ClimbingPanther

Ouch, there's a stat that *should* single-handedly nail the coffin on Hillary. Of course, Bush's $6,210,938,571,965 earmark for the war makes them all look like saints. With that kind of money, you could insure a lot of people with the best single-provider health insurance a socialist regime can offer! Bring it.

i've never heard them called "answers" before

Are any of you members of JACS???

Here's some references to it: Article the fifth [Amendment III] No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. Article the sixth [Amendment IV] The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Article the seventh [Amendment V] No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Years of supreme court interpretation and congressional law have clarified an individual's liberties are not the same on private & public property, thus giving private property a high degree of importance pertaining to liberty.

Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither OR... Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Environmental Sustainability Deserve Neither

hmmm... I said: "and those views included a disdain for hardcore libertarian private property rights" "and involved federal regulation of private property" maybe you incorrectly stated them in the first place? oh well, this is neither here nor there. I just wanted to make the point that private property is super important and is more intertwined with the liberties the Constitution gives us than most people think.

I'm starting to understand why the ACLU is so vehemently pro-Craig... When the commie government owns all our property and we have no more privacy, at least we'll have public restrooms!

I didn't assume, you clearly stated your views on the subject of private property, and those views included a disdain for hardcore libertarian private property rights and involved federal regulation of private property. Obviously, we already have that to some extent, but it is frankly a dangerous precedent and an open door to the minimizing of personal liberty in other areas. It's the willingness to open that door that surprises me about you, given your alignment with the ACLU. When you give the feds that kind of power, it's only a good thing until the gov't is controlled by people who have a different ideology.

just to clarify, tvashy, what do you mean by "ask properly?" is it this? anyway, without any pesky labels or offensive words or anything else you might grasp at to avoid my intellectual brawn, what have you to say about the following idea? "Private property is fundamental to the protections the Constitution gives to private citizens. Congress & the SCOTUS have painted a very different picture of personal freedom depending on who owns the land. Destroy private property and you have destroyed the Constitution."

dude, I said your views on private property were communist in nature... is that accurate or not? I didn't call YOU a dirty commie or anything. Name calling is your domain and I leave you to it.

finding something about my post to be offended about is a reason to avoid the intellectual content? brilliant!

well shoot, we can't have emotional decisions on the court, now can we?

but you DO need God and an afterlife to have a fulfilling afterlife! haha!

bravo! now, if we can only figure how to compress air without emissions. it is a cool idea though, and at least emissions would not be so concentrated in big cities.

Mine were used and did not come with an insole. I've thought of cutting off an insole after the arch, but am afraid I'll regret it on downhill terrain. Anybody tried this and happy with it?

i have a beat up used pair that i can't use just yet b/c the front won't take an insole without squashing your foot & losing circulation. the padding on the lower tongue is excessive... anyone else have this problem, or have some advice for a solution?

would jon, timmy & porter get assassinated if someone posted a cartoon?

AFAIK, this is not known to be true. It's an idea people are studying, and the mere fact that scientists are studying it has led many to believe it's true. Believe me, we'll all know when they find "the gay gene." Can you imagine the media frenzy? "How could God make people gay and then condemn them for how he made them?"

so how does your communist view of property mesh with your ACLU-style privacy & liberty? Private property is fundamental to the protections the Constitution gives to private citizens. Congress & the SCOTUS have painted a very different picture of personal freedom depending on who owns the land. Destroy private property and you have destroyed the Constitution.

you sound so libertarian when it's convenient. if only it were true in EVERY argument you make, you angst-ridden liberal, you!

give in, tvash, you know you want to bite on that one

PILLOW!!!!

stop trying to talk sense into tvash, he's not thinking right now. my chest freezers are, of course, full of chests.

"love is blind" truly explains many strange phenomena

where's that mousetrap sex picture when you need it?