See other All is Vanity Articles
Title: Attention 4um Members
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://none
Published: May 4, 2008
Author: me
Post Date: 2008-05-04 22:40:24 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 18980
Comments: 655
I have to be honest, I'm completely distressed at what's happened to this forum. The fighting and the distrust between those for and those against Obama has gotten to the point where, in my opinion, it's destroying the forum. What's the point of having an open free speech venue when everyone is bozo'ing everyone else? When I read my mission statement and what Freedom4um was created to be, I don't even recognize the place anymore. There will be changes made in the near future as I decide what is best for the continued growth of this forum.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-345) not displayed.
.
.
.
#346. To: Mudboy Slim (#344)
LOLOL !!! Just remember, I've got your coming out party for Halloween Day 2008 in the 4um free pick'em pool...
You're a liar here. I know five who have you on Bozo and I know there are more.
.
Since I already explained although I just started using bozo and have more than 10 on bozo, that means I'll be off then. There are 60-80 unique posters a day on this forum, 14 didn't seem that many when it allowed me to have a pleasant experience. Bye.
"To destroy a people you must first sever their roots." - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Bye. And thus the people who pushed you into bozoing them get what they want.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
anyone who would fall for a gun grabber's promise of less war is deluded. THE ONLY REASON ANY POLITICAN EVER WANTS TO DISARM ANYONE, IS TO ULTIMATELY KILL THEM. no one sincerely for peace would ever try to oppress man's natural right, IMO. applauding...i soooo concur!
Well, shows what differences people have when they hop on a board. Not to be derogatory, but if you want a pleasant experience, you gotta do something else. In a discussion forum, if there's no heat or conflict, it's boring. You shouldn't leave.
Take care. 4um's loss is the DUmpster's gain...
Now you went and made me try that. I can't see any of my posts. lol
Tagline space for rent.
Make it three. Are you insane?
Seems that people got some wires seriously crossed or something. I saw a thread--maybe the one you pulled these quotes from?--where Neil posed a hypothetical question about whether you would kill an innocent child if, by doing so, you could protect your right to keep and bear arms. On its face it sounds like a question someone might ask who has maybe had a bit much to drink. I wouldn't kill an innocent child but, assuming I only had to think of myself and not worry about others around me, I wouldn't hesitate to blow any adult away who came to take it from me. I ask for nothing more from the government than to be left alone and don't think that is too much to ask. By that same token I could never harm an innocent person who had not harmed me. Neil, could you please elaborate a bit on what would cause you to ask such a question? It seemed out of character to me.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. It's your site and your rules but I think you've made a mistake in doing this Christine. While I believe the use of the bozo filter is chickenshit, I also think it allows those participating in this online community to practice a bit of freedom of association. If they do not want to associate with a particular person, they shouldn't have to. If they want to live in a bubble where the only replies they ever hear are the ones they agree with, then, it shouldn't be anyone else's business, although I would question why they are here in the first place. But like I said, your house, your rules.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976
Hey, you got that right! Even the “better half” noted that “we would feel proud to trot her out in front of the world’s diplomatic corps!
;-(
MY REPLY TO ZEITGEIST: 1John Chapter 2: "21 I write to you not because you do not know the truth but because you do, and because every lie is alien to the truth. 22 Who is the liar? Whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Whoever denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist." Yeah, a virtual WASP Blonde Ice Goddess, coiffed, poised, impeccably dressed with a classy sense of style and blonde. Wonder if she engaged in any photographic indiscretions when she was younger. Compare to Bill and Michelle, and I tell ya, they may not admit it, but many voters will gravitate to her, and not only men, women too.
LOL! Post of the day... I've yet to say I definitely WON'T vote for McCain...it's waaay too early...MUD
#347. To: Mudboy Slim (#341)
Nope...three bozos total...MUD
#348. To: christine (#333)
I've incorporated my compromise solution to the bozo filter debate. The total number of slots is now 10 rather than 20. I hope that's a decision that everyone can live with, but if not, I understand.
#349. To: robin (#348)
Bye.
#350. To: Artisan (#297)
it's a nonsensical discussion. we dont have to nor should we give up our basic human right of self defense in promise of ''world peace''. what bullshit.
#351. To: robin (#348)
a pleasant experience
#352. To: robin (#348)
Bye.
#353. To: tom007 (#343)
This thread's got me so pissed off, I decided to bozo myself.
#354. To: karelian (#342)
There are only one or two people here who said they would vote for McCain …
#355. To: angle, Neil McIver (#261)
Here's the thread that changed the way I viewed Neil. It's not just one post. It was post after post when regular people who like Neil were questioning his statements. It just got bizarre.
Lord Acton
#356. To: robin, christine (#348)
I've incorporated my compromise solution to the bozo filter debate. The total number of slots is now 10 rather than 20. I hope that's a decision that everyone can live with, but if not, I understand.
#357. To: swarthyguy (#345)
Why? Cindy McCain, she looks like she was born for the WhiteHouse.
#358. To: robin (#348)
Bye.
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#359. To: karelian (#357)
#360. To: tom007 (#343)
This thread's got me so pissed off, I decided to bozo myself.
 | Gold and silver are REAL money, paper is but a promise. |
#361. To: swarthyguy (#345)
Why? Cindy McCain, she looks like she was born for the WhiteHouse. And how cool is it for a guy to marry the hot heiress of a BEER distributor? Yeah, those are all great reasons to vote for somebody. No wonder we're stuck with crooks and idiots in the WH each time around.
Hell, I'll vote for him, but being from MA, it's a throwaway vote anyway.
#362. To: robin (#348)
Bye. I don't fully understand why the bozos have to be limited. If you don't want to talk to someone, why should you be forced to do so? And if someone doesn't want to be bozo'd, then let them act like a human being.
Bye.
.
#363. To: karelian (#342)
Why would you vote for four more years of Bush?
#364. To: Rupert_Pupkin (#361)
You got any better, after all, Americans have put Bush in twice because despite being a teetotaller, more Americans felt more comfortable having a beer with him as opposed to Gore or Kerry. You got your criteria, I got mine, promises of changing the world and the way Washington does business are flowery campaign rhetoric. The system puts Obama in such a sweet spot, why first of all, does he wish to change it anyway, when he's been the beneficiary of it to the extent that Obama, a one term Senator with barely a couple of years in the Senate gets to compete for the highest political office in the land.
#365. To: swarthyguy (#364)
Sorry, but I can't think of a more stupid reason to vote for somebody. You may as well vote for a candidate who's taller or a better dresser. And I'm not supporting Obama -the best I can do is a third party protest vote, which is a hell of a lot better than an endorsement of somebody whose views I despise. I can't understand why anyone who claims to be against the welfare and warfare state would support either McCain or Obama.
Americans have put Bush in twice because despite being a teetotaller, more Americans felt more comfortable having a beer with him as opposed to Gore or Kerry
#366. To: TwentyTwelve (#354)
Well, I was shot in the head in Viet Nam! VA said I was OK, but what do they know.
Are you insane?
#367. To: karelian (#366)
Never trust the VA.
Well, I was shot in the head in Viet Nam! VA said I was OK, but what do they know.
#368. To: Rupert_Pupkin (#365)
And you're criticising me for frivolity in my voting criteria? Some know nothing numbnut party that can't even win local election spots and wants to be a Presidential party? The best third party performers, Perot and John Anderson acted like nothing more than spoilers ultimately.
a third party protest vote
#369. To: swarthyguy (#368) (Edited)
The "spoilers" business is spin from the Dems and GOP. They like to pretend that they own votes, and that if third party candidates weren't there, they'd get the votes that "belong" to them. Fact is, most third party voters would rather stay home than vote for Bush/Gore, Bush/Kerry, or McHillObama. And yes, voting on "who you'd rather have a beer with" is pretty frivolous. Especially when Bush's cowboy/regular guy image is as phony as everything else he says. He's your typical spoiled, rich frat brat, just a bit slower than the rest. I have to give his handlers credit for the good PR job, though, it sure fooled a lot of people.
#370. To: Pinguinite (#332)
Neal, I no longer vote *because* I don't trust promises by politicians. Where in god's holy name are you going with this?
Would you vote for someone for president who promised to bomb the nation of Iran if he also promised to secure the national interests of the USA by restoring the 2A?
#371. To: Rupert_Pupkin (#369)
But my bigger point is that voters vote on a variety of criteria, not necessarily on the high minded analysis that many may think. Comfort level with the candidate is key in America, and any candidate who doesn't provide that usually doesn't win. As far as spoiler being spin, I'll concede that, but it doesn't detract from my point that no matter how talented the individual, going national without institutional support only carries you so far.
#372. To: karelian (#366)
Inadvertent trepanning. Gotta look at the bright side, it may have made you terminally immune to politician's promises. No faith, no disappointment.
#373. To: Pinguinite (#269)
I thought it sounded so far out of character for you to suggest that anyone who didn't vote for some statist was somehow on the same par with murderers. Thanks for your post clearing that up.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton
#374. To: TwentyTwelve, robin, red jones, swarthyguy, jethro Tull, lodwick (#354)
Make it three. Are you insane? Make it four. I just came back from the McCain HQ here in my Hummer with yellow ribbons on it and gave the campaign TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS in twenties and intend to do it tomorrow and every day after that until he wins. Our future is at stake and we need a man who knows what the Muslime World understands and respects - Violence and Pain. They are happy to be in Club Gitmo, there they get better attention than they ever did in their pig stys in Iraq. The Iraqi people are grateful we are in Iraq to liberate them. Did you know I made a huge amount of moola from my Halliburton stocks? Its true I bought thousands of shares at the Jan18 bottom and sold at the April 22 top. I do this all the time. All I see here is poor, poor peaceniks. Gotta go, my butler says its time for my pedicure, and I have Richard Perle waiting on the phone, (they like to run policy change by me to see what I think), they all really love me.
There are only one or two people here who said they would vote for McCain …
#375. To: robin (#348)
Don't let the door hit you on the way out you closet commie.
Mark
If America is destroyed, it may be by Americans who salute the flag, sing the national anthem, march in patriotic parades, cheer Fourth of July speakers - normally good Americans who fail to comprehend what is required to keep our country strong and free - Americans who have been lulled into a false security (April 1968).---Ezra Taft Benson, US Secretary of Agriculture 1953-1961 under Eisenhower
#376. To: BIGBUCKS_BADEYE (#374)
Glad you got a Hummer. Did you give it to yourself as a gift? I am not much of a McCain guy. Personally, I am hoping Bush refuses to step down and just remains in office as President for life.
I just came back from the McCain HQ here in my Hummer
---------------------------------------------------------
Aren't you lucky. You get to receive one of the 15 posts I'm allowed each day.
#377. To: aristeides (#288)
What do you suspect would lead the moron to believe that it is any of his business what guns other people have or don't have? If he doesn't want any guns he shouldn't have any and if he doesn't like them at all then the people who guard the goofy eff shouldn't have any either. I am so tired of politicians and people like Rosie O'Donnell who think that peons shouldn't have any weapons but it is fine for people to protect them with those evil guns.
Obama wants to limit gun rights more than some people here would like
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton
#378. To: BIGBUCKS_BADEYE (#374)
I hope you lose every penny of your $10,000. You must really hate America.
I just came back from the McCain HQ here in my Hummer with yellow ribbons on it and gave the campaign TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS in twenties and intend to do it tomorrow and every day after that until he wins.
#379. To: BIGBUCKS_BADEYE (#374)
McKook can't even ties his shoes. What a joke.
Our future is at stake and we need a man who knows what the Muslime World understands
#380. To: BIGBUCKS_BADEYE (#374)
Our future is at stake and we need a man who knows what the Muslime World understands and respects - Violence and Pain.
#381. To: Artisan, Pinguinite, ghostdogtxn (#289)
I believe this guy had his property condemned and he was forced to vacate. Ray Kirkus Mr Flatt, This is formal notice and request: I am calling on the Indiana Militia to assist and restore constitutional government in the Laporte County Indiana Courts and within the Sheriff's office. You have seen the video. NOW this kangaroo court moves forward while the previous order is still under appeal and then my jury demand is denied!! These clowns are OUT OF CONTROL AND HAVE RUN AMOK! The property has been ordered vacated by Judge Baldoni based on absolutely "no evidence" and no facts; no water or soil samples and a 5 minute inspection which was ordered unlawfully and still under appeal. all based on a dry rotted 4" pvc pipe that discharges nothing but is simply a drain tile. The appeal fact alone prevents both the court and the health dept from moving forward. However at the last hearing, Baldoni denied me a jury trial and proceeded summarily anyway, then ordered my son out of his home by midnight. Enough is enough, this is a formal call calling on your organization and requesting its assistance to restore the Indiana Constitution and arrest Judge Baldoni for sedition and treason and to arrest Sheriff Arnold for failure in performing his duties while viewing an offence in his presence and doing nothing. Where is your line William, or do you keep redrawing it as these criminals do more and more damage to the people of Indiana? If you are not the one in charge, please forward this email to the ones who are. THIS IS AN SOS and A FORMAL REQEUST OF THE INDIANA MILITIA TO DEFEND THE PEOPLES RIGHTS AS SECURED BY THE INDIANA AND FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONS IN LIBERTY, IF we do not hang together on these issues, then we will most assuredly hang seperately.... Ben Franklin IN LIBERTY, IF we do not hang together on these issues, then we will most assuredly hang seperately.... Ben Franklin His reading of the 4th differs from that interpretation of the Supreme Court on what constitutes an unreasonable search. http://laws.findlaw.com/us/359/360.html FRANK v. MARYLAND. A Baltimore City health inspector seeking the source of a rat infestation discovered evidence of such an infestation in the rear of appellant's home, and, having no search warrant, requested appellant's permission to inspect his basement in the day time. For refusing such permission, appellant was convicted and fined for a violation of 120 of Art. 12 of the Baltimore City Code, which provides that, "Whenever the Commissioner of Health shall have cause to suspect that a nuisance exists in any house, cellar or enclosure, he may demand entry therein in the day time, and if the owner or occupier shall refuse or delay to open the same and admit a free examination, he shall forfeit and pay for every such refusal the sum of Twenty Dollars." Held: Section 120 is valid, and appellant's conviction for resisting an inspection of his house without a warrant did not violate the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Pp. 361-373. Affirmed. Benjamin Lipsitz argued the cause and filed a brief for appellant. C. Ferdinand Sybert, Attorney General of Maryland, and James H. Norris, Jr., Special Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for appellee. With them on the brief were Hugo A. Ricciuti and W. Thomas Gisriel. A brief urging affirmance was filed for the Member Municipalities of the National Institute of Municipal Law Officers, as amici curiae, by Joe W. Anderson, Roger Arnebergh, John C. Banks, Alexander G. Brown, Nathaniel H. Goldstick, William N. Gurtman, Claude V. Jones, Ralph S. Locher, Walter J. Mattison, John C. Melaniphy, Barnett I. Shur, Charles H. Tenney, Charles S. Rhyne, Brice W. Rhyne and S. White Rhyne, Jr. [359 U.S. 360, 361] MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER delivered the opinion of the Court. Acting on a complaint from a resident of the 4300 block of Reisterstown Road, Baltimore, Maryland, that there were rats in her basement, Gentry, an inspector of the Baltimore City Health Department, began an inspection of the houses in the vicinity looking for the source of the rats. In the middle of the afternoon of February 27, 1958, Gentry knocked on the door of appellant's detached frame home at 4335 Reisterstown Road. After receiving no response he proceeded to inspect the area outside the house. This inspection revealed that the house was in an "extreme state of decay," and that in the rear of the house there was a pile later identified as "rodent feces mixed with straw and trash and debris to approximately half a ton." During this inspection appellant came around the side of the house and asked Gentry to explain his presence. Gentry responded that he had evidence of rodent infestation and asked appellant for permission to inspect the basement area. Appellant refused. At no time did Gentry have a warrant authorizing him to enter. The next forenoon Gentry, in the company of two police officers, returned to appellant's house. After receiving no response to his knock, he reinspected the exterior of the premises. He then swore out a warrant for appellant's arrest alleging a violation of 120 of Art. 12 of the Baltimore City Code. That section provides: The Health Code of the City of Baltimore, of which 120 is an important part, deals with many of the multiform aspects of hygiene in modern urban areas. A vital portion concerns the hygiene of housing. Typical of the content and method of enforcing its provisions is the section requiring that "[e]very dwelling and every part thereof shall be kept clean and free from any accumulation of dirt, filth, rubbish, garbage or similar matter, and shall be kept free from vermin or rodent infestation." Baltimore City Code, Art. 12, 112. If the occupant of a building fails to meet this standard, he is notified by the Commissioner of Health to abate the substandard conditions. 1 Failure to remove these hazards to community health gives rise to criminal prosecution. Ibid. The attempted inspection of appellant's home was merely to ascertain the existence of evils to be corrected upon due notification or, in default of such correction, to be made the basis of punishment. We have said that "[t]he security of one's privacy against arbitrary intrusion by the police" is fundamental to a free society and as such protected by the Fourteenth [359 U.S. 360, 363] Amendment. Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U.S. 25, 27 . Application of the broad restraints of due process compels inquiry into the nature of the demand being made upon individual freedom in a particular context and the justification of social need on which the demand rests. The history of the constitutional protection against official invasion of the citizen's home makes explicit the human concerns which it was meant to respect. In years prior to the Revolution leading voices in England and the Colonies protested against the ransacking by Crown officers of the homes of citizens in search of evidence of crime or of illegally imported goods. The vivid memory by the newly independent Americans of these abuses produced the Fourth Amendment as a safeguard against such arbitrary official action by officers of the new Union, as like provisions had already found their way into State Constitutions. In 1765, in England, what is properly called the great case of Entick v. Carrington, 19 Howell's State Trials, col. 1029, announced the principle of English law which became part of the Bill of Rights and whose basic protection has become imbedded in the concept of due process of law. It was there decided that English law did not allow officers of the Crown to break into a citizen's home, under cover of a general executive warrant, to search for evidence of the utterance of libel. Among the reasons given for that decision were these: Inspection without a warrant, as an adjunct to a regulatory scheme for the general welfare of the community and not as a means of enforcing the criminal law, has antecedents deep in our history. * * * Affirmed.would you say defending your land against such 'benevolent' intruders is wrong? this video is amazing.
http://www.apfn.net/Messageboard/07-04-06/discussion.cgi.77.html
CALLING ON THE INDIANA MILITIA
Sun Jul 2, 2006 10:17
Ray Kirkus
Ray Kirkus U.S. Supreme Court
FRANK v. MARYLAND, 359 U.S. 360 (1959)
359 U.S. 360
APPEAL FROM THE CRIMINAL COURT OF BALTIMORE, MARYLAND.
No. 278.
Argued March 5, 1959.
Decided May 4, 1959. "Whenever the Commissioner of Health shall have cause to suspect that a nuisance exists in any house, cellar or enclosure, he may demand entry therein in the day time, and if the owner or occupier shall refuse or delay to open the same and admit a free examination, he shall forfeit and pay for every such refusal the sum of Twenty Dollars." [359 U.S. 360, 362]
Appellant was arrested on March 5, and the next day was found guilty of the offense alleged in the warrant by a Police Justice for the Northern District of Baltimore and fined twenty dollars. On appeal, the Criminal Court of Baltimore, in a de novo proceeding, also found appellant guilty. The Maryland Court of Appeals denied certiorari. The case came here under a challenge, 28 U.S.C. 1257 (2), to the validity of 120 to determine whether appellant's conviction for resisting an inspection of his house without a warrant was obtained in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. "It is very certain, that the law obligeth no man to accuse himself; because the necessary means of compelling self-accusation, falling upon the innocent as well as the guilty, would be both cruel and unjust; and it should seem, that search for evidence is disallowed upon the same principle. There too the innocent would be confounded with the guilty." Id., at col. 1073. [359 U.S. 360, 364]
These were not novel pronouncements to the colonists. A few years earlier, in Boston, revenue officers had been authorized to use Writs of Assistance, empowering them to search suspected places, including private houses, for smuggled goods. In 1761 the validity of the use of the Writs was contested in the historic proceedings in Boston. James Otis attacked the Writ of Assistance because its use placed "the liberty of every man in the hands of every petty officer." 2 His powerful argument so impressed itself first on his audience and later on the people of all the Colonies that President Adams was in retrospect moved to say that "American Independence was then and there born." 3 Many years later this Court, in Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616 , carefully reviewed this history and pointed out, as did Lord Camden in Entick v. Carrington, that ". . . the 'unreasonable searches and seizures' condemned in the Fourth Amendment are almost always made for the purpose of compelling a man to give [359 U.S. 360, 365] evidence against himself, which in criminal cases is condemned in the Fifth Amendment; and compelling a man 'in a criminal case to be a witness against himself,' which is condemned in the Fifth Amendment, throws light on the question as to what is an `unreasonable search and seizure' within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment." 116 U.S., at 633 .
* * *
#382. To: Big Meanie (#316)
Hey, Big Meanie. Good to cybersee you.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end.
Lord Acton
#383. To: BIGBUCKS_BADEYE, FOH (#374)
Make it three. Are you insane? Make it four. There are only one or two people here who said they would vote for McCain …
#384. To: ... (#328) (Edited)
Which for me is no choice at all.
IMO, the choice is between McCain and Obama.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976
#385. To: christine (#0)
Never have, never will.
...everyone is bozo'ing everyone else?
"The Northern onslaught upon slavery was no more than a piece of specious humbug designed to conceal its desire for economic control of the Southern states." Charles Dickens, 1862
#386. To: BIGBUCKS_BADEYE, FOH (#374)
Make it three. Are you insane? Make it four. There are only one or two people here who said they would vote for McCain …
.
.
.
Comments (387 - 655) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest