User Profile: 2GodBeTheGlory

2GodBeTheGlory

Member Since: September 02, 2010

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [8] February 4, 2016 at 11:35am

    Why would Cruz report anything? Why would Cruz restate anything from CNN? Does Cruz believe that CNN is an upstanding news source?

  • [5] February 3, 2016 at 7:21pm

    @Proverbs17-12NLT

    I will NOT take that bet.

    I wouldn’t put it past the FBI/NSA/KGB (all the same anyway) from doing this as a setup. It fits their MO.

  • [11] February 3, 2016 at 2:03pm

    Take your children out of school. Teach them at home.

    Responses (2) +
  • [26] February 3, 2016 at 11:02am

    I doubt the conditions of this story.

    This is the FIRST story that I’ve heard like this in better than 40 years.

  • [1] February 2, 2016 at 12:42pm

    @zapparules,

    Come one, liberal, answer the question.

    Do you support a person that is ok with lying to each other as married people?
    or
    Do you support a communist?

    Which is it?

  • [15] February 2, 2016 at 12:39pm

    I say go for it. Drive that “tank” right into Israel with as many “fighters” that you can muster up. I dare you.

  • [8] February 2, 2016 at 12:36pm

    Amen

  • [1] February 2, 2016 at 12:15pm

    @zapparules,

    So, who do you promote?

  • February 2, 2016 at 8:34am

    The only problem that I have with Ted Cruz is the Expatriate Terrorist Act. I would like to know the Constitutional authority of the administrative branch of government having the right to prevent a citizen entry without a judge/jury trial?

    Now, I don’t mind if a person is incarcerated UPON entry into the U.S. by a government that has obtained a warrant for a citizens arrest. However, what I refuse is a branch of government taking unilateral actions against a citizen without judicial FROM THE PEOPLE (jury trial, if requested by citizen). Anything else is a clear over-reach.

    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s247/text/is

    Responses (3) +
  • February 2, 2016 at 8:30am

    @Dima,

    Here is the actual text that Ted Cruz put forward (it’s also on Ted Cruz’s web site).

    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s247/text/is

    Here is my problem with this legislation. It allows the executive branch to remove citizenship status WITHOUT evidence and without a jury trial. I’ve got no problem if a jury trial is optional by the citizen. Anything else is unconstitutional that would grant rights to the federal government that would give it way too much power.

    Sorry, a state controlled due process hearing is NOT acceptable nor allowable by the constitution. The federal government cannot eject a citizen by making a statement, using a hearing that the own (think vaccine court), without a jury of as persons peers. This is not the right of the government. It is dangerous, unconstitutional, and downright crazy to allow the federal government that right. All the government would have to do is redefine what a terrorist organization is and they could “revoke” thousands of people. As a for instance, the federal government could assert that anyone that stores money in foreign banks to be “terrorist organization”, then they could revoke citizenship. I know it sounds crazy, but look at what the federal government has taken as rights next to what it was supposed to do.

    Tell me this is an action of a person that follows the constitution.

  • [1] February 1, 2016 at 7:59pm

    @makingout,

    If a citizen is in a war zone and firing upon our military, I’m not going to ask for their ID, or check their passport. Like ANYWHERE; shoot at someone, that authorizes the release of lethal force – shoot back. Do you have a problem with that?

  • February 1, 2016 at 7:56pm

    That’s because it’s never gotten out of committee. Check it out for yourself:

    https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s247/text/is

  • February 1, 2016 at 7:34pm

    @ODST,

    Relevant part of the bill (S. 247):

    “Revocation

    The Secretary of State shall revoke a passport or passport card previously issued to any individual described in paragraph (1).(b)

    Right of review

    Any person who, in accordance with this section, is denied issuance of a passport or passport card by the Secretary of State, or whose passport or passport card is revoked or otherwise restricted by the Secretary of State, may request a due process hearing not later than 60 days after receiving such notice of the nonissuance, revocation, or restriction.”

    - Notice that it’s a hearing, not a trail – Government in control, not the people.

  • [1] February 1, 2016 at 7:09pm

    @ODST,

    RE: “I imagine that there would be some judicial process. ” – Unfortunately, no. Hence my problem with Ted Cruz. You can look it up on his own website.

    Re: “If someone joins ISIS, they do not deserve to keep their citizenship.” – I disagree. Someone who joins any group does not automatically loose their citizenship. That’s dangerous waters to go through. Imaging a “bad” regime that asserts that if you talk against, or protest against a policy that you will “loose your citizenship”. No, I would rather a jury of peers send the citizen to jail or to death for their ACTIONS against another person (killing military members or other citizens, not for disagreeing with a stated foreign policy).

    Be careful in understanding what you ask for, for whatever inalienable right you give up, may be used against you and your family. Power such as this should remain with the people, not the government.

  • [1] February 1, 2016 at 5:30pm

    The only problem that I have with Ted Cruz is the Expatriate Terrorist Act. I would like to know the Constitutional authority of the administrative branch of government having the right to prevent a citizen entry without a judge/jury trial?

    Now, I don’t mind if a person is incarcerated UPON entry into the U.S. by a government that has obtained a warrant for a citizens arrest. However, what I refuse is a branch of government taking unilateral actions against a citizen without judicial FROM THE PEOPLE (jury trial, if requested by citizen). Anything else is a clear over-reach.

    Think about this, if Ted Cruz, who is supposed to be a self professed Constitutionalist, is willing to go against the Constitution in preventing citizens entry to their homes, businesses, family, etc., just by a government decree, then what is he willing to do against people that are here, yet asserting that he’s for it?

    Anyone care to explain it?

    Responses (4) +
  • February 1, 2016 at 5:21pm

    @texan99,

    The only problem that I have with Ted Cruz is the Expatriate Terrorist Act. I would like to know the Constitutional authority of the administrative branch of government having the right to prevent a citizen entry without a judge/jury trial?

    Now, I don’t mind if a person is incarcerated UPON entry into the U.S. by a government that has obtained a warrant for a citizens arrest. However, what I refuse is a branch of government taking unilateral actions against a citizen without judicial FROM THE PEOPLE (jury trial, if requested by citizen). Anything else is a clear over-reach.

  • [5] February 1, 2016 at 2:07pm

    @JPM1920,

    Here is what I got from you diatribe:

    If you see an officer speed, don’t do anything or you will make it worse for everyone. LEO can and should break the law, otherwise everyone will be worse off. Oh, and the law really doesn’t apply to LEO.

    Got it.

  • February 1, 2016 at 9:27am

    Although I agree with your assessment, for I’ve wrestle with the same issues with Trump. We need to look at the elephant in the room. What is the biggest concern?

    These are mine, in priority:

    1. Economy
    2. Boarder
    3. Big Government

    What’s your priority and why?

  • [-2] January 31, 2016 at 8:35am

    @SlowSVT,

    Assumption based on ignorance. Maybe, just maybe, government troll, you should ACTUAL take a firearms course. Maybe, just maybe you should actually pay attention to the class.

    So, I take it, by your response, that a person is NOT responsible for every round they fire. Does that logic extended to citizens or is it ONLY for GOVERNMENT personnel?

    You are the liberal; “He made me discharge my firearm! IT’s HIS fault. No, it doesn’t matter that I pulled the trigger, I’m not responsible or accountable for my actions because it’s HIS fault, he made me do it!” – That’s a big government liberal.

  • January 31, 2016 at 8:28am

    @Paladin44,

    It is more reasonable for an FMJ to shatter an arm and still have enough energy to kill a person through the chest than an hollow point. I’s possible, however, unlikely.

    @SeenItAll,
    I see no reason to expound. I mean what I say and say what I mean.

123 To page: Go
Restoring Love