Apparently the demos want Miranda rights read on the battlefields. And they think we’ll believe them when they say they will be tough on terrorists? Please

(By the way, through no fault of her own, my ex was – and, I presume, still is – a big time Wolverine fan … so, you see, it’s a little personal with me.)

You probably haven’t noticed that you get exceptionally bitchy when you’ve been caught in a lie. Just like you keep failing to notice that you really are a man.

Once again, you validate the fact that you are a liar. And are immature.

That Walt!!! Letting the secret of my broom out!!! You’re going to spoil a good thing – Mr. Aphrodite thinks I’ve been racking up frequent flyer miles….

#103 – “This is why we don’t take MA seriously. He’s a liar:
I’m off to the airport……have a great day!
Comment by mighty aphrodite — September 21, 2006 @ 2:17 pm
Comment by mighty+aphrodite — September 21, 2006 @ 3:25 pm”
Comment by unbelievable

*********I suppose when they get laptops and wi-fi in Podunk, GA you’ll get up to speed…..FYI – You shouldn’t eat your Blackberry…..

And, regarding the Pelosi comment (Hugo Chavez is a thug) – I would use a different analogy. To me, her defending Bush is like the way a Bears fan (that’d be me) feels about the Green Bay Packers. I hate ‘em … until their in the playoffs against (take your pick) the 49ers, the Giants, the Eagles, the Rams … Hey, the Packers may be jerks, but they’re OUR jerks! (And I’d take Brett Favre over Joe Montana any day of the week … even if he doesn’t know how to pronounce his own name …)

(Though as a Big 10 fan, I’m not so sure I can be that generous when it comes to Michigan. But hey, that’s Michigan. I mean, c’mon … they have the most obnoxious fans in the world. They make Notre Dame fans look good. Why, Michigan football fans are worse than Duke basketball fans, fer Chrissakes. …. Okay, have I offended nearly everyone by now?)

I’m off to the airport……have a great day!
Comment by mighty aphrodite — September 21, 2006 @ 2:17 pm

Comment by mighty+aphrodite — September 21, 2006 @ 3:25 pm

Comment by coachjason

Now that’s the kind of sense of humor some of us enjoy. Civility will get you a long way with many of us, coachjason. I hope you’ll find that many liberals can explain themselves quite well and will not sound as insane as some would have you believe. I invite you to challenge us on our facts and demand we explain our opinions. The intellectual exercise is quite fun for many of us, and it helps someone to re-examine his or her beliefs from time to time. That’s when one learns that some of the bases for one’s opinion no longer apply today.

There is nothing wrong with being conservative, as long as there’s open-mindedness. What many of us see in the Republicans in Congress, and especially in the White House, is a total unwillingness to even briefly entertain the notion that maybe, just maybe, they might not be right. And that’s not being “resolute” or “strong-willed” or “determined”, that’s just being stubborn.

Keep on visiting us, coachjason. Stick around long enough, debate fairly and squarely (no making up bullshit facts like some do), and you’ll earn the respect you deserve. But lapse into mindless unnecessary personal attacks (as opposed to merely attacking an idea, which is fine) and you’ll quickly get the same treatment you’ve seen others get. Looking forward to hearing what you have to say in the future. Don’t be a stranger.

Outstanding!

But the very first time I engaged in any sort of back-and-forth dialouge with the Mighty One (on a thread dealing with whether the federal judge in Michigan should have recused herself from hearing the case against the Bush administration over the NSA warrantless wiretapping program), she responded to a lengthy post of mine as follows: “Dear Dave, Esq, You Insufferable Prig/Prog – I suppose you were the same kind of weasel who did other students’ briefs – for a fee…”

And, of course, she utterly failed to respond to the substance of my arguments.

This is a trend that has gone on, over and over and over again, every time I try to engage her in rational debate. Now, you may be right – she may have been treated rudely from day one, and so she expects us all to be jerks – but I find her attacks to be, well, rather humorous.

You, on the other hand, are always respectful and I appreciate that.

“What IS vague is the directive in c.): “outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment;” I am ALL for a little humiliation if I can get one of these SOBs to give up a plot or cell. Personal dignity???? Give me a break!!!! They deserve the personal dignity of a toilet and sink, a bright light shining on their sorry selves and sleep deprivation. I would pipe in some gang-bang hippity-hop bass-laden “music” until they begged to talk so as to enjoy some peace and QUIET. If my methods appear harsh to you, remember your methods seem impotent to me.

Oddly, though, you don’t tell us why you think the quoted language is vague. Instead, you say that you are “ALL for a little humiliation” … which is directly contrary to the language of Common Article III. Then you say “Personal dignity???? Give me a break!!!! They deserve the personal dignity of a toilet and sink …” which, again, is a rejection of the requirements of Common Article III.

In other words, under the guise of claiming that Common Article III is vague, you are actually arguing that those aspects you disagree with – i.e., the provisions of Common Article III that prohibit humiliation and outrages upon personal dignity – should not apply to captives in GWOT. So, my comment that you are, in effect, definging those provisions out of existence is, um, right on point.