of fucking bullshit is this? Now I know why they call you Boob.
Every direct male descendant of my great-great grandfather, who fought in the civil war, has served and the only my father and my Uncle were injured, my father was shot in the leg and my Uncle had his thumb shot off in Korea. They replaced it with his big toe.

So BOob, anyone in your family serve?

Briwo

I wasn't talking to you DumMy. Pay attention.

My G-G-Grandfather served in the 82nd Illinois Infantry, Company C, and fought at Gettysburg.
"One company. (Company C. the Concordia Guards) was an Israelitish company. (The Israelites of Chicago collecting, within three days, $10,000 among themselves for its benefit.)"

The Eighty-second participated in the engagement on May 4. and then returned to camp at Stafford court house, where it had a much needed rest until June 12, when it moved on the Gettysburg campaign. Before it quite reached Gettysburg, General Renolds was killed, but his brave and sorely pressed Divisions still held their position near the Theological Seminary, above the town. At noon, General Howard arrived on the field, and assumed command of the troops, the immediate command of the Eleventh Corps devolving on Carl Schurz. This Corps was thrown into position to the right of the first, and received, soon after, the weight of the first attack of Ewell's fresh troops, which forced it back to the village of Gettysburg, where the officers, to save their men from the terrible fire through the main streets, attempted to march them diagonally by crossing streets through the town, the attempt resulting in confusion, degenerating into a panic.

General Howard instantly selected Cemetery Hill, south of Gettysburg, as his line of defense, to which point the troops were withdrawn and re-formed, the First Brigade of the Third Division acting as rear guard -- the Eighty-second Illinois guarding the rear of the Brigade in the retreat to the new position. The Eleventh Corps, in the line of battle of the following days, held the center -- the crest of Cemetery Hill and the declivity in its front.

The Third Division occupied the right of Howard's line, joining Slocum's Twelfth Corps on their left. Toward evening, on Thursday, the 2d of July, Ewell's Confederate Corps, by a sudden rush on our right, carried a portion of the line of rifle pits which had been constructed during the day, in front of Slocum's and Schurz's line, and which were protected by only a single Brigade -- the right having been weakened to support Sickles, on the left, against the terrific assault of Longstreet's forces. On Friday morning the battle raged in the woods in front of Schurz. The rebels were still in the rifle-pits, and the infantry were fighting them where our gunners could give no aid, for fear of killing friend as well as foe. From early morning until past eleven --seven hours-- the men fought to regain those rifle-pits, when Ewell's Corps was finally repulsed, and the Union line advanced to its former position.

Colonel Salomon, with the Eighty-second, made a charge upon the pits in his front, driving the Confederates back with the loss of more prisoners than the number of his command. During the three days' fighting, Colonel Salomon had two horses shot under him, while leading his Regiment. which was especially complimented by Generals Howard and Schurz for its bravery and efficiency during the struggle. Its losses were 131 killed, wounded and missing. Captain Emil Frey and Lieutenant Eugene Hepp, Co. H, were taken prisoners.

The Eighty-second then joined in the pursuit of Lee. through Virginia, and then, on September 25, marched to Manassas Junction, en route for Tennessee.

OzarkAnnie

So he ran away from the 82nd Illinois Infantry, Company C, and ran away at Gettysburg. I'm sure you come from a long line of pants pissers. If not--they'd be ashamed of your punk ass.

;-)

Says the guy who suspects there are smokestacks on the moon.

Posted by goatman at 2008-04-13 05:16 PM | Reply


Says the guy who sees movement in a still picture.

;-)

Hey, bOoB -- I'm still waiting for the link that supports your claim that no one is born with inherent rights and that they can be taken away from them.

Are you going to supply it, or are you going to admit that I am right?

So far
Goatman: 1
da bOoB: 0

Says the guy who sees movement in a still picture.

???

What the fuck are you talking about, bOoB?

Guess you didn't bother to read how they were overrun and then fought their way back.

Typical b00b.

And I doubt they'd consider 6 years in SubLantFleet to be anything but honorable. Navy felt the same way when I was discharged.

Better than being a draftee and a REMP huh b00b?

Says the guy who suspects there are smokestacks on the moon.

Posted by goatman at 2008-04-13 05:16 PM | Reply

Says the guy that thinks you don't have to touch first base in baseball as long as you get close to it---it is the same thing.

;-)

Says the guy who sees movement in a still picture.

???

What the fuck are you talking about, bOoB?

Posted by goatman at 2008-04-13 06:01 PM

I thought that's what you saw in that picture. A zoom in that showed movement from one picture. NO? Got the guts to tell me what you DID see Sgt Schultz? Was it Nutzing--did you see NUTZING??!!?!

;-)

Says the guy that thinks you don't have to touch first base in baseball as long as you get close to it---it is the same thing.


Says the guy who sees movement in a still picture.


You've completely lost it, I see. I haven't a clue what you are referring to.


BTW, bOoB -- I'm still waiting for the link that supports your claim that no one is born with inherent rights and that they can be taken away from them.

Are you going to supply it, or are you going to admit that I am right? Or are you going to come back with a quip about basketball this time?

Goatman: 1
da bOoB: 0

"Hey, bOoB -- I'm still waiting for the link that supports your claim that no one is born with inherent rights and that they can be taken away from them."

Can't prove a negative dUmmY. Got a link that shows we are born with inherent rights? That's a positive. If it is true--you can prove it. It's your statement--you prove it.

;-)

I thought that's what you saw in that picture.

What the fuck made you think I saw that, bOoB? Seek help, dude. Your hallucinations are becoming quite severe.

Got the guts to tell me what you DID see Sgt Schultz?

Yes I do. And i will tell you when you answer my question, since I was first, you know.

Can you provide a link that supports your claim that people are not born with certain inherent rights and the ones they do have can be taken away from them?

Until then:

Goatman: 1
da bOoB: 0

So, bOoB, got a link to counter mine? One says that inherent rights can be taken away? That is not a logically negative action. To take someting away is a positive action in a logical sense.

Can't prove it? Don't have a link? I didn't think so

From Goatman's link:

"It doesn't matter, because regardless of where these rights come from or why we have them, we all agree that we have them and that these rights are inherent to our very nature."

We all agree? Whose is "we"?

That link doesn't prove anything except that there are plenty of pompous assholes who presume to think they speak for everyone.

That link doesn't prove anything except that there are plenty of pompous assholes who presume to think they speak for everyone.

Can you provide a link or reference to disprove it, null?

Whose is "we"?

Those possessing the capacity for rational thought.

"Can you provide a link or reference to disprove it, null?"

You can't prove a negative. The burden of proof is on those who claim that such a thing as "inherent rights" exist.

"Those possessing the capacity for rational thought."

Horseshit. There is nothing rational about "inherent rights." That's an entirely subjective opinion supported by zero evidence.

You can't prove a negative.

I see you are following the bOoB's lead. Null. duh. good handle.

I asked upthread for the bOoB to prove that inherent rights can be taken away. In a logical sense, that is a positive action.

The bOoB maintains that all rights come from the government. That is positive logically as well. I asked for a link to support that. I am not asking for a negative to be proven here. I am asking for a link that agrees with the bOoB's assertion all rights come from the government. You can pretend that is asking you to prove a negative and if you think so, you are either as idiotic as the bOoB, or you maintain that position because you know there is no such link.

So can you provide a link that supports the bOoB's claim that all rights come from the government? Or will it just be another null strawman?

Lotta love in this thread.

Goatman

Your question has been answered. Long ago.

"they cannot legally be taken away or violated."

Of course they can. The jews in Germany are proof of the flaw in that statement. The Cambodians of the Killing Fields are proof of the flaw in that statement. The Russians of the Gulags are proof of the flaws in that statement. The people of Darfur are proof of the flaw in that statement. The dissidents of China are proff of the flaw in that statement. The Native Americans of our own country are proof of the flaw in that statement. On and on and on---how much do you need?

Just because something is written down and sounds pretty and you'd like to beliefve it is true, don't be so gullible as to believe it even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. All those mentioned had their rights legally taken away.

The rights you describe are worthless. As worthless as those glasses to the blind man you described. Yes, he has glasses, but they are worthless. The same as the rights you describe. No value.

NOTHING

"Declining to enforce a right is not the same as giving it away".

Blah Blah Blah. It is still worthless. Still without value. Worth less than a fart in a hurricane when you are on your knees with a gun about to show you its function.

Get it yet? So what if you have rights if they are worth less than a paper ring from a cigar band? BFD. Whoopee do. They are worthless to the people mentioned. They only have value here because our government enforces these rights. Without our government, we are Darfur.

;-)

Posted by Buffalo_Bob at 2008-04-13 10:41 AM

You can't prove a negative. It is up to you to prove your claim of inherent rights.

Your link is bullshit. It is not a source for anything. It is as valid as any fiction novel.

Get it? You seem to think that whoever wrote that is the ultimate source. They aren't.

NOW. Got the guts to tell me what you DID see Sgt Schultz?

;-)

Don't put words in my mouth. I don't speak for BuffaloBob and he doesn't speak for me.


"I asked upthread for the bOoB to prove that inherent rights can be taken away. In a logical sense, that is a positive action."


Nice try, but that assumes that "inherent rights" exist. You need to prove that "inherent rights" exist first. The burden of proof is on you. Good luck.

"You can't prove a negative.

I see you are following the bOoB's lead."

Posted by goatman

Actually they admitted "You can't prove a negative." at the Salem Witch Trials.

They killed a bunch of innocent folks anyway.

Just in case.

Goatman

You ask for a link, and I give you reality. Cambodia--no rights from their government--millions die. Germany--Jews--no rights from their government--millions die. Russia--no rights from their government--millions die. American Indians--no rights from the government---millions die. Africa--no rights from the government--millions die and are enslaved. Spaniards in the New World---natives have no rights from the government--millions enslaved and killed.

And you ask for a link? Idiot. History is the fucking link.

You can claim rights for those people--you can claim they were all millionaires and christians and geniuses too. It is meaningless. Valueless. Worthless. Do you need a link to the meaning of those words DuMMy? The rights you claim aren't of any value.

You are the moron yelling at a corpse and telling it, it has a right to life.
tWit.

;-)

bOoB, --

As always, when you start floundering, your posts get longer and longer and say less and less.

I presume by your ramblings that you STILL cannot provide a link that supports your claim that all rights come from the government?

Nope, you sure can't. Score remains the same.

Goatman: 1
da bOoB: 0

Provide just one link. One itsy bitsy link that supports your claim. Get yourself on the scoreboard. As Null pointed out, the one who makes the claim has the burden of proof. You claim that all rights come from the government. Now prove your claim.

Outside a legal context, "burden of proof" means that someone suggesting a new theory or stating a claim must provide evidence to support it: it is not sufficient to say "you can't disprove this." Specifically, when anyone is making a bold claim, it is not someone else's responsibility to disprove the claim, but is rather the responsibility of the person who is making the bold claim to prove it. In short, X is not proven simply because "not X" cannot be proven

You ask for a link, and I give you reality.

Then give me a real link. What is happening in Cambodia and happened in Nazi Germany is your interpretation of rights. I want to see a link that states logically that all rights come from the government.

You have the burden of proof. Don't be afraid to get on the scoreboard.

Goatman: 1
da bOoB: 0

You are the moron yelling at a corpse and telling it, it has a right to life.


???

You keep coming up with these utterly bizarre statements. What's up with that? While you are searching for a link, maybe you can provide one that supports your claims that I

a) see movement in a still picture.
b) think you don't have to touch first base in baseball as long as you get close to it
c) You are the moron yelling at a corpse and telling it, it has a right to life

You're losing your mind big time, dude. They say mind exercises help. So exercise yours and find me a link that supports your claim that all rights come from the government.

Do you need a link to the meaning of those words

Nope. Just one that supports your claim that all rights come from the government.

No link can prove that either "all rights come from government" or that "inherent rights exist."


Those are both opinions. The only thing you could link to is another opinion.

Thus, the constant demand for links is absurd.

Crew served machine guns and bulldozers would send a message and be more cost effective than a fence.

Goatman v. BuffaloBob

-- and on and on it goes to my endless amusement (grin)

Can't prove it? Don't have a link? I didn't think so

Was it Nutzing--did you see NUTZING??!!?!

;-)

Goatman: 1
da bOoB: 0

If it is true--you can prove it. It's your statement--you prove it.


dUmmy.

Seems you don't know WTF you are talking about.

;-)

Says the guy who suspects there are smokestacks on the moon.

Copy and paste or STFU. Simple isn't it.

Have you stopped fucking goats?

Link, please?

???

What the fuck are you talking about, bOoB?

I wasn't talking to you DumMy. Pay attention.

But your straw man was pretty good--for me to POOP on.

;-)

Now everyone can STFU. Simple isn't it.

Drive along any road parallel to the Mexican border.

Count the runners.

saw a Sundance? preview before seeing "Juno" last nite on a poor Mexican boy's (he had eyes like a baby seal) experiences in America after his father is arrested & deported or whatnots leaving him to the American werewolves in border patrol...didn't catch the title but its sure to be a hit in lovey duvey Minnesota especially by Republican convention time...

Certainly thought it might be a new favorite movie for CC:>)

"Goatman v. BuffaloBob"
-CC

Another battle of wits with unarmed opponents.

So BOob, anyone in your family serve?

Posted by briwo


off topic again...well, well my dad & both granddads did in WW1 (wilson's War) & WW2.

Civil War had a few in the family serve.

Serveral on the French side of my father's side served & deserted Napoleon's army...one in 1804:>)

Serveral on the French side of my father's side served & deserted Napoleon's army...one in 1804:>)
Posted by Bani

Shazam....a French deserter! Doesn't that take the cake.

Shazam....a French deserter! Doesn't that take the cake.

Only 10 years after they ate it

Hell, it's a fence. Go find the gate and just knock; someone will let you in.

The Texas Rangers used to machinegum wetbacks they caught crossing the Rio Grande. It was effective. If we declare martial law along the border, and shoot unauthorized people found in the zone there, illegal immigration would be discouraged.

Then if we withheld welfare from illegals, and punished employers who employed them, there would be little incentive to come here.

Possibly then, we could gain control, establish a bracero program, and import people to work in gangs under control of their manager. They could work agriculture mainly, and possibly some slaughterhouse work. After their work is doen, back over the border. If the Hispanics wouldn't come, there were other braceros from other countries who worked here previously, who could be recruited.

And yes, we need to remove jus soli, automatic grant of citizenship to children born here without regard to the status of their parents. That would remove another incentive and deprive the illegals of the anchor baby avenue to residency. This can be done retroactively since the court case that decided the matter is somewhat vague as t applicability to illegal Hispanics.

Of course, there's a political dilemma here as the Hispanics offset the votes of another numerous group, the blacks. And removal of the Hispanics would give the Democrat Party a leg up as the anti-black vote would be reduced.

Johnson-
re: "The Texas Rangers used to machinegum wetbacks they caught crossing the Rio Grande. It was effective. If we declare martial law along the border, and shoot unauthorized people found in the zone there, illegal immigration would be discouraged....

....Of course, there's a political dilemma here as the Hispanics offset the votes of another numerous group, the blacks... "

Are you as despicable as all that, Johnson?

saw a Sundance? preview before seeing "Juno" last nite on a poor Mexican boy's (he had eyes like a baby seal) experiences in America after his father is arrested & deported or whatnots leaving him to the American werewolves in border patrol...didn't catch the title but its sure to be a hit in lovey duvey Minnesota especially by Republican convention time...

Posted by danni at 2008-04-13 08:54 AM

"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."

Rights are accorded to certain groups by a compact of men who agree to abide by them, and under particular terms and conditions.

Get real.

Johnson-
re:(Johnson is speaking of the children of Mexicans) "Do you eat veal? Nursing calves have such adorable eyes, yet we slaughter them for food..."

Yes, I suppose you are truly that repugnant to any decency or humanity, indeed to anything of love.

Let's see. First we strew anti-personnel mines along the border, so if the fence is penetrated, there is another barrier in addition to those manning the fence. Then as it is a zone under martial law, those who "make it through" will need to avoid human assets, who are empowered to shoot them on sight.

I sympathize with the people trying to get here. But they have their own country where they can survive. Why do we need to limit our actions to keep them out if it is in our interests to do so? We aren't.

Johnson-
re: "The Declaration was a political document contrived to support our struggle as a nation being created so as to rationalize our efforts."

Them's fightin' words, you sorry SOB!

Johnson-
You just reduced the American experiment, embodied in the Declaration and the Bill of Rights, to the vagaries of a mob boss's day, and for that you should answer.

You have never seemed to be at a loss for words, Johnson.

nada?

3 FF's Bets:>)

Betelg- I'm gonna be honest here...

While "johnson" is totally repugnant, what exactly would you do if a small army of immigrants came up to your fence and broke through it with dangerous weaponry?

Imagine it was your job to guard the damn thing.(as the natl guard should be doing, instead of fucking around in Iraq) Now what?

Gas? Tazers? Rubber bullets?

send "Machine Gun Johnson" down there?

Alexandrite-
I would look to past and current economic "leadership" for blame well before I would target the immigrants who have passed with a wink and a nod to work at Wal-Mart and Tyson, and for decades in agriculture so onions are cheaper.

I say we make an agreement with illegal aliens. Simple rule.

"your only allowed to kill people for letting you stay here"

You look up the word "ignorant" in the dictionary, and it says "liberals, democrats, and anyone for illegal immigration".

And I say we force dems to rent out rooms in their house to every illegal felon released from prison. they want, they can attempt to use their magic power of negotiation to make them law abiding citizens.

So far, democrats are proving their worth! They side with child predators, drug dealers, and illegal alien felons over American Citizens.

Wow, what a great party, where do I vote democrat?

Kuma

Betel- THe irony is that these immigrants are highly motivated if their bringing weapons to destroy this wall...after traveling through the grueling desert sun.

Seems they should use that motivation to overthrow their own govt and stop coming here.

And I say we force dems to rent out rooms in their house to every illegal felon released from prison.

Would that be before or after every pro-life asshole takes an unwanted fetus into their womb, and adopts a few unwanted children?

Seems they should use that motivation to overthrow their own govt and stop coming here.

Posted by Alexandrite

ff there's a thought...maybe we could read our bill of rights to them to give them inspiration!

Once again Kuma tells his lies about Dems being responsible for the non-enforcement of immigration laws during the Republican President's term of office.
I have a question for the Drudge folks, are any of you stupid enough to believe anything KUMA posts????

SOunds like they're going after frankenstein's monster...

I have a question for the Drudge folks, are any of you stupid enough to believe anything KUMA posts????
Just our regular Rightwingnuts, Danni. Did you know more American troops died under Clinton than under Dubya?
Just ask Sniper. And Clinton never appointed any blacks to the bench or his Cabinet, either.
Again, Sniper's the one with the 4-1-1.

I have a question for the Drudge folks, are any of you stupid enough to believe anything KUMA posts????


I have a question for the Drudge folks, are any of you stupid enough to believe anything buffalo bob posts????

"And I say we force dems to rent out rooms in their house to every illegal felon released from prison."

Would that be before or after every pro-life asshole takes an unwanted fetus into their womb, and adopts a few unwanted children?

Who didn't see this one coming?

guard tower, marksman, scope, rifle every 250m with kill bonuses will solve the problem. $250 a head will motivate anyone.

Then put a head on top of each one of those posts.

You wanna get serious about that problem? There's the solution. They need to know that it will cost them their life to cross illegally.

Being that the whole idea is to keep terrorists from entering through Mexico, it's appropriate.

It's them or us. We need to stop being a bunch of liberal pussies.

-Viz

I'm on the fence on this one.

The government does not give rights it only takes them away. What Bob sees as the government giving rights is the subset of rights that the government allows the people to keep. In a sense both sides are right in the rights do not exist. The rights we speak of are artificial constructs to allow people to digest the many situations that existence throws in our path.

Its all semantics when we talk about rights.

However in THIS country we have decided that our rights are natural and thus our government does not grant rights so much as regulate them. The Constitution is like a contract that determines what right we the people are granting to the government.

"1.Throw the employers in jail instead of the illegal aliens. It is much easier and will be much more effective if backed up with serious fines and jail time.

2. Dedicate a geosynchrous satellite to monitor concentrations of people near the border. Couple that with model airplane sized planes with cameras mounted on them, ground movement and heat detection devices and the results would be much more effective and much less costly."
--BUFFALO_BOB

Bob's idea in general is probably the best solution. Punish employers and monitor the border with guards on standby to act when something is found. Unfortunately, it'll be tough to get politicians in there who'll actually take this stand (repubs won't offend businesses, and dems care more about appearing humane than enforcing a border).

Why the wall, fence, or whatever else has become a political issue is beyond me. Most people agree that we should do something about the situation, but insist on arguing about the means to accomplish anything useful.

"Bob's idea in general is probably the best solution."
--LIVE_OR_DIE

After writing this, a kitten was struck by lightning.

""Bob's idea in general is probably the best solution."
--LIVE_OR_DIE

After writing this, a kitten was struck by lightning.

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2008-04-14 11:42 AM |"

Kittens, or other "pussies" aside, you're correct Live Or Die. As I alluded to in previous post(s), the Berlin Wall solution has been proven not to work (difficult to implement, slow to produce, $$$, AND not as much bang for the $$$) and that was on a much smaller/simpler/easier scale. At a MINIMUM, this approach is worth a try!

"Short it out by throwing water on it......they're not as stupid as you think"

b-bob



But apparently you are.

short it out by throwing water on it.....that's f'n priceless.

KWR25

Take a plugged in radio into the shower with you. That would be priceless.

Salaryman

No government--no rights.

This simple equation has been proven time and time again.

You fail to face reality.

Tell me ONE time when there was no government when people had rights?

Once

One time?

Anytime


Anything?

No.

All rights come from the government.

No government---your ass belongs to whoever has the power. So does your wife--so do your children. Got a gun? Good--they can use it.

Is that just a jab? or are you offering that as an example of electricity and water mixing?


because, based on GF wall outlets, and the general conductivity of water, I can prove that what you suggest would offer no more than an incredibly brief mild tickle.

try again.

I was giving you credit for suggesting a tub too....


a shower? ruining an AM radio with absolutely no harm to me would be "Priceless"?

do you have to wear the head gear at night too?

KWXR25

You are still stupid even when posting under another name Goatman. The stupidity reeks. Another name doesn't hide the stench.

I friggin love it...

I can assure you, I'm not GM.

there really are a whole lot of us out here, who think you might be 'special'

Buf Bob,

Do we have to do this again?

Our gov't's job is to protect the rights we are born with - the gov't doesn't grant them to us - we, in effect, hired the gov't to protect our rights for us.

When you close your eyes, the sun doesn't disappear - when the government is gone, your rights don't disapear.

I understand what you're saying - really, I do - but I refuse to admit my rights are arbitrary.

Philosophic question: At what point should the "Will of the People" be honored, regardless of whether it makes sense or not? Especially assuming that nobody is harmed in the process.

In every poll, overwhelming numbers of Americans state that they want a fence of some sort built along the border with Mexico.
The reality is, such a fence will do little if anything to lessen the number of undocumented aliens entering this country from the South.
On the other hand, building the fence would not "hurt" Americans, and would in fact make many people feel a lot better about our government's attempt to control the border.

I frankly am not convinced that a fence will make any difference. In the abstract I oppose it. On the other hand, I don't see it doing any harm (other than costing lots of money.) If such a large percentage of Americans want the fence built then maybe our elected officials should simply go ahead and build it. After all, the elected officials job is to do the will of the people - isn't it?

Spilemansfluch

We were born with rights? Link? The rights you speak of are worthless. Those are the rights that protect the people of Darfur--they are worthless.

Worthless rights are no rights at all as far as I'm concerned. If you think those worthless rights have any value--more power to you. Live in your delusions. The people of Darfur know their value. Nothing. Zero. zip. Nada. Get it? The rights you speak of are the same rights a dog has--or a salamander.

"You are still stupid even when posting under another name Goatman. The stupidity reeks. Another name doesn't hide the stench."

Stupid? You wanna talk "stupid?" If "stupid" was a snowflake, you'd be a walking blizzard.
I'll even bet that you could work in a Kotex factory and think you were making mattresses for mice.
There's an old saw, BOOBalo, that goes, "If someone calls you a jackass, ignore him. If a group of people are calling you a jackass, maybe you should go looking for a saddle." You need a saddle badly.

Let's rumble, Bob:
;)

Argument from two points:

Point one: The US is the only nation in the history of the world that has codified the rights of it's people as existing without regard of its government. Any link to the text of the Deceleration of Independence will tell you that:

"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,"

Ergo, our rights were in full existence and acknowledged (not granted) by the Constitution, which came later.

Next Argument: It may be argued that every person in the world has inalienable rights (whatever that means - I'm not convinced and still think that Americans are better than most other people). And it is the job of the people to create a means which guarantees them their rights. Whether they have them in fact or not is up to their ability to reinforce them.

Again, something _is_ whether or not it is apparent. When you close your eyes, does the world still exist? Are you that much of a sophist?

Even in the US, it may be argued that any limitations on our rights are only temporary - an expediency to an orderly society as, technically, no person is able to even waive their rights for any reason. It gets fuzzy here, though.

Just because you choose not to use a right - if you choose to not own a gun, for example, doesn't mean that you don't or no longer have that right. You are choosing to not exercise it and may change your mind at any time (ignoring the "common-sense" limitations, for the sake of argument - let's focus on the majority of instances as we are talking about where the practicality and hypothetical merge with the theoretical already....)

By the way, Buf Bob - are you from Buffalo, NY? I was born and raised there....

moder8,

"Will of the People" is reflected in the will of the states, or more recently in the will of the popular vote. I think this was considered by the Founders and they sought to limit this in a few subtle ways while allowing for change, through the electoral college, for example.

It can be argued that the founding fathers made several mistakes by, for example, allowing slavery or excluding women the right to vote. But it's important to realize that they didn't think they were doing something final and perfect - they imbued the Constitution with enough flexibility to allow changes to be made in order to "create a more perfect union". They may not have given everybody the right to vote because the country would have never gotten off the ground - instead they built in a means and a method for improvements to be made in due time when it wouldn't tear apart the country and you have to respect that vision.

"By the way, Buf Bob - are you from Buffalo, NY? I was born and raised there....

Posted by Spielmannsfluch at 2008-04-14 05:05 PM"

BB's from Canada. But Chairborne101 lives in a trailer park in Buffalo with his mom.

Something to think about:

"The U.S. Border Patrol, INTENTIONALLY grossly understaffed, does their best to guard our southern borders, but catches only 1 in 5 (17%) unauthorized border crossers, by its own admission. At the same time, the USA gives the U.N. (South Korea) 35,000 American troops year around for the past 50 years to VERY effectively guard their border. "

This simple equation has been proven time and time again.

Really, bOoB? Where? When? I've asked for links but you never provide them.

When and where was it proven even once -- much less time and again?

A: It wasn't. You are a liar.

I can assure you, I'm not GM

Yes you are -- I mean I am -- I mean you are . . .

Shit. Who am I logged in under at this moment? I can't keep up.

Hey danni, idiot, bro.

Dems block all legislation to solve the problem.

And if they can't stop if in congress, they sue and stop it in court.

Dems fault.

Kuma

Spilemansfluch


"Point one: The US is the only nation in the history of the world that has codified the rights of it's people as existing without regard of its government. Any link to the text of the Deceleration of Independence will tell you that:"

So? Just because the United States says somthing, doesn't make it true. Does that surprise you?



"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,"

Ever wonder why those words didn't apply to all the slaves at the time---or women? They are just words--with no validity--no power. It is a simple Decaration. Not a law, and the reality of the world shows it to be false. All men are not created equal---the United States has never treated all men as created equal--because all men are not created equal. Just because you can write words, doesn't mean the words you write are reality, or even what you believe in. The people who wrote those words--owned slaves--they didn't believe it either. In addition--The Declaration is a government document. Don't you think it is strange you cite a government document to say that all rights don't come from the government?


"Ergo, our rights were in full existence and acknowledged (not granted) by the Constitution, which came later."

Sorry--again, you fail to realize that just because something is written down, doesn't necessarily mean that it is true. By your own account, these rights only exist for Americans---and only because of the government says we have them.




"Next Argument: It may be argued that every person in the world has inalienable rights (whatever that means - I'm not convinced and still think that Americans are better than most other people). And it is the job of the people to create a means which guarantees them their rights. Whether they have them in fact or not is up to their ability to reinforce them."

I thought they were born with them--isn't that you8r point? Or is it only Americans that were born with them. Born with them because our government gave them to us.



"Again, something _is_ whether or not it is apparent. When you close your eyes, does the world still exist? Are you that much of a sophist?"

Rights have nothing to do with your statement. Closing eyes does not make anything appear or disappear.

Spilemansfluch


"Point one: The US is the only nation in the history of the world that has codified the rights of it's people as existing without regard of its government. Any link to the text of the Deceleration of Independence will tell you that:"

So? Just because the United States says somthing, doesn't make it true. Does that surprise you?



"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,"

Ever wonder why those words didn't apply to all the slaves at the time---or women? They are just words--with no validity--no power. It is a simple Decaration. Not a law, and the reality of the world shows it to be false. All men are not created equal---the United States has never treated all men as created equal--because all men are not created equal. Just because you can write words, doesn't mean the words you write are reality, or even what you believe in. The people who wrote those words--owned slaves--they didn't believe it either. In addition--The Declaration is a government document. Don't you think it is strange you cite a government document to say that all rights don't come from the government?


"Ergo, our rights were in full existence and acknowledged (not granted) by the Constitution, which came later."

Sorry--again, you fail to realize that just because something is written down, doesn't necessarily mean that it is true. By your own account, these rights only exist for Americans---and only because of the government says we have them.




"Next Argument: It may be argued that every person in the world has inalienable rights (whatever that means - I'm not convinced and still think that Americans are better than most other people). And it is the job of the people to create a means which guarantees them their rights. Whether they have them in fact or not is up to their ability to reinforce them."

I thought they were born with them--isn't that you8r point? Or is it only Americans that were born with them. Born with them because our government gave them to us.



"Again, something _is_ whether or not it is apparent. When you close your eyes, does the world still exist? Are you that much of a sophist?"

Rights have nothing to do with your statement. Closing eyes does not make anything appear or disappear.

Even in the US, it may be argued that any limitations on our rights are only temporary - an expediency to an orderly society as, technically, no person is able to even waive their rights for any reason. It gets fuzzy here, though.

It gets fuzzy because you run out of logic. If we are born with rights, no government can take them away. Government can take away rights--therefore--born with rights don't exist. What about Before Born with right? Do you only get these rights when you are born?



"Just because you choose not to use a right - if you choose to not own a gun, for example, doesn't mean that you don't or no longer have that right."

Are you paying attention to the world? The USSC is at this moment determining your right to own a gun. If they say yuou don't have the right to own a gun--guess what--you don't have the right to own a gun.


"You are choosing to not exercise it and may change your mind at any time (ignoring the "common-sense" limitations, for the sake of argument - let's focus on the majority of instances as we are talking about where the practicality and hypothetical merge with the theoretical already....)"

If the government says you have a right--you have a right. If the government says you have no right--you have no right.



"By the way, Buf Bob - are you from Buffalo, NY? I was born and raised there...."

Never been there. Drove through once.



Now--tell me the value of these rights. What good are they? Why are the people of Darfur being shot when they have these rights? Because they don't have these rights. Their government took these rights and decided to kill them. Value of the "born with" rights--zero.

Same with Cambodian Killing Fields. What value were these rights there when the government said there were no right? Millions died. Value of the "born with" rights--zero.

Same with Russian Gulags. Millions shipped off for speaking out--being liveral--being educated. What happened to the rights they were born with? What vaue are those right to people on their way to the Gulags? Value of the "born with" rights--zero.

Same with the Jews of Germany. Value of the "born with" rights--zero.

Same with the American Indians. Value of the "born with" rights--zero.

Same with African slaves brought to this country. Value of the "born with" rights--zero.


So tell me what value are thse rights youi claim to exist, and where do they come from? So far, your only source is the government. Anything else?

Califchris

Ask Goatman if he is KWXR25 and see what he says. KWXR25 is too new to have the emotional hatred for me that he does, and if you can't tell Goatmans style by now.......... Besides I wouldn't pay any attention to Goaman earlier in the day and he figured he could use a new ID to get me to respond.

Goatman works with lots of computers, and getting a new IP address would be a snap. That's why he isn't worried about getting banned. He can probably come up with 25 names for himself. When he first came on as Goatman he had a hard on for me, which means he knew me before he was Goatman.