Cape May County Forum
Cape May County Forum
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups 
 ProfileProfile      Log inLog in 



Uncle Obama is finally found
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cape May County Forum Forum Index -> Cape May County Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 7:55 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

posterX wrote:
You belittle the idea of constraint on constitutional rights...then call my examples of necessary constraint a diversion.


I don't belittle it, I out right condemn it. There can be NO constraint on constitutional rights.

Please, give us another lecture on how criminal acts are not covered. Tell me what constitutional constraint would you have us adopt?

I won't respond to your other drivel.

I'll say this again, I know me and I know the general population, I'll bet you anything you wouldn't have said or insinuated that I advocated the raping of children to my face. How much ya wanna bet?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:00 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Just so we're on the same page. There is no such thing as a constitutional constraint. It's an oxymoron. A constitutional constraint would in effect be unconstitutional.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
posterX



Joined: 03 May 2011
Posts: 2828
Location: Wildwood Crest

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:15 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Frank Sinatra wrote:
posterX wrote:
You belittle the idea of constraint on constitutional rights...then call my examples of necessary constraint a diversion.


I don't belittle it, I out right condemn it. There can be NO constraint on constitutional rights.

Please, give us another lecture on how criminal acts are not covered. Tell me what constitutional constraint would you have us adopt?

I won't respond to your other drivel.

I'll say this again, I know me and I know the general population, I'll bet you anything you wouldn't have said or insinuated that I advocated the raping of children to my face. How much ya wanna bet?


You're embarrassing yourself. Stop trying to impress me. Working in bars and nightclubs in Philly and Wildwood...and more, I've had all kinds of drunks, punks and tough guys threaten me, more than one at a time and on a regular basis. I've had guys tell me they were going to get a gun and come back for me... not one was truly willing to back it up...and I never backed off of what I had to say. I stand by my comment....although like most instances, you embellished it for drama. Internet forum tough guy? There's always someone tougher. Frank Sinatra? Like I said before....more like Frankie goes to Hollywood. Tool.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:24 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

posterX wrote:
You belittle the idea of constraint on constitutional rights...then call my examples of necessary constraint a diversion.


posterX wrote:
You're embarrassing yourself.


Enlighten us on what constitutional right you want constrained?

Better yet, give us several constraints.

I'm embarrassing myself?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:29 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

posterX wrote:
....more like Frankie goes to Hollywood. Tool.


What does that mean and why do you keep on saying it?

EDIT: From Wiki:

Frankie Goes to Hollywood (FGTH) were a British dance-pop band popular in the mid-1980s.

Okay, You're saying I'm british dance pop band from the 80's...I still don't get it.

If you're gonna call me a british musical group, call me Led Zeppelin.


Last edited by Frank Sinatra on Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:34 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rummrunner2



Joined: 08 Aug 2009
Posts: 1817
Location: family has been lifetime resident of stone harbor since 1930

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:32 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Frank Sinatra wrote:
posterX wrote:
....more like Frankie goes to Hollywood. Tool.


What does that mean and why do you keep on saying it?
posterx is talking about a gay music group called frankie goes to hollywood.see posterx is so into rim jobs she/he wants everyone to jion oh and frank .that wiki is WRONG watch this link
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aLGbXHc-Ce0&feature=related hey posterx I was reply to franks POST to you which has your reply .I STILL HAVE YOU ON IGNORE


Last edited by rummrunner2 on Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:43 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
posterX



Joined: 03 May 2011
Posts: 2828
Location: Wildwood Crest

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:35 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Frank Sinatra wrote:
Just so we're on the same page. There is no such thing as a constitutional constraint. It's an oxymoron. A constitutional constraint would in effect be unconstitutional.


Another nonsensical comment. No, this isn't an oxymoron...and no, you're not one...you have to remove the "oxy" part first before the word can be applied to you.

Of course there can be constraints on constitutional rights and laws. Are really going to stick with this? Would you like to change you story?

Definition:
Constraint- Limitation or Restriction.

For instance, you might limit or restrict the practice of Freedom of Religion by prohibiting the practice of child rape under the guise of religious freedom.

Get it? I'll wait further threats.


Last edited by posterX on Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:36 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

rummrunner2 wrote:
posterx is talking about a gay music group called frankie goes to hollywood.


LMAO, okay, so I'm a gay British dance-pop band popular in the mid-1980s.

That's intellectual.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
posterX



Joined: 03 May 2011
Posts: 2828
Location: Wildwood Crest

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:36 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

rummrunner2 wrote:
Frank Sinatra wrote:
posterX wrote:
....more like Frankie goes to Hollywood. Tool.


What does that mean and why do you keep on saying it?
posterx is talking about a gay music group called frankie goes to hollywood.see posterx is so into rim jobs she/he wants everyone to jion


LOL! Hey Rummy! Still responding to people that are supposed to be on your ignore list? You are a classic! LOL!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
posterX



Joined: 03 May 2011
Posts: 2828
Location: Wildwood Crest

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:41 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Frank Sinatra wrote:
rummrunner2 wrote:
posterx is talking about a gay music group called frankie goes to hollywood.


LMAO, okay, so I'm a gay British dance-pop band popular in the mid-1980s.

That's intellectual.


Well, more that than a dead Italian-American, lush singer from five decades ago. OK...have it your way. To me, you're Frankie goes to Hollywood.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 8:57 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

posterX wrote:
For instance, you might limit or restrict the practice of Freedom of Religion by prohibiting the practice of child rape under the guise of religious freedom.


There is no way you are this ignorant.

Because someone goes to court and claims to have a constitutional right to rape children does not mean that freedom of religion has been constrained.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
posterX



Joined: 03 May 2011
Posts: 2828
Location: Wildwood Crest

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:04 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Frank Sinatra wrote:
posterX wrote:
For instance, you might limit or restrict the practice of Freedom of Religion by prohibiting the practice of child rape under the guise of religious freedom.


There is no way you are this ignorant.

Because someone goes to court and claims to have a constitutional right to rape children does not mean that freedom of religion has been constrained.


Yes, that is a constraint...a limitation, or restriction on religious Freedom. For Christ's sake. There are all kinds of "constraints" or limits on constitutional rights. You make a federal case out of Obama wanting to constrain the right to bear arms...didn't you? Of course there was much embellishment interjected fiction..and you...as usual...were vague. Get on with it. Do you have a real point? You're getting like Freddy, going around and around on the same thing.

What's the matter? No more threats?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:15 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

posterX wrote:
Yes, that is a constraint...a limitation, or restriction on religious Freedom.


No, it's not. It is a violation of law. The Constitution does not protect you from violations of LAW.

Why is that so hard for you to understand. You do realize Obama walked back those remarks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:18 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

posterX wrote:
What's the matter? No more threats?


I didn't threaten you. You stated i advocated raping children. I said, I bet you wouldn't say that to my face. Would you like me to say it again. I'll guarantee you wouldn't say it to my face.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:20 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

posterX wrote:
There are all kinds of "constraints" or limits on constitutional rights.


Name one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
posterX



Joined: 03 May 2011
Posts: 2828
Location: Wildwood Crest

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:21 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Frank Sinatra wrote:
posterX wrote:
What's the matter? No more threats?


I didn't threaten you. You stated i advocated raping children. I said, I bet you wouldn't say that to my face. Would you like me to say it again. I'll guarantee you wouldn't say it to my face.


You're kidding me right? Sure go ahead and say it...it's free on spout off.

Go back and quote the part where I said you advocated raping children. (oxy):: fool ::!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:27 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

posterX wrote:
Go back and quote the part where I said you advocated raping children. (oxy):: fool ::!


posterX wrote:
Sounds like you are a big supporter of Warren Jeffs. Hey, he has a constitutional right to Freely practise his religion...according to Franky...this should not be constrained and Obama is anti-constitution for constraining Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls.


Jeff's has no constitutional right to rape children because it's a violation of law. The constitution does not protect you from violating the law. The constitution gives you the right to practice religion freely, not rape children and call it religion. It's a pretty good system too, you should research it.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:36 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

posterX wrote:
Go back and quote the part where I said you advocated raping children. (oxy):: fool ::!


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
posterX



Joined: 03 May 2011
Posts: 2828
Location: Wildwood Crest

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 9:55 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Frank Sinatra wrote:
posterX wrote:
Go back and quote the part where I said you advocated raping children. (oxy):: fool ::!


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].


posterX wrote:
according to Franky...this should not be constrained...Jeffs from raping 13 year old girls[/b].


I'm thinking that you're nuttier than Rummy. Like I said....show me where I said that you advocate the raping of children. Yes, I said that, according to you, there should be no constraint of the constitutional right to practice religion...which Jeffs argued gave him the right to have sex with children...which most of us...normal....people would call rape. This merely means that you are misguided enough to accept a very fundamental interpretation of the constitution. Durph-wad.

Franky, step away from your PC...before you become completely un-corked...if you're not already.

Is it me, or are you a little too touchy about the subject matter? I'll await more of your internet forum, tough guy threats.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Frank Sinatra



Joined: 28 Nov 2010
Posts: 248

PostPosted: Fri Sep 02, 2011 10:15 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

posterX wrote:
Yes, I said that, according to you, there should be no constraint of the constitutional right to practice religion...


THERE IS NO CONSTRAINT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRACTICE RELIGION.

YOU ARE A CEMENT HEAD.

THE CONSTITUTION GUARANTEES YOUR RIGHT TO PRACTICE YOUR RELIGION FREELY WITHOUT CONSTRAINT. THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF IT.

FREEDOM OF RELIGION WITHOUT CONSTRAINT.

BECAUSE A PERSON VIOLATES THE LAW AND CLAIMS THEY HAVE A RIGHT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT MEAN THE CONSTITUTION HAS BEEN CONSTRAINED. IT MEANS YOU NEVER HAD THE RIGHT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION TO BEGIN WITH.

THIS IS BASIC CIVICS.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
4everBlowingBubbles



Joined: 07 Jun 2006
Posts: 2006
Location: Banned

PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2011 2:25 am    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

I wonder why "sue me for discrimination" was considered vulgar and removed by admin but homophobic comments are allowed to remain.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
posterX



Joined: 03 May 2011
Posts: 2828
Location: Wildwood Crest

PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2011 12:24 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Frank Sinatra wrote:
posterX wrote:
Yes, I said that, according to you, there should be no constraint of the constitutional right to practice religion...


THERE IS NO CONSTRAINT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO PRACTICE RELIGION.

YOU ARE A CEMENT HEAD.

THE CONSTITUTION GUARANTEES YOUR RIGHT TO PRACTICE YOUR RELIGION FREELY WITHOUT CONSTRAINT. THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF IT.

FREEDOM OF RELIGION WITHOUT CONSTRAINT.

BECAUSE A PERSON VIOLATES THE LAW AND CLAIMS THEY HAVE A RIGHT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION DOES NOT MEAN THE CONSTITUTION HAS BEEN CONSTRAINED. IT MEANS YOU NEVER HAD THE RIGHT UNDER THE CONSTITUTION TO BEGIN WITH.

THIS IS BASIC CIVICS.


Actually, I did try to research it. I can find no alternate definition of the word constraint that apply solely to constitutional rights and differs from what my definition is...to limit...to restrict. There have been many legal challenges to constitutional rights and their interpretation by people like Warren Jeffs. The laws ARE the constraints. The laws were enacted to limit immoral behavior taken place under the umbrella of the constitution.

There was a debate concerning constraint not too long ago on CNN...with one guest siting what he called "necessary" constraints on our rights...guaranteeing other rights. The "you can't yell fire in a crowded theater" is one of the examples he used. The right to free speech is constrained by the law that prohibits this...and protects another basic right of personal security.

What about the Patriot Act? Did this not "constrain" our right to privacy?

If you have the de facto definition of "constrain" relative to the constitution...then post it...and by all means include some urls so that I can learn more. Feel free to use all CAPS...if you like.

As for me being a cement head...well...now you are just sounding like my wife.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
posterX



Joined: 03 May 2011
Posts: 2828
Location: Wildwood Crest

PostPosted: Sat Sep 03, 2011 12:25 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

4everBlowingBubbles wrote:
I wonder why "sue me for discrimination" was considered vulgar and removed by admin but homophobic comments are allowed to remain.


Who made homophobic comments?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Wilder West



Joined: 01 Jul 2011
Posts: 45

PostPosted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 1:54 pm    Post subject: Add User to Ignore List Reply with quote

Was there ever any doubt?
President Obama's uncle -- arrested last month on drunken driving charges and perhaps facing deportation back to Kenya -- has apparently been released from a Massachusetts jail.

And that's about all we know.

Officials released President Obama's uncle from Plymouth County jail yesterday after holding him for more than two weeks on an immigration detainer for violating an order to return to his native Kenya in 1992.

U.S. officials refused to disclose any other information about Onyango Obama, who remained in the United States undetected until Framingham police arrested him Aug. 24 on drunken driving and other charges.

Yesterday, federal immigration officials refused to say whether the 67-year-old Framingham resident posted bond, whether they are keeping track of his whereabouts, or even whether they are still seeking his deportation, raising questions about public accountability in the case.

The U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement website confirmed Obama's release by listing him as "not in custody.''

Although the website confirmed it, Brian P. Hale, an agency spokesman, said he would not comment on the case because privacy laws and the agency's policies prohibit it. He said the database is accurate, however.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Cape May County Forum Forum Index -> Cape May County Forum All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum