I'm just here with popcorn for the RON PAUL fans.

So much for that liberty, eh Libertarians?

cman: FTFM

And yet it's still wrong.

/Do us a favor and just give up.

James F. Campbell: cman: FTFM

And yet it's still wrong.

/Do us a favor and just give up.

Come on. He's just lonely and trying to get some attention. I'll bet he posts in this thread 20+ times even though no one responds to him.

Headline: Ron Paul backs CISPA

TFA: Ron Paul supports an amendment to CISPA that protects civil liberties, does not mention if he would support the bill with the proposed amendment

sigh

cman: Three Crooked Squirrels: cman: Ed Finnerty: James F. Campbell: cman: FTFM

And yet it's still wrong.

/Do us a favor and just give up.

Come on. He's just lonely and trying to get some attention. I'll bet he posts in this thread 20+ times even though no one responds to him.

Funny, you have nothing relevant to say so you resort to personal attacks.

Flaming is not becoming of you, and, actually, you really suck at it

Ummmm. . . Because you added "will" and FTFM but still don't know the difference between "isle" and "aisle"?

I aint nown for my good spelin

Nor your good reddin', good logikin' or good consistencyin'.

cman: James F. Campbell: cman: FTFM

And yet it's still wrong.

/Do us a favor and just give up.

Explain to me how it is wrong to support a bill aimed at curbing piracy if it contains restrictive uses and ensures civil rights are upheld.

Oh, you want some attention, do you, attention whore? All right, motherfarker, here I am. Here's your attention, attention whore. I am talking to you. I am validating your miserable, shiat-flecked, ignorant existence. Here are are, we're doing this. Look, look, look at cman. Everyone pay attention to him. Look at how stupid he is. Isn't it truly pathetic how he thinks his existence depends on the responses of assholes stupid enough to respond to him? I'm not worse which is worse: that he's pretending to be stupid, or that he really is stupid -- but either way, what a huge waste of space! Are you happy yet? Am I providing fulfillment to your life? Do you enjoy being a goddamn moron? Does being blind to, I don't know, reality, does it enable you to get through the day? Or is it the attention that stays the pistol from your temples?

This shouldn't be surprising to anyone who listens to Ron Paul.

Tyranny is fine, as long as the federal government isn't the executive/legislative body doing it. State government, local government, corporations, the courts...

CYBERSECURITY ISN'T IN THE CONSTIUTION!

/states' rights, yadda yadda blah blah blah...

timujin: Thompson's amendment seeks to offer Web users protection by making the Secretary of Homeland Security and Director of National Intelligence coordinate with privacy and civil liberties groups develop policies to "minimize the impact on privacy and civil liberties," and to "reasonably limit the acquisition" and sharing of personally identifiable information.

hrm... vague wording is vague. I'm never comfortable seeing that word worked into a law. My definition of reasonable might not be the same as yours.

Well, I guess it's a good thing that it's not part of just about every area of law, eh?

AKTurkey: Headline: Ron Paul backs CISPA

TFA: Ron Paul supports an amendment to CISPA that protects civil liberties, does not mention if he would support the bill with the proposed amendment

sigh

Here's every last thing that's wrong with American politics at the moment, and if you can't see it, I don't know how to better explain it.

"Oh, you have this bill? Well, it needs this amendment."
"Ah, OK. Hadn't thought of that. So, if we add this amendment, you'll vote for my bill?"
"Are you kidding? If I voted for your bill, my constituents would tear me apart. It's not ideologically pure."
"So, if you're not going to vote for my bill, why should I add your amendment?"
"Because, without it, it would be a bad bill, and I wouldn't vote for it."
"And if we add your amendment, you're not going to vote for it?"
"No, but it would be a better bill."

Oh great, another thread where the internet tries to convince us that they're a bunch of freedom fighters when all they're really worried about is it getting harder to download shiat for free that they should be paying for.

In a few months we can go back to forgetting that RON PAUL exists. That's gonna be cool, because fark that guy.

In future news: Amendments added to bill, Ron Paul votes no anyway.

cman: cannibalparrot: CYBERSECURITY ISN'T IN THE CONSTIUTION!

/states' rights, yadda yadda blah blah blah...

But copyrights are in the constitution and are the sole responsibility by the fed gov

Great! My mockery of the average Paultard is true to form!

9beers: Oh great, another thread where the internet tries to convince us that they're a bunch of freedom fighters when all they're really worried about is it getting harder to download shiat for free that they should be paying for.

Look at you changing the subject. How cute.

cman: James F. Campbell: cman: FTFM

And yet it's still wrong.

/Do us a favor and just give up.

Explain to me how it is wrong to support a bill aimed at curbing piracy if it contains restrictive uses and ensures civil rights are upheld.

Oh, please. fark off.

cman: AKTurkey: Headline: Ron Paul backs CISPA

TFA: Ron Paul supports an amendment to CISPA that protects civil liberties, does not mention if he would support the bill with the proposed amendment

sigh

This just in: news headlines overly simplistic

/Not all journalists are partisan assholes

Except it appears he is suppo9beers: Oh great, another thread where the internet tries to convince us that they're a bunch of freedom fighters when all they're really worried about is it getting harder to download shiat for free that they should be paying for.

You are still here? I thought you were still taking a ride on Zimmerman pubes. Yes, you are a farking parasite.

cman: cannibalparrot: cman: cannibalparrot: CYBERSECURITY ISN'T IN THE CONSTIUTION!

/states' rights, yadda yadda blah blah blah...

But copyrights are in the constitution and are the sole responsibility by the fed gov

Great! My mockery of the average Paultard is true to form!

I am not a "Paultard". I am a Gary Johnson fan

And, before someone says Citation Needed, well here ya go Link

Please point out what led you to believe I was referring to you.

/christ, what happened to snark for snark's sake?

cman: Sabyen91: cman: James F. Campbell: cman: FTFM

And yet it's still wrong.

/Do us a favor and just give up.

Explain to me how it is wrong to support a bill aimed at curbing piracy if it contains restrictive uses and ensures civil rights are upheld.

Oh, please. fark off.

Of I am the moron that people like you make me out to be, how am I acting in such manner in that question?

English should be the offal langage of the United States of Merk.

cman: Some version of this bill eventually be passed. There aint no way in hell that it wont.

Best to cross the isle and soften the blow under compromise

"On July 3, 2004, Ron Paul was the only Congressman to vote against a bill hailing the 40th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act."

Some things are important enough for him compromise on, and some things just aren't . . .

cman: cannibalparrot: cman: cannibalparrot: CYBERSECURITY ISN'T IN THE CONSTIUTION!

/states' rights, yadda yadda blah blah blah...

But copyrights are in the constitution and are the sole responsibility by the fed gov

Great! My mockery of the average Paultard is true to form!

I am not a "Paultard". I am a Gary Johnson fan

And, before someone says Citation Needed, well here ya go Link

You're a Gary-tard. You probably think that Gary Cherone is the best Van Halen frontman, You miss Gary Coleman. Gary.

GARY

Look at you, voting for some dude named Gary.

HighOnCraic: cman: Some version of this bill eventually be passed. There aint no way in hell that it wont.

Best to cross the isle and soften the blow under compromise

"On July 3, 2004, Ron Paul was the only Congressman to vote against a bill hailing the 40th anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act."

Some things are important enough for him compromise on, and some things just aren't . . .

He is against all government...except when he isn't. Paul supporters are the new Nader voters.

cman: Sabyen91: cman: Sabyen91: cman: James F. Campbell: cman: FTFM

And yet it's still wrong.

/Do us a favor and just give up.

Explain to me how it is wrong to support a bill aimed at curbing piracy if it contains restrictive uses and ensures civil rights are upheld.

Oh, please. fark off.

Of I am the moron that people like you make me out to be, how am I acting in such manner in that question?

English should be the offal langage of the United States of Merk.

Yes, and while we are at it we should ship back all those native Americans to where they come from. And, oh wait, lets pass a law outlawing Islam. And before we forget, lets pass a law making it a death offense for smuggling cocaine. But first off we have to throw all these sodomites in prison before their agenda takes over our country!

At least you speak derp well enough.

Here you go, Subby.

cman: Sabyen91: cman: Sabyen91: cman: Sabyen91: cman: James F. Campbell: cman: FTFM

And yet it's still wrong.

/Do us a favor and just give up.

Explain to me how it is wrong to support a bill aimed at curbing piracy if it contains restrictive uses and ensures civil rights are upheld.

Oh, please. fark off.

Of I am the moron that people like you make me out to be, how am I acting in such manner in that question?

English should be the offal langage of the United States of Merk.

Yes, and while we are at it we should ship back all those native Americans to where they come from. And, oh wait, lets pass a law outlawing Islam. And before we forget, lets pass a law making it a death offense for smuggling cocaine. But first off we have to throw all these sodomites in prison before their agenda takes over our country!

At least you speak derp well enough.

Whatever, dude

I make a statement saying that a bill that keeps constitutional safeguards in place and combats piracy should be considered. As a response, I am attacked by two people. The first one must have missed their anger management meeting, and you, the second one, claim that I want to establish an official language.

Wow, when you show people they are full of shiat they really get angry at you

Your schtick is hardly persuasive.

cman: Sabyen91: cman: Sabyen91: cman: Sabyen91: cman: Sabyen91: cman: James F. Campbell: cman: FTFM

And yet it's still wrong.

/Do us a favor and just give up.

Explain to me how it is wrong to support a bill aimed at curbing piracy if it contains restrictive uses and ensures civil rights are upheld.

Oh, please. fark off.

Of I am the moron that people like you make me out to be, how am I acting in such manner in that question?

English should be the offal langage of the United States of Merk.

Yes, and while we are at it we should ship back all those native Americans to where they come from. And, oh wait, lets pass a law outlawing Islam. And before we forget, lets pass a law making it a death offense for smuggling cocaine. But first off we have to throw all these sodomites in prison before their agenda takes over our country!

At least you speak derp well enough.

Whatever, dude

I make a statement saying that a bill that keeps constitutional safeguards in place and combats piracy should be considered. As a response, I am attacked by two people. The first one must have missed their anger management meeting, and you, the second one, claim that I want to establish an official language.

Wow, when you show people they are full of shiat they really get angry at you

Your schtick is hardly persuasive.

Then why not answer my question? Why sit here and continue to attempt to insult me instead of answering my question?

You asked a question? I only saw douchebaggery. Ask it again.

cman: Of I am the moron that people like you make me out to be, how am I acting in such manner in that question?

If this is the question you really need to shut the fark up. You are not a victim.

cman: I make a statement saying that a bill that keeps constitutional safeguards in place and combats piracy should be considered.

"Thompson's amendment seeks to offer Web users protection by making the Secretary of Homeland Security and Director of National Intelligence coordinate with privacy and civil liberties groups develop policies to "minimize the impact on privacy and civil liberties," and to "reasonably limit the acquisition" and sharing of personally identifiable information."

All it does is say "we will talk to these groups". It doesn't say "we will implement the suggestions of these groups.

For someone who posts a lot about not trusting government, you sure seem trusting now ;-)

cman: Sabyen91: cman: Sabyen91: cman: Sabyen91: cman: Sabyen91: cman: Sabyen91: cman: James F. Campbell: cman: FTFM

And yet it's still wrong.

/Do us a favor and just give up.

Explain to me how it is wrong to support a bill aimed at curbing piracy if it contains restrictive uses and ensures civil rights are upheld.

Oh, please. fark off.

Of I am the moron that people like you make me out to be, how am I acting in such manner in that question?

English should be the offal langage of the United States of Merk.

Yes, and while we are at it we should ship back all those native Americans to where they come from. And, oh wait, lets pass a law outlawing Islam. And before we forget, lets pass a law making it a death offense for smuggling cocaine. But first off we have to throw all these sodomites in prison before their agenda takes over our country!

At least you speak derp well enough.

Whatever, dude

I make a statement saying that a bill that keeps constitutional safeguards in place and combats piracy should be considered. As a response, I am attacked by two people. The first one must have missed their anger management meeting, and you, the second one, claim that I want to establish an official language.

Wow, when you show people they are full of shiat they really get angry at you

Your schtick is hardly persuasive.

Then why not answer my question? Why sit here and continue to attempt to insult me instead of answering my question?

You asked a question? I only saw douchebaggery. Ask it again.

Can you explain to me how it is wrong to support a bill aimed at curbing piracy if it contains restrictive uses and ensures civil rights are upheld?


/I think I may have an idea why you took it as douchebaggery. That was not my intent

For Paul? Any bill that is federal is against his beliefs. If he supports it you know he will be bringing in the pork.

cman: Can you explain to me how it is wrong to support a bill aimed at curbing piracy if it contains restrictive uses and ensures civil rights are upheld?

What bill are you talking about? Surely not CISPA or even the proposed amendments. Are you talking about some other bill that isn't part of this article?

downpaymentblues: cman: Can you explain to me how it is wrong to support a bill aimed at curbing piracy if it contains restrictive uses and ensures civil rights are upheld?

What bill are you talking about? Surely not CISPA or even the proposed amendments. Are you talking about some other bill that isn't part of this article?

And when has Paul ever supported a federal bill that ensures civil rights?

cman: Can you explain to me how it is wrong to support a bill aimed at curbing piracy if it contains restrictive uses and ensures civil rights are upheld?

What bill "curbs piracy", yet "ensures civil rights are upheld"? There is a bill that does both? How?