By-Tor.com

Zivo · Post by **Zivo** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 12:38 am

You want the truth about the lies? Click on the link below

http://bush-lies.blogspot.com/

Aerosmitten · Post by **Aerosmitten** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:14 am

While I am not pleased with all of my President's doings, I think he has done much better than Mr. Gore would have.

*Lifesonite · Post by *Lifesonite » Sun Mar 21, 2004 8:37 am

Did you know that U.S. officials met with Osama Bin Laden in France... It was in a French newspaper, this was before 9/11. So I'm a bit skeptical about anything with Bush, he seemed more than ready to build a platform off of that day.

ElfDude · Post by **ElfDude** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 10:45 am

Sir Myghin wrote:you do not need government to determine a law, being as 99.9% of the laws that are enforced are God's law

It is true that the laws of the great nations have usually been based on the laws of the great religions. And if I understand you correctly, you?re describing an ideal that I share. If all men were to live God?s law, there would be no need for a central government.

In our current status, however, certain percentages of the populations of the world are unwilling to live God?s law. If they were, this topic never would have been posted. We would not have peddlers of indecency. We would not have violent crime. There would be no debate of how to regulate our media. Love, decency, honesty, and respect would abound. Law enforcement of any kind would not be necessary.

In the meantime, we deal with things how they are. We are blessed that in the free nations of the world, we still allow debate and the exchange of ideas. We do our best to elect people into office that will represent us. And when the population cries out for action about something, debate ensues, and in some cases, solutions are found.

There was a genuine outcry from the public over an indecent act that took place during the Super Bowl, and that?s to be expected. My original point was that as an unfortunate upshot of this, we have opportunists among our leadership that want to cash in on that outcry. I?ll get off my soapbox now.

But I do have a question about the original post in this thread. Mr. PH, you wrote ?They made the decision that it is now illegal to use the F word in any and all transmissions, communications etc.? Can you direct me to where I might be able to read that decision? I was under the impression that they were only talking about the regulated public airwaves, namely broadcast television and radio, and that the basically unregulated cable and satellite channels were still pretty much free to do as they chose. I haven?t heard of HBO having to pull The Sopranos or of Cinemax being ordered to stop featuring soft-core porn movies. I also understood that the Internet remains largely unregulated and is, as of yet, unaffected by any of these decisions. Am I incorrect?

ElfDude · Post by **ElfDude** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 10:48 am

*Lifesonite wrote:Did you know that U.S. officials met with Osama Bin Laden in France... It was in a French newspaper, this was before 9/11. So I'm a bit skeptical about anything with Bush, he seemed more than ready to build a platform off of that day.

There were three times that Bill Clinton was offered Osama Bin Laden on a platter and Clinton turned it down every time. It was that kind of cowardice that lead to 9/11.

ElfDude · Post by **ElfDude** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 11:05 am

Zivo wrote:You want the truth about the lies? Click on the link below

http://bush-lies.blogspot.com/

I took a quick scroll down and looked at all the headlines there. I?m not really seeing anything that has to do with campaign promises. In regards to what they are listing, I never did agree with Bush?s proposals on Medicare reform, and wouldn?t try to defend them. But most of it seems to revolve around ?Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction!? Well, most of the left-wingers making the claim that Bush lied made the same claims a few years back. Here are some samples.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

I could go on for many more pages. Heck, the U.N. itself had at least eleven resolutions in place concerning how to deal with Saddam?s stockpile of weapons. For these people to point a finger at George Bush and call him a liar in this regard is both hypocritical and infantile.

The Snow Dog · Post by **The Snow Dog** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 12:21 pm

God's law. I must ask, which god? Buddah? Allah? Zeus? Odin? Ra? or do you mean the standard judeo-christian variety? having everyone policed based on "God's Law" in this country would more or less be a violation of our rights to practice whatever religion we want, so long as our practices don't violate someone else's rights and freedoms. granted, most of the laws we have in place are based largely on christian ideals (thou shall not steal, thou shall not kill. etc) but they are also kind of common sense. what i'm getting at is that we need a change in the system, more of a citizen controlled government, than what we have. I feel taxed without representation, as I didn't vote for Bush. see? we need a change, where everyone who gives a damn has two cents, and it's worth legal tender!

Mr. Potatoe Head · Post by **Mr. Potatoe Head** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:13 pm

Sir Myghin · Post by **Sir Myghin** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 3:25 pm

Very true elf, good rantings. By God's law that speak, i mean the one God, the Lord Jesus Christ, , hope that helps clarify

awip2062 · Post by **awip2062** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 8:31 pm

Sir Myghin wrote:, let the law enforcers be the closest thing to external government

External government is any government that is not self-government. That would include, but not be limited to, home (parents), civil (police), and church (pastors).

ElfDude · Post by **ElfDude** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 9:35 pm

The Snow Dog wrote:I feel taxed without representation, as I didn't vote for Bush. see?

But... Bush lowered your taxes...

*Lifesonite · Post by *Lifesonite » Sun Mar 21, 2004 10:20 pm

Hah, yeah, lower taxes and increase spending

ElfDude · Post by **ElfDude** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 10:31 pm

*Lifesonite wrote:Hah, yeah, lower taxes and increase spending

It's a good thing that lowering taxes increases revenue.

Yeah, we spent more than we took in this year. That happens in wartime. I did it the year I got the mortgage on my house too.

Zivo · Post by **Zivo** » Sun Mar 21, 2004 10:59 pm

Ok, then he's not a revenge-seeking, "nucular"-saying, old-boy-obsessed, Florida cheating, moral-"majority"-only supporter, who, along with others like him, believe that if it's not One Nation Under God, it's total demonic chaos. Hundreds of years ago (before Jimmy Swaggart, Janet Jackson, or even electricity) we left a beautiful country, to suffer and die along the way, possibly falling off the edge of a flat Earth, simply because even then we knew we were all different. Different beliefs, likes and dislikes, ideals and mindsets. We would go where we would be free to think and feel what and how we, as individuals, see fit. How cro-mag do you have to be to try to stifle humans, making their ways of life, art, speech, (enter your personal list here) illegal, immoral and black-balled? I'm not a demon because I do not follow. I would never hurt you or intentionally offend you in any way, and I will resist until the bitter end, any negative force that tries to extinguish my light or peel off any layers of the freedom we have EVOLVED from our barbaric history.
I'm glad we are not all the same. I love my country and the idea behind it.
You're a devout Christian? Awesome! It's wonderful to have something to be passionate about. Better donate your t.v. though. It's evil. And you know music is the devil's siren. Also, that art on your wall, there is a naked woman in it. Better get rid of that lest a child be permanently scarred by the site of it. I have great respect for the Amish, I just don't want to be forced to live like one.
I'm just sayin'

ElfDude · Post by **ElfDude** » Mon Mar 22, 2004 7:46 am

Despite being a religious zealot, I, like you Mr. Z, absolutely treasure the freedom that this nation offers... more freedom than anywhere else in the world. And as the rights established by the founding fathers of this country are slowly taken away, one by one, by those who "know what's best for us", I too get angry.

I never ever want to see government take away anyone's ways of life, art, speech, religion, right to bear arms, right to own property, etc. Without those things, it's all just an academic exercise.

FYI