The Anti-Federalists may not have won, but they have certainly been proven right.
 May 21, 2014 at 12:07pm
Paul is not so much defending the guy as he is defending his rights. It may seem like semantics but it is not.
What happens if they were to unilaterally declare that drone strikes were permissible for gang bangers? Should we support that? Or what if people on the Right supported drone strikes on abortion clinics? Or what would happen if the left supported drone strikes on gatherings of people with firearms? They could be “domestic terrorists”.
If you cannot see the – it’s not even a slippery slope – outright moral disregard for basic rights then there’s not much else to say!
You sound like an apologist. There is no need for that. Rand Paul is a straight up guy but he's wrong on this. Anwar al-Awlaki deserved to die with no trial. He was, in fact, an enemy combatant.
Have you any record of this ever having occured in any other point in the history of the United States nad by The United States?
Perhaps the shade of your thought, not your skin, would bring you under accusation?
As a minority of thoought or thinking, it is easy to overlook presumption of innocense. Our history is rich with the defending of the unpopular, the defending of slaves, the defending of woman, scopes, segregation, and on and on. The right to trial must be more popular, than the subject of the trial itself, and that can never change.
If I am ever drone, please DON'T believe the lie that it was because I aligned with the enemy and "revoked" my citizenship.
With the Nobama Administration's living documents, Costa Rica, Singapore, and Israel could all become "the enemy" and anyone of us could be "non-combat insurgents." And the media would be complicit in their occupation as chief lapdog.
I stand with Rand.
I don't know what the hell you're talking about bringing up minorities. I'm Mexican and don't see your point at all. Al-whateverthef*** was with the enemy. That's all the proof I need. Unless you want our troops to ask for papers before blowing someone away, recognize the difference between an "American" and an American traitor fighting with the enemy.
AMEN Rainhaven, you just struck pay dirt, spot on reality...that is exactly what Rand Paul is doing!
I didn't even address the 'gang-banger' comment because it is so far off left field. Total non-sequitur as we're talking the difference between a drone within the US and outside the US. If YOU cannot see the difference, then there is not much else to say.
If even John Adams defended the British who were tried for murder in the case of the Boston Massacre because everyone must be subject to the law in order for the law to be effective, then surely you must agree that the Bill of Rights is law and it, too, must be obeyed or the law itself becomes impotent.
Apologists, according to Jefferson are a good thing and helps everyone to be able to smartly debate their own position. I do not think it is a derrogatory term how you are using it.
September 25, 2013 at 6:04pm
Read the book of Daniel and you will see that it successfully traces the future of the Babylonian, Medo/Pesian, Greek and Roman empires. And it was written hundreds of years before the events took place. And it’s not just vague references. Very detailed specifics about Alexander the Great and Antioches IV Epiphanes are contained in the book. Again, they are so obvious and detailed that skeptic historians have to maintain that the book was written AFTER the events took place, but the manuscript evidence precludes this.
Another example is all of the old testament prophecies about Jesus Christ. They are not vague. They detail very specific things about his birth, life and death. One example. There are two Bethlehems. If the Bible merely said “Bethlehem” regarding the Messiah’s birth, the that would be semi-vague. But it explicitly says Bethlehem Ephrathah. When looked at cumulatively, you will see, strikingly, that Jesus is the only one who can walk through that door.
The archeological evidence too, is not just happenstance. In the book of Joshua, Joshua proclaims that the city of Jericho would only be rebuilt at the cost of the builders’ first born child. When they excavated the ruins of Jericho they found under the main gain urns that contained the skeletons of infants…that’s just one example. There are myriads more.
September 25, 2013 at 4:51pm
So Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Julius Africanus, etc. are not credible? If, in fact, you were to take the whole of information written about Jesus, including the New Testament, which is written from eye witness testimony, you have a more complete case about the life and death of Jesus than pretty much any other figure of antiquity.
I recommend you read Simon Greenleaf – Harvard Law School professor who is hailed as the greatest authority on English and American Common Law. He took all of the evidence and from a legal perspective, makes a very credible case – all from a legal standpoint.
September 25, 2013 at 4:36pm
Deavon – I appreciate your reply.
But my premise still stands. If we get over the basic argument that there is in fact a Creator. Then either A. that creator interacts with his creation or B. he has left his creation to fend for itself and is aloof.
If you read the scriptures of the major religions of the world with an open mind you will undoubtedly see that the Bible stands head and shoulders above all of the rest of sacred writings. God did indeed condescend to Earth, in fact He loves His creation so much that he took on the limitations of human flesh and subjected himself to human punishment and torment that was completely unjust. Why? To pay for our sins and show us the way. Can you imagine a being of such intelligence and power that he can create everything your eye can not only see, but also the things that we can’t see? And then that being says, I will pay for debt just so that I can have a relationship with you. And not only that, but I’m going to recreate the whole shebang so that everything will be new – including you. Can you imagine that? That’s what he offers. And if you are unsure because you see his supposed followers messing up, well, again you should read the Bible. You can see from the first to the last of the book how every single one of the people that God has ever chosen has completely muffed it up and He has had to work out his plan with imperfect, sinful people.
September 25, 2013 at 4:27pm
Mossburg – check out the Discovery Institute’s website. It’s a good starting point.
MrGeek – Yes, I think you misunderstand what I wrote. I stated that the Universe can not be Eternal or have eternally existed due to Entropy. So I would definitely agree with what you wrote. The facts seem to point to the universe having a beginning and it will have an ending. Unless someone with the power to create comes along and does a “reset”.
I was pointing out that there are only 4 main philosophical arguments for the existence of the universe. And I stated why 3 of the 4 arguments have major problems…Please re-read my post for more info.
September 25, 2013 at 4:03pm
Exactly what I was thinking…sounds so ridiculous to me!
September 25, 2013 at 10:15am
Ummm…why did the site change my “no” to “know” several times…I “know” I didn’t type it that way…
September 25, 2013 at 10:13am
Deavon, you are not ‘non-biased’. You’ve either never looked into the evidence of the resurrection seriously, or you’ve bought into someone else’s twisted version of why Christianity is supposedly lacking in evidence.
The truth is that there is a wealth of extrabiblical evidence from Roman and Jewish scholars regarding Jesus. Also, almost every turn of the archeologist’s spade produces new evidence confirming the particulars of the Bible. And many of these discoveries come from secular sources. And the prophecies of the Bible astound every scholar who looks at the evidence. The scoffers must conclude that the prophecies were written after the events took place, but the manuscript evidence that is dated suggests otherwise, in fact most of the books that were claimed to be “late dated” have all now come to a scholarly consensus that they were written in many cases, earlier than first thought. So clearly the Evidence is not lacking any “credibility”.
September 25, 2013 at 10:06am
Deavon, I don’t know what ‘god’ you’re referring to, but it definitely isn’t the God of the Bible. God makes it very clear that we are not damned by ignorance. We are damned by our actions, every single one of us. If we sincerely ask him for more light, he will give us more light. So much that it will illuminate everything and you will know doubt believe he is real and loves you. But the reality is that we don’t want light. We want darkness, we love the darkness because it’s in the dark that we can hide and conceal our hideousness.
If I put you in a car against your will and said – we are going to Disney Land because it is paradise and the best place on Earth – and you replied that you hated Disney Land, wanted nothing to do with Disney Land and yet I drug you in there kicking and screaming against your will, would Disney Land be paradise for you? Know paradise would be torture for you. God is no different. We either say Lord – Your will be done or we say No Lord – My will be done. And He says Amen either way.
Hell becomes torture for the unbeliever not because God is beating you or causing you agony, it is torture because, to use the Disney Land metaphor again, you see the roller coasters and the rides, the bright lights and you hear the laughter. And you rush to the gate only to find that it is locked, forever and you can never enter. That is what makes Hell, Hell. It is self induced, not God induced.
September 25, 2013 at 9:58am
Yes Southern, you are correct, but that is not what Dawkins is implying by saying we’re “apes”. He’s not talking about taxonomy. He’s saying that whereas the Bible says humans are created in God’s image and are categorically special because of that, Dawkins is saying that we are merely animals that happen to have a larger brain than other animals. He presupposes that life comes from non-life, then that life differentiated into other species randomly and then somehow some random species became rational and created morals. So, I would disagree with your assertion that anyone who believes in a Creator is getting their “theological panties in a wad.” Dawkins knows exactly what he is saying and it’s a loaded statement. He doesn’t want to foster open communication on competing theories or talk about the evidence, like a real scientist would and should, instead he is guard dog that barks, snarls and bites at anyone who would challenge his religion that he calls “science”.
September 25, 2013 at 9:30am
He does not have evidence. In fact he is sorely lacking any evidence. The evolutionary biologists can’t get over the fact that the Cambrian Explosion in the fossil record completely obliterates Darwin’s entire theory. There are no transitional forms. Every extant body plan for animals and plants are found in an extremely short amount of geological time – completely opposite of Darwin’s theory. The scientific “answers” regarding biology in light of this evidence is laughable at best. I know you won’t, but if you actually read the irrational gymnastics that they jump around with in light of this evidence, it is really quite astounding…to say the least.
September 25, 2013 at 9:26am
When you look around you what do you see? You see complex design. Engineers and Mathematicians have been scoffing at and denouncing evolution for years. They make computer simulations called Genetic Algorithms and none of the simulations can create anything worth a smack. If you were to build a bridge you would have to have foresight and purpose to build a bridge, you couldn’t just have complete randomness come along and build the bridge one plank at a time. Evolution is a dead dog and people like Dawkins are propping up the corpse.
You can absolutely prove the existence of God. Everyone knows cause and effect. The universe is an effect. It must have a cause equal to or greater than itself. There is nothing irrational to say that God/the Creator is the uncaused first cause.
Either the universe came from nothing – nothing doesn’t come from nothing, nothing ever could. Or it has eternally existed. 2nd law of thermodynamics (entropy) precludes this. The universe would’ve died of a heat loss death billions of years ago. The universe isn’t real, it’s imaginary. Good luck with that one. Or it was designed and created by a supreme intelligence.
The facts definitely sway heavily to the side of a supreme Creator being.
September 25, 2013 at 9:18am
He says God can’t be proven out one side of his mouth, but then lends credence to alien seeder theory out the other. Ok well then where did our alien creators come from Mr. Dawkins? Everyone knows cause and effect. The universe is an effect so it must have a cause equal to or greater than itself. God is the uncaused first cause.
BEN STEIN: What do you think is the possibility that Intelligent Design might turn out to be the answer to some issues in genetics or in evolution?
DAWKINS: Well, it could come about in the following way. It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe, a civilization evolved, probably by some kind of Darwinian means, probably to a very high level of technology, and designed a form of life that they seeded onto perhaps this planet. Now, um, now that is a possibility, and an intriguing possibility. And I suppose it’s possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer.
September 19, 2013 at 5:32pm
Wrong. The constitution was forced onto the states in the same way that Obamacare was forced onto us. The federalists, with Hamilton as a guide, created the constitution to get to where we are now. They wanted big government. Read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers…it’s all there. The amendments were bones that the Federalists threw out to the people after they actually read what tyranny had been enforced on them!
Also read about the Whiskey Rebellion…good ole’ George Washington wasn’t as great as everyone thinks. He was the first president and he was the first one to used armed jack-booted thugs on his own people.
“But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain – that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist.” -Lysander Spooner
September 18, 2013 at 9:16am
Author Joel L Watts, who says Dalmanutha doesn’t exist, sounds like an idiot. How can anyone say dogmatically that someplace doesn’t exist. As if we’ve uncovered all of the evidence of past people, places and things.
Furthermore, if the Gospels all had the same exact stories, word for word, then all critics would immediately cry Collusion! It would be obvious. But the gospels give us different perspectives and the authors focus on different aspects of Christ’s ministry and travels. If Magdala was 500 feet away it’s highly likely that this was more of a “metropolitan” area. If I wrote a story from eye witness accounts and I was told: “and then the guy went to New York” and then another eye witness told another person recording the story: “then the guy went to Manhattan”, would I be able to just say, well, obviously these stories are contradictory because one author said New York and the other said Manhattan. Obviously Manhattan doesn’t exist. Watts needs to go back to school.
September 17, 2013 at 3:54pm
I think the model pictured actually has the sweet “White House Holographic Sight” and the hard to find “Washington Monument Front Post Sight” – now adjustable for windage!
September 17, 2013 at 2:23pm
Ruger Mini 14. Find them at your LGS…
September 17, 2013 at 2:21pm
I would just like to point out that the gun pictured in the cartoon is not an AR-15…that is a Ruger Mini 14. Another “scary” black rifle…
September 13, 2013 at 9:24am
All of you fighting about Liberal this, and Conservative that…exactly like the good sheeple they want you to be while they use their slight of hand.
You literally have to have your head in the sand and your fingers in your ears if you don’t think there was anything wrong with how the situation was handled…or rather not handled that day.