Medias Bias? you Betcha

[Taft2016]

If you are going to argue that rights can be removed based on suspicions, then they are not rights at all.

If you are going to argue against things I've never said, then there's no point in arguing.

But, since you brought it up... the Supreme Court established standard for a search of a person without a warrant is "a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, or is about to commit, a crime."

Also, the hitler thing is laughable. It is a poor comparison. What would be more accurate is if someone from the same country as Hitler called NYC. And whether it is every week or not is irrelevant. They were intercepting the 1st call.

No, they were monitoring calls not based on the country they were originating from, but the person who was making the call, or the phone number itself. Stop making up facts to fit your argument.

I'm not sure that's the case any longer.

 

[Canceled.2014.1]

If you are going to argue against things I've never said, then there's no point in arguing.

But, since you brought it up... the Supreme Court established standard for a search of a person without a warrant is "a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, or is about to commit, a crime."



No, they were monitoring calls not based on the country they were originating from, but the person who was making the call, or the phone number itself. Stop making up facts to fit your argument.

I'm not sure that's the case any longer.

You were willing to throw out a US citizens right to be free from unreasonable search & seizure based solely on the country of the other caller. Yes, that is removing rights based solely on suspicions.

 

[Taft2016]

You were willing to throw out a US citizens right to be free from unreasonable search & seizure based solely on the country of the other caller. Yes, that is removing rights based solely on suspicions.

I just explained how that wasn't the case.

Are you reading what I write, or are you just blabbing to hear yourself talk?

 

[christiefan915]

I suppose we all look alike to you?

You all quote the same RW talking points from the same tired sources. The only way we can tell you guys apart is by the differences in spelling, grammar and syntax.

 

[christiefan915]

Not really. Obama just didn't want the massive layoffs and booting onto the exchanges prior to the midterm elections.

Post 104. Did I call it or what? Taken right from hotair.com.

"In other words, taxpayers will cover the costs of these layoffs through more spending, even though the point of sequestration was to force cuts in government spending. Instead of paying contractors — mainly defense workers — to work, we’ll start paying them not to work. And why? Because the White House doesn’t want massive numbers of layoff notices coming in the last few days ahead of the election. And make no mistake — with overall durable goods orders dropping 13.2% in a month and defense orders dropping 40%, those layoff notices would otherwise be coming, and sooner rather than later."

 

[christiefan915]

But this does give us an opportunity to say he doesn't like the Constitution.

He has no authority to rewrite a law in this manner.

"Rewriting the law", check. Another RW talking point covered.

 

[christiefan915]

It is.

So if Hitler was calling someone who lived in NYC once a week, would you have insisted that FDR went and got a warrant to tap the phone lines?

And what would you have had FDR do if the warrant application was denied?

Who would have ultimate repsonsibility if some event of terrible sabotage resulted? FDR or the judge?

Bottom line: The United States Constitution designates the President as the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, and as such he has the right to collect signal intelligence from the enemy. Which is what Bush was doing.

It doesn't allow a fishing expedition, which is what Obama is doing.

Hitler reference aka Godwin's Law, check. Another RW talking point arriving like clockwork.

 

[The Dude]

Tafts next smart post will be his first
Another faux news middle class angry white dude proud he has more than a welfare recipient

 

[Big Money]

Tarts next smart post will be his first Another faux news muddle class angry white dude proud he has more than a welfare recipient

 

[Taft2016]

"Rewriting the law", check. Another RW talking point covered.

What's the point of that video?

Is that supposed to some how prove me wrong?

And the fact is, Obama has rewritten the law by delaying the employer mandate one year beyond the date prescribed by the law itself.

What Constitutional authority does he have to do so?

I can tell you; None.

 

[Taft2016]

Godwin's Law, check.

Wow. You even did that without a "ZOMG!"

Impressive.

 

[Taft2016]

Tafts next smart post will be his first
Another faux news muddle class angry white dude proud he has more than a welfare recipient

Bad news: white walled tires on your double wide doesn't qualify you as the 1%.

 

[The Dude]

This message is hidden because Taft2016 is on your ignore list, because teabaggers hate college

 

[Big Money]

Bad news: white walled tires on your double wide doesn't qualify you as the 1%.

In Louisiana it might.

 

[christiefan915]

What's the point of that video?

Is that supposed to some how prove me wrong?

And the fact is, Obama has rewritten the law by delaying the employer mandate one year beyond the date prescribed by the law itself.

What Constitutional authority does he have to do so?

I can tell you; None.

The point is, do you have an original thought or is everything just a repetition of RW talking points?

 

[christiefan915]

Wow. You even did that without a "ZOMG!"

Impressive.

I don't know what ZOMG means but apparently you do.

 

[Taft2016]

The point is, do you have an original thought or is everything just a repetition of RW talking points?

WTF?

That might be the lamest thing I've ever read on a forum, and that's saying a lot.

I fleshed out the accusation more than the video did. Quite specifically.

And you have no reply? No answer? No satisfactory explanation?

You just dismiss arguments you can't come up with an answer to as "RW talking points"?

Do you possess any intellectual curiosity? Do you ever consider viewpoints other than your own? If you can't explain your own position satisfactorily you really should do more reading and less typing.

 

[Dantès]

So what, i didn't graduate college, that just means I learned to think on my own, and not be brainwashed by liberal professors.

If this were actually the case one would expect to see some evidence of this but so far all I have read from you are rather confused and inarticulate right wing talking points, so I would say you might be exaggerating at least the "I learned to think on my own" part and probably the "I learned to think" part to an even much higher degree!

 

[The Dude]

Patriot teabagger banging on professors
Priceless

Broses knows, always tell a bro to go to college.
That's where the hottest chicks are

 

[patriot66]

I never said anyone was not a liberal. I simply called you on your bullshit.

you called me on nothing, the numbers are there for you to read, just because you don't like the numbers doesn't make them less accurate, the leftist media is carrying water for the Regime.