The best thing about Arnold's victory - Page 6

juju · 10-10-2003, 02:26 PM

Sorry, that's wrong. If everyone had a nuclear weapon, the human race would be extinct. Unlike you, the founding fathers would be intelligent enough to understand this.

When you interpret words, you have to consider the intent of the author.

Radar · 10-10-2003, 02:46 PM

Unlike you, I'm not interpreting words. I'm reading them for their actual meaning. And the founders were clear on their intent to ensure that the government could have no weapons that individual citizens couldn't own WITHOUT EXCEPTION.

So we we don't think people should have nukes, we should take them away from the government.

Some people say, "Everyone is more polite if everyone has a gun". Just imagine how polite people would be if everyone had a nuke.

The principles behind the desire to have the American public be able to outgun the government are every bit as fresh, important, and valid now as they were back when the weapons were muskets.

I, unlike you, comprehend the principles that drove the founding fathers to write the Constitution in the specific language in which it was written. The founders were very intelligent, like me, and understood the true meaning words like "freedom", "liberty", "justice", and "responsibility".

Those who try to put words in their mouth because they don't understand these principles are violating everything great this country stands for. It wouldn't matter if we had muskets, or disintigrating ray guns, the principle still holds true. Government must never have more physical force than the general populace.

warch · 10-10-2003, 03:00 PM

Wow! Radar quote of the day:

Quote:

Unlike you, I'm not interpreting words. I'm reading them for their actual meaning.

honorable mention:

Quote:

The founders were very intelligent, like me, and understood the true meaning words like "freedom","liberty", "justice", and "responsibility".

Radar · 10-10-2003, 03:05 PM

Reading isn't "interpreting" genius.

And I stand by the second comment.

warch · 10-10-2003, 03:22 PM

Now is that

Reading isn't "interpreting" genius.
('Cause you know there *are* some brilliant writers out there.)

or Reading isn't "interpreting", genius.
('Cause then I'd argue that, yes it is an act of interpreting if you are able to build any meaningful understanding at all out of the cluster of letters.)

juju · 10-10-2003, 03:23 PM

You cannot read words without interpreting them. It's impossible.

juju · 10-10-2003, 03:27 PM

Also, in your fantasy-land where the government has no nuclear weapons, there is no American government, becuase it was destroyed by the Soviets 20 years ago, who do have nuclear weapons.

JeepNGeorge · 10-10-2003, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by juju
You cannot read words without interpreting them. It's impossible.

William S Burroughs has a great thought on Language.

"Language is a Virus....We must find out what words are and how they function. They become images when written down,
but images of words repeated in the mind
and not of the image of the thing itself."
- W.S. Burroughs

xoxoxoBruce · 10-10-2003, 10:51 PM

RADAR says:
Nowhere have I threatened the president. I have suggested an appropriate punishment for a military deserter who later commits treason and endangers the entire world, has Americans killed, or turned into mercenaries, attacks our civil rights, violates the Constitution, etc.

Ahem

You don't think lying to the American people to gain support for an unconstitutional use of our military in a war against a sovereign nation that has never attacked America, poses no threat to America, and has no connections with anyone who has attacked America doesn't merit impeachment? I think it merits execution for treason.

And then

Wrong A-G-A-I-N. The President is a public servant. He answers to ME.

juju · 10-10-2003, 10:58 PM

Oh, you don't have to go through all that. He directly threatened the president's life in the "Happy Tax Day!" thread. He's just forgotten about it.

Whit · 10-10-2003, 11:56 PM

      So, Radar, as I recall you were either about to get married or had just gotten married?Either way, how's that workin' for ya?

Radar · 10-11-2003, 01:46 AM

xoxoxoBruce: You have failed to prove I have threatened the president. I've said he richly deserves to be executed for his crimes against America and I'd even volunteer to pull the switch if given the opportunity, but that is not a threat. Just wishfull thinking.

Quote:

Oh, you don't have to go through all that. He directly threatened the president's life in the "Happy Tax Day!" thread. He's just forgotten about it.

That is an outright lie. I have not now, nor have I ever threatened the life of the president. I wish for it, hope for it, know he deserves it, and would gladly volunteer to carry out his execution if the courts gave him the punishment he deserves, but I have never threatened him. He will be remembered among names like Pol Pot, Hitler, Stalin, Ghengis Khan, Saddam Hussein, etc.

Quote:

So, Radar, as I recall you were either about to get married or had just gotten married?Either way, how's that workin' for ya?

The considerably large amount of paperwork is finished. The wedding date has been scheduled for February, and I will be traveling to Saigon (Ho Chi Minh City) to marry her soon. Luckily I've been working at Boeing and making a decent living so I will be able to afford a nice wedding. Only 200-400 of my closest strangers.

We'll go to Thailand for the honeymoon, and then it will take me another 6-8 months before she can come to America so we can get started on the family thing. in the meantime we've been visiting each other every week on the webcam, email, letters, and phone calls. Thanks for asking.

juju · 10-11-2003, 02:51 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radar
That is an outright lie.

No it's not. It's a cold, hard fact.

Also, Bruce was right. So that makes twice now!

xoxoxoBruce · 10-11-2003, 08:23 AM

Quote:

Luckily I've been working at Boeing and making a decent living so I will be able to afford a nice wedding. Only 200-400 of my closest strangers

I see, so this whole affair is being paid for with profits generated by W's warmongering.

Tobiasly · 10-11-2003, 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Radar
What part of "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" do some people have a problem understanding?

Well, let's see:

the people: Who are "the people"? Does this include 4-year olds? Prison inmates? Cop killers?

keep and bear: Does this mean I can mount a machine gun on a turret to the roof of my truck, and drive around town? Can I bring it into a high school, day care, or airport?

arms: What sort of arms? Apparently you seem to think this includes thermonuclear warheads. Most people don't.

To make it clear, I have no interest whatsoever in what your answers to these questions are, because I could probably figure that out myself. I'm just illustrating that a seemingly simple phrase can have vastly different meanings to different people.

Whether or not the word "interpret" was actually used in the Constitution, the simple fact is that any words written by humans are open to interpretation.

(Edit: typos)

10-10-2003, 10:51 PM	#84
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	RADAR says: Nowhere have I threatened the president. I have suggested an appropriate punishment for a military deserter who later commits treason and endangers the entire world, has Americans killed, or turned into mercenaries, attacks our civil rights, violates the Constitution, etc. Ahem You don't think lying to the American people to gain support for an unconstitutional use of our military in a war against a sovereign nation that has never attacked America, poses no threat to America, and has no connections with anyone who has attacked America doesn't merit impeachment? I think it merits execution for treason. And then Wrong A-G-A-I-N. The President is a public servant. He answers to ME. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

10-10-2003, 11:56 PM	#86
Whit Umm ... yeah. Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Arkansas, USA Posts: 949	So, Radar, as I recall you were either about to get married or had just gotten married?Either way, how's that workin' for ya? __________________ A friend will help you move. A true friend will help you move a body.

10-10-2003, 02:26 PM	#76
juju no one of consequence Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,839	Sorry, that's wrong. If everyone had a nuclear weapon, the human race would be extinct. Unlike you, the founding fathers would be intelligent enough to understand this. When you interpret words, you have to consider the intent of the author.

10-10-2003, 02:46 PM	#77
Radar Constitutional Scholar Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ocala, FL Posts: 4,006	Unlike you, I'm not interpreting words. I'm reading them for their actual meaning. And the founders were clear on their intent to ensure that the government could have no weapons that individual citizens couldn't own WITHOUT EXCEPTION. So we we don't think people should have nukes, we should take them away from the government. Some people say, "Everyone is more polite if everyone has a gun". Just imagine how polite people would be if everyone had a nuke. The principles behind the desire to have the American public be able to outgun the government are every bit as fresh, important, and valid now as they were back when the weapons were muskets. I, unlike you, comprehend the principles that drove the founding fathers to write the Constitution in the specific language in which it was written. The founders were very intelligent, like me, and understood the true meaning words like "freedom", "liberty", "justice", and "responsibility". Those who try to put words in their mouth because they don't understand these principles are violating everything great this country stands for. It wouldn't matter if we had muskets, or disintigrating ray guns, the principle still holds true. Government must never have more physical force than the general populace.

10-10-2003, 03:05 PM	#79
Radar Constitutional Scholar Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Ocala, FL Posts: 4,006	Reading isn't "interpreting" genius. And I stand by the second comment.

10-10-2003, 03:22 PM	#80
warch lurkin old school Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Minnesota Posts: 2,796	Now is that Reading isn't "interpreting" genius. ('Cause you know there are some brilliant writers out there.) or Reading isn't "interpreting", genius. ('Cause then I'd argue that, yes it is an act of interpreting if you are able to build any meaningful understanding at all out of the cluster of letters.)

10-10-2003, 03:23 PM	#81
juju no one of consequence Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,839	You cannot read words without interpreting them. It's impossible.

10-10-2003, 03:27 PM	#82
juju no one of consequence Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,839	Also, in your fantasy-land where the government has no nuclear weapons, there is no American government, becuase it was destroyed by the Soviets 20 years ago, who do have nuclear weapons.

10-10-2003, 10:58 PM	#85
juju no one of consequence Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Arkansas Posts: 2,839	Oh, you don't have to go through all that. He directly threatened the president's life in the "Happy Tax Day!" thread. He's just forgotten about it.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)