View Full Version : LAURA INGRAHAM: "Civil liberties much ado about nothing."
Remember that neo-con wench who gave a rude introduction to RP at Iowa Straw Poll? Here's what she said about Romney's performance in the debate .
LAURA INGRAHAM: I thought that was the best moment of the night for Romney. No doubt about it. Without security or safety the whole debate about civil liberties is much ado about nothing. Okay? Simple as that. If we have to into a mosque, we'll go into a mosque. If we have to go into a prison where they're converting people to Islam we're going to go into the prison. If we have to into Starbucks in Northern Virginia where we apparently have a corridor of suspicious activity then we'll go into the Starbucks. If we have to into the 7-11 parking lot we'll go there too. If we have to hit the day laborer centers where illegal aliens hang out we'll go there. That's what people want to hear in this country. They want to hear about how we can keep this country safe and what measures are you going to take to do it.
Worse yet, Romney is featuring this quote on his website!
there u have it...the Constitution is worthless...trust Romney instead
Yea thats pretty much the official stance of "influential" republicans such as Ingraham, as long as the government promises to kill or deport whatever scares them they don't care what freedoms are lost. Luckily most Americans know better and without Ron Paul they don't stand a chance of winning in 08. We might end up with more entitlement spending and taxes under the dems but at least we won't have cia pizza delivery guys spying on us for laughing at a George Bush parody on comedy central.
ItsTime
09-09-2007, 07:12 PM
"When you sacrifice liberty for security, you lose both!"
Cowlesy
09-09-2007, 07:18 PM
They won't be prominent for much longer. I'm seeing an escalation in their rhetoric as more people are seen questioning what they've preached for so long.
Shink
09-09-2007, 07:22 PM
Benjamin Franklin would rip people like her limb from limb.
smhbbag
09-09-2007, 07:24 PM
I honestly do no understand how Romney can claim to be an American.
"Give me liberty or give me death!" has become, in his mind....
"Do anything you want, just don't let me die!"
Even if liberty came at the expense of security....we should STILL choose liberty!
cjhowe
09-09-2007, 07:26 PM
New Hampshire should be ripping Mitt limb from limb right now. What the hell happened to "Live Free or Die"
New Hampshire should be ripping Mitt limb from limb right now. What the hell happened to "Live Free or Die"
Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death! - Patrick Henry
Romney is spending a lot of time in NH...Our boy needs to visit there more
themanhere
09-09-2007, 07:31 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsC3LkcvmJM
Mitt Romneys sideburns
09-09-2007, 07:38 PM
"Freedom is not a concept in which people can do anything they want, be anything they can be. Freedom is about authority. Freedom is about the willingness of every single human being to cede to lawful authority a great deal of discretion about what you do."
- Rudolf Giuliani
Proemio
09-09-2007, 07:42 PM
If we have to into Starbucks in Northern Virginia where we apparently have a corridor of suspicious activity then we'll go into the Starbucks.
Yeah, that's that top-secret tunnel in Langley, leading directly to the renowned, underground BinLaden Studios at Tora Bora - a.k.a. TruthProductions Inc.
Lose lips sink ships - Chertoff won't be amused...
LibertyEagle
09-09-2007, 07:50 PM
Remember that neo-con wench who gave a rude introduction to RP at Iowa Straw Poll? Here's what she said about Romney's performance in the debate .
LAURA INGRAHAM: I thought that was the best moment of the night for Romney. No doubt about it. Without security or safety the whole debate about civil liberties is much ado about nothing. Okay? Simple as that. If we have to into a mosque, we'll go into a mosque. If we have to go into a prison where they're converting people to Islam we're going to go into the prison. If we have to into Starbucks in Northern Virginia where we apparently have a corridor of suspicious activity then we'll go into the Starbucks. If we have to into the 7-11 parking lot we'll go there too. If we have to hit the day laborer centers where illegal aliens hang out we'll go there. That's what people want to hear in this country. They want to hear about how we can keep this country safe and what measures are you going to take to do it.
Worse yet, Romney is featuring this quote on his website!
there u have it...the Constitution is worthless...trust Romney instead
Yeah, I heard that too. It was disgusting.
TexMac
09-09-2007, 07:55 PM
They won't be prominent for much longer. I'm seeing an escalation in their rhetoric as more people are seen questioning what they've preached for so long.
Right. Did you guys see this?
Coulter draws yawns, not jeers (http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070907/NEWS01/709070412/-1/CINCI)
People are sick of their act. Ingraham is just a Coulter wannabe.
Kuldebar
09-09-2007, 07:55 PM
Guys, Romney has really great teeth and perfect hair, we can't under estimate this.
trispear
09-09-2007, 07:57 PM
The thing is, I'm not scared of terrorism. Car accidents and bathtub accidents kill more people each year than Terrorism in America does generally each year.
In his movie Fahrenheit 9/11 - Michael Moore was looking around why America had the highest shooting rates. He found out countries like Canada and Switzerland had more guns per Capita. He went to Canada perplexed and found out people kept their doors open and all that and wondered what was so different - and then he looked at their Television programming - their nightly news had much less FUD (Fear Uncertainty Doubt) stories than ours.
Essentially, the average American is being programmed to be scared. After that, Michael Moore jumped to the conclusion we should have less guns. It wasn't a bad movie - but how he followed an almost logical trail to the very end, just to leap onto another branch entirely, had me shaking my head.
The thing is, I'm not scared of terrorism. Car accidents and bathtub accidents kill more people each year than Terrorism in America does generally each year.
In his movie Fahrenheit 9/11 - Michael Moore was looking around why America had the highest shooting rates. He found out countries like Canada and Switzerland had more guns per Capita. He went to Canada perplexed and found out people kept their doors open and all that and wondered what was so different - and then he looked at their Television programming - their nightly news had much less FUD (Fear Uncertainty Doubt) stories than ours.
Essentially, the average American is being programmed to be scared. After that, Michael Moore jumped to the conclusion we should have less guns. It wasn't a bad movie - but how he followed an almost logical trail to the very end, just to leap onto another branch entirely, had me shaking my head.
car accidents are the equivalent of a 9/11 each month!
Deaths at the hands of illegal aliens are 3 9/11's per year!
themanhere
09-09-2007, 08:06 PM
car accidents are the equivalent of a 9/11 each month!
Deaths at the hands of illegal aliens are 3 9/11's per year!
Yes but Mitt has a plan to hire government employees to drive and follow us around to make us feel safer! One government employee per household = MORE LIBERTY!
quickmike
09-09-2007, 08:12 PM
These people are the biggest cowards I think I've ever seen LOL
Always afraid of the boogie man, and willing to do anything, and I mean anything to make themselves feel better about terr'ists plotting in a Starbucks over a caramel double decaffinated latte. And they talk about us being weak?
This reminds me of the Red Scare after WWI
They have it COMPLETELY backwards.
SeanEdwards
09-09-2007, 08:14 PM
Surveilance is completely constitutional.
As long as there is an independent judiciary that is permitted to review the evidence and approve or deny a warrant for that surveilance.
The affront to our liberties is not the wiretapping, it is the lack of judicial oversight.
jb4ronpaul
09-09-2007, 08:14 PM
I used to be part of that whole conservative movement, especially when it first started. Now they have become everything that we fought against originally. Actually they are even worse than the liberal elite we fought. What she said is about as un-American as anything I have heard.
Yes but Mitt has a plan to hire government employees to drive and follow us around to make us feel safer! One government employee per household = MORE LIBERTY!
You know what's sad? If the media packaged it the right way...the public might actually go for your solution to the "car crash crisis."
All it would take would be daily stories and images of every fatal car accident in America. After a few weeks of this saturation coverage of the bloodbath on our highways...coupled with "polls"...some politician would suggest setting up a "Department of Auto Security"...a multi billion dollar bureaucracy designed to "keep us alive."
Ron Paul would oppose it and Rudy and Romney could laugh at him...with half the idiots in the audience booing Ron Paul.
dwdollar
09-09-2007, 08:21 PM
They won't be prominent for much longer. I'm seeing an escalation in their rhetoric as more people are seen questioning what they've preached for so long.
Yes! They're only digging themselves deeper, but the neocons are still so arrogant to believe their double down will pay off.
quickmike
09-09-2007, 08:39 PM
What a f--kin child she is.:D ......................... a scared little child.
http://www.patriotart.com/signed/LaurasBikeSigned1.jpg
Cowlesy
09-09-2007, 08:48 PM
I still think she's really a dude.
Yes, I know this is a public forum.
No, I don't care.
angelatc
09-09-2007, 09:09 PM
Yes but Mitt has a plan to hire government employees to drive and follow us around to make us feel safer! One government employee per household = MORE LIBERTY!
I didn't hear that! I'll bet he was just one-upping McCain who said MExicans were going to cut my yard and clean my house.
Thompson must have an even better plan.
quickmike
09-09-2007, 09:11 PM
I still think she's really a dude.
Yes, I know this is a public forum.
No, I don't care.
Get a date with her and find out for us ;)
wgadget
09-09-2007, 09:22 PM
She often speaks of the virtues of the Patriot Act, which makes me think she'll NEVER come over to the Ron Paul side.
Cowlesy
09-09-2007, 09:28 PM
Get a date with her and find out for us ;)
4 highballs of Maccallan and a few Pabst Blue Ribbons I'd probably tell her to "Shutup and Sing".
TheEvilDetector
09-09-2007, 10:47 PM
Surveilance is completely constitutional.
As long as there is an independent judiciary that is permitted to review the evidence and approve or deny a warrant for that surveilance.
The affront to our liberties is not the wiretapping, it is the lack of judicial oversight.
Toilet surveillance in every household is completely constitutional as long as there is an independent judiciary that is permitted to review the evidence and approve or deny a warrant for that surveilance. The affront to our liberties is not the wiretapping, it is the lack of judicial oversight when it comes to toilet surveillance.
nullvalu
09-09-2007, 11:00 PM
...a multi billion dollar bureaucracy designed to "keep us alive."
hate to break it to you, but they already have that bureaucracy.. it's called the Department of Transportation which consists of the FAA, FTA, FHWA, NHTSA, .....
hundreds of billions right there..
SeanEdwards
09-09-2007, 11:10 PM
Toilet surveillance in every household is completely constitutional as long as there is an independent judiciary that is permitted to review the evidence and approve or deny a warrant for that surveilance. The affront to our liberties is not the wiretapping, it is the lack of judicial oversight when it comes to toilet surveillance.
Article 4
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
So does that mean you reject the Constitution? Or does it mean you just don't understand it?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.