hugo

Of course, buddy.

It is to encourage creativity .

You make some valid points.

Funny, I use them all the time and never had a problem. Them machines are a lot smarter than the typical Wal-Mart employee. If they weren't cost effective they would not be in use.

McCain/Feingold dealt the 1st a significant blow. Biggest attack on the 1st since the Alien and Sedition acts under John Adams. The article you refer to has nothing to do with the 1st Amendment. I have the legal right to tell my wife she looks fat in that dress. I will suffer consequences if I utilize this right.

That eddo guy seems like a bigger darn asshole than I am.

It makes at least as much sense as labeling the red states as Jesusland. No one is talking about invading Canada. It is the liberals who cannot stand the fact they lost the last election who are fantasizing. Wilderness tactics has a hard time defending against nukes. Your anarchy comments are off topic. If there is one thing the blue states and Canada are not for is limited government, much less anarchy. Anarchist ideology is total BS. The free rider problem and recovery of third party costs prevents anarchy from being a workable ideology. Try the Libertarian Party for a limited government solution. Anyone who thinks anarchists ever had any chance to influence the US is not living in reality. The US is not real great at guerilla warfare. I am betting we got more gorillas then Canada if it comes to gorilla warfare.

I think a better name for that blue area would be the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

About as good as you can expect from ADHD boy. Has proven himself a bleeping moron. He needs to actually read the Constitution sometime.

Misdiagnosing the Malady by Patrick J. Buchanan

Been married to a filapina for 25 years. That is the problem with dating...it can lead to marriage.

Of course you ignored the rest of the post. You are incapable of intelligent debate. The only facts you have cited were the ones I gave to you and of course you misapplied them. I don't think any pill can help you.

If I was a member of the jury I would convict. If I was ajudge I would give the minimum sentence with deferred ajudication.

The fact is these laws exist all across the country and not one single court has revoked them on 1st Amendment grounds. TH is incapable of removing his head from his ass.

Sadly, for ADHD boy, large letters do not equate an intelligent reply. Please quote the words in the Constitution that allow states to deprive felons of second amendment rights but not first amendment rights. Of course, all rational people, which does not include ADHD boy, recognize that limiting someones residence within so many feet of a house of worship does not exclude them from attending religious services. There are pretty solid reasons why opponents of these laws tend to focus on the 5th Amendment, not the first.

Let me supply a quote

But there is a god. The Great Goombah, creator of some things. I have seen him draw Shiner beer from my kitchen sink faucet. We celebrate GG by sacrificing the fermented crops of the field and the marinated fatted calf. Praise Goombah!

Political correctness won't end until we get nuked.

He doesn't even recognize that communism is a big joke.

What ADHD boy fails to understand is that a similar Arkansas law has already been upheld though a judge has prevented authorities from evicting individuals who were residents when the law was passed. Not even the laws opponents have brought up religious freedom as an issue. The law does not prevent individuals from going to church...just from living near one. The major issue judges are hesitating on is the ex post facto situation which prevents an additional punishment after the individual has been sentenced. The situation is quite similar to preventing felons from gun ownership. Let me give ADHD boy a couple facts from National Review Felon Voters A growing movement. By David Lampo ADHD Boy, take a pill and focus, read something for a change. A lot of people forget about the 10th Amendment

You are incredibly stupid. Nothing in the Constitution states felons lose their 2nd Amendment rights, but keep their 1st. Nor does it say they lose the right to vote. In fact, in some states felons have the right to vote. By and large, felons lose the right to bear arms. This is because the courts find that the states have a significant interest in preventing violent crime and this overcomes the due process and equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment. The courts have properly left it up to the states to determine the restrictions placed on ex-cons in this area. Similarly, there are laws in many localities preventing sex offendors from living near schools or churches. These laws have generally been upheld. Most of these laws restict felons from living within 500 feet of a school or house of worship. The 2000 foot restriction has been overruled in at least one case because it was found it significantly harmed the ex sex offendor after he had already been sentenced. It did not rule on if sex offendors who committed their offense after the enactment of the law would be immune to such a law.

Let me now apologize to phreakwars for calling him a dumbfuck, without provacation or explanation, in one of my initial posts. I was simply testing the disciplinary procedure. I don't want to waste time again in a site I will be banned from. The 72 hours in the idiot box seemed fair.

Please, tell me.