Fred Thompson Mega-Thread (Merged)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Marshall- Really liked the whole "We burned the Bill of Rights in order to save it speech". I would buy it but for one thing;

By the government's own admission The Patriot Act has not helped catch a single terrorist.

It has instead been used to violate people's rights and fill the SCOTUS docket.

I wonder when people are going to stop sticking their heads in the sand and wake up in this country.
 
If, for some reason, you are or have to vote for a Democrat, the only one worth anything is Bill Richardson. I don't agree with him on a few things but he's way better than Clinton or Obama.

Untill the Libertarians can come up with some good candidates, which probably will not happen in my lifetime, I will be voting GOP at the federal level.
 
Inevitability: All Fred Thompson Threads on the internet will be come a debate about Fred Thompson vs Ron Paul.

Interesting.
 
He voted for proposing an amendment to ban flag desecration. ***. That's what makes this country different from all the others.
Click to expand...

There was a time where taking a lighter to the american flag would get you a serious thumping, not from any authorities but just plain folks. I'd be willing to bypass an amendment if we could reinstate this "attitude adjustment".

However since that just isn't going to happen, I'm all for such an amendment and support those who propose it. No person who actually loved their country would ever desecrate the flag. Period.
 
However since that just isn't going to happen, I'm all for such an amendment and support those who propose it. No person who actually loved their country would ever desecrate the flag. Period.
Click to expand...

It's not about love, it's about the right to do it. There are a lot of things a person who actually loves their country wouldn't do. That doesn't mean we ban all those things.

Anyway nevermind, if you cannot see any problem with banning flag burning because it is unpatriotic, there's nothing I can say that will convince you otherwise.

I'd be willing to bypass an amendment if we could reinstate this "attitude adjustment".
Click to expand...

Guess I see where you stand, lynching a flag burner is a lesser evil than flag burning.
 
Originally posted by TennTucker:
I don't see a big RP support outside of the gun boards.
Click to expand...

For a lot of people who are single issue candidates, as many hear seem to be (the 2nd Amendment and gun rights the issue in question) that should tell you something.

Ron Paul is the better candidate for gunowners than Fred Thompson or any of the other candidates. Look at the bills he has repeatedly introduced into Congress. For example he introduced a bill that would restore the 2nd Amendment rights of all Americans in a Republican Controlled Congress with a Republican President. Guess what... it got nowhere. So why should I vote for Fred Thompson, a man who claims to be Pro-Gun, when he did not introduce such a wide spanning bill which would restore our rights? He could have supported it but did not.

If your a one-issue voter and that issue is guns I would suggest voting for Ron Paul.
 
By the government's own admission The Patriot Act has not helped catch a single terrorist.
Click to expand...

Oh yea? Show me. Are you saying we didn't use any tatics provided by the Patriot Act to stop the recent JFK Airport terror plot?

As of 2004, the Department of Justice indicated approximately 500 persons have been charged with immigration violations and have been deported who have been of interest to the 9/11 investigation. Also, approximately 300 individuals have been criminally charged who are of interest to the 9/11 investigation. Of the persons criminally charged, approximately half have either pled guilty or been convicted after trial.
 
Oh yea? Show me. Are you saying we didn't use any tatics provided by the Patriot Act to stop the recent JFK Airport terror plot?
Click to expand...
No,Show me.
I have seen nothing but allegations about some guys that did not have the means to accomplish anything.
If they had been able to carry out their"plot", It would have had minimal impact. It was/is lame.
At this point it does not rise above beer talk.
 
The point was, was the Patriot Act helpful. All you're doing is trying to discredit the plot as being beer talk. To that I say....BS and so do the feds. Taped conversations describing motives, satellite photo's and solicitation of funds from Muslim Extremist groups overseas for support of the terror plan, suggests otherwise. So yes, it's been helpful, yet again.

A wiretap transcript given to CNN by the FBI indicates the alleged plotters targeted the airport because of the popularity its namesake, John F. Kennedy, who was assassinated in 1963.

"Anytime you hit Kennedy, it is the most hurtful thing to the United States. To hit John F. Kennedy, wow ... they love JFK -- he's like the man," former JFK airport cargo worker Russell Defreitas allegedly said in a telephone conversation monitored by the FBI.

"If you hit that, this whole country will be in mourning. It's like you can kill the man twice," Defreitas allegedly added.

Defreitas identified targets and escape routes and assessed airport security, the complaint alleges. Officials said the "defendants obtained satellite photographs of JFK airport and its facilities from the Internet and traveled frequently among the United States, Guyana and Trinidad to discuss their plans and solicit the financial and technical assistance of others."

In one conversation taped by the FBI, Defreitas allegedly discusses an incident he says motivated him to strike JFK. He claimed he saw military parts being shipped to Israel, including missiles, that he felt would be used to kill Muslims.

He allegedly says he "wanted to do something to get those bastards."

In another recorded conversation with his alleged conspirators in May 2007, Defreitas compared the plot to attack JFK airport with the September 11, 2001, attack on the World Trade Center, saying, "Even the Twin Towers can't touch it. This can destroy the economy of America for some time," according to Justice officials.
Click to expand...
 
Marshall- Show me a name. Any name. Oh that is right you can't (it is a secret). But I can send you the names of nearly two dozen people who the SCOTUS said the Patriot Act violated their rights. These people by the full admission of the DoJ had nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.

It is all about power. Nothing to do with keeping people safe. As a protector of the Constitution it is my duty to defend it against all enemies. The Patriot Act and it's offshoots present a clear and present danger to the constitution. I will not support anyone for president who supports it.
 
Are you backing off your previous statement about the government admitting they haven't caught a single terrorist?

I have given you what you asked for, I have shown you how the Patriot Act has been helpful. You haven't shown me anything to back up anything you have said.

If you're backing off to the point of it infringing upon a right, that's fine. You are free to think how you wish and support who or whom you wish. But don't make accusations you can't back up and accuse us of having our head in the sand when it's obviously the other way around.

As I described before, is the Patriot Act perfect? No. However, is it worthy, I do believe it is.
 
I don't think making things safer at the expense of the Constitution is a good idea. I don't think that was the intent of the founders either.

Of course, the Patriot Act does not make us safer anyway, it just makes people feel safe.
 
If it helps assists in stopping a terror attack or attacks, how is that not making us safer?
Click to expand...

Because I think bad people will always be able to do bad things. I would feel safer knowing the Constitution is fully valid, than sacrificing parts of it in an attempt improve safety.

And even if I believed the Patriot Act was making us safer, I still don't think we should compromise the Constitution even for real safety.
 
Marshall,

You are wasting your time. They will never accept anything you say because the don't want to. Whenever you meet the criteria they specify they will just change/increase the criteria.

You Ron Paul guys are really starting to look foolish. You invade every political thread with your "Ron Paul is the best, everyone else hates America" garbage whether it's called for or not. I like Ron Paul but your foolishness makes me stay off his bandwagon because I don't want to be associated with you. You had me for a while but forget it, I'm out.

Someone asked a legitimate question about why people support Fred Thompson and people just couldn't help but jump in and start bashing him. The OP didn't ask why people don't support him so it was uncalled for. Grow up, you're starting to remind me of those college kids blocking traffic because they think it's a legitimate form of protest for whatever scatterbrained "cause" they are pushing this week.

Is this The High Road or the playground?
 
I am not backing off of anything. You have not linked the Patriot Act to the Airport Plot. Wiretaps have been around forever. We did not need to trash the constitution for them.

Maybe you believe that the AWB reduced crime? Certainly crime dropped after it was implemeted and has risen since it was repealed...
 
I am not backing off of anything. You have not linked the Patriot Act to the Airport Plot. Wiretaps have been around forever.
Click to expand...

Let me help you, obviously you're not very familair with the Patriot Act.

Service providers have expanded obligations under the Patriot Act. For example, the definitions of trap and trace device have been significantly expanded to allow for access to certain information concerning Internet activity.

This was helpful in busting the JFK Airport Plot. That's just one example, there are others.
 
So What? Why did we need 400 pages of anti- freedom garbage to do that?

Have you actually read it? If you have you are miles ahead of most of the congress and senate. If not than you should and there are a number of points I think need clearing up...
 
So What? Why did we need 400 pages of anti- freedom garbage to do that?

Have you actually read it? If you have you are miles ahead of most of the congress and senate. If not than you should and there are a number of points I think need clearing up...
Click to expand...

If you would have read it, you would know how it helped in the JFK Airport plot and I wouldn't have had to point that out. If you would have read it you would understand the answer to your question.

Point being.........yawn........all you have said so far is "I feel this way, I think that way", stuff. And the accusations you've made have been wrong. I'll say it again, feel and think however you wish, I don't care and, I'm glad you can, and do. Just think before you type things that have no basis.
 
I guess the legislation that Sen. Murkowski introduced to cover PEN/trap warrants and have them based on clear and articulate facts instead of conjecture and fishing expeditions by LEOs as prohibited by the constitution means nothing to you? and yet it is ME that knows nothing about it.

So there was no need for the power grab. There was a solution in place. But most people like you who know little of what you speak pass out dis-information and claim to know everything. Then want to dismiss me as an alarmist. I speak only the truth with facts to back it up.

Go ahead and Yawn away your freedom. If you will not take actions to protect your rights you are not worthy of them.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Fred Thompson on the Issues
2 3 4
Replies
82
Views
2K
JShirley
JShirley
R
  • Locked
Ron Paul v.s. Fred Thompson
Replies
12
Views
755
Biker
Biker
F
  • Locked
Fred Thompson: Neocon Globalist?
Replies
2
Views
483
Correia
C
M
  • Locked
New Fred Thompson thread
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
Art Eatman
A
C
  • Locked
Fred Thompson Interview Weekly Standard
Replies
8
Views
446
dralarms
D
Back
Top