Quote Originally Posted by DuncanONeil View Post
Your knee jerk response was that, of course our oil gets sold overseas. The evil oil company wants to make as much money as possible. By implication that would mean all of it!
Now to try and lay off that because of transportation. Sorry but all they would have to do is to sell the oil FOB origin. Then the transportation does not matter.
Free trade has little to do with but to seriously refute would take more time than this site will allow for a response.





What has this got to do with oil??



I thought this was a response to a discussion on oil? What documents are you talking about?



Care to be a little more specific? Or is this just intended as filler or just a snide remark?



No one in the US is denied medically necessary care! And those that receive it are not funded by the Government



Based on this comment you would fit in quite well at the ACLU. First of all the Supreme Court sends no one to jail! And you provide, again, no specifics for analysis. Then there is the propensity to through up past history as if it was headlines in yesterdays daily paper!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States

The supreme court rules on the constitutionality of a criminal conviction. By upholding it as constitutional they send someone to jail. So you are wrong. History informs the future. Your fundamental argument in this thread is that historic documents should be used with historic interpretations to limit the mandate of government, yet when someone presents history you don't like you attempt to shut it down by being irrelevant due to being not current. It would be equally ridiculous for me to tell you to stop quoting some document from the 18th century in a thread about the 21st.