Obama

[FreshNugz]

His plan for early pull-out reminds me of Catholic birth control.....pulling out early may work for a while but not for long.

LMFAO

[BlueCat00]

That photo is really mature there psycho...are you channeling torog? LOL makes you look real smart. :thumbsup:
this is an "S" and this is a "B" two completely different words like ass and class.

Obama has a plan and that is more than I can say for the neocons.

So old wise one WHAT IS YOUR SOLUTION to Iraq. It is easy to throw stones at someone else's plan. We all know there are no easy answer for the mess Bush has gotten us into but let's hear yours old swamy of good intentions. I can't wait.

I have missed debating with you by the way. You want to see my Costa Rica pictures? It is paradise there not a McDs or Burger King in sight. No corporate America just wild horses on the beach, sloths in the trees and the smell of weed in the air it was great. :rastasmoke:

[8182KSKUSH]

That photo is really mature there psycho...are you channeling torog? LOL makes you look real smart. :thumbsup:
this is an "S" and this is a "B" two completely different words like ass and class.

Obama has a plan and that is more than I can say for the neocons.

So old wise one WHAT IS YOUR SOLUTION to Iraq. It is easy to throw stones at someone else's plan. We all know there are no easy answer for the mess Bush has gotten us into but let's hear yours old swamy of good intentions. I can't wait.

I have missed debating with you by the way. You want to see my Costa Rica pictures? It is paradise there not a McDs or Burger King in sight. No corporate America just wild horses on the beach, sloths in the trees and the smell of weed in the air it was great. :rastasmoke:

If it's so great there and so terrible here.......
Not to mention, you are demanding that Psycho, whom last I checked isn't running for president lay out a Foriegn Policy? Ok, he very well may do that. I don't see what makes you so smart, you have just latched onto a candidate and accepted anything they say as gospel, and don't listen to anything they say that may show inconsistancies with their own positions? Whose the smart one?:jointsmile:

[8182KSKUSH]

It's pretty telling when you are debating someone and they just sling half assed personal insults and keep regurgitating rhetoric that you can get off of CNN or MSNBC, as opposed to stating clear ideas. Again, the democratic party, the party of tolerance, as long as you agree with them and do what they say. You need to re-examine your facism claims, and then look more closely at whom you support. :thumbsup:

[BlueCat00]

You said on another thread that you didn't believe my son showed me a clipping that said cops don't get in trouble for keeping peoples stuff when they arrest them....you made it sound as if I was lying. Which was rude.

I have given plenty examples of why I feel the way I do and you'll have to show me where you feel I have skirted any issue as it has not been intentional. I have answered every post even the asinine ones.
You really should hold your judgment until you know a person more. I have always been very politically conscience and involved. I have never been one to follow the crowd. If you read my posts of long ago you'd know that. I was so ANGRY with my country and the neocons that I was really thinking of leaving when Bush made it in for the second time. My son has been up to his knees in blood for 2 damn years now and I have to vote for the person that I believe will get him home to me in one piece. I have a vested interest its not a game for me. This effects my family and my life. I do not take my vote lightly.

You on the other hand have yet to say who you are supporting and why. Just saying who ever wins the most electoral votes is chicken shit don't you have an opinion of your own? Who is being a sheeple now dude?

[BlueCat00]

I actually like Romney as a person but I feel he could easily be intimidated(my opinion) Sometimes he looks really scared to me. Maybe he is not scared just uncomfortable in the hot seat. I don't know. Also I don't want this country run like a business. Rummy tried running the Army like a business and look where it got us.

[8182KSKUSH]

You said on another thread that you didn't believe my son showed me a clipping..

Actually here I have cut and pasted my exact words,
"I would like to read that article. I think it's bull shit too, the "article" that is."So thanks for putting words in my mouth, and show me where in that sentence, it was a 1 sentence responce, that I said I don't believe that your son showed you a clipping? I just stated that I am not taking your word for it WITHOUT being able to verify WHERE the article came from. I then went on to ask you to provide the source so I could READ IT for myself. You then promptly never gave me the source. So now who is lying? And rude?

.you made it sound as if I was lying. Which was rude.?

I didn't make you sound like you were lying, but your last post makes you sound like that, it is also rude. If it was a clipping then just let me know from where, I can find it. That's what I was asking. Again, you are obviously grasping at straws here trying to defend yourself by launching yet another personal attack.

.You really should hold your judgment until you know a person more..

Again, SHOW ME, don't misquote me, or make something up. I haven't passed any judgement on you personally, until now.:thumbsup:

.I have always been very politically conscience and involved. I have never been one to follow the crowd. If you read my posts of long ago you'd know that. I was so ANGRY with my country and the neocons that I was really thinking of leaving when Bush made it in for the second time. My son has been up to his knees in blood for 2 damn years now and I have to vote for the person that I believe will get him home to me in one piece...

OK, then vote for a guy that will leave a small number of Americans right in the eye of the storm, and pray that your son isn't one of them. Did he volunteer? I always thought we had a VOLUNTEER military. Why do you think they give them guns and train them to kill?

I have a vested interest its not a game for me. This effects my family and my life. I do not take my vote lightly. ...

You left out 1 word, you have a vested "emotional" intrest. Do you think that you are the only one with loved ones in Iraq? You are letting your emotions cloud your objectivity.:jointsmile:

[BlueCat00]

No way Skush you can have both emotions and objectivity.

BTW my son (I have 3) just came home and the article you said was probably not the truth was from a New York times newspaper from last week and guess what I found it. So can you be a man and admit you were wrong?

New York Times January 23, 2008
Justices Broaden Immunity for Officers
By LINDA GREENHOUSE
WASHINGTON -- Federal law enforcement officers are immune from lawsuits
for mishandling, losing or even stealing personal property that comes
under their control in the course of their official duties, the
Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday in a 5-to-4 decision.

The case was brought by a federal prison inmate, but the ruling was
not limited to the prison context. It was an interpretation of the
Federal Tort Claims Act, which applies to federal employees' liability
for damages and generally waives immunity from being sued.

The statute has numerous exceptions that preserve immunity in
particular situations, however. The exception at issue in the case
provides that "any officer of customs or excise or any other law
enforcement officer" will be immune from suit for "any claim arising
in respect of the assessment or collection of any tax or customs duty
or the detention of any goods, merchandise or other property."

The question was the meaning of the phrase "any other law enforcement
officer." Did Congress mean to confer blanket immunity for property-
related offenses on the part of any federal law enforcement officer?
Or was the immunity limited to officers engaged in tax or customs
work?

The answer was sufficiently ambiguous that of the 11 federal circuits
of appeals to address the issue, six had interpreted the exception as
applying broadly to all officers, and five had read it narrowly to
apply only to property seizures connected to revenue or customs
enforcement.

The Supreme Court majority, in an opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas,
chose the broad interpretation. When Congress enacted the law in 1946,
"it could easily have written 'any other law enforcement officer
acting in a customs or excise capacity,' " Justice Thomas wrote,
adding, "We are not at liberty to rewrite the statute to reflect a
meaning we deem more desirable."

Beyond the holding in the case, Ali v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, No.
06-9130, this first 5-to-4 decision of the current term was notable in
several respects.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote a dissent that was signed by the
three other dissenters, John Paul Stevens, David H. Souter and Stephen
G. Breyer. In the court's last term, Justice Kennedy voted with the
majority in all 24 of the 5-to-4 decisions.

His position on Tuesday meant that the swing vote was cast by Justice
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who in closely divided cases can almost always be
found with Justices Stevens, Souter and Breyer. She did not write
separately to explain her position.

Justice Kennedy said the majority had failed to adhere to longstanding
principles of statutory interpretation, including the rule that "a
single word must not be read in isolation, but instead defined by
reference to its statutory context."

He said the majority had mistakenly focused on the word "any" in the
phrase "any other law enforcement officer," when it was clear from the
context that Congress was discussing only customs and revenue
seizures.

Justice Breyer made a similar point in a dissenting opinion of his
own. "It is context, not a dictionary" that matters the most, he said.

The plaintiff, Abdus-Shahid M. S. Ali, was being transferred from a
federal prison in Atlanta to one in Inez, Ky., and left two duffle
bags of personal property to be shipped. When he received the bags,
religious articles, including two copies of the Koran, were missing.

Valuing the missing items at $177, Mr. Ali filed suit, appealing to
the Supreme Court after the federal appeals court in Atlanta had
dismissed his case in the decision that the justices affirmed. ***

Copyright 2008 The New York Times Company

[BlueCat00]

SO they CAN steal your shit and there is NOTHING you can do.

There is no doubt in my mind there will be cops out there that will take full advantage of this.

[8182KSKUSH]

SO they CAN steal your shit and there is NOTHING you can do.

There is no doubt in my mind there will be cops out there that will take full advantage of this.

Did you read this article?
I think you need to re-read that article.
1. This only applys to federal officers, not COPS!
2. COPS, work for you local city government they ARE NOT FEDERAL EMPLOYEES!
3. Just like you did with what I wrote, you read what you wanted to read and made an opinion based on what you "think" you read, not what was actually written. Here is your post ver batum,

"I read an article last week about how cops can keep whatever stuff you have when they arrest you. They can keep it for themselves they don't have to turn it in or give it back! ipod laptop whatever it is theirs. Now that's scary! I have to find that article again my son was showing it to me. What bullshit."
This ruling doesn't really have ANYTHING to do with your local police. So don't worry "dude" your ipod is safe.:thumbsup: