Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse

Firehouse.com Forum Rules & Guidelines

Forum Rules & Guidelines

Not Permitted or Tolerated:
• Advertising and/or links of commercial, for-profit websites, products, and/or services is not permitted. If you have a need to advertise on Firehouse.com please contact [email protected]
• Fighting/arguing
• Cyber-bullying
• Swearing
• Name-calling and/or personal attacks
• Spamming
• Typing in all CAPS
• “l33t speak” - Substituting characters for letters in an effort to represent a word or phrase. (example: M*****ive)
• Distribution of another person’s personal information, regardless of whether or not said information is public knowledge and whether or not an individual has permission to post said personal information
• Piracy advocation of any kind
• Racist, sexual, hate type defamatory, religious, political, or sexual commentary.
• Multiple forum accounts

Forum Posting Guidelines:

Posts must be on-topic, non-disruptive and relevant to the firefighting community. Post only in a mature and responsible way that contributes to the discussion at hand. Posting relevant information, helpful suggestions and/or constructive criticism is a great way to contribute to the community.

Post in the correct forum and have clear titles for your threads.

Please post in English or provide a translation.

There are moderators and admins who handle these forums with care, do not resort to self-help, instead please utilize the reporting option. Be mature and responsible for yourself and your posts. If you are offended by another member utilize the reporting option. All reported posts will be addressed and dealt with as deemed appropriate by Firehouse.com staff.

Firehouse.com Moderation Process:
Effective immediately, the following moderation process will take effect. User(s) whose posts are determined by Firehouse.com staff to be in violation of any of the rules above will EARN the following reprimand(s) in the moderation process:
1. An initial warning will be issued.
2. A Final Warning will be issued if a user is found to be in violation a second time.
3. A 3-day suspension will be issued if the user continues to break the forum rules.
4. A 45-day suspension will be issued if the user is found to be a habitual rule breaker.
5. Habitual rule breakers that have exhausted all of the above will receive a permanent life-time ban that will be strictly enforced. Reinstatement will not be allowed – there is no appeal process.

Subsequent accounts created in an effort to side-step the rules and moderation process are subject to automatic removal without notice. Firehouse.com reserves the right to expedite the reprimand process for any users as it is deemed necessary. Any user in the moderation process may be required to review and agree to by email the terms and conditions listed above before their account is re-instated (except for those that are banned).

Firehouse.com reserves the right to edit and/or remove any post or member, at any time, for any reason without notice. Firehouse.com also reserves the right to warn, suspend, and/or ban, any member, at any time, for any reason.

Firehouse.com values the active participation we have in our forums. Please ensure your posts are tasteful and tactful. Thank you very much for your cooperation.
See more
See less

Chicken sh*t Nancy Pelosi!!!!!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Shark, the most misunderstood aspect of the US Constitution is that its primary purpose is to limit the power and scope of the federal government, not grant rights to the citizens.
    PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

    Comment


    • George,

      The Constitution does not grant rights, it affirms those that the authors of the Constitution believed were natural, and needed to be protected:

      Originally posted by The Preamble to the Bill of Rights
      Congress of the United States begun and held at the City of New-York, on Wednesday the fourth of March, one thousand seven hundred and eighty nine.
      THE Conventions of a number of the States, having at the time of their adopting the Constitution, expressed a desire, in order to prevent misconstruction or abuse of its powers, that further declaratory and restrictive clauses should be added: And as extending the ground of public confidence in the Government, will best ensure the beneficent ends of its institution.
      RESOLVED by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, two thirds of both Houses concurring, that the following Articles be proposed to the Legislatures of the several States, as amendments to the Constitution of the United States, all, or any of which Articles, when ratified by three fourths of the said Legislatures, to be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of the said Constitution; viz.
      ARTICLES in addition to, and Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, proposed by Congress, and ratified by the Legislatures of the several States, pursuant to the fifth Article of the original Constitution

      Comment


      • Originally posted by ECCMac View Post
        George,

        The Constitution does not grant rights, it affirms those that the authors of the Constitution believed were natural, and needed to be protected:
        Shark, the most misunderstood aspect of the US Constitution is that its primary purpose is to limit the power and scope of the federal government, not grant rights to the citizens.


        I think I said that?
        PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
          Shark, the most misunderstood aspect of the US Constitution is that its primary purpose is to limit the power and scope of the federal government, not grant rights to the citizens.


          I think I said that?
          Sorry I missed your meaning...thanks for setting me straight.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
            Although I am undoubtedly the most intelligent person most of you will ever encounter, when I have limited knowledge of a subject, I admit it. I have limited knowledge of the subject of offshore drilling. But I can't seem to remember a major oil spill that occurred from a drilling rig. Anecdotally, I have heard about a major spill in like 1968. But in my adult life, there apparently hasn't been one.

            If that is true, wouldn't that make offshore oil drilling incredibly safe and environmentally friendly? There wasn't even a major spill post-Katrina. Of course, that would provide even further proof that Pelosi is a fool.

            Secondly, I have an aquaintance who regularly fishes in AK in the area where the Valdez oil spill occurred. He reports that the area is cleaner, more beautiful and has an abundant array of fish since the oil spill. There is no evidence of the spill. I am not advocating having an oil spill to spark a makeover, but I think it shows that these horrible incidents don't mean the end of life as we know it.

            That was until I came along

            Some things just into the category of too easy, sorry George

            But on to the topic. Methods have improved considerably. What gets me is it is environmentally OK to drill in other parts of the world and pay a premium price, yet we can't drill our own oil.

            I saw a piece a day or so ago that said the USGS is usually way low when they estimate the amount of oil under the ground. That being said there is a whole bunch of oil waiting for us north of the arctic circle
            Last edited by ScareCrow57; 08-14-2008, 05:33 PM.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
              Shark, the most misunderstood aspect of the US Constitution is that its primary purpose is to limit the power and scope of the federal government, not grant rights to the citizens.
              I would go one step further and state a primary purpose is to protects the rights of the minority.

              For example. There is nothing more reviled in my lifetime than the accusation of being a communist (although several on this board have accused me of just that). But the Constitution allows one to be a member of the communist party and permits freedom of speech for that purpose of the individuals who believe in that as an ideology.
              They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

              I'm not saying you're stupid. I'm saying you have bad luck when it comes to thinking.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
                I would go one step further and state a primary purpose is to protects the rights of the minority.

                For example. There is nothing more reviled in my lifetime than the accusation of being a communist (although several on this board have accused me of just that). But the Constitution allows one to be a member of the communist party and permits freedom of speech for that purpose of the individuals who believe in that as an ideology.
                No. The Constitution protects the rights of EVERY citizen, regardless of their race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, political ideology or any other way that an American could be classified. EVERY US citizen.
                PROUD, HONORED AND HUMBLED RECIPIENT OF THE PURPLE HYDRANT AWARD - 10/2007.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
                  I would go one step further and state a primary purpose is to protects the rights of the minority.
                  Agreed, but what is the smallest minority?



















                  The individual.
                  Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
                  For example. There is nothing more reviled in my lifetime than the accusation of being a communist (although several on this board have accused me of just that).
                  Well, it's hard not see strong similarities between some of the positions of the politically liberal, and that of traditional communism.
                  Last edited by txgp17; 08-14-2008, 09:31 PM.
                  The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened. --Norman Mattoon Thomas, 6 time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by GeorgeWendtCFI View Post
                    No. The Constitution protects the rights of EVERY citizen, regardless of their race, color, creed, religion, sexual orientation, political ideology or any other way that an American could be classified. EVERY US citizen.
                    True enough. But it protects the Rights of all groups from having their rights abridged by the group with the majority.

                    IE. If there were a group that came to power believing slavery of a certain group was the correct thing to do the Constitution would prevent that from occurring.
                    They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

                    I'm not saying you're stupid. I'm saying you have bad luck when it comes to thinking.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
                      True enough. But it protects the Rights of all groups from having their rights abridged by the group with the majority.

                      IE. If there were a group that came to power believing slavery of a certain group was the correct thing to do the Constitution would prevent that from occurring.
                      That is funny. The colonist (including Washington and Jefferson) had slaves. So those people who created the constitution believed in slavery, and hence would not want to prohibit it. The constitution prohibited alcohol (18th amendment) and then it was repealed (21st amendment). The constitution prohibited slavery (13th amendment) ; so I'm not so sure that the constitution couldn't be amended again to put slavery back in place.

                      But the worst amendment of all 16 (passed in 1913) for income tax. Imagine that 150 years without it and the country did well. In the next 100 years we have gone downhill and are continuing to slide. Question; Who are they protecting with this beauty?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by ScareCrow57 View Post
                        That is funny. The colonist (including Washington and Jefferson) had slaves. So those people who created the constitution believed in slavery, and hence would not want to prohibit it. The constitution prohibited alcohol (18th amendment) and then it was repealed (21st amendment). The constitution prohibited slavery (13th amendment) ; so I'm not so sure that the constitution couldn't be amended again to put slavery back in place.

                        But the worst amendment of all 16 (passed in 1913) for income tax. Imagine that 150 years without it and the country did well. In the next 100 years we have gone downhill and are continuing to slide. Question; Who are they protecting with this beauty?
                        You should read how the Supreme Court ruled on that Amendment...it ain't all it's cracked up to be.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by ScareCrow57 View Post
                          That is funny. The colonist (including Washington and Jefferson) had slaves. So those people who created the constitution believed in slavery, and hence would not want to prohibit it. The constitution prohibited alcohol (18th amendment) and then it was repealed (21st amendment). The constitution prohibited slavery (13th amendment) ; so I'm not so sure that the constitution couldn't be amended again to put slavery back in place.
                          It would certainly be an interesting exercise in futility.

                          The ownership of slavery is one of the many paradoxes of several of our Founding Fathers.

                          As far as taxation. The Constitution allows for congress to do that. I never understood why an ammendment was necessary.
                          They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

                          I'm not saying you're stupid. I'm saying you have bad luck when it comes to thinking.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by scfire86 View Post
                            It would certainly be an interesting exercise in futility.

                            The ownership of slavery is one of the many paradoxes of several of our Founding Fathers.

                            As far as taxation. The Constitution allows for congress to do that. I never understood why an ammendment was necessary.
                            Not on income, and any priviledges not specifically granted to the Federal government is reserved for the states...

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by ECCMac View Post
                              Not on income, and any priviledges not specifically granted to the Federal government is reserved for the states...
                              Art I.
                              Section. 8.
                              Clause 1:

                              The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

                              The courts have ruled that means Congress can levy taxes and spend it on just about anything.
                              They told me if I voted for Hillary Clinton the president would be emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable. They were right. I voted for Hillary Clinton and got a president that is emotional, impulsive, and unpredictable.

                              I'm not saying you're stupid. I'm saying you have bad luck when it comes to thinking.

                              Comment


                              • During my senior year in college where I earned a bachelor's in Political Science our semester-long assignment was to perform a presentation on the Bill of Rights pertaining to whether the Bills GRANT the citizenry said rights, or whether they INSURE said rights. Some very interesting discussions were produced from this idea. My contention was that the Bill of Rights insure those rights, not grant them. That they are rights inherent to all of man, from God, and that the Bill or Rights protected these specific rights from future encroachments. I would be interested in what everybody's opinion is on the matter.

                                Concerning the Constitution protecting minorities. On a previous post somebody mentioned the Federalist Papers. In this book one of the overriding ideas was the detrimental effect that factions, minorities or special interests, will have upon a country. It basically reads that if a country begins treating certain members of the citizenry differently than others, then the country will soon be faced with more and more factions as time progresses. Rather than being able to focus on what is best for the country as a whole, the government divert more and more attention to the growing number of factions. This is exactly what the US is facing today. Rather than everybody being an American we have African-American, Latino-American, gays, lesbians, Native American, etc. Nobody is entitled to special treatment. The government is not in existence to hold a person's hand and walk them through life. Each person should be expected, and able, to make their own way. If they can't, then there are ways to get help i.e-churches, family, neighbors, etc. I do think that in certain instances the government should be an avenue that somebody can pursue if they have fallen on hard times. Once they get the help they need then that's it, no more freebies. Get back on your feet and support yourself. Our government has become so absurdly gigantic that I'm sure our founding fathers are turning over in their graves. Unfortunately, both Republicans and Democrats are at fault for this.

                                We have become a nation of cry babies that is always seeming to look elsewhere for answers or somebody to blame, and I'm freaking tired of it. When did men stop acting like men?? Nut up and get your nose to the grind stone just like most people before you.

                                Sorry for the digression from Nancy "I've had too much plastic surgery" Pelosi.

                                Comment

                                300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

                                Collapse

                                Upper 300x250

                                Collapse

                                Taboola

                                Collapse

                                Leader

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X