Jughaid

Don't forget that history is constantly being reviewed to make sure the interpretation of the events are correct. For example, how we interpret Reconstruction in 2010 is much different than how we interpretted in in 1900. That interpretation differs because our views on things are much different now than it was 100 years ago. How we interpret the events after World War II today are nothing like we saw them in 1950. The world has changed and our perspective is much different after we have time to re-evaluate how we view things. The notion that we were founded as a Christian nation is absurd and

There were prego teens when I was in school in 70s only you didn't see them. They took care of it or were sent away to live with an aunt in another state. It happened then as much as it does today. It has always been the case. Remember The Scarlett Letter?

The fact is we are a nation of laws and the military is secondary to the law, not the primary enforcer of laws. We are a civilian run government, not a military facist government. The right wing extremists are so easy and predictible.

Insulting your military service? Not yet. How about this. You don't support the Constitution but make things up in the name of the Constitution and are a Poser. How is that? You still have not pointed to the part in the Constitution that supports your claim. Why do you just make up sheeze? Why do you want to kick out people who disagree with you?

Any more liberals you want to throw out of the classroom or deport for not agreeing with your extremist views?

Those werern't crimes against our military but the nation itself. The WTC Towers were not military targets but civilian centers. What about that do you not get? That was not a military event but a crime against the US. You attitude is why the US is seen as arrogant and a target for the rest of the world. Attitude adjustment time.

You missed a chance to say the liberals did that.

So much for the Constitution, eh? Thanks for admitting again how extreme you really are. Let's not forget that you want all liberals removed from teaching, too. That's quite an American view you've got going there. How's that defending the Constitution disguise working for ya? Ithy said.

No American loses their rights under the Constitution unless they are convicted in a trial after a proponderance of the evidence. You are a vigilante and not a defender of the Constitution.

Point proven. Easy conviction. Execute the Muslim. Guilty by decree of Ithy.

Why try them in a military court? Really. Why? The rules of evidence are much easier in a military court and everyone knows it is by far easier to get a conviction. Why not try them in the criminal court and prove to the world that we are fair enough to give the best possible defense for those that attack us? The battle is not just against the terrorists but for the rest of the world's heart and soul. If we lose that battle, we lose it all. Let's look at two numbers. 3 verses 319. Three is the number of people who have been convicted in the military commissions system. Two of the men co

My point is made. Thank you for acknowleding it. Have you considered joining the John Birch Society? In America, it is innocent until proven guilty. That's not the way it is in countries like Iraq or where the Taliban runs things. This is America. There is always doubt until the trial proves the guilt.

Wishful thinking. If he is Muslim, the Far Right Wing Extremists want him executed. Terrorist or not, if he is Muslim, they want him dead.

Yep.

Yep. All I got from it.

He said he hoped to get the utility upgrade program passed by COngress. Is that what you're talking about?

I didn't say that he said anything great. Just the visit was great.

Loved it. Just like any other presidential visit to anywhere else.

I know. Jealousy is tough but you will survive.

That is a lot of information those Speakers know.

The double standards are so easy.

No. You missed the point. Hastert didn't fly commerical. Where was the condemnation then? Why the double standard? Are you serious that you want the Speaker of the House to fly commerical? Imagine the security risk and what could happen in an airport with a terrorist attack to kidnap the Speaker. My heavens. And you're serious!

Just pointing out the two standards that seem to be so prevelant amongst so many on here.

This is the sort of extremism that should scare the hell out of everyone.

If it wasn't the point you were trying to make then why in the hell did you bring it up? Do you want to go back and say the same things about when the RepubliSINs were in charge and they didn't fly commercial? Can you say Hastert, hmmmm?I don't recall this being an issue with the RepubliSINs but it is now? Can we say double standard? You really want the Speaker of the House to fly commercial and open up that sort of security risk? That's politics to the point of being silly.