Idiot. States can and must designate what the debts they owe or are owed are to be paid in. They must designate that those debts are paid in gold or silver coin. You have failed to point to any clause in the Constitution that lets the federal government override this requirement. It's hilarious to see you desperately trying to argue that the Constitution doesn't mean what it plainly says. You'd make a good Obama pick for the Supreme Court.
This is real simple... don't wage war against the United States (as al-Awlaki unquestionably did as a prominent member of al-Qaeda) and you won't make yourself a military target. P.S. You never did say if you think Obama's a terrorist for authorizing his killing. Is he, yes or no?
Grow up loser and admit you're wrong. This says it all about YOUR desperately changing "argument": http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3381790#post3381790
You mean agree with everything the government of the United States does and everything will be fine? Also, if it is so unquestionable (Awlaki), where is the proof? You never answered any of my questions. Obama should be impeached for usurping the Constitution. A term like terrorist, to me, is all but meaningless at this point. Obama definitely has blood on his hands. However, the word is simply a tool used for propaganda purposes. Hell, our own representatives call each other terrorists. "We have negotiated with terrorists,â angry Rep. Mike Doyle, a Democrat from PA, said, according to sources who were in the room. âThis small group of terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money.â Biden agreed: Biden, driven by his Democratic alliesâ misgivings about the debt-limit deal, responded: âThey have acted like terrorists,â according to several sources in the room." http://www.theblaze.com/stories/politico-biden-likens-tea-party-republicans-to-terrorists/ When I taught terrorism classes for the Marine Corps, I used to make the point of explaining that one man's terrorist, is another man's freedom fighter, as per the OPNAVINST. Seriously, get over the word terrorist already. As to your admonition to not wage war against the US...one day, posting something online that counters what the government asserts could effectively be just that. Maybe, it already is. And then, we all know what happens next...drones come to rain down death and destruction indiscriminately. No, the solution is to end this farcical war on an emotional state of being/tactics that can never be stopped and restore America now. Vote for Ron Paul 2012, the only man who will restore America to it's past glory. Oh yeah, if another nation's military, say Syria, dropped a bomb on your house and killed your family would you be ok with it? And, what if the President declares you are an enemy combatant...what do you do? How do you go about proving your innocence?
So our response to the terrorism is what caused the terrorism in the first place? Circular. Non-causal.
If you're so dense and hard headed that you're going to question that al-Awlaki was a terrorist who waged war against the United States, I might as well be talking to a rock.
I do tend to question things, it's called critical thinking. I especially tend to question things when the entity telling me the thing has lied to me in the past. See, past lies tend to weaken a messenger's credibility (learned that in intel school). Do you take everything at face value simply because the government says it to be true? Because if you do we should probably discuss a tremendous opportunity available for you in real estate. Again, where is your proof Awlaki waged war on the US? Who did he kill and where is the evidence to support your claim?
What part of "if you're so dense and hard headed that you're going to question that al-Awlaki was a terrorist who waged war against the United States, I might as well be talking to a rock" didn't you understand?
Uh, the part where you were going to show me the evidence to support your claim. You say Awlaki was a terrorist who waged war against the United States. Great. Now show me the evidence to support your claim that: a. he was a terrorist who waged war against the United States b. he waged it enough to merit a summary execution See, I'm still waiting for this little thing called evidence. Do you understand what evidence is? Hint: it is not you making the same unsupported statement over and over again. You know what, let's not leave anything to chance: ev·i·dence   [ev-i-duhns] Show IPA noun, verb, -denced, -denc·ing. noun 1. that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof. 2. something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign: Trader666's flushed look was visible evidence of his fever. 3. Law . data presented to a court or jury in proof of the facts in issue and which may include the testimony of witnesses, records, documents, or objects. Now that you understand what evidence is, where's your evidence?