Increasing Number Of Americans View Supreme Court As ‘Too Conservative’
Increasing Number Of Americans View Supreme Court As ‘Too Conservative’
During the full first term of Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, the court has taken a sharp turn to the right. In June, the court ruled that local school authorities “cannot take modest steps to bring public school students of different races together.” It also upheld a ban on the so-called “partial birth” abortion procedure and repeatedly sided with big business in decisions.
According to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll, an increasing percentage of the American public is unhappy with this shift:
The percentage who said the court is “too conservative” grew from 19 percent to 31 percent in the past two years, while those who said it is “generally balanced in its decisions” declined from 55 percent to 47 percent. [...]
[A] majority disagreed with the court’s decision that sharply restricted the ability of local school boards to use race when making school assignments to achieve diverse student bodies. Fifty-six percent of those polled disapproved of the decision; 40 percent approved.
During their nomination hearings, Roberts said he had “no agenda.” Alito said he would rule in a “neutral fashion.” Yet the two Bush nominees have sided with one another approximately 90 percent of the time.
The Senate is frustrated that the two justices have not lived up to their promises. Yesterday, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) said that the Senate “should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush ‘except in extraordinary circumstances.’” Sen. Arlen Specter (R-PA), who championed the nominations of Alito and Roberts, plans to review their Senate testimony to “determine if their reversal of several long-standing opinions conflicts with promises they made to senators to win confirmation.”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:24 pmAlito and Roberts are way too conservative.
Not much can be done now, however, we’re stuck with them.
Elections have consequences. Maybe the President will get an opportunity to recess appoint Ann Coulter or Robert Bork to a vacant seat!
July 28th, 2007 at 6:26 pmSo what will Arlen recommened if he determines that Alito and Roberts have broken the “promises they made to senators to win confirmationâ€?
Will he ask his colleagues in the House to institute impeachment proceedings, meanwhile promising that, if it reaches the Senate, he’ll vote to convict and remove? Will he promise to be less of a lickspittle in the future?
I suppose he’ll conclude that they did break their promises, but only a bit, and although he’s troubled by all of this, he hopes everything will move along acceptably from now on.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:27 pmYup, like Marie said, we told you so.
How can we see these things and they not?
July 28th, 2007 at 6:28 pmBoth Roberts and Alito have been on the wrong side of so many important decisions. Democrats should have filibustered or placed a hold on both of these nominations. It is a pity the filibuster for Alito failed. Their decisions have set back women’s rights and civil rights and desegregation in this country. We need a democratic president who will appoint people to the bench that respect the previous decisions of the court. I’m glad Sen. Kerry had the forth sight to try to filibuster the Alito nomination.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:28 pmMarie ~ Exactly.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:29 pmNow all we can do is hold our breathe and hope that no other justices die between now and Jan 09!
Not me!!!
July 28th, 2007 at 6:29 pmI suppose he’ll conclude that they did break their promises, but only a bit, and although he’s troubled by all of this, he hopes everything will move along acceptably from now on.
Hahaha! Idiot, they followed Ginsberg Precedent to a T!
July 28th, 2007 at 6:29 pmLong live Justice Stevens!
July 28th, 2007 at 6:31 pmFifty-five percent of those polled — including majorities of both women and men — approved of the court’s abortion ruling. The decision significantly shifted the court’s abortion jurisprudence, marking the first time justices have upheld a restriction on a specific abortion procedure and one that does not include an exception for a woman’s health.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:31 pmIt’s not about right or left with the Supreme Court. It’s about the law and the constitution. And the Constitution is all about individual rights. Not favoring one race over another. A color blind society like Dr. King asked for.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:32 pmAnother opportunity for Specter to show off his caving skills.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:33 pmA color blind society like Dr. King asked for.
Comment by Kevin — July 28, 2007 @ 6:32 pm
———————-
Exactly, and that is one of the strong points for this Supreme Court.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:36 pmLet’s see, you vote for the war and Bush gives you war. You vote for Gonzales and you get Bush’s private attorney. You vote for these two friendly fascists and you get a far right wing majority on the Supreme Court.
-GSD
July 28th, 2007 at 6:40 pmThe RATS are in charge of the judicial branch of the government.
R=Roberts
A=Alito
T=Thomas
S=Scalia
Kennedy is the swing voter and his vote is going to the highest bidder.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:42 pmless gullible elected representatives, please.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:42 pm#4
Comment by pwapvt — July 28, 2007 @ 6:28 pm
I agree. As a person of average intelligence, why are these things so apparent to me and not to those who make the decisions?
July 28th, 2007 at 6:43 pmAre they all too removed, too isolated to see beyond their small world in government, whereas the rest of us deal with others day in day out in all walks of life, and we can smell a rat even if we can’t see it yet?
During their nomination hearings, Roberts said he had “no agenda.†Alito said he would rule in a “neutral fashion.†Yet the two Bush nominees have sided with one another approximately 90 percent of the time.
Roberts and Alito are blatant liars, and they are on the highest court in that land.
That is so f*cked up.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:47 pmKevin, in an ideal world, it IS the law of the land (the Constitution) that the SCOTUS interpret – and it should be without political bias. But throughout history, individual bias has always seeped into the deliberations and judgments. The ideal is to appoint judges who, regardless of their politics, will see the whole picture and vote for the better of the country and equality and fairness for its people. Bush&Co, sadly, look ONLY at politics.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:47 pmComment by Marie — July 28, 2007 @ 6:43 pm
I agree with what you said at the top, but, Marie, don’t sell yourself short. One of the reasons I enjoy reading your posts even when “lurking” through, is because you are clearly (to me) of above average intelligence. Otherwise I would likely never respond to them favorably. I think you’ve seen how I respond unfavorably. :)
Keep up the good posting.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:48 pmIt’s not about right or left with the Supreme Court. It’s about the law and the constitution. And the Constitution is all about individual rights. Not favoring one race over another. A color blind society like Dr. King asked for.
Comment by Kevin — July 28, 2007 @ 6:32 pm
You’re right, Kevin.
But that’s not what the SCOTUS is doing, and that is the problem.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:48 pmYes it’s too conservative, but some Democrat Senators helped to make it happen. They deserve most of the blame now.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:49 pm#20, Wayne
July 28th, 2007 at 6:50 pmGee, thanks! :)
Keep up the good posting.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 6:48 pm
I wholeheartedly agree! If I see a comment by Marie, I read it, because I know she’s always very level-headed and really knows her stuff.
Thanks, Marie!!
July 28th, 2007 at 6:50 pmDoes anyone else here think GWB looks like a little kid in the pic?
A power-drunk kid.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:51 pmDoes anyone else here think GWB looks like a little kid in the pic?
A power-drunk kid.
Comment by trueblue — July 28, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
He often holds the posture of a young child.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:53 pmYou’ve noticed that before, as well?
Zooey,
July 28th, 2007 at 6:54 pmDitto! :)
Roberts and Alito are blatant liars, and they are on the highest court in that land.
That is so f*cked up.
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
And this is why we are so ph*cked to the core as a previously free people!!
The corporate suckup DemoGraphics colluded with the Repugniscums to screw all of us into the ground.
I’m a human without a party!!!
July 28th, 2007 at 6:55 pmHave any of you heard a Republican talk about “activist judges” when the Democrats want to nominate a judge? They want “strict constructionists” which is in itself dumb since the world has changed greatly since the constitution was written. But the “activist judges” thing is what really gets to me. What we have now are activist right wing judges who interpret law according to their religious beliefs. If that’s not an “activist judge”, I don’t know what is.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:55 pmDoes anyone else here think GWB looks like a little kid in the pic?
A power-drunk kid.
Comment by trueblue — July 28, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
Does anyone else here think GWB looks like a little kid in the pic?
A power-drunk kid.
Comment by trueblue — July 28, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
He often holds the posture of a young child.
You’ve noticed that before, as well?
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 6:53 pm
Are we talking about the picture of Alito and Roberts above? or is there another pic I missed? Or am I drunk now?
July 28th, 2007 at 6:56 pmAre we talking about the picture of Alito and Roberts above? or is there another pic I missed? Or am I drunk now?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 6:56 pm
That’s right, Wayne, embarrass everybody.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:58 pmI find it rather ironic that we would be in a much better position if the Democrats had filibustered Alito and/or Roberts and the Republicans had done their “nuclear option” on the filibuster. If they had done it, they would not be able to filibuster the Democrats today. I actually think the filibuster should be done away with.
July 28th, 2007 at 6:59 pmWow we now live in a colorblind society? Ummm somebody better inform New Orleans.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:03 pmI find it rather ironic that we would be in a much better position if the Democrats had filibustered Alito and/or Roberts and the Republicans had done their “nuclear option†on the filibuster. If they had done it, they would not be able to filibuster the Democrats today. I actually think the filibuster should be done away with.
Comment by bilbobaggins — July 28, 2007 @ 6:59 pm
Certainly, the threat of employing the “nuclear option” reduces the effectiveness of the filibuster. It at least seems fair that, if both sides are going to employ the filibuster, then both sides should either use the threat of the nuclear option or both sides should not use it.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:03 pmWhat we have now are activist right wing judges who interpret law according to their religious beliefs. If that’s not an “activist judgeâ€, I don’t know what is.
Not only are those Activist Judges, they should be considered treasonist judges for seeking guidance outside of the rule of man in favor of some imagined and ridiculous, useless god!
July 28th, 2007 at 7:03 pmThat’s right, Wayne, embarrass everybody.
Comment by Egreggious — July 28, 2007 @ 6:58 pm
Not my intent. I thought perhaps that they were referring to a funny pic in one of the links in the article. I’m easily confused.
Jeb fall down.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:05 pmHey nader voters; There’s your dimes worth of difference.
In 08 Congress needs to raise the number of Suprrmoes then President Edwards can fill the seats with non-religious fanatics.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:07 pmThe Supreme Plutocrats
-GSD
July 28th, 2007 at 7:12 pmAre we talking about the picture of Alito and Roberts above? or is there another pic I missed? Or am I drunk now?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 6:56 pm
Gee whiz, Wayne. Too much sun? :-D
July 28th, 2007 at 7:13 pm37. Maybe President Edwards or Obama or Richardson or Dodd or Biden can appoint Hillary to the Supreme Court.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:14 pmChew on that one trollie boys.
Or Gore (almost forgot).
July 28th, 2007 at 7:16 pmHillary for Supreme Court !!!!
Well, Bush was hoping that Herriet Miers will be on the Supreme Court bench,to begin with
July 28th, 2007 at 7:24 pmShe is now not responding to the Congress Subpoena sent to her.
Roberts asked for a pay raise two months after he started..
There you have it…
Maybe President Edwards or Obama or Richardson or Dodd or Biden can appoint Hillary to the Supreme Court.
While I have said that I wopn;t vote for her because I want her to fulfill the six year term she asked us New Yorkers to give her, I would support her nomination to the Supreme Court (though I would prefer her husband for that slot. Hell, why not both? Then the conservatives can finally STFU, because they wouldn’t be speaking out as much.)
July 28th, 2007 at 7:24 pmThank you Schumer, Leahy, Feinstein for the gold dust twins—Roberts and Scalito. You put up one helleva fight to keep these jerks off the court!!!
July 28th, 2007 at 7:25 pmMany knew that Alito and Roberts would wind up pushing a conservative agenda, despite their promises to the contrary. What I find difficult to understand is how the Senate didn’t see it coming and took these two at their word? It must be a mental deficiency that kicks in as soon as you’re elected to the Senate
Or maybe they knew full well that these two would push a conservative agenda?
July 28th, 2007 at 7:30 pmIt’s all about balance.
Sure, the Court is now conservative…we (the left) made it so w/a weak 2004 Presidential race. Unless you’re a hypocrite, you can’t blame the winner for that can you? Who would Kerry have appointed? Second place is first loser.
That said, a conservative court will lead to a progressive/liberal electorate as your average voter gets disenfranchised by the conservative voice of the court. And over time…vice versa… That’s the beauty of our system in the long view, the pendulum will always swing back the other way.
Naturally…the short term does suck though.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:31 pmIf Bush is actually able to push through one more conservative judge, I wouldn’t be surprised if we start seeing a generation of Constitutional amendments being proposed to overturn unpopular decisions.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:34 pmPlease, Egreggious,
Don’t scare me like that.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:36 pmDon’t scare me like that.
Comment by trueblue — July 28, 2007 @ 7:36 pm
I was actually trying to inject a ray of hope. Amending the Constitution is the remedy we have for a Supreme court run amuck (or is that amok?).
July 28th, 2007 at 7:38 pmIt’s amok.
:)
I thought you meant they would return us to days I was happy I did not have to live through, as far as women’s rights went.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:40 pmI thought you meant they would return us to days I was happy I did not have to live through, as far as women’s rights went.
Comment by trueblue — July 28, 2007 @ 7:40 pm
Well that too, unfortunately. I was thinking if Roe v. Wade was overturned, it might be very difficult to get a Constitutional amendment that would restore the rights granted by that decision.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:43 pmLets keep our toes and fingers crossed that Kennedy remains healthy at least until Al Gore takes office in early 2009
July 28th, 2007 at 7:43 pmBTW, my dictionary says that amok is a variant of amuck.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:44 pm… so where is the ray of hope?
I’m not seein’ it.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:44 pm:P
BTW, my dictionary says that amok is a variant of amuck.
Comment by Egreggious
We’re both right.
YAY!
:)
July 28th, 2007 at 7:45 pmNo problem just let Larry Flynt do a background check and Alito and Roberts they will be removed. Alito is truely gay and sick in the mine. Roberts has a woman or more on the side. For those who disagree I only point to Vitter the Christian choice. Yes the Paster who preached the word of God while having sex with men. Ralph Reed the Christian boy who lied and steal from the Church. Jackie Abramoff you know what he did. Then there’s Fingers Foley who while voting for the Iraq war was on his computer talking sex with kids, he did go to the men’s room on a as needed bases.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:47 pmComment by Egreggious — July 28, 2007 @ 7:38 pm
Comment by trueblue — July 28, 2007 @ 7:40 pm
On the contrary, we would make sure those rights are embedded within the constitution. Let’s claer up the issue of Reproductive Rights once and for all, and guarantee a woman’s right to her own decisions, since a majority of the country favors a woman having such a right. (Many may also favor some restrictions, but at least they most emphatically do not want to see it taken away entirely.)
Amd why stop there? Amend the constitution to formally consider executive signing statements to carry no weight in law, absent specific legislation granting that authority to the excecutive branch, under Art 1, Sec 8, Cl 18., and require them at the time of signing, so it can’t be re-interpreted to suit their needs.
Do away with the electoral college and go straight to popular votes detemining presidential elections. Require all balloting to be on paper ballots (until such time as paper no longer exists, then find some other form of hard medium).
Prohibit all guaranteed cost-plus contracts with the government or any of its subsidiaries. And require that at least 90% of our money for contractors be put up for competitive bid. (I made that number up; it could vary according to how much must really be given directly to one company.) Limit any one contractor and its subsidiaries from receiving more than a certain percentage of the people’s money in any fiscal year.
I could go on, but not here. The point is that there is a lot we can do with the right people in government.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:50 pmI said difficult, not impossible. If abortions start being performed in back alleys again, people will hopefully come to their senses that this is not the kind of America we want to have, and we could then amend the Constitution to guarantee freedom of choice.
I also think that there is a lot of pandering by politicians and others over abortion, to appease their fundamentalist base. But, if it actually came down to it, I wonder if they’d actually be in favor of abandoning Roe v. Wade. It’s almost better to keep it out there as an issue to get those voters lining up. Kind of like the gay marriage amendments which turned out voters in 2004. Now that they got their way, how will they motivate these homophobes?
July 28th, 2007 at 7:51 pmI nominate Wayne Schneider for President!!
YAYYYYY!
July 28th, 2007 at 7:56 pmWayne, I agree with you.
It’s been a long time since the Constitution was amended, but it is not an unusual event really. The time may be coming again.
I remember you wrote something about having another Constitutional Convention or something. Tell me why you think that would be a good idea (if you do believe that).
July 28th, 2007 at 7:56 pmMaybe the President will get an opportunity to recess appoint Ann Coulter or Robert Bork to a vacant seat!
Comment by m12 — July 28, 2007 @ 6:26 pm
To where? One of the WH bathrooms?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:01 pmThe Court will be a sobering reminder of the neocon experiment–like the lingering smell of rotten eggs. It will remind us not to screw up again.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:03 pmComment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
Long time no see Zooey. Where you been hiding.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:04 pmA power-drunk kid.
Comment by trueblue — July 28, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
Why do we get so many pix of the Deciderer riding his bicycle? Jes’ asking.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:05 pmComment by Egreggious — July 28, 2007 @ 7:56 pm
First of all, thank you, but I am unelectable.
I suggested it esentially for the reason i stated above. I’m getting tired of wondering where a lot of five-four decision, which under stare decisis (sp?) should be decided law, are going to come down in the future. This court has demonstrated its willingness to overturn precedent. It’s time to take the wiggle room out of all those decisions and settle it once and for all.
Add the elimination of “Corporate Personhood” and any rights one of them might have to the list. (And no, I have no idea how that should be worded, but I think it’s understood what needs to be eliminated.)
Here’s another. Because the word “marriage” carries certain religious aspoects to it for some people, why not, on a federal level, eliminate the word “marriage” and replace it with “civil union”, defined to be a union of two, and only two (you religious wingnuts) humans (and you, Santorum). I’m confident the Union would not desolve if two gay people were allowed to enjoy the same benefits as heterosexual amrried (and even some unmarried) couples enjoy.
What else needs solidification in the constitution in order to make idiotic justices like these irrelevant to the Republican plan?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:06 pm“Not much can be done now, however, we’re stuck with them.
Comment by Marie — July 28, 2007″
And that sure is good news!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:09 pmI didn’t read all the comments yet and I apologize if this has already been asked..
July 28th, 2007 at 8:09 pmIf Senator Spector finds they misrepresented themselves to the Senate during confirmation hearings in order to win their seats on the Supreme Court, can their seats be challenged and can they be removed or impeached from the Court?
“Maybe the President will get an opportunity to recess appoint Ann Coulter to a vacant seat!
Comment by m12 — July 28, 2007″
I could support that! She is after all a Constitutional Attorney!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:10 pmHow can we change the process in the future to correct it. The last few years have amply illustrated that all you have to do to be approved is to lie your teeth off.
And as they’re philosophically talking about a scenario of what they may or may not do in the future, it is always easy to say that the current situation and action doesn’t match the philosophical scenario. Not to mention that time has elapsed since then and I’ve changed a little and the nice judge RATS next to me made such a good argument, yada, yada, yada………
In short, one couldn’t even conclusively establish that they were lying – excuse me, I meant talking discretely.
And I’m not even talking just about Supreme Court, but any presidential appointment on which Congress has a hearing. Remember the factual tongue of various UN nominees and nominees for head of the DOJ.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:10 pmWhat else needs solidification in the constitution in order to make idiotic justices like these irrelevant to the Republican plan?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 8:06 pm
Right now I’d like to see Executive Privilege defined.
And a clarification of what constitutes a legal war.
But you are right on the money with your suggestions as usual, Wayne.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:10 pm“Their decisions have set back women’s rights and civil rights and desegregation in this country.
Comment by Probus — July 28, 2007″
The above statement is a perfect example of why I come here! It’s both idiotic and untrue.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:13 pmComment by MapleStreet — July 28, 2007 @ 8:10 pm
Also a good point.
I believe the Congress can impeach Justices, but that is probably as far as their power goes. I think it’s even been done before. Wayne? I bow to your expertise.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:13 pm#57 Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 7:50 pm
Do away with the electoral college and go straight to popular votes detemining presidential elections.
I have a fear of this. The tyrany of the majority is a frightening prospect to me. In today’s world of disinformation and misinformation, not to mention outright lying, which is enabled by the mass media, where is the security of “an informed citzenry” that Jefferson banked upon? The Iraq debacle is a case in point. Sold on lies and based on fear, the majority was pushed into thoughtless decisions in their choice of action.
And then there is the “religious” angle that is being sold by Bush in his pursuit of Good vs Evil. Again, the people are being conned, by fear (if you are against Evil, by Bush’s definition, you are against god.) and hesitate to respond. The media by its lack of speaking out enables this dangerous direction. It is the goal of the religious right to replace the Constitution with the bible as the source of governance. As the majority of people in this country are christians it is all too possible to have a problem.
That a candidate is a “religious” believer should not be the basis for election, and yet, as Bush’s “election” shows, many people believed him to be the right man for the job, based on his professing his belief in god.
As great as it sounds, I don’t think we are ready, at this time, to do away with the electoral process.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:14 pm“But you are right on the money with your suggestions as usual, Wayne.
Comment by Egreggious — July 28, 2007″
Wayne has never been right about anything. Wayne, I thought you picked up your toys and went home?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:14 pm“Do away with the electoral college and go straight to popular votes detemining presidential elections.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007″
Did you want to do away with the Electoral College after both of Clinton’s victories?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:16 pm“The Iraq debacle is a case in point. Sold on lies and based on fear
Comment by Merlin — July 28, 2007″
What lies?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:18 pmAs great as it sounds, I don’t think we are ready, at this time, to do away with the electoral process.
Comment by Merlin — July 28, 2007 @ 8:14 pm
I don’t understand how giving states like Wyoming more influence in elections than their population would indicate they should have, solves the problem of an uninformed mass determining elections.
I agree with Wayne. I think a popular vote would have been fine in the Clinton years as well, Ann.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:20 pmWayne A. Schneider, I’ve been reading your blogs. They are very good. I like your ideas.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:20 pm“Or maybe they knew full well that these two would push a conservative agenda?
Comment by W.Clements — July 28, 2007″
You people are brain dead! Did you actually think that they would push a liberal agenda?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:21 pm“I agree with Wayne. I think a popular vote would have been fine in the Clinton years as well, Ann.
Comment by Egreggious — July 28, 2007″
Answer the question I posed in #76?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:22 pm“I like your ideas.
Comment by JG — July 28, 2007″
Of course you do.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:23 pmSo michael, ARE you Ann coulter? Or, is it you just want to BE Ann Coulter??
July 28th, 2007 at 8:24 pmI could support that! She is after all a Constitutional Attorney!
Comment by michael — July 28, 2007 @ 8:10 pm
When (she) was in private practice (she) was a corporate lawyer.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:24 pmThat’s the beauty of our system in the long view, the pendulum will always swing back the other way.
Comment by swill — July 28, 2007 @ 7:31 pm
—————————-
Well, this part is true, but I don’t know if I would call it “beauty,” maybe just the idiocy the idiocy and weak-mindedness of the masses.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:24 pmDid you want to do away with the Electoral College after both of Clinton’s victories?
Comment by michael — July 28, 2007 @ 8:16 pm
michael, I’ll play your game for a little bit.
To the best of my memory, I was not at all concerned with the Electoral College vote after Clinton’s victories, because it wouldn’t have changed the outcome either way.
I had thought about the Electoral College system before 2000, if that’s what you mean, and had come to the conclusion that it was silly. US Elections should be based on people, not geography, as far as I’m concerned.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:25 pm#70 Comment by Egreggious — July 28, 2007 @ 8:10 pm
Right now I’d like to see Executive Privilege defined.
And a clarification of what constitutes a legal war.
Yes, and add signing statements to the list. It would be good to examine the role of Commander in Chief, as defined by the Constitution, in today’s world. The abuse of power by this cabal requires it, I believe.
Unitary president. Indeed!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:25 pm“You put up one helleva fight to keep these jerks off the court!!!
Comment by nochickenhawk — July 28, 2007″
Why are they jerks?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:26 pmAnd do you have anything intelligent to say?
Comment by michael — July 28, 2007 @ 8:17 pm
Oh, gosh, Michael. I think I might be a couple of inches shorter after that.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:27 pmProbably die six months earlier too.
76: Tell us about how Clinton lost the popular vote in 92 and 96.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:27 pm77: Yes, your an assH@le.
78: WMD; Iraq oil will pay for the war; Mission Accomplished; Sadam involved in 9-11; connections between al queda and iraq pre-war; welcome us with flowers; No need for 300,000 + troops.
Anyone else care to educate my owner.
“When (she) was in private practice (she) was a corporate lawyer.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007″
So what! She’s a Constitutional Attorney!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:27 pmComment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 7:50 pm
I agree, Wayne. Reproductive rights are a no-brainer, or they ought to be.
And the electoral college needs to go. We obviously have the capability of counting votes on a massive scale, and our population is 99% literate. The electoral college is antiquated.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:28 pmLong time no see Zooey. Where you been hiding.
Comment by shane — July 28, 2007 @ 8:04 pm
I’ve been Zehava for a few days. :-)
July 28th, 2007 at 8:29 pmComment by Merlin — July 28, 2007 @ 8:14 pm
Thank you Merlin, Eggreggiosu,and JG.
I do not propose that this be done in a vacuum. We could also amend it to restrict media ownership to prohibit the kinds of evil perpetrated on the public by that pack of pernicious poodle pumpers. You get the idea.
In general, let’s have us a good old constitutional convention and propose amendments to cover as many controversial issues as possible, especially where any kind of “executive privilege” might begin or end. (Nat’l security only.)
Guarantee something like the Freedom Of Information Act, so we can make sure we’re never leid to again.
I think I’m going to start writing these all down somewhere, and I’ve got just the place. I’ll be back later. Thanks again everyone.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:29 pm92. And I’m a neurosurgeon.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:30 pm“US Elections should be based on people, not geography, as far as I’m concerned.
Comment by Egreggious — July 28, 2007″
Of course you feel that way! Gore would be in the Oval Office today and your mother and sisters would be wearing burkas!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:30 pmSo what! She’s a Constitutional Attorney!
Comment by michael — July 28, 2007 @ 8:27 pm
Are you embarrassed by that revelation?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:31 pmI think I’m going to start writing these all down somewhere, and I’ve got just the place. I’ll be back later. Thanks again everyone.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 8:29 pm
Wayne’s ideas for a new constitutional congress.
Fan-damn-tastic!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:31 pm97: Quick, look under your bed, there’s islamo-fascists!!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:32 pm“WMD; Iraq oil will pay for the war; Mission Accomplished; Sadam involved in 9-11; connections between al queda and iraq pre-war; welcome us with flowers; No need for 300,000 + troops.
Anyone else care to educate my owner.
Comment by michael’spotbellypig — July 28, 2007″
And you can document the quotes behind each one of these where lies have been documented?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:32 pmAnd you can document the quotes behind each one of these where lies have been documented?
Comment by michael — July 28, 2007 @ 8:32 pm
Rule.
Ann is the hostile party here. Let’s put the burden of proof on her, if it’s so important to her.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:34 pm101: ??? Speak english. Close your eyes, click you heels three times and repeat after me . . . There’s no place like home, there’s no place like home, there’s no place like home.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:35 pm“We obviously have the capability of counting votes
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007″
Not so fast zooey. Arithmetic doesn’t come until the 6th grade in today’s public schools. Don’t be in such a rush.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:35 pmComment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 8:06 pm
Wayne, I admire your enthusiasm, and in no way is it my intent to discourage you. However, I have been reading your ideas regarding the Constitution and I feel that some of what you suggest is not in the best interest of America.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:36 pmMr owner is practiced in the fine art of repetitive redundancy.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:36 pm“Let’s put the burden of proof on her, if it’s so important to her.
Comment by Egreggious — July 28, 2007″
One of you made the statement that there were lies, I’m just asking for proof!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:37 pmRule.
Ann is the hostile party here. Let’s put the burden of proof on her, if it’s so important to her.
Comment by Egreggious
Agreed.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:37 pm107: And we are asking you and your small-minded attitude to go “POOF”.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:38 pmThe Electoral College was created to give the individual colonies due influence in elections. It was a way to get everybody to sign on to the Constitution.
It’s antiquated and it’s silly to have it now.
Why should a voter in Alaska have more influence than a voter in New York? It’s ridiculous.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:38 pmWayne, I admire your enthusiasm, and in no way is it my intent to discourage you. However, I have been reading your ideas regarding the Constitution and I feel that some of what you suggest is not in the best interest of America.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 8:36 pm
What are your thoughts on that, Mr P?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:38 pm“There’s no place like home, there’s no place like home, there’s no place like home.
Comment by michael’spotbellypig — July 28, 2007″
Does that mean you can’t document the lies? I didn’t think so. Well I’m off to Home Depot to mingle with some intelligent Republican shoppers!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:39 pmI think I’m going to start writing these all down somewhere, and I’ve got just the place. I’ll be back later. Thanks again everyone.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 8:29 pm
July 28th, 2007 at 8:40 pm—————————–
Ah… Wayne, I hope the disappointment won’t be too much for you.
112: It’s just that you seem to live in a fantasy world and I thought I would help you find your way back home.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:40 pmComment by michael — July 28, 2007 @ 8:39 pm
Thank goodness he’s gone. Talking to an imaginary pot belly pig!?
Heh!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:41 pmMr. Pee, did you get home Eck OK?
He was kind of weird this morning. I couldn’t get him to make eye contact.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:41 pmThank goodness he’s gone. Talking to an imaginary pot belly pig!?
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 8:41 pm
Home Depot’s good for something anyway.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:42 pmWhat are your thoughts on that, Mr P?
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 8:38 pm
——————————————————–
My thought is that most of the ideas on this board are way too idealistic.
The Leftists here should always remind themselves:
You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:43 pmYou can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 8:43 pm
What about Cheney?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:44 pmAh… Wayne, I hope the disappointment won’t be too much for you.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 8:40 pm
Nevermind my question to you in #111. It was ridiculous to hope for a normal discussion.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:44 pmYou can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 8:43 pm
Yep, I was right. Useless.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:45 pmWell I’m off to Home Depot to mingle with some intelligent Republican shoppers!
Ummm, how can you tell which are the Republican shoppers? Do they LOOK different? Do they wear signs on their heads, wear pins, or have a secret handshake? (I’ve never seen any..) Or do only Republicans shop at Home Depot? (Oops, I shop there too..)
July 28th, 2007 at 8:45 pmMy thought is that most of the ideas on this board are way too idealistic.
The Leftists here should always remind themselves:
You can’t have your cake and eat it too.
Comment by Mr. President
Wow a vague point punctuated by a nebulous label followed by an idiomatic proverb. Bravo. Clearly stated as usual.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:46 pmComment by michael — July 28, 2007 @ 8:17 pm
“Got any good gags about Pat Tillman while you’re yukking it up?
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — July 28, 2007″
And do you have anything intelligent to say?
Comment by michael
TRoS has more intellegence in his little finger than you do in your whole body. Funny you should ask about intellegence, you empty headed troll. Please, regal me with all your college degrees and prestigious awards. I am impressed easily, you know. You are like the “Straw Man” in the “Wizard of Oz” but without the Wizard to give you any brains.
On this board you have nothing constructive to say, and do nothing but ask inane questions designed to get a response. You are simply a coward who would sell his worthless soul to the highest bidder.
Yeah, the reality of your presence here sucks, but you’re here. Sh*t happens.
Hmmmmm…
July 28th, 2007 at 8:46 pmI wonder if you are worth using your head as a punching bag. I’m not sure its worth the effort of pumping it up every time I want to punch it around. And without being full of air, it just won’t sound the same.
Home Depot’s good for something anyway.
Comment by Egreggious — July 28, 2007 @ 8:42 pm
I hope he finds lots of things to occupy his tiny mind and soft hands.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:46 pmI probably should go get ready for that catering gig.
I’ll leave my computer on for a bit to monitor the situation here.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:47 pmWhy is Think Progress once again buying into the strategic triangulation of Arlen Specter? How many times will Liberal websites buy his feint left run right routine until they stop using him as a poster boy for Conservative “moderates.” Don’t you realize that everything that comes out of this mans mouth is nothing but rhetoric designed to trick Independents, moderates and misinformed Democrats into keeping him in office. He consistently says one thing and does the opposite. Let’s not help him fool his constituents anymore shall we?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:47 pmI actually enjoy talking with Pee after a bout with Coultergeist.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:48 pm#127 Comment by Snowball
Agreed. Anything Specter says just absorbs some of the shock for this administration. The MSM flouts how one leading repug is questioning their own and blah…blah…the main point is lost.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:49 pmComment by Snowball — July 28, 2007 @ 8:47 pm
Hallelujah!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:50 pmWow a vague point punctuated by a nebulous label followed by an idiomatic proverb. Bravo. Clearly stated as usual.
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 8:46 pm
——————————————-
Well, okay.
I didn’t want to insult anybody, but frankly, a strict democracy is a recipe for disaster. The majority of Americans are not qualified to make political decisions, and as far as Reproductive Rights go, I have to ask:
How can one say “there is no justification for taking a life” while at the same time the same person supports abortion?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:53 pmPart of Specter’s game is to pretend to criticize the far right and then the media will use him as a counterpoint to a hard right Republican instead of having a Democrat in the debate. Then later on, he caves allowing the far right to have its way. Works every time.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:53 pm#123 Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 8:46 pm
Wow a vague point punctuated by a nebulous label followed by an idiomatic proverb. Bravo. Clearly stated as usual.
Well said! An insightful view!
July 28th, 2007 at 8:54 pmHmmmmm…
I wonder if you are worth using your head as a punching bag. I’m not sure its worth the effort of pumping it up every time I want to punch it around. And without being full of air, it just won’t sound the same.
Comment by Merlin — July 28, 2007 @ 8:46 pm
Do wear gloves, Merlin. That crusty snot under michael nose has been there for weeks.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:54 pmHow can one say “there is no justification for taking a life†while at the same time the same person supports abortion?
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 8:53 pm
You are pro-choice. Don’t stir up the shit.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:56 pmThe majority of Americans are not qualified to make political decisions,
Comment by Mr. President
And there it is the seed of fascism. “I know that I am better than others and they should not have the rights I do.” Pathetic. Un-American in its most ugly form.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:56 pmPart of Specter’s game is to pretend to criticize the far right and then the media will use him as a counterpoint to a hard right Republican instead of having a Democrat in the debate. Then later on, he caves allowing the far right to have its way. Works every time.
Comment by Snowball — July 28, 2007 @ 8:53 pm
Specter isn’t the main point of this post, Snowball. I think we all know what Specter is. The point is the PEOPLE are viewing the SCOTUS as too conservative.
July 28th, 2007 at 8:57 pmYou are pro-choice. Don’t stir up the shit.
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 8:56 pm
July 28th, 2007 at 8:57 pm————————————
Yes, but I never said that there was no justification for taking a life.
The majority of Americans are not qualified to make political decisions,
Comment by Mr. President
Straight from the horses mouth. Oh, the irony! :)
July 28th, 2007 at 8:58 pmAnd there it is the seed of fascism. “I know that I am better than others and they should not have the rights I do.†Pathetic. Un-American in its most ugly form.
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 8:56 pm
July 28th, 2007 at 8:58 pm—————————————————–
I never said that I was better than others.
Wayne, I admire your enthusiasm, and in no way is it my intent to discourage you. However, I have been reading your ideas regarding the Constitution and I feel that some of what you suggest is not in the best interest of America.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 8:36 pm
And I appreciate your courteously-given constructive crticism. I do. I have often said that the defense of the views I post is one of the reasons I put them out there for everyone to see and criticize.
So, may I ask to what you refer, sir?
July 28th, 2007 at 8:59 pmI didn’t want to insult anybody, but frankly, a strict democracy is a recipe for disaster. The majority of Americans are not qualified to make political decisions…
I actually share your concern about the majority of Americans, Pee (all I have to do is look at the 2004 election).
Democracy is not perfect. I think our founding fathers realized this when they created a “representative democracy” and tried to put some checks and balances on the idea of mob rule.
That said, democracy as a concept beats monarchies or dictatorships as far as I’m concerned.
The Electoral College does not smarten up the election process, in my opinion. It dumbs it down.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:01 pm#134 Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 8:54 pm
Do wear gloves, Merlin. That crusty snot under michael nose has been there for weeks.
Yes. Thanks for the warning. I will send him the bill if the gloves get cuts on them.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:01 pmI never said that I was better than others.
Comment by Mr. President
Whatever. Parsing words of the same meaning and then claiming you never said them is spineless. Stand up to what you said. You think most Americans should not have the right to think and choose about a topic but you should. Or do you include yourself in those that are too stupid to be allowed to vote on the subject. Which is it? Are you better than them or are you one of the stupid.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:01 pmHow can one say “there is no justification for taking a life†while at the same time the same person supports abortion?
How can one say “there is no justification for taking a life” and support this war (based on lies) in Iraq that has taken over half a million Iraqi lives and over 3,500 lives of American soldiers. This doesn’t even count the lives that will be lost due to the long lasting effects of depleted uranium. How do you justify that?
You aregue that abortions are wrong because life is sacred, but once the children are born you veto legislation that would ensure children have needed health care. Where is the value of life there?
In the same breath, you argue against and veto stem cell research, which has the potential to save MANY lives using stem cells that are going to be discarded and destroyed anyway. You can’t have it both ways. You either value life or you don’t. Actions speak louder than words.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:02 pmHere, I’ll save some time and say that the Preamble should be amended to include the very important statement along the lines of,
July 28th, 2007 at 9:03 pm“In all considerations, those who serve the people under oath to support the constitution shall construe “the best interests of the United States of America” to mean the best interests of its citizens, as human beings with rights, both enumerated and not.
So, may I ask to what you refer, sir?
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 8:59 pm
—————————————–
Most troubling is your suggestion for a democracy proper. I don’t trust the masses to make informed decisions.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:03 pmIt dumbs it down.
Comment by Martha Stewart — July 28, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
————————————–
How so?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:05 pmMost troubling is your suggestion for a democracy proper. I don’t trust the masses to make informed decisions.
A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:06 pmJohn F. Kennedy
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 8:57 pm
Yes, I know that Zooey. My point is, is that the Corporate Media consistently uses Specter to limit the terms of the debate. That’s his function. Just like he made a big show about criticizing Gonzo and did a 180 degree flip flop by attacking Schumer for trying to actually do something about it. Nothing is gained by Liberal websites propelling and promoting Specter’s rhetoric. It’s designed to suck the oxygen out of the debate and limit any possible action that could be taken to reign in the far right. Works every time and it’s time for Liberal websites to stop helping him do it.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:07 pm#131 Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 8:53 pm
“The majority of Americans are not qualified to make political decisions…”
Serious question, Mr. Pee
July 28th, 2007 at 9:07 pmThen who should make the decisions and what would you call the form of government that would exist under that choice?
Most troubling is your suggestion for a democracy proper. I don’t trust the masses to make informed decisions.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:03 pm
What, are you denigrating the Fox News demographic?
Are you actually saying that we’d be better off if individuals… **snicker-ouch-snicker…** like YOU were making the decisions, He Who Thinks The Saudis Aren’t Moslems?
Snicker-ouch-snicker… BWAHAHAH-ouch-HA-ouch-HA-ouch…
July 28th, 2007 at 9:07 pmOr do you include yourself in those that are too stupid to be allowed to vote on the subject. Which is it? Are you better than them or are you one of the stupid.
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 9:01 pm
July 28th, 2007 at 9:08 pm———————
I’m one of the learning. I don’t vote.
How so?
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:05 pm
This is my personal opinion, and I’ll probably get some slack for it. But for some strange reason the “general” population of less populated states like Wyoming, Alaska, Idaho (sorry, Z), etc., tend to have some backwards ideas about what’s good for this country. And yet, these same states have a disproportional influence in the outcome of presidential elections.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:09 pmI don’t vote.
………. you don’t vote..?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:10 pmThen how can you be so critical of those of us who do and who work for a better country for ourselves and our children??
Comment by JG — July 28, 2007 @ 9:02 pm
I take it you agree with me, that that way of thinking is contradictory.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:10 pmThe majority of Americans are not qualified to make political decisions,
Comment by Mr. President
Your statement states that there are those that are not qualified to make political decisions(vote?). That would mean that there are those that are qualified(better). Which of these two categories would you place yourself? I’ll give you a choice: Better Than or Less Than. And remember its an either/or statement that YOU made so an either/or answer is requested.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:10 pm#153 Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:08 pm
I’m one of the learning. I don’t vote.
What do you mean by “learning?” And why don’t you vote?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:13 pmI’m one of the learning. I don’t vote.
Comment by Mr. President
Wow. You don’t vote. Bravo. You are “One of the Learning”? What the heck does that mean? Does that mean that you are waiting for that special moment to practice the sacred act of voting? Dude, it happens at 18. There’s no reason to be a 40 Year Old Vote Virgin.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:14 pmYes, but I never said that there was no justification for taking a life.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 8:57 pm
That was saidin regard to the death penalty. Don’t try to make this an abortion issue.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:14 pmI’m one of the learning. I don’t vote.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:08 pm
Thank you for not voting.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:15 pmSerious question, Mr. Pee
Then who should make the decisions and what would you call the form of government that would exist under that choice?
Comment by Merlin — July 28, 2007 @ 9:07 pm
———————————
1) Those who have devoted their lives to statecraft and are determined to make the nation the best it can be in the opinion of the citizens.
2) A politeia.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:16 pmThis is my personal opinion, and I’ll probably get some slack for it. But for some strange reason the “general†population of less populated states like Wyoming, Alaska, Idaho (sorry, Z), etc., tend to have some backwards ideas about what’s good for this country. And yet, these same states have a disproportional influence in the outcome of presidential elections.
Comment by Martha Stewart — July 28, 2007 @ 9:09 pm
You’ll get no argument from me on that. :)
July 28th, 2007 at 9:16 pmRecent Supreme court decisions have made two very significant changes in the Abortion debate.1. The health of the mother is no longer paramount.2.The courts, not physicians, decide what is a necessary medical procedure.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:17 pmIf the court overturned Roe v. Wade, abortions would be illegal in some states and not others. Poor women, who have difficulty traveling to other states, would suffer.
And… democracy Without a Bill of rights is very dangerous. Tyranny of the majority.
Personally, I don’t define an embryo as life, and thus find no contradiction.
I know this is a controversial stance. When DOES life begin? I’ll take the Roe v. Wade compromise. That’s just me.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:17 pmMost troubling is your suggestion for a democracy proper. I don’t trust the masses to make informed decisions.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:03 pm
Thank you. I see.
But, you know, if more money had been spent educating our youth instead of building up a huge weapons arsenal to use against no one with the ability to dream of defeating it, we might not have such an ill-informed electorate.
Had we not allowed media corporations to quietly consolidate so that one company controls a huge percentage of the media that reach our citizens, we might not have an electorate so ignorant that they believed that Saddam had something to do with 9/11. (Though one can truthfully thank the massive deception campaign by the White House designed to increase support for their Iraq war, if not our understanding of exactly why it was supposed to be necessary. It kept changing so often.)
At the risk of sounding silly, there’s a quote that I’ve always liked, and its source doesn’t matter that much.
“In the 24th century, there will be no more hunger, there will be no more greed. And all of the children will know how to read.”
I believe that world is possible much sooner if we all had the willto put down our weapons, and recognize that sooner or later, we’re going to have to face survival as a species, not as a bunch of autonomous, arbitrary city-states, forever mistrustful of one another.
I guess one of the core differences between me and conservatives, is that I believe that people are born inherently good, and are taught to be bad. And I believe that the world will one day be a better place for all of us on it if we just learn to work together for the common good. I honestly do.
I think that conservatives believe that humans are born inherently bad, and must be taught how to be good. And that we will always be in danger because of this. They are naturally distrustful and cynical, and become part of the problem we need to overcome.
That’s how I see it, anyway. So I want to amend the constitution to protect the rights we all agree we should have, so that judges like the ones that Bush (Cheney) appoint won’t be able to take them away from us.
DO you oppose putting money toward making sure all citizens are taught civics lessons? It could be a licensing thing that would decrease your taxes if you take it. You would get a little more than you had to pay to attend the classes, so it would finacially attractive to people who measure life in dollars and cents.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:18 pmMr. P: Do you not vote because you are not 18, a felon or ex-felon, not a U.S. citizen or a non-voting citizen? If it’s the latter, you have no right to comment on anything that affects you politically.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:19 pm1) Those who have devoted their lives to statecraft and are determined to make the nation the best it can be in the opinion of the citizens.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:16 pm
And how do you determine the opinion of the citizens?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:19 pmIf it’s the latter, you have no right to comment on anything that affects you politically.
Comment by michael’spotbellypig — July 28, 2007 @ 9:19 pm
Yes he does. It’s in the First Amendment.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:20 pm168. Legally yes. But he has no social, moral or ethical standing to complain about anything.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:21 pmAnd how do you determine the opinion of the citizens?
Comment by Martha Stewart
Preemptive Mr. PEE response:
July 28th, 2007 at 9:21 pmBy not allowing them to vote.
well, back on topic–I’m just waiting for the witch trials to start up again.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:22 pmLegally yes. But he has no social, moral or ethical standing to complain about anything.
Comment by michael’spotbellypig — July 28, 2007 @ 9:21 pm
That’s better, I guess. But if his moral stance is that voting is dumb, he may still have a point.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:22 pmYes he does. It’s in the First Amendment.
Comment by Martha Stewart — July 28, 2007 @ 9:20 pm
I’ve always considered voting to be a civic responsibility, and have voted since I turned 18. Less formally, I considered voting to be my purchase of “b*tching rights.”
Frankly, if I know someone hasn’t voted, I don’t want to hear it.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:24 pmFrankly, if I know someone hasn’t voted, I don’t want to hear it.
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 9:24 pm
Take that, Mr. P! :)
July 28th, 2007 at 9:25 pmwell, back on topic–I’m just waiting for the witch trials to start up again.
Comment by loretta — July 28, 2007 @ 9:22 pm
According to wingnuttia, the witch trials are occurring now.
*eyes rolling*
July 28th, 2007 at 9:25 pmTake that, Mr. P! :)
Comment by Martha Stewart — July 28, 2007 @ 9:25 pm
Yeah, and his little dog too! :-)
July 28th, 2007 at 9:26 pmComment by michael’spotbellypig — July 28, 2007 @ 9:19 pm
Comment by michael’spotbellypig — July 28, 2007 @ 9:21 pm
Your second post referencing the first was off by one number on my screen. I had the first one as #167, and the second as #170.
I point this out not to nitpick, but to suggest the advantage of copying the entire “name-date-time” stamp when making a reference, to avoid possible confusion. Sometimes the number comment being referenced supported the person attacking the misnumbered one. And sometimes much hilarity ensued, but usually it got a little avoidably ugly. If you only saw how many times people said “What?” last night. :D
Anyway, I agree with your point, BTW.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:27 pmYour statement states that there are those that are not qualified to make political decisions(vote?). That would mean that there are those that are qualified(better). Which of these two categories would you place yourself? I’ll give you a choice: Better Than or Less Than. And remember its an either/or statement that YOU made so an either/or answer is requested.
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 9:10 pm
———————————————–
Am I better than or less than what?
I don’t remember saying that some citizens were better than others.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:28 pmThe original witch trials occured during the Taliban phase of American History. Patriarchy is evil, and leads to mysogeny. Teach the worlds girls to read!
July 28th, 2007 at 9:30 pmwell, back on topic–I’m just waiting for the witch trials to start up again.
Comment by loretta
Well you might have to wait for a negative time of 315 years. What is happening now is just pure political happenings. Ya know….corruption…trial…conviction…commuted sentence……pure 21st century Republican gold.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:31 pmTeach the worlds girls to read!
Comment by Badger — July 28, 2007 @ 9:30 pm
Oprah, is that you?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:31 pmWhat do you mean by “learning?†And why don’t you vote?
Comment by Merlin — July 28, 2007 @ 9:13 pm
———————————————–
I don’t have time to explain the epistemological and cognitive aspects of “learning,” so for now, understand it as defined by Oxford or Webster.
I don’t vote because I don’t trust the government.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:33 pmHey Martha,
What’s for dinner? Is it a fancy affair? :)
July 28th, 2007 at 9:33 pmI don’t remember saying that some citizens were better than others.
Comment by Mr. President
The majority of Americans are not qualified to make political decisions,
Comment by Mr. President
Ok. Would you apply yourself to those that are qualified to make political decisions or to those that are not qualified to make political decisions?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:34 pmHey Martha,
What’s for dinner? Is it a fancy affair? :)
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 9:33 pm
I wouldn’t say it was a fancy affair. More like a gay affair.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:35 pmSpeaking of which, I have got to start getting ready.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:35 pmI’ve always considered voting to be a civic responsibility, and have voted since I turned 18. Less formally, I considered voting to be my purchase of “b*tching rights.â€
Frankly, if I know someone hasn’t voted, I don’t want to hear it.
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 9:24 pm
———————————————————–
So in the future, when you are not allowed to vote, you also will not be allowed to b!tch.
Fun times.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:37 pmWould you apply yourself to those that are qualified to make political decisions or to those that are not qualified to make political decisions?
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 9:34 pm
July 28th, 2007 at 9:38 pm———————————-
I would say that I am not yet qualified, but one day hope to be.
I would say that I am not yet qualified, but one day hope to be.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:38 pm
You can’t bgin to imagine how much you’re not qualified to do.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:39 pmMr.P: Very few people, except a few Fox news viewers, “trust”the government. But we still vote. If you don’t vote, you really have no right to engage in political debate, since you cannot directly affect it. Unless, you organize others to vote, although that would seem hypocritic. As such, I fail to see how you add to the debate, no matter how erudite your posts.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:39 pmI wouldn’t say it was a fancy affair. More like a gay affair.
Comment by Martha Stewart — July 28, 2007 @ 9:35 pm
Have a lovely gay time!!
July 28th, 2007 at 9:40 pmWhat’s for dinner? Is it a fancy affair? :)
Comment by Zooey
Chicken marinated in yogurt, lime and Balti seasoning, skewered with sweet bell pepper.
And it’s very fancy. I’m even wearing pants!
July 28th, 2007 at 9:40 pmI don’t have time to explain the epistemological and cognitive aspects of “learning,†so for now, understand it as defined by Oxford or Webster.
I don’t vote because I don’t trust the government.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:33 pm
I’d suspect you also don’t have the ability to explain it either.
Since you don’t vote and don’t trust the government, why don’t you just f*ck off, nitwit?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:40 pmSo in the future, when you are not allowed to vote, you also will not be allowed to b!tch.
Fun times.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:37 pm
The point is that we ARE allowed to vote, but you CHOOSE not to do so.
No b*tching for you.
If we are not allowed to vote at some point in the future, b*tching will be an insufficient response.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:42 pmDid Mr. P answer the question of whether the reason he doesn’t vote and is “one of the learning” due to him being under the age of 18? I’m curious.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:42 pmDidn’t really word that question right..
July 28th, 2007 at 9:42 pm#162 Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:16 pm
1) Those who have devoted their lives to statecraft and are determined to make the nation the best it can be in the opinion of the citizens.
This is pretty much the definition proposed by Leo Strauss, the teacher of neoconservatism.
1. Are you aware of that?
2. As Machiavellian thought is a big part of neocon ideology have you “learned” about Machiavelli?
3. If you have read him, do you actually agree with his advice?
4. If not will you do that as part of your “learning?”
2) A politeia.
What is the definition of this word. I can’t find it.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:42 pmTell me again, why are we trying to convince Mr. Pee to vote?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:43 pmComment by Michael’spotbellypig — July 28, 2007 @ 9:39 pm
Listen not to me, but to the LOGOS
– Heracleitus
July 28th, 2007 at 9:44 pmChicken marinated in yogurt, lime and Balti seasoning, skewered with sweet bell pepper.
It sounds sublime!
And it’s very fancy. I’m even wearing pants!
Comment by gummitch — July 28, 2007 @ 9:40 pm
Good. I’m be able to concentrate this time….
July 28th, 2007 at 9:44 pmI would say that I am not yet qualified, but one day hope to be.
Comment by Mr. President
So that explains it. Not qualified. let me guess. You are 15 yrs old. Rove is your illegitimate dad and you hate it and that’s why you blog…….to get attention. Got it.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:44 pmJuly 28th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
2) A politeia.
What is the definition of this word. I can’t find it.
Comment by Merlin — July 28, 2007 @ 9:42 pm
It’s the name he invented for his political system. It took me a moment too.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:45 pmTell me again, why are we trying to convince Mr. Pee to vote?
Comment by Martha Stewart
He’s an American with voting rights. Everyone should do it.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:45 pmHe’s an American with voting rights. Everyone should do it.
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 9:45 pm
Damn!
July 28th, 2007 at 9:46 pmTell me again, why are we trying to convince Mr. Pee to vote?
Comment by Martha Stewart — July 28, 2007 @ 9:43 pm
Ah hell, I’m not. He can do what he wants.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:48 pmI would never have thought that Pee was an American.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:48 pmwhy is it we have no lives?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:49 pmMerlin,
Here’s a Wiki site about politeia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politeia
July 28th, 2007 at 9:49 pmI just tossed a DeGiorno Ultimate 4 Meat Pizza in the oven!
wheeeeeeeeeeee!
July 28th, 2007 at 9:50 pmWhat is the definition of this word. I can’t find it.
Comment by Merlin — July 28, 2007 @ 9:42 pm
—————————————————–
Literally, it means “Constitution,” but it refers to an nation that is governed by the most qualified for the benefit of all the citizens.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:50 pmwhy is it we have no lives?
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 28, 2007 @ 9:49 pm
Waaaaaaaaahhhh!!!!!
July 28th, 2007 at 9:50 pm#182 Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:33 pm
I don’t have time to explain the epistemological and cognitive aspects of “learning,†so for now, understand it as defined by Oxford or Webster.
C’mon. Don’t cop out here. I want a simple idea on where you are. What are you interested in learning about? Or where are you on this learning scale. (Regarding political knowledge and the voting issue.)
I don’t vote because I don’t trust the government.
If you are qualified to vote and don’t vote, do you believe you are free of what the government does, and the laws that are legislated by that government? In other words, how does not voting help you?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:50 pm2) A politeia.
What is the definition of this word. I can’t find it.
Comment by Merlin
It’s a group of non-partisan peoples that talk and discuss political situations. It is independently funded. Usually to bounce back ideas amongst different groups to come to an understanding.
It was just a teaser for Mr. Pee. They have no “voting rights” so who cares.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:51 pmHe’s an American with voting rights. Everyone should do it.
I TOTALLY agree with this statement. That is what makes this country strong, EVERYONE being given the right to vote and make their voices heard by taking part in the process. Sure we don’t all agree on everything, but again, usually that makes us stronger because we can debate it all and hopefully come up with what is best for all Americans. (Except in the case of this Administration who has done all they can to silence those voices, take away our freedoms and destroy the process).
July 28th, 2007 at 9:51 pmHere’s a Wiki site about politeia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politeia
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 9:49 pm
Oops, my bad.
I’m all for going Greek though. What do you say, Mr. Pee?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:52 pmAfter the SCOTUS in 2000, the better question is; how DOES voting help you?
July 28th, 2007 at 9:52 pmI just tossed a DeGiorno Ultimate 4 Meat Pizza in the oven!
wheeeeeeeeeeee!
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 28, 2007 @ 9:50 pm
I’m sorry….
I’m eating a lovely nectarine, and have my monthly New York steak waiting to be cooked. Life is good.
Hi, Lee. :)
July 28th, 2007 at 9:53 pmWieners.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:53 pmSteak sounds good… My stomach is starting to growl.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:54 pmComment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 9:49 pm
Some of that information is incorrect.
PEOPLE, DON’T RELY ON WIKIPEDIA, READ THE BOOKS YOURSELF!!!
July 28th, 2007 at 9:54 pm” That is what makes this country strong, EVERYONE being given the right to vote and make their voices heard by taking part in the process.”
Voters News Service (exit polls) was shut down after 2002 election because they didn’t Jive with the results (in Diebold counties).
In 2004 they used independant services and their own conclusions about what happened in Ohio didn’t match their data.
so they made the data unavailable.
It’s the illusion of free elections that make THEM strong.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:56 pmSome of that information is incorrect.
PEOPLE, DON’T RELY ON WIKIPEDIA, READ THE BOOKS YOURSELF!!!
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:54 pm
I’m aware of that, Mr P. I wasn’t citing a fact, it was just for a definition.
Don’t throw around your pretentious ideas, and then neglect to define them, dope.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:57 pmLiterally, it means “Constitution,†but it refers to an nation that is governed by the most qualified for the benefit of all the citizens.
Comment by Mr. President
No. Politiea does not mean “Constitution”. If you think so please link. It means a group of peoples that meet to discuss political events.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:57 pm#204 Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 9:45 pm
Tell me again, why are we trying to convince Mr. Pee to vote?
Comment by Martha Stewart
He’s an American with voting rights. Everyone should do it.
I agree. But, like Zooey, I am not trying to convince him to vote. Simply trying to create thought.
PS Zooey, thanks for the Wiki.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:58 pmSteak sounds good… My stomach is starting to growl.
Comment by JG — July 28, 2007 @ 9:54 pm
I look forward to steak night every month. Yum. :)
July 28th, 2007 at 9:58 pmWhat are you interested in learning about?
Everything… I’m a philosopher!
do you believe you are free of what the government does, and the laws that are legislated by that government
Oh yeah, I’m free like O.J., all day, everyday! But about two years ago, I decided to chill out, straighten up, and go back to school.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:59 pmPEOPLE, DON’T RELY ON WIKIPEDIA, READ THE BOOKS YOURSELF!!!
Comment by Mr. President
Yes. Let us rely upon the wisdom of Mr. Pee.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:59 pmPS Zooey, thanks for the Wiki.
Comment by Merlin — July 28, 2007 @ 9:58 pm
You’re welcome, Merlin. :)
July 28th, 2007 at 9:59 pmIt’s the illusion of free elections that make THEM strong.
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 28, 2007 @ 9:56 pm
In a sense, this might be construed as another reason to do away with the Electoral College.
Those intent on undermining the system can concentrate on those few states where Electoral votes are high and the outcome is uncertain.
The ability to commit election fraud might well be reduced by a popular voting system.
July 28th, 2007 at 9:59 pmI didn’t want to insult anybody, but frankly, a strict democracy is a recipe for disaster. The majority of Americans are not qualified to make political decisions…
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 8:53 pm
Pure Straussian thinking. Speak that noble lie, sir! Serve those aristocratic masters, sir! They know better than you do, because they are noble. There is absolutely, positively no way that giving control of elections over to the elite, wealthy few of the country could backfire. There is no conceivable way that the wealthy and powerful would use the system to make sure they keep their money and power, while denying it to everybody else. No way, no how, no siree Bob!
The answer to this is, of course, not to prevent the masses from voting, but rather to inform the masses. An informed, educated voting population leads to a healthy republic. When the masses are not told the truth, and allowed to make an informed decision, it all goes to hell in a handbasket rather swiftly.
When a large percentage of the populace is purposefully lied to, deceived into believing untruths, or to think that the truth is “fair and balanced”, of course they are not voting properly. Duh! That is why there are anti-propaganda laws in the U.S. The government is not allowed to conduct the kind of propaganda that FOX conducts on American citizens. If it ever comes to light that anyone in our civilian intelligence community or military intelligence community is behind FOX’s agenda of propagandizing, the people will fume, and heads will likely roll. Even if it is all Murdoch’s private agenda leading to such propaganda, it is still hurting the nation. No news agency should be allowed to knowingly lie to the public, period, end of discussion.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:00 pmOh yeah, I’m free like O.J., all day, everyday! But about two years ago, I decided to chill out, straighten up, and go back to school.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:59 pm
But he still goes commando to keep a little of that spirit alive.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:01 pmOh yeah, I’m free like O.J., all day, everyday! But about two years ago, I decided to chill out, straighten up, and go back to school.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:59 pm
You’re deluded.
BTW, what happened two years ago to make you decide to get back to school? What motivates a man who doesn’t care?
July 28th, 2007 at 10:01 pmNo. Politiea does not mean “Constitutionâ€. If you think so please link. It means a group of peoples that meet to discuss political events.
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 9:57 pm
Politeia, Greek for “citizenship”. Found it referenced as a root word for other words.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:02 pmLiterally, it means “Constitution,†but it refers to an nation that is governed by the most qualified for the benefit of all the citizens.
Comment by Mr. President
If you remember, PiPPy fancies himself a scholar of the ancient philosophies.
But, essentially, what he’s describing he derived from the Cliff Notes to The Republic, and it’s very much the form of government urged by the neocons. The good and smart people decide what will be done and, of course, they get to define who the good and smart people are. Them.
I don’t know about the rest of you, but the notion of Bill Kristol being one of the philosopher-kings is pretty gag-arific.
And laughable.
This is exactly what the Constitution was created for, to avoid this form of government.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:02 pm…end of discussion.
Comment by Moderation — July 28, 2007 @ 10:00 pm
Indeed!
July 28th, 2007 at 10:02 pmNo news agency should be allowed to knowingly lie to the public, period, end of discussion.
Agreed. But, how do you prevent that when it is such a small handful of powerful people who own control over all the media outlets?? I am really alarmed about this too. I get some of my news from other news sources that are outside of the US to get another perspective. It is pretty interesting..
July 28th, 2007 at 10:03 pmComment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 9:54 pm
PEOPLE, DON’T RELY ON WIKIPEDIA, READ THE BOOKS YOURSELF!!!
If you have citations and the info needed to change Wiki, why don’t you, instead of complaining that the whole thing is bogus?
July 28th, 2007 at 10:03 pmPEOPLE, DON’T RELY ON WIKIPEDIA, READ THE BOOKS YOURSELF!!!
Comment by Mr. President
By the way, I did not use Wiki. If you want others to believe you then link something YOU think is worthy.
Would you apply yourself to those that are qualified to make political decisions or to those that are not qualified to make political decisions?
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 9:34 pm
———————————-
I would say that I am not yet qualified, but one day hope to be.
Comment by Mr. President
Just saying that was one of the most pathetic responses ever…..ever.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:04 pmWell Zooey, enjoy your steak. I am going to go open up my yucky jar of spaghetti sauce and start the water for the noodles.. :-(
July 28th, 2007 at 10:06 pmThis is exactly what the Constitution was created for, to avoid this form of government.
Comment by gummitch — July 28, 2007 @ 10:02 pm
Mr P’s authoritarian streak rears it’s ugly head.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:07 pmPoor apathetic Mr. P. I’m suprised your not over at TMZ looking at the latest Linsay Lohan gossip.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:07 pmModeration; I just read an article in Nation that talked about people from private companies and corporations working with the CIA, FBI and others on delicate and secure security matters. Seeing briefings and information. Even taking part in the preperation of the PDB.
It would seem that corporate America may in fact be what Gonzo is spending so much time protecting.
Now, we all know how insestrious these corporations are. it would be nothing to make the link between these “green tag” inteligence officers and Fox or other media outlets.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:08 pmWell Zooey, enjoy your steak. I am going to go open up my yucky jar of spaghetti sauce and start the water for the noodles.. :-(
Comment by JG — July 28, 2007 @ 10:06 pm
Hey, sometimes ya gotta do the sketti. :)
July 28th, 2007 at 10:08 pmMr P’s authoritarian streak rears it’s ugly head.
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 10:07 pm
I think it’s kind of cute. You know, the Authoritarian in his Mama’s Basement.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:09 pmMr P’s authoritarian streak rears it’s ugly head.
Comment by Zooey
As it always does, and it seems to be a standard feature with all models of the troll. PiPPy has aspirations for tyranny, when he’s proven to the other members of the elite that he’s ready.
Yet another reason to thank god or fate or blind chance that the Founders were as smart as they were.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:09 pmPoliteia, Greek for “citizenshipâ€. Found it referenced as a root word for other words.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
Damn you Wayne(not really). Ok . I concede that “politeia” means citizenship in the direct translation. But in the current form it means a group of people that discuss political events and topics in an unpartizan situation. Its not just about individuals anymore….like most of the Greek words that form many of our words today…it has changed.
Nice catch though. /bow/
July 28th, 2007 at 10:11 pmZodiac lived in his momma’s basement for awhile.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:11 pmPoliteia, Greek for “citizenshipâ€. Found it referenced as a root word for other words.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 10:02 pm
———————
Indeed. It also means: government, administration, policy, constitution, commonwealth. – Oxford Classical Greek Dictionary
It shares an etymology with “polis,” the Greek word for nation-state.
It all depends on the context.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:11 pmI think it’s kind of cute. You know, the Authoritarian in his Mama’s Basement.
Comment by Martha Stewart — July 28, 2007 @ 10:09 pm
Just imagine that mama…..
July 28th, 2007 at 10:11 pmIt all depends on the context.
Comment by Mr. President
wrong there. you are either living in momma’s basement or you are not
July 28th, 2007 at 10:13 pmIndeed. It also means: government, administration, policy, constitution, commonwealth. – Oxford Classical Greek Dictionary
It shares an etymology with “polis,†the Greek word for nation-state.
It all depends on the context.
Comment by Mr. President
You neglected to give it any context. You just put it on a list, without any amplification. As such, it’s just a word.
And, of course, it also shares the root word we see in politician. Or politics. Wow. How erudite you are.
You have still defined an entirely undemocratic and, dare I say it, unAmerican form of government.
Give up Plato for awhile and try reading Jefferson.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:14 pmYet another reason to thank god or fate or blind chance that the Founders were as smart as they were.
Comment by gummitch — July 28, 2007 @ 10:09 pm
Absolutely. I hope that someday I will be better able to understand the origins of this type of behavior. It seems fear-based, but it must be more than that.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:14 pm“Give up Plato for awhile and try reading Jefferson.”
Comment by gummitch
I quit reading Jefferson when he split with Weezie.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:15 pmIt all depends on the context.
Comment by Mr. President
So you than admit that you knew the definition of the word you used it to confuse the reader. Nicely done young bottom-feeder.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:16 pmAbsolutely. I hope that someday I will be better able to understand the origins of this type of behavior. It seems fear-based, but it must be more than that.
Comment by Zooey
what type of behavior is that?
July 28th, 2007 at 10:16 pmMr.Pee,
You are a philosopher, you say. You admonish us to read the books ourselves. Well, follow your own advise. I recommend you read Michael Ledeen’s book called “Machiavelli on Modern Leadership.”
Ledeen is one of the behind the scenes philosophers of the neocons among other things. It is an eye opener, to say the least. I will await your thoughts after you read it, with interest.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:16 pmComment by gummitch — July 28, 2007 @ 10:02 pm
Actually, if you had ever read Aristotle’s Politics, which the Founders most certainly had, you would realize how much they were influenced by the classics.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:17 pm“Yet another reason to thank god or fate or blind chance that the Founders were as smart as they were.”
It doesn’t seem to matter how smart they were now. They did not forsee a Bush/Cheney administration.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:17 pmwhat type of behavior is that?
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 28, 2007 @ 10:16 pm
Sorry, Lee. I was talking about authoritarian behavior, which so many of the trolls exhibit.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:18 pm“what type of behavior is that?”
Yours, Lee Cobb, yours.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:18 pmComment by Merlin — July 28, 2007 @ 10:16 pm
I’ve got Machiavelli’s The Prince and The Discourses right here, I read it over and over again every night.
But thanks for the recommendation, I’ll check it out.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:19 pmAgreed. But, how do you prevent that when it is such a small handful of powerful people who own control over all the media outlets?? I am really alarmed about this too. I get some of my news from other news sources that are outside of the US to get another perspective. It is pretty interesting..
Comment by JG — July 28, 2007 @ 10:03 pm
Simply put:
A) Enforce the anti-trust laws. Stop allowing media moguls to exist at all. Any news service, be it newspaper, news broadcasts or news websites, needs to be limited in size. Once that size is exceeded, the company must be broken up into smaller companies. Current mass media moguls must have the news portions of the corporations sold off or dissolved. It’s the only way to protect the people from willful propaganda and lies spread by a few voices with vested political and economic interests in spreading those lies.
B) Anyone who does not qualify as a news organization, and who instead specialized in op-ed pieces as opposed to fact-based journalism, shall not be allowed to label themselves as “news” under any circumstances. The news broadcasts labeled as “news” must consist of 100% news. Opinion shows must fall during different times. By extension, this means that no CHANNEL can call itself a “news channel”, ever. You can have channels that display a lot of news, but no STATION or CHANNEL should be allowed to call itself “_____ News”.
C) Throw into jail, for treason against the United States of America, any owner of a news organization that is found in violation of domestic propaganda laws. Don’t care if the President of the United States himself came right in to your office and gave you the propaganda he wants the people to see. Don’t care if he did so at gunpoint from the Secret Service. The press cannot be allowed to lie to U.S. citizens. Period.
Selection (C) above is the clincher. If there is anything that will get the press back to reporting the FACTS, it is the threat of their jobs, their freedoms (taken away when imprisoned), and the loss of their esteemed newspaper/station/website.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:20 pmYou mean those two outstanding jurists may have commented prejury and did so with comtempt for Congress?
If so then that is reason for impeachment and removal from the Supreme Court. High crimes means something for the the Supreme Court too!
July 28th, 2007 at 10:20 pmIt doesn’t seem to matter how smart they were now. They did not forsee a Bush/Cheney administration.
Comment by JPark
The founding fathers didn’t anticipate the misuse of the fourteenth amendment giving corporations rights as individuals.
Rove didn’t outsmart the constitution, and the Neocons didn’t do it alone.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:20 pmYours, Lee Cobb, yours.
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 10:18 pm
I’m gonna smack you!
July 28th, 2007 at 10:21 pmGive up Plato for awhile and try reading Jefferson.
Comment by gummitch — July 28, 2007 @ 10:14 pm
———————
Jefferson stole his shit from Plato and Aristotle you blithering idiot!!!
LOL!!!
I’ll be back……..
July 28th, 2007 at 10:21 pmI am just teasing!!!! I suppose that doesn’t come across on the net, Zooey. I am sorry Lee.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:22 pmJefferson stole his shit from Plato and Aristotle you blithering idiot!!!
LOL!!!
I’ll be back……..
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 10:21 pm
Weren’t you the one talking about context a minute ago?
July 28th, 2007 at 10:23 pmSorry, Lee. I was talking about authoritarian behavior, which so many of the trolls exhibit.
Comment by Zooey
They’re behavior, like their nature is submissive. They have been programed to believe everything they hear from “the right” sorces; not to question authority; and to revere wealth above all other virtue.
They are the product of what the Neocons have been pushing thru the media for over two decades now. They have no real outside perspective to challenge the thinking.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:24 pmNo news agency should be allowed to knowingly lie to the public, period, end of discussion.
Comment by Moderation — July 28, 2007 @ 10:00 pm
If I may, as they love to say in DC, revise and extend that remark, I wuld like to suggest that it read:
No government aganecy should be allowed to knowingly lie to the public, period, end of discussion.
There. That’ll do.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:26 pmActually, Lee, I have a feeling they did forsee it. If you read TJ’s writings he was not hugely optimistic about democracy. He knew it would fail sometimes no matter how many checks were put into the Constitution.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:26 pmI am just teasing!!!! I suppose that doesn’t come across on the net, Zooey. I am sorry Lee.
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 10:22 pm
Sorry, JPark. :}
July 28th, 2007 at 10:27 pmI am just teasing!!!! I suppose that doesn’t come across on the net, Zooey. I am sorry Lee.
Comment by JPark
I’m eating pizza. i don’t care. I’m just like the NeoCon Trolls…feed me a noble lie or two and fill my belly with junk, and you can do anything you want.
munch munch munch
July 28th, 2007 at 10:27 pmNo government aganecy should be allowed to knowingly lie to the public, period, end of discussion.
There. That’ll do.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider
Have they lied to us? and if so, what are we doing about it?
July 28th, 2007 at 10:28 pmI quit reading Jefferson when he split with Weezie.
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 28, 2007 @ 10:15 pm
Today’s personal favorite.
“Yet another reason to thank god or fate or blind chance that the Founders were as smart as they were.â€
It doesn’t seem to matter how smart they were now. They did not forsee a Bush/Cheney administration.
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 10:17 pm
Runner up.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:29 pmThey are the product of what the Neocons have been pushing thru the media for over two decades now. They have no real outside perspective to challenge the thinking.
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 28, 2007 @ 10:24 pm
I guess I’m longing to know where this thought process comes from. Upbringing? Hardwiring?
Maybe a certain percentage of us has always been this way, but there have been checks and balances in place, and they never got enough power to have a real effect on the rest of us.
Man, I can’t wait for school to start. :)
July 28th, 2007 at 10:29 pmWell I’m voting, for one thing. Unlike some people here.
I wonder where our friend “michael” votes? And where is he registered to vote?
I’m also working on a list of proposed constitutional amendments to try to fix someof the problems. I expect the results to be quite amateurish, but from the heart.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:30 pmActually, Lee, I have a feeling they did forsee it. If you read TJ’s writings he was not hugely optimistic about democracy. He knew it would fail sometimes no matter how many checks were put into the Constitution.
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 10:26 pm
A. Lincoln mentioned two sets of inherant rights that belonged to us as Americans, in his First Innagural Address…the first was the Constitutional rights and the second were our Revolutionary Rights. It were these rights, he said that we were duty bound to use were the government to cease to represent the will of the people.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:31 pmI expect the results to be quite amateurish, but from the heart.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 10:30 pm
Use lots of “thous” and “shalt nots”.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:32 pmElections have consequences. Maybe the President will get an opportunity to recess appoint Ann Coulter or Robert Bork to a vacant seat! Comment by m12
I know what Conservatibe used to mean. Today, in its Orwellian scent, it smells rotten. The federalists, Borkers, are not conservative.
Define federalist m12.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:32 pmActually, Lee, I have a feeling they did forsee it. If you read TJ’s writings he was not hugely optimistic about democracy. He knew it would fail sometimes no matter how many checks were put into the Constitution.
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 10:26 pm
—————————————————–
100% correct.
Jefferson did not want to give the idiot masses too much power, he was no fool.
Okay, now I’m going for real…………
July 28th, 2007 at 10:33 pmComment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 28, 2007 @ 10:30 pm
Wayne,
I’m pretty sure michael is in California. He probably votes — he’ll want to make sure we get the benefit of his “wisdom.”
OT: I’m catching up on your blog. You are such a prolific writer, I hadn’t realized how far behind I was!
July 28th, 2007 at 10:33 pmComment by Martha Stewart — July 28, 2007 @ 10:29 pm
whoohooo! Now I’m off to pizza land. My dog just ran by the door with it. bastard.
later all
July 28th, 2007 at 10:34 pmLee, that doesn’t mean they are ACTUALLY inherent. They can be taken away by a government that is (like you say) not for the people. They don’t exist magically. They exist because the 3 branches of government believed in them (for the most part). The Bush admin does NOT believe in anything but their own power…Congress are muling pansies and the courts are stocked with Bush’s b!tches. It is not good.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:36 pmwhoohooo! Now I’m off to pizza land. My dog just ran by the door with it. bastard.
later all
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 28, 2007 @ 10:34 pm
I hate that when it happens. I need to go cook a steak.
Be back later, y’all. :)
July 28th, 2007 at 10:36 pm#253 Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 10:14 pm
Absolutely. I hope that someday I will be better able to understand the origins of this type of behavior. It seems fear-based, but it must be more than that.
That would be authoritarian behavior.
All the emotions can be used to control an individual or group. Fear, shame, guilt, jealousy. These have been used to force children into a pattern of behavior that is sanctioned by the prevailing authorities since time immorial. (Whether it is the parents, the church or the government.) The child’s response will vary depending on the circumstances. Wimpy or Authoritarian.
To see it in action on a personal level, look at those people close to you (friends, neighbors, family), and ask; Is what they are doing some form of control over others. If you haven’t done this, be prepared for the “Volkswagen syndrome” to get you. (After you buy one of them there seems to be nothing but VWs on the road. Before that, you did not see any.)
July 28th, 2007 at 10:36 pmComment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 10:33 pm
Thank you. If I hadn’t been working so much at my job recently, I would have found time to write more. And sometimes I just put something on another blog. I want to do more this weekend, though.
And thank you, and everyone else who does so, for visiting my blog.
Meanwhile, we’re supposed to be discussing…
…the politics of the Supreme Court. Right.
Um, never cared for these guys.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:37 pmJefferson did not want to give the idiot masses too much power, he was no fool. Okay, now I’m going for real…………Comment by Mr. President
Much as you see yourself, a college student, as not part of the masses, you are part of the masses. You are perhaps still dependent on mom and dads liberal allowance to pay your way. You see yourself, ironically, as not part of the masses.
Guess what Mr P, many people graduate from college and then discover the real working world. Your pretty much a welfare recipient at this point. Mr Masses.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:38 pmDAGIM, I am not sure what Conservative means. In my lifetime Conservative has meant screw the poor and middle class as much as you can while enriching yourself and your corporate buddies. Then again, Reagan was the earliest righty president I remember (I guess Nixon was around when I was born but thankfully not for long).
July 28th, 2007 at 10:39 pmJefferson stole his shit from Plato and Aristotle you blithering idiot!!!
LOL!!!
I’ll be back……..
Comment by Mr. President
Regression to the mean.
And another demonstration of truly astonishing ignorance.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:41 pmJefferson stole his shit from Plato and Aristotle you blithering idiot!!!
LOL!!!
I’ll be back……..
Comment by Mr. President
Sorry went for a small walk……but come on.
Mr. Pee. where do you think Plato and Aristosle got their “shite” from? Think they lerned it from sumwhere? Duh? Using others as a reference that progress thinking is not not a bad thing.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:43 pmJefferson did not want to give the idiot masses too much power, he was no fool.
As if you know anything more than you have read. The founding father were not fond of the British Royalty nor the French Bourgeoise.
They created a system of governance for the people, by the people and of the people. The seperations of powers were meant to hold the pwoerhungry elites at bay, for they knew they would bring war for profit into this country. They warned of us becoming involved in other nations problems.
What have you given us Mr Franklin?
A Republic Madam. if you can keep it.
efferson stole his shit from Plato and Aristotle you blithering idiot!!!
LOL!!!
I’ll be back……..
Comment by Mr. President
And what happened after Plato Mr President? Care to expound on that?
July 28th, 2007 at 10:48 pmMr. Pee is against education and voting. This is only a synopsis of tonight. I am sure there is more.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:49 pmThe Bush admin does NOT believe in anything but their own power…Congress are muling pansies and the courts are stocked with Bush’s b!tches. It is not good.
Comment by JPark
So which of the rights he spoke of in the !st, does that leave us with?
July 28th, 2007 at 10:50 pmAnd what happened after Plato Mr President? Care to expound on that?
Comment by DAGIM
You do realize that he is now going to have to Goggle for an hour for that answer.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:51 pmMr. Pee. where do you think Plato and Aristosle got their “shite†from?
Solon
July 28th, 2007 at 10:54 pmYou do realize that he is now going to have to Goggle for an hour for that answer.
Comment by Lee J. Cobb
If only. An hour from “It all depends on the context. Comment by Mr. President” would be awesome.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:54 pmThey created a system of governance for the people, by the people and of the people.
Oh, that is rich!
July 28th, 2007 at 10:55 pmLee, every right could be taken away at a moments notice. The Patriot Act proves that.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:55 pm“Oh, that is rich”
You don’t believe in a government by the people, for the people and of the people?
July 28th, 2007 at 10:57 pmMr. Pee. where do you think Plato and Aristosle got their “shite†from?
Solon
Comment by Mr. President
So why do you rail away at someone that got their ideas from P and A? Its like a transfusion of ideas. Do you think that we should learn from those before us or stop at some point and discontinue rational thought?
July 28th, 2007 at 10:58 pmThen in 186 A. D. the Roman army strangled the new emperor, the practice began of selling the throne to the highest bidder.
Much like today the office is won by the person with the most money. You are a poor college student Mr P.
A Iota in the masses.
Isn’t that what the constitution says Mr P? For the people?
But, please, go ahead and repeat history Mr P. Put all that college to waste.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:59 pmAnd what happened after Plato Mr President? Care to expound on that?
Comment by DAGIM — July 28, 2007 @ 10:48 pm
——————————————————–
???
Speusippus took control of The Academy ™, Aristotle started up the Lyceum, Theophrastus took over for Aristotle when he died.
Alexander of Macedon invaded Athens and the Hellenistic period began.
Time didn’t stop with Plato.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:01 pmdlet, don’t you understand? Gallilio is not worth emulating even if he WAS right about the earth rotating around the sun because…um…he is dead? Not sure what Mr. P’s point is, I guess.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:01 pmSo why do you rail away at someone that got their ideas from P and A?
Socrates was a poor man Mr P, yet wise.
Wonder why that is….
Say wasn’t Jesus also poor Mr P?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:02 pmLee, every right could be taken away at a moments notice. The Patriot Act proves that.
Comment by JPark
Apparently I am not making myself clear to you…
they have already been taken away! You’re rights are only yours it they say they are.
And now, they don’t have to give issue or warrent or notice, to just take them…and you.
The Rights that lincoln was talking about were our Revolutionary Rights
bought and paid for by those coragous enough to know when they had had enough.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:02 pm“Time didn’t stop with Plato.”
Who said it did? TJ took ideas from Plato and Aristotle because they made sense. And he obviously expanded on their ideas or we would not have the United States. Why the hate for our founding fathers?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:03 pmModeration; I just read an article in Nation that talked about people from private companies and corporations working with the CIA, FBI and others on delicate and secure security matters. Seeing briefings and information. Even taking part in the preparation of the PDB.
It would seem that corporate America may in fact be what Gonzo is spending so much time protecting.
Now, we all know how incestuous these corporations are. it would be nothing to make the link between these “green tag†intelligence officers and Fox or other media outlets.
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 28, 2007 @ 10:08 pm
Oh, it’s not only that. Judith Miller herself said that the American people would be “surprised” if they found out exactly which major news personalities were, pin her own word, “mockingbirds”
Firedoglake had an article with a link to the money quote from Ms. Miller it at some point, but I can’t find it at the moment. I even asked others at FDL if I were remembering it correctly, and it was verified by multiple, long-time posters, but the link and quote are definitely gone from their site.
Operation: Mockingbird is illegal. The CIA is not allowed to spy, propagandize, or otherwise have jurisdiction in the homeland whatsoever. They are not allowed to handle domestic issues, we have other intelligence agencies for that. Those agencies are also not allowed to broadcast propaganda viewable on U.S. soil. That is why our foreign propaganda shows are often blocked domestically. In fact, the intelligence community has complained in recent years about how much it has been held back conducting propaganda in other countries, because the internet and world-wide satellite and cable broadcasts keep showing their propaganda to U.S. citizens on U.S. soil, which they know is illegal for them to allow to happen, and they are forced by their superiors to stop work on those broadcast avenues.
The fact that this administration politicized EVERYTHING should give you an idea of where such a situation would lead to. Politicizing mockingbirds? You’d better damned well believe this administration would resort to that.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:04 pmAlexander of Macedon invaded Athens and the Hellenistic period began.
Time didn’t stop with Plato.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 11:01 pm
I believe that was DAGIM’s point. Time didn’t stop with the Hellenistic period either.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:04 pmChief Justice Roberts is a hypocrite Gay man who play-acts as straight. There are pics on the Internet of him dining with Gay guys and being fondled by them. He got married to a woman for cover and they adopted 2 kids from Europe. Eventually he will be fully exposed and the far-right will become unhinged about it.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:05 pmMy best guess is that PiPPy took one course, Pholosophee 101 and has now an intimate and rich understanding of Socrates, Plato et al. Since he’s never studied anything else, unfortunately, this is not “knowledge” that he can apply.
And, just as obviously, he’s yet to take any courses in American history.
“Federalist Papers? Huh?”
Jefferson, Hamilton, Madison, Paine . . . just for starters, PiPPy. Get back to us when you’ve done a little reading.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:05 pmYou don’t believe in a government by the people, for the people and of the people?
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 10:57 pm
July 28th, 2007 at 11:06 pm———————————————-
I believe in a government for the people.
I get it now, Lee, you are right. Our rights left us when Bush started eavesdropping on American citizens. The fact that he took that one right away from us (and later habeus corpus) means he can take every right away.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:06 pmMr. Pee? did you know that Solon degreed it a crime for any citizen that did not stand up against a crime or injustice that they knew to have taken place?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:06 pmTime didn’t stop with Plato.
Comment by Mr. President
Nor did the collapse of empires.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:06 pmDo not you perhaps think our founding fathers were trying to break that cycle?
Mr. Pee is spot on with words he can read. Too bad rational thinking can’t be divulged in a textbook. Read and read….but never think. that is a great loss. Good for you. But who set up Alexander? Think he did all by his lonesome, ever powerful, homosexual self? He learned from a few people and there were those that made the army that he used. Philip II?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:07 pmMr. President, if it is not of the people and by the people there is not f^cking way it will be for the people. You do get human nature, right?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:07 pmI believe in a government for the people.
Comment by Mr. Presiden
How RICH!!!!
Hypocrite.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:08 pmThere are pics on the Internet of him dining with Gay guys and being fondled by them.
Comment by Jay Randal — July 28, 2007 @ 11:05 pm
Link?
Please?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:08 pmI believe in a government for the people.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 11:06 pm
So in other words, instead of Big Brother, you would have Big Daddy.
Is that it?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:08 pmWhy the hate for our founding fathers?
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 11:03 pm
———–
I love the founding fathers.
The only reason the ancients were brought up is because Merlin asked me what I would call my chosen form of government.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:09 pm“The only reason the ancients were brought up is because Merlin asked me what I would call my chosen form of government.”
But you clearly left out by the people and of the people. That is not showing the big guys the love.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:10 pmAll right I’m done sitting here cheering for Pee to make a valid point.
I repeat the same action over and over, expecting a different result.
I got my kneepads on and I’m off to my “catering” job.
Probably will sleep through most of the day tomorrow.
Good night, all!
July 28th, 2007 at 11:11 pmChief Justice Roberts is a hypocrite Gay man who play-acts as straight. There are pics on the Internet of him dining with Gay guys and being fondled by them. He got married to a woman for cover and they adopted 2 kids from Europe. Eventually he will be fully exposed and the far-right will become unhinged about it.
Comment by Jay Randal — July 28, 2007 @ 11:05 pm
Please Jay, stop with the “gay” thing. I’ve never seen you post any evidence of it, and Roberts is going to be gone, I want him gone because of his job performance or lack thereof, not because of his personal life.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:11 pmI believe in a government for the people.
Comment by Mr. President
There it is. Not “by” the people…but “for” the people. Lead the herd….so to speak.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:12 pmGood night, all!
Comment by Martha Stewart — July 28, 2007 @ 11:11 pm
You’re hilarious! Goodnight, Egg.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:13 pmWell, you all know my political leanings (I’m so far left, I’m lying in the gutter right now), but, I have to admit…
I know where Mr. Pee is coming from. and he isn’t altogether wrong.
he’s a prick. but he’s not wrong.
First of all this is a Constitutional Republic which is a form of democracy.
If we had a pure democracy, then 49% of the population would be subserviant to 51%…and right now it’s more like 99% to 1%.
if we had a pure democracy, then we would probably have two countries right now because the South would have left, and the majority of the Northerners wouldn’t have wanted to hold the Union together.
We would probably not have passed the Civil Rights Act under Johnson, it was very unpopular….
and abortion rights…well…let’s hope that wouldn’t go away.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:18 pmYou do get human nature, right?
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 11:07 pm
—————————————
I do. But “the people” are human too, whether they are ruling or being ruled. So if Hobbes is correct, by nature, “the people” who happen to be ruling, will act in their own self-interest.
If find the whole “by the people, of the people, for the people…” rhetoric to be utterly meaningless.
As Nietzsche would say metaphorically, the expression is like an old coin that has been in and out of so many pockets that the face has all but worn away.
No matter what, I feel that the government should be for the people.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:18 pmThere it is. Not “by†the people…but “for†the people. Lead the herd….so to speak.
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 11:12 pm
————————-
Not at all. The government is for the people. It is there for the people! That is a good thing for the people!
Perhaps you are confused. I did not say that the people are for the government, like the sheep are for shepard.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:21 pm#321 Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 11:08 pm
I believe in a government for the people.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 11:06 pm
So in other words, instead of Big Brother, you would have Big Daddy.
Is that it?
Ouch!!! Blappity, blappity, blippity blap. How does your head feel Mr. Pee? Zooey just nailed you!
July 28th, 2007 at 11:22 pmWe elect our representatives through democratic process, but we do not hold populous votes on every issue before congress.
We elect those who best represent our wishes, and then if they break rank, the only recourse we have is the next election cycle (IMPEACH).
I say Indict then Impeach, but that’s a different thread.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:23 pmZooey >Roberts personal life is valid. If he was not a hypocrite, then I could care less about his sexuality. Do not cover for GOPers who get married to cover up being Gay. It destroys everybody around them.
I have ZERO problem with openly Gay men.
TP does not like posting links to pics on here, otherwise I would post a link to a few.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:24 pmSo if Hobbes is correct, by nature, “the people†who happen to be ruling, will act in their own self-interest. -Mr P
Hellooooooo!!!! Thats not in your interest!!
If find the whole “by the people, of the people, for the people…†rhetoric to be utterly meaningless. -Mr P
Your really internally conflicted. This post is completely conflicting.
Your interest, it would seem. Mr P is yourself and only yourself.
You would be a terrible leader for a democracy. You should consider moving to Russia. Or Iran. Maybe Cuba.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:25 pm“If find the whole “by the people, of the people, for the people…†rhetoric to be utterly meaningless.”
I am not really sure what you are saying. We have a Republic that is by the people, of the people, and for the people. That doesn’t mean, by the majority, of the majority, and for the majority. Well, actually, these days it is by the corporation, of the corporation and for the corporation and you seem ok with that.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:28 pmNot at all. The government is for the people. It is there for the people! That is a good thing for the people!
Perhaps you are confused. I did not say that the people are for the government, like the sheep are for shepard.
Comment by Mr. President
I guess I just get confused when you say this:
The majority of Americans are not qualified to make political decisions,
Comment by Mr. President
Please explain you reasoning between your statements.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:28 pmMr. Pee? did you know that Solon degreed it a crime for any citizen that did not stand up against a crime or injustice that they knew to have taken place?
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 28, 2007 @ 11:06 pm
————————————————————–
Much of the info we have about Solon was written hundreds of years after his death, and his own words are in the form of Elegiac poetry, so it is hard to say exactly what he did and did not do. What is your source, Diogenes Laertius / Plutarch / Herodotus?
Interestingly, it seems that Solon was the real author of “The Noble Lie”
July 28th, 2007 at 11:29 pmTWO NEAT GUYS!!…..wih sticks up their butts
July 28th, 2007 at 11:30 pmZooey >Roberts personal life is valid. If he was not a hypocrite, then I could care less about his sexuality. Do not cover for GOPers who get married to cover up being Gay. It destroys everybody around them.
I have ZERO problem with openly Gay men.
TP does not like posting links to pics on here, otherwise I would post a link to a few.
Comment by Jay Randal — July 28, 2007 @ 11:24 pm
Sorry Jay, I understand your problem with hypocrisy — I share it. But unless you start backing this stuff up with facts, you are hurting your own credibility. That’s my opinion.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:31 pmThe majority of Americans are not qualified to make political decisions,
Comment by Mr. President
And pork barrel lobbyists are? Many of the Senators don’t even read the bills for Gods sake!
Bridges to nowhere require a qualified what???
July 28th, 2007 at 11:33 pmOuch!!! Blappity, blappity, blippity blap. How does your head feel Mr. Pee? Zooey just nailed you!
Comment by Merlin — July 28, 2007 @ 11:22 pm
——————————–
It makes me feel embarrassed for Zooey, as it seems she is judging me with some false preconceptions, that is why I chose not to respond.
Now I feel embarrassed for you, because you said “Blappity, blappity, blippity blap.”
July 28th, 2007 at 11:33 pmOuch!!! Blappity, blappity, blippity blap. How does your head feel Mr. Pee? Zooey just nailed you!
Comment by Merlin — July 28, 2007 @ 11:22 pm
Heh.
Thanks, Merlin. :)
July 28th, 2007 at 11:34 pmWe need Supreme Court justices who will keep Roe v. Wade as the law of the land. A woman’s right to choose must be protected.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:34 pmSolon the creator of the Noble Lie -Comment by Mr. President
And how great that all worked out.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:35 pmMuch of the info we have about Solon was written hundreds of years after his death,
Comment by Mr. President
I wonder if that happened a lot in the “old age”. Ya know fantastical stories about people walking on water, different social legends of the “Great Flood”, burning bushes in the ME(and if memory serves me, I wonder why anything in the ME doesn’t spontaneously combust…..it’s freakin’ hot there.)
July 28th, 2007 at 11:35 pmIt makes me feel embarrassed for Zooey, as it seems she is judging me with some false preconceptions, that is why I chose not to respond.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 11:33 pm
Bullshit. You said a while ago that you didn’t believe in government by the people, of the people, for the people.
Now you believe in government for the people.
What’s it gonna be, Pee?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:36 pmPerhaps you are confused. I did not say that the people are for the government, like the sheep are for shepard.
Comment by Mr. President
There is no confusion on my part. “By” describes a democracy better than “For” anyday…….in my book at least.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:37 pmComment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 11:28 pm
I’m saying that, sure “people” are necessarily going to be involved. I realize we have a Republic, and I am thankful we do.
You may not have read this entire post, but originally I was objecting to the idea of a strict democracy (as was advocated earlier by Wayne and Egg.), I would much rather have a representive democracy (Republic) with reasonable laws to prevent an uninformed “people” from making hasty decisions.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:40 pmOk, Mr. P. I agree with you that a Republic is better than a pure Democracy. I didn’t read your original post. I don’t want the majority rule. If we had that the Christian crazies might actually have some power.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:42 pmThere is no confusion on my part. “By†describes a democracy better than “For†anyday…….in my book at least.
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 11:37 pm
July 28th, 2007 at 11:43 pm——————————————-
Tell me, if you were sick, (assuming you are not a doctor) would you go to a professional, or would you try to treat yourself?
Mr. P,
You still have not answered my question if you are part of the group of people that YOU believe that are mentally strong enough to make decisions for our country or if you think you should be exclude or included in the voting of our leaders.
Please respond. Are you worthy or unworthy of this Constitutional Right?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:44 pmTell me, if you were sick, (assuming you are not a doctor) would you go to a professional, or would you try to treat yourself?
Comment by Mr. President
What am I sick of…..that makes a big difference.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:45 pmComment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 11:36 pm
Actually, this is what I said:
July 28th, 2007 at 11:47 pm
I believe in a government for the people.
Comment by Mr. President
Exactly.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:48 pmWhat am I sick of…..that makes a big difference.
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 11:45 pm
—————————————-
You wouldn’t know, but a professional might…
by the way, at the very least your livelihood is at stake, at the most the illness will cost you your life.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:49 pmby the way, at the very least your livelihood is at stake, at the most the illness will cost you your life.
Comment by Mr. President
Do I have insurance? Hypothetically of course.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:50 pmI would much rather have a representive democracy (Republic) with reasonable laws to prevent an uninformed “people†from making hasty decisions.
Comment by Mr. President
It’s interesting you say that while still touting Athenian Democracy, because they were a pure democracy that worked very well.
They maintained that a well informed citizenry was critical to the stability of Athens.
They had “the golden mean” which meant they worked toward keeping all political extremes in check.
And it was not Solon who came up with “the Nobel Lie”… it was Pericles and his introduction of imperialism led ultimately to the downfall of Athens.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:50 pmIf we had that the Christian crazies might actually have some power.
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 11:42 pm
——————————————————–
Anybody? Anybody…
Come on TPers, JPark has set this one up perfectly……
July 28th, 2007 at 11:50 pmdlet has a good point, Mr. P. For the people has become non-existant in the last 6 years. The government cares about one thing…money.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:52 pm“Come on TPers, JPark has set this one up perfectly……”
Maybe I did. And I agree with myself, as usual!! However, the current government is nothing like what you describe. Are you happy with what we have?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:54 pmCaption:
July 28th, 2007 at 11:54 pm.
The 2007 Opus Dei Pocketball Team
Mr. P,
You still have not answered my question if you are part of the group of people that YOU believe that are mentally strong enough to make decisions for our country or if you think you should be exclude or included in the voting of our leaders.
Please respond. Are you worthy or unworthy of this Constitutional Right?
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 11:44 pm
How long must I wait for an answer?
July 28th, 2007 at 11:54 pmYou are comparing apples to oranges with the politician as doctor analogy.
medicine is a study of collected information spanning the begining of our time. It is a careful analysis of symptoms and observations in order to derive a given conclusion as to cause, scientific cause.
Politics are the realm of all the governed. i have no better understanding of the needs of my township than does my neighbor.
The problem is that people abandon their faith in themselves to govern because some people say they don’t have the “business” or “legal” background for it.
I suggest that a pure democracy coupled with a well informed population is by far the best democracy to have.
July 28th, 2007 at 11:57 pmIt’s interesting you say that while still touting Athenian Democracy, because they were a pure democracy that worked very well.
Well, not exactly, only citizens had a say. That ruled out slaves and women.
They had “the golden mean†which meant they worked toward keeping all political extremes in check.
No. The mean was Aristotle’s rule for living a life according to virtue. It meant that one should not be excessive nor should one be deficient in one’s activities.
And it was not Solon who came up with “the Nobel Lieâ€â€¦ it was Pericles and his introduction of imperialism led ultimately to the downfall of Athens.
Read Plutarch’s Life of Solon, part 8.
Solon had a “vision from the Gods” telling him that the Athenians would be victorious if they broke a peace treaty and invaded Salamis.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:00 am#341 Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 11:33 pm
It makes me feel embarrassed for Zooey, as it seems she is judging me with some false preconceptions, that is why I chose not to respond.
Now I feel embarrassed for you, because you said “Blappity, blappity, blippity blap.â€
The trouble you have Mr. Pee is that you are stuck in philosophy. You need to start studying psychology. Zooey nailed you psychologically. Philosophers that are not aware of psychology create lots smoke as they puff their philosophical pipe until the smoke is so thick you can’t see.
“Now, puff, puff, as I was saying, puff, puff, in the olden days, Plato, puff, said, puff, puff, in the Republic, puff, puff…”
You are hiding from your own psychology if you can’t see the brilliant nail sticking out of your chest, Mr. Pee.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:00 amActually, this is what I said:
I believe in a government for the people.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 11:06 pm
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 11:47 pm
Actually, what you said is this:
If find the whole “by the people, of the people, for the people…†rhetoric to be utterly meaningless.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:00 am#365Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 12:00 am
Actually, what you said is this:
If find the whole “by the people, of the people, for the people…†rhetoric to be utterly meaningless.
Puff, Puff, Puff, Puff, Puff, Puff, Puff,…Gasp, wheeze, hack, cough
July 29th, 2007 at 12:02 amComment by Merlin — July 29, 2007 @ 12:00 am
Zooey thinks that I want the gov’t to be my daddy. She is wrong. I want to the gov’t to work for me!
Your whole authoritarian mumbo-jumbo is not accurate.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:03 amPuff, Puff, Puff, Puff, Puff, Puff, Puff,…Gasp, wheeze, hack, cough
Comment by Merlin — July 29, 2007 @ 12:02 am
Laughing myself silly… :D
July 29th, 2007 at 12:04 amIf find the whole “by the people, of the people, for the people…†rhetoric to be utterly meaningless.
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 12:00 am
July 29th, 2007 at 12:04 am————-
yep. what’s your point?
How long must I wait for an answer?
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 11:54 pm
July 29th, 2007 at 12:05 am——————–
Can you please rephrase that?
“Your whole authoritarian mumbo-jumbo is not accurate.”
You might want to stop being right wing then.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:06 amWhat’s it gonna be, Pee?
Comment by Zooey — July 28, 2007 @ 11:36 pm
Uh-oh.
Zooey: What’s it gonna be, Pee.
I can wait all night.
What’s it gonna be?
Mr. P : Well let me sleep on it, Zooey, Zooey,
Let me sleep on it.
Let me sleep on it,
I’ll make up an answer in the morning.
Sorry. Had a little “paroditty” escape out. I’ll try to control that. Please, continue with what you were saying. I’ll step back.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:07 amyep. what’s your point?
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:04 am
You are constantly contradicting yourself on this thread. If you don’t think so, observe the responses you have gotten above.
Your one-liners are passive/aggressive, and you think you’re making others look stupid — but you only do harm to your own arguments.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:08 am#367 Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:03 am
Comment by Merlin — July 29, 2007 @ 12:00 am
Zooey thinks that I want the gov’t to be my daddy. She is wrong. I want to the gov’t to work for me!
Exactly Zooey’s point! Glad you are beginning to see the light
Your whole authoritarian mumbo-jumbo is not accurate.
Denial will get you nowhere. Psychological reality doesn’t go away by denying it. The fact that you can’t understand it means you need to LEARN about it. Look into psychology! It will open your eyes! You might even get over your confusion.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:09 amHowever, the current government is nothing like what you describe. Are you happy with what we have?
Comment by JPark — July 28, 2007 @ 11:54 pm
————————————————
I know. I’m still answering side question that stemmed from this:
I’m not overly happy, but I’m not complaining.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:09 amYour whole authoritarian mumbo-jumbo is not accurate.
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:03 am
Projecting. Again.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:09 amMichael, if you mean by uninformed that evangelicals can’t vote I’m right there with you.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:10 amSorry. Had a little “paroditty†escape out. I’ll try to control that. Please, continue with what you were saying. I’ll step back.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 29, 2007 @ 12:07 am
Heh. That’s great, Wayne. I’m done with The Pee for tonight. He’s shot his argument all to hell anyway.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:11 amFirst of all this is a Constitutional Republic which is a form of democracy.
If we had a pure democracy, then 49% of the population would be subservient to 51%…and right now it’s more like 99% to 1%.
We would probably not have passed the Civil Rights Act under Johnson, it was very unpopular….
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 28, 2007 @ 11:18 pm
That is called a tyranny of the masses (I am actually certain you know that already). That is why we have a representative democracy. The representatives then debate and deliberate in our stead, and require two separate majorities, one in the House, one in the Senate. Often, at least one of these is more than a mere up-down vote, specifically to prevent a tyranny of the masses.
However, that is why we elect representatives alone. How we elect the representatives themselves is a completely separate issue from the legislative process itself. We can surely elect our President in the same such manner. If the vote falls within the margin of error, you have a recount. If the recount ends within the margin of error as well, you hold a vote-off between those candidates.
The electoral college is not only not necessary, it has the potential to be abused severely. The members of the college are not required to vote consistent with their State’s results. This is rarely done, but all it takes is one time for the electoral college to vote completely against the wishes of We the People for disaster to strike. Should this mean a President Cheney, for example, even with the lowest popular vote in the race, can you imagine it? The only thing stopping the electoral college from not doing so is the backlash. But if it is the one opening that leads to the downfall of our republic, one time was once too many, eh?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:12 am“I also think that there is a lot of pandering by politicians and others over abortion, to appease their fundamentalist base.”
I read somewhere that the right will never overturn Roe v. Wade. Why? Because it is their lightening rod. It is how they have been convincing people to vote against their own best interests for many years now. If you overturn Roe v. Wade, how is the Right going to get all those people in the heartland to vote for a party that does nothing for their quality of life. There are only two issues that really make a difference to these people in the heartland, one is women having the right to chose what to do with her body and the second is gay marriage. Without those lightning rod issues, the Right will lose a lot of their base.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:12 amDo I have insurance? Hypothetically of course.
Comment by dlet — July 28, 2007 @ 11:50 pm
July 29th, 2007 at 12:13 am—————-
Yes.
ding, ding, ding bilbobaggins we have winner!!!!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:14 amComment by bilbobaggins — July 29, 2007 @ 12:12 am
I never thought of it that way before, bilbobaggins, that’s a very interesting angle. Thanks.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:15 am“I’m not overly happy, but I’m not complaining.”
Then you have not been paying attention.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:15 amYou’re right, moderation. The electorial college system is a fraud.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:16 amIt should be done away with and all candidates should get air time for free. The Fairness Doctrine must be brought back.
Yes.
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:13 am
That’s an interesting statement, Mr Pee. Just a few days ago you were claiming not to have had insurance for the last three or four years.
Which is it?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:16 amYou are constantly contradicting yourself on this thread. If you don’t think so, observe the responses you have gotten above.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:17 am…
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 12:08 am
——————
Pay attention to the “doctor” conversation I am having with dlet, and you will see that I am not contradicting myself at all.
Then you have not been paying attention.
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 12:15 am
I think this is the biggest problem in the country today.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:17 ambilbo, that has crossed my mind before. If the righties won their battles against Roe, affirmative action and SS and welfare, what would they run on? It would be 50-100 years before they would have another really good issue to divide people on.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:18 amMr P,
Disregard #386. I mis-read the question.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:18 ambiblobaggins my wife and I were talking about that too the gay marriage piece is starting to gain acceptance as is the removal of the don’t ask don’t tell policy but for a large number of evangelicals otherwise known as Bush’s 30% approval rating they will stand by the Republicans as long as they are Pro-Life even though as conservative as the court is there is no precedent for Rowe v. Wade to ever be over turned.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:18 amRepublicans are NEVER elected on what they would do. They are elected on what they hate.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:19 amPay attention to the “doctor†conversation I am having with dlet, and you will see that I am not contradicting myself at all.
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:17 am
You’ve finally started to answer dlet’s question, huh?
I’m looking at the conversation you were having BEFORE that. You know, when you were contradicting yourself.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:20 amBut that’s not what the SCOTUS is doing, and that is the problem.,
Why does the SCOTUS have to agree with Zooey to do what it should be doing?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:22 amI’m looking at the conversation you were having BEFORE that. You know, when you were contradicting yourself.
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 12:20 am
July 29th, 2007 at 12:22 am—————-
Where?
I think this is the biggest problem in the country today.
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 29, 2007 @ 12:17 am
I agree, Lee. It’s what I see around me everyday. I have a friend who I love dearly, but she has absolutely no idea, and no interest, of what’s going on in this country. That just floors me.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:22 amWhere?
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:22 am
Above.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:23 amWhile I have said that I wopn;t vote for her because I want her to fulfill the six year term she asked us New Yorkers to give her, I would support her nomination to the Supreme Court
I’d support Bill Clinton to the Supreme Court over most of the wackos Edwards could pick. Too bad he’s been disbarred.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:24 amWhy does the SCOTUS have to agree with Zooey to do what it should be doing?
Comment by m12 — July 29, 2007 @ 12:22 am
God you’re stupid. Get lost.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:24 amHe’s not answering her question and he’s not still proving the doctor analogy either.
Representatives only have to have MBAs in the right-wing big business intitlement world. and they damn sure don’t have to be philosophers or historians (Bush proves that).
The idea that representatives have to have some “advanced” knowledge is a myth designed to keep “average” people from being elected.
For much the same reason that it cost 100 million to fun for office.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:25 am#392 Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 12:19 am
Republicans are NEVER elected on what they would do. They are elected on what they hate.
And/or what they say.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:25 amAbove.
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 12:23 am
July 29th, 2007 at 12:26 am————–
Haven’t contradicted myself at all, and I’ve answered honestly. If you are confused about something, just ask.
If the last three election cycles are any indication, republicans aren’t ‘elected” at all.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:28 amHey there m12, remember this? It is your post!
Describe victory in Iraq…
Victory in Iraq is a thriving Democracy with oil revenues flowing into US coffers through US military bases that can and will be used for further military action against Iran.
Comment by m12 — July 22, 2007 @ 9:49 pm
What a selfish, arrogant and angry man you are! To believe these things as you stated them you share Bush’s insane megalomania. (That means delusions of grandeur, in case you did not know.) You need serious help from a psychotherapist.
And you think you have anything worth saying or that people are interested?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:29 amGod you’re stupid. Get lost.
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 12:24 am
Bahahaha! Someone take away your barbie doll?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:30 amcorrection; 4 cycles.
2000 – supreme court orders halt to counting (Gore would have won)
2002 – exit polls showed serious problems with count (fraud proven)
2004 – Ohio and Diebold and more election counting problem (aside from the popular vote that had Kerry winning elevtion)
2006 – we all know what happened there.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:31 amDid someone take away your leather gimp doll, m12?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:31 amVictory in Iraq is a thriving “Democracy” with oil revenues flowing into US coffers through US military bases that can and will be used for further military action against Iran.

Comment by m12 — July 22, 2007 @ 9:49 pm
—————–
Perfect, m12!!!!!!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:31 amComment by The Republic of Stupidity — July 28, 2007 @ 8:01 pm
Nope, to the Supreme Court of course!
For all his whining about pre-emptive war, Chuck Schumer has just declared it on judicial nominees as he tries to usurp the power of the President.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:32 amm12 loves him some Zed.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:32 amBahahaha! Someone take away your barbie doll?
Comment by m12 — July 29, 2007 @ 12:30 am
Forget stupid, you’re brain dead.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:33 amYeah, m12, and you have no problem with Bush usurping all power. You are such a pathetic toad.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:33 amPlease respond. Are you worthy or unworthy of this Constitutional Right?
One should have to pay at least $.01 in net revenues to the federal government in the previous 2 years to be worthy of that Constitutional right!
I’m sick of deadbeats voting themselves my wallet.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:33 amBahahaha! Someone take away your barbie doll?
Comment by m12
Somebody take away the child you would like to molest?
Don’t make me pull out the list and embarass you and your whole group of diaper wearing pervs.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:33 amm12 loves him some Zed.
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 12:32 am
I really am gonna smack you!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:33 amYeah, m12, and you have no problem with Bush usurping all power. You are such a pathetic toad.
Hmm? What are you talking about?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:33 amRepublicans are NEVER elected on what they would do. They are elected on what they hate.
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 12:19 am
The entire modern conservative movement was based on opposition to Liberalism, specifically the programs of FDR (Lke Social Security, and programs that help the needy, and so on.) Lke you said, it’s not what they’re for, it’s what they’re against.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:33 amI find m12 incredibly distasteful. He would be the type to turn in his neighbors to the gestapo. Disgusting.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:34 amAin’t no way I am apologizing for insulting m12, Zooey!!!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:34 amI’m sick of deadbeats voting themselves my wallet.
Comment by m12
Whats this Iraqi Terrorist Freedom campaign (ala Curveball) costing you?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:35 amHaven’t contradicted myself at all, and I’ve answered honestly. If you are confused about something, just ask.
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:26 am
Nope. I’m tired of you bouncing off the walls. Play with someone else.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:35 amI’d love to be there when they kick in his door and M12 tries to explain that he’s “one of them” as they kick his ass and put a sack over his head. I’ll bet he sh*ts himself. i don’t mean then…I mean, now. like everyday.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:35 amAin’t no way I am apologizing for insulting m12, Zooey!!!
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 12:34 am
No, please don’t!! Just don’t encourage him. :P
July 29th, 2007 at 12:36 amIn the same breath, you argue against and veto stem cell research, which has the potential to save MANY lives using stem cells that are going to be discarded and destroyed anyway.
Correction: He vetoed pork federal spending of stem cell research.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:36 am“I’m sick of deadbeats voting themselves my wallet.”
Oh, shut up already. Until you are battling corporate welfare, just shut up.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:36 amWell m12, the solution to those diaper wearing pervs who worm their way into your wallet by war is simple.
Join the Army. Are you Man enough?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:36 amWhats this Iraqi Terrorist Freedom campaign (ala Curveball) costing you?
Comment by DONT — July 29, 2007 @ 12:35 am
A more than reasonable figure for the defeat of our enemies.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:37 amBut m12 DOES love his Zed. He is kind of fond of ball gags as well.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:37 amOh, shut up already. Until you are battling corporate welfare, just shut up.
Are you saying that paying money for a product or service is the same as handing out a blank check to a welfare mom?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:38 amNope. I’m tired…
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 12:35 am
July 29th, 2007 at 12:38 am—————————
Yep.
I’d love to be there when they kick in his door and M12 tries to explain that he’s “one of them†as they kick his ass and put a sack over his head. I’ll bet he sh*ts himself. i don’t mean then…I mean, now. like everyday.
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 29, 2007 @ 12:35 am
I’m convinced that is the mindset of some of these trolls. “Guys! Hey, I’m on your side. Remember? Um guys, these cuffs are way tight. Guys, where are we going!!?”
July 29th, 2007 at 12:38 am#407 Perfect, m12!!!!!!
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:31 am
Isn’t that what you said before?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:39 amCurveball is reasonable??? And Chalabi too, right? Failure, that is all you righties have to offer. Incompetent morons.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:39 amCorrection: He vetoed pork federal spending of stem cell research.
Comment by m12
Actually stem cell research continues. The lobbysists just privatized it. Thru your ahem, boss at work who controls your wallet!
Idiot.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:39 amI’m sick of deadbeats voting themselves my wallet.
Comment by m12
So, do Depends come with a wallet pocket or do you have to wear it around your neck? And did you ever replace the photo of your “girlfriend” that came with the wallet, or does it still make you a little weak in the knees pretending she’s someone you know?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:39 amm12, I am not talking about paying for a product obviously. I am talking about handouts to corporations. Or does that escape you?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:40 amActually stem cell research continues. The lobbysists just privatized it. Thru your ahem, boss at work who controls your wallet!
Idiot.
So let it continue. The people of California can pay for it, so I dont have to.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:40 amm12, I am not talking about paying for a product obviously. I am talking about handouts to corporations. Or does that escape you?
What handouts?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:41 amHehe, gum. I think he just replaced his old stock girlfriend with Lindsay Lohan.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:41 amNope. I’m tired…
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 12:35 am
—————————
Yep.
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:38 am
That’s who you are, Mr Pee. You pick and choose what suits you. Whatever makes you feel comfortable with yourself and your glaring hypocrisy.
I know who and what I am. Maybe one day you’ll be able to say the same about yourself — it might throw you for quite a loop though.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:42 amAre you kidding, m12? Really. Are you f^cking kidding? Have you ever heard of corporate welfare? If not, you are not very bright.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:42 amSo let it continue. The people of California can pay for it, so I dont have to.
Comment by m12
Actually its not California. Idiot. Get your head out of the media.zSheesh.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:42 amwhich would have kept stem cell research in the public domain and thus provided to the public at cost because taxpayers where the ones fronting the bill for the research. Thus any patents on alzteimers or parkinsons would be cheap. 65% of the people would donate their remaining eggs for stem cell research.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:43 amm12, I am not talking about paying for a product obviously. I am talking about handouts to corporations. Or does that escape you?
What handouts?
Comment by m12
Jesus, you really are the most clueless troll ever.
“Huh? Corporations getting subsidies? No way, you commie!”
You could start “reading” with information about the railroads in the 19th century and work your way forward.
I guess homeschooling really is a plague.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:43 amI’m convinced that is the mindset of some of these trolls. “Guys! Hey, I’m on your side. Remember? Um guys, these cuffs are way tight. Guys, where are we going!!?â€
Comment by Zooey
I call it the “Amway Syndrome”. They just fawn over the rich like puppies. Drolling and swooning to show them they can tow the company line.
What they don’t know is that these CEOs see them for what they are, just like we do; brown nosing suck-ups that would sell their own mother out for an invitation to a party they can’t even afford to attend.
it’s pathetic really. and they call us unrealistic.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:44 amWhats this Iraqi Terrorist Freedom campaign (ala Curveball) costing you?
Comment by DONT — July 29, 2007 @ 12:35 am
A more than reasonable figure for the defeat of our enemies.
Comment by m12 — July 29, 2007 @ 12:37 am
As he strides smiling happily across the 3000+ coffins of our dead soldiers.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:44 amActually its not California. Idiot. Get your head out of the media.zSheesh.
Well, they decided to raise some money via bonds to pay for this junk science. Their problem, not mine!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:45 amToo Bad So Sad amerika and amerikan sheeple !!!
Told You So
but nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
you had to vote for the Second Coming
bawahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
July 29th, 2007 at 12:45 amI sense a victory for the trolls…………………..
July 29th, 2007 at 12:46 am#437 Comment by m12 — July 29, 2007 @ 12:40 am
So let it continue. The people of California can pay for it, so I dont have to.
Said the generous and visionary troll.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:48 amthe messed up thing all you would have to do is install the draft and impliment a tax to actually pay for this war and we would be home next week until government knows people won’t switch away from American idol long enough to care. This country avoids critical thinking.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:48 amComment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:46 am
That is the problem with you neocons – your definition of victory is flawed. Everyone else sees you as defeated!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:48 amI sense a victory for the trolls…………………..
Comment by Mr. President
not alot of light in momma basement is there?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:48 am“You could start “reading†with information about the railroads in the 19th century and work your way forward.
I guess homeschooling really is a plague”
Homeschooling is weak on history and strong on the Jesus. Reality does not intrude.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:50 amit’s pathetic really. and they call us unrealistic.
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 29, 2007 @ 12:44 am
Amway Syndrome — I like it!
I hope I never feel so much like I have to be a member of a team, that I would compromise myself or my country.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:50 amI wonder what is going to happen to Mr. P and M12 when they find out that the ‘enemy” al Qaeda is really someone in the The White House.
if all the lost soldiers and iraqis are justified by destroying the enemies..
how about the trade centers? Is that justified too?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:50 amthat is still messed up so Bush thinks stem cell research is murder so the government wont’ fund it but if he actually felt that way won’t he stop private companies from doing stem cell research. So what private murder is ok?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:50 amThe Bush admin does NOT believe in anything but their own power…Congress are muling pansies and the courts are stocked with Bush’s b!tches. It is not good.
Hmm? Bush appointed the same number of judges as Clinton did!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:50 amI sense a victory for the trolls…………………..
Comment by Mr. President
Ah, thinking from the gut, huh, PiPPy? And, as per usual, your gut is producing nothing but very bad smells.
Taking satisfaction in the companionship of turds like i’m12 and CT should be cause for reflection rather than triumph. Even an utter fool such as yourself can set goals a little higher than cockroach.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:52 am“I sense a victory for the trolls…………………..”
I hope that is a joke. Otherwise you are not all that rational.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:52 amA more than reasonable figure for the defeat of our enemies.
Comment by m12
You need million dollar missiles to blow up a camel? Why then waste all that money rebuilding the infrastructure and power plants eh?
Why waste money building hospitals in Iraq?
IDIOT.
Stem Cells, free market, is now Conservative junk science that doesn’t matter.
Guess that shoots down another talking point, eh?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:52 amyes, but clinton’s appointees knew what the word precedent meant!!!!
it only took you half as long to say clinton did it.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:53 amyes, but clinton’s appointees knew what the word precedent meant!!!!
it only took you half as long to say clinton did it.
No they did not.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZS.html
That analysis should have controlled Bowers, and it controls here. Bowers was not correct when it was decided, is not correct today, and is hereby overruled.
Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined
July 29th, 2007 at 12:54 am#I sense a victory for the trolls…………………..
Comment by Mr. President
Naw, actually they just lost another talking point =)
July 29th, 2007 at 12:55 amOh, m12, 7 justices appointed by Republicans and 2 by Democrats. Again, just give up.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:55 am“I sense a victory for the trolls…………………..â€
I hope that is a joke. Otherwise you are not all that rational.
Comment by JPark
Ssssssh. You’ll upset the “philosopher-king” in waiting. Once he joins the Elite you’ll be sorry.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:55 amOh, m12, 7 justices appointed by Republicans and 2 by Democrats. Again, just give up.
No sh!t sherlock! This country has trusted Republicans in the White House over Democrats as of late!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:56 amNaw, actually they just lost another talking point =)
Comment by DONT — July 29, 2007 @ 12:55 am
July 29th, 2007 at 12:57 am—————————
Just wait… it will happen…………..
“No sh!t sherlock! This country has trusted Republicans in the White House over Democrats as of late!”
And we are rewarded with the likes of GWB. Have you ever heard of a self-defeating argument?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:58 amNice flip-flop, by the way, m12. You can turn on the fly. I am impressed.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:59 amNo sh!t sherlock! This country has trusted Republicans in the White House over Democrats as of late!
Comment by m12
Huh? What happened in 2006 m12?
I am having visions of Jason M Hendler and his cup of wisdom.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:59 amAnd we are rewarded with the likes of GWB. Have you ever heard of a self-defeating argument?
Hmm? This nation was not rewarded with President George W. Bush. We chose him in 2004!
July 29th, 2007 at 1:00 am“Just wait… it will happen…………..”
Don’t you ever feel dirty?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:00 amHuh? What happened in 2006 m12?
I am having visions of Jason M Hendler and his cup of wisdom.
Hmm? There was a Presidential election in 2006?
Damn, Bush just got his 3rd term!
July 29th, 2007 at 1:01 amThat was my point, m12, we were “rewarded” with Forrest Gump without the athletic talent and the wisdom. Lucky us!!!
July 29th, 2007 at 1:01 amNo they did not.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-102.ZS.html
That analysis should have controlled Bowers, and it controls here. Bowers was not correct when it was decided, is not correct today, and is hereby overruled.
Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined
Comment by m12
Wow bud never become a lawyer. If a state law violates your constitutional rights even if its very old sodomy law still on the books then yes the courts are following federal precedent in over turning the decision.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:01 amif all the lost soldiers and iraqis are justified by destroying the enemies..
how about the trade centers? Is that justified too?
Is this some theory about how missiles hit the trade centers instead of planes?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:02 amI’m out somebody pimp slap M12 if he gets out of line or just let the air out of his doll.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:04 amI sense a victory for the trolls…………………..
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:46 am
It’s gas. This too shall pass….
July 29th, 2007 at 1:04 amDer, m12, did he say anything about missles? Dolt.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:05 amHmm? There was a Presidential election in 2006?
Damn, Bush just got his 3rd term!
Comment by m12
We were speaking of stem cells and lobbyists, ergo congress.
As I stated they did not want government research for a good reason.
They knew Bush would veto it. Idiot.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:05 amif all the lost soldiers and iraqis are justified by destroying the enemies..
how about the trade centers? Is that justified too?
………….. um. what?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:05 amchad, I think that blowup doll needs to be blown up. He is clearly unsatisfied.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:06 amMP, motives. If we are justified in out revenge were they justified in their revenge?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:06 amWe were speaking of stem cells and lobbyists, ergo congress.
As I stated they did not want government research for a good reason.
They knew Bush would veto it. Idiot.
Comment by DONT — July 29, 2007 @ 1:05 am
Actually, the comment you replied to was about SCOTUS nominations, ergo, executive. Given that we have had Reagan, Bush, and Bush and 3 of our last 4 presidents, of course they will have made more nominations than 1 Dim President.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:07 amI wonder what is going to happen to Mr. P and M12 when they find out that the ‘enemy†al Qaeda is really someone in the The White House.
if all the lost soldiers and iraqis are justified by destroying the enemies..
how about the trade centers? Is that justified too?
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 29, 2007 @ 12:50 am
It really does make you wonder just how much they will allow or apologize for, doesn’t it? What is the threshold?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:07 amSee, m12, you were played.
Some victory for the stem cell crowd. NOT.
Free Markets are what lobbyists do!
They don’t WANT the government involved in it. FOOL.
Jeebus. Reverse your Psyhcology!! DOLT
July 29th, 2007 at 1:08 amIf we are justified in out revenge were they justified in their revenge?
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 1:06 am
July 29th, 2007 at 1:08 am—————–
Not at all. They had no reason to take revenge.
That was my point, m12, we were “rewarded†with Forrest Gump without the athletic talent and the wisdom. Lucky us!!!
What luck? There were 2 clear choices, and one of them was left wing extremist hanoi Kerry.
We chose.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:08 amZoo, I have no doubt they would be apologists right up until Nuremberg.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:09 amActually, the comment you replied to was about SCOTUS nominations, ergo, executive. Given that we have had Reagan, Bush, and Bush and 3 of our last 4 presidents, of course they will have made more nominations than 1 Dim President.
Comment by m12
BWAHAHAHAH!!
Victory!! LMAO!!
July 29th, 2007 at 1:09 am………….. um. what?
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 1:05 am
If you actually put up Lee J’s entire comment, it makes a bit more sense. You are being manipulative, as usual.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:09 amleft wing extremist hanoi Kerry.
heh.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:10 amReally, MP? With the US interference in their governments for the past 30 years I would say they certainly had a gripe (I think Osama used that as an excuse to lead others into it but you guys don’t care about him anyway).
July 29th, 2007 at 1:11 am“We chose.”
Well, except for Florida and Ohio.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:11 amActually, the comment you replied to was about SCOTUS nominations, ergo, executive. Given that we have had Reagan, Bush, and Bush and 3 of our last 4 presidents, of course they will have made more nominations than 1 Dim President.
Comment by m12
You just dont get it do you?
Mr President, could you talk to your patron about free markets and corporate welfare and corporate [free market] financing of collegiate technology?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:12 amBWAHAHAHAH!!
Victory!! LMAO!!
Comment by DONT — July 29, 2007 @ 1:09 am
Seems like we did win, if liberals are in panic mode over the Courts.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:12 amMr. President doesn’t find it amusing to actually tell the truth, DONT. He just likes yanking liberal chains.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:13 amleft wing extremist hanoi Kerry.
heh. Comment by Mr. President
Okay, you dont get it either. =)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:13 amZoo, I have no doubt they would be apologists right up until Nuremberg.
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 1:09 am
Sadly, I think you are correct, JPark. It’s sickening….
July 29th, 2007 at 1:13 amComment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 1:11 am
Kuwait asked the international community for help. We agreed, so did Saudi Arabia. The Saudi gov’t allowed us to station troops there, OBL didn’t agree. OBL spoke out against the Saudi Kingdom and he was exiled, he blamed America, and issued a Fatwa against the USA and SA. Some Muslims ate his shit and killed thousands of innocent Americans.
That is not a reason.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:14 amSee, m12, you were played.
Some victory for the stem cell crowd. NOT.
Free Markets are what lobbyists do!
They don’t WANT the government involved in it. FOOL.
Jeebus. Reverse your Psyhcology!! DOLT
Coherence is your friend. Who said anything about free markets?
The California state government isn’t a free market.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:14 amSeems like we did win, if liberals are in panic mode over the Courts.
Comment by m12
If by “we” you mean the neocons, yes, you’ve managed to corrupt the Supreme Court. If by “we” you were to refer to the American people, than the answer is definitely no. But since you hate America and the American people, you obviously couldn’t care less.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:15 amSeems like we did win, if liberals are in panic mode over the Courts.
Comment by m12
No, neo-cons and federalists aren’t conservative. =)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:15 amJeebus, Im trying to help you and Mr P m12.
Would you stop and think, I mean really think.please?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:16 amIf by “we†you mean the neocons, yes, you’ve managed to corrupt the Supreme Court. If by “we†you were to refer to the American people, than the answer is definitely no.
Why is the answer definitely no?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:16 amNo, neo-cons and federalists aren’t conservative. =)
Comment by DONT — July 29, 2007 @ 1:15 am
—————–
I know, neo-cons are liberals with a sense of reality.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:17 amThe California state government isn’t a free market.
Comment by m12
And Schwarzenegger is not a hollywood liberal.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:17 am“Kuwait asked the international community for help. We agreed, so did Saudi Arabia.”
Was somebody talking about the Gulf War? You lost me.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:19 amWas somebody talking about the Gulf War? You lost me.
Comment by JPark — July 29, 2007 @ 1:19 am
July 29th, 2007 at 1:20 am—————-
Osama used the Gulf War as an excuse.
Why is the answer definitely no?
Comment by m12
Because giving up our liberties is never a win. Having a Supreme Court that is essentially a puppet of the corporations means giving up our liberties.
Is that simple enough to penetrate your skull?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:21 amActually he used the bases in the Muslim holy land as an excuse. And Bush used 9/11 to attack Iraq (which had nothing to do with 9/11). You and the terrorists are both wrong and if I may say, evil as hell.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:21 amBecause giving up our liberties is never a win. Having a Supreme Court that is essentially a puppet of the corporations means giving up our liberties.
Hmm? What exactly are you talking about? 47% of Americans think the SCOTUS is generally balanced in its decisions!
July 29th, 2007 at 1:22 amI know, neo-cons are liberals with a sense of reality.
Comment by Mr. President
Is not oxford, from which you, from their dictionary, quoted the meaning of Polis, then liberal?
Does or does not, if analyzed, capitalism require liberalism? A free market needs liberalism [freedom] to expand, yes or no?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:22 am“Hmm? What exactly are you talking about? 47% of Americans think the SCOTUS is generally balanced in its decisions!”
That is your defense for taking away American liberties? Really?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:23 amIs that simple enough to penetrate your skull?
Comment by gummitch — July 29, 2007 @ 1:21 am
Ever the optimist…..it’s your charm. :-D
July 29th, 2007 at 1:24 amI think Mr P has just seen a little light bulb go off in his head. =)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:28 amBecause giving up our liberties is never a win. Having a Supreme Court that is essentially a puppet of the corporations means giving up our liberties.
Hmm? What exactly are you talking about? 47% of Americans think the SCOTUS is generally balanced in its decisions!
Comment by m12
And the relevance of this is . . . ?
Your own Supreme Leader says polls are irrelevant.
http://tinyurl.com/3ck99h
So the number of Americans who think the Court is balanced is dropping, and that is a completely non-responsive “answer.”
http://tinyurl.com/327eeu
That’s Forbes, by the way. “Supreme Court Sides With Business”
July 29th, 2007 at 1:29 amEver the optimist…..it’s your charm. :-D
Comment by Zooey
I need an auger, I think. At any rate, I’ve got a good book to read and I’ve run out of patience with the stupidity of our trolls. Have fun with them but never take them seriously.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:31 amHmm? What exactly are you talking about? 47% of Americans think the SCOTUS is generally balanced in its decisions!
Comment by m12
Sounds pretty balanced =)
The point here being?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:31 ambush replaced to republican appointees with conservatives, he did not replace any liberal judges with right wing ones, he maintained the balance. schumer pathetic unconstitutional attempt to block future nominees without even knowing who they will be shows just how liberals aim to control us with their intrusive big government. schumer needs to resign after these dispicable threats.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:34 amdlet couldn’t/wouldn’t answer this question, can anyone else?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:34 am
I need an auger, I think. At any rate, I’ve got a good book to read and I’ve run out of patience with the stupidity of our trolls. Have fun with them but never take them seriously.
Comment by gummitch — July 29, 2007 @ 1:31 am
Never — I keep learning. :)
I’m off to my own book….
July 29th, 2007 at 1:37 amComment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 1:34 am
Do I have insurance and what are the extent of my injuries?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:39 amDo I have insurance and what are the extent of my injuries?
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:39 am
—————-
Yes, and you don’t know what illness you are suffering from because you are not a doctor…
but at best your livelihood is on the line, at worst, you could lose your life.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:41 amTell me, if you were sick, (assuming you are not a doctor) would you go to a professional, or would you try to treat yourself?
Comment by Mr. President
You treat yourself daily Mr P. =)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:42 amCome on, guys. This isn’t that hard…
Do you, an unqualified, clueless, (your occupation here, assuming that you are not a doctor), treat yourself, or do you go to a professional?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:45 ambut at best your livelihood is on the line, at worst, you could lose your life. Comment by Mr. President
Truth be known Mr P, I have glued my quite deep cuts, at work, which required sutures, together with super glue more than once. =)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:48 amYes, and you don’t know what illness you are suffering from because you are not a doctor…
but at best your livelihood is on the line, at worst, you could lose your life.
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 1:41 am
If I have insurance, or live in a country that cares about its citizens and provides insurance, I might go. Depends on the doctor and depends on what I find through my own research of my symptoms. I have had some horrendous ones I would not return to. The one I have now is awesome so I would go to her.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:49 amThe one I have now is awesome so I would go to her.
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:49 am
July 29th, 2007 at 1:51 am——————————————————–
Cool! Thank you for your honesty and rational thought.
Do you, an unqualified, clueless, (your occupation here, assuming that you are not a doctor), treat yourself, or do you go to a professional?
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 1:45 am
Why do you have to be clueless? I research my symptoms all of the time to be sure I am not wasting mine or my doctors time. Believe it or not she likes an informed patient
July 29th, 2007 at 1:52 amI sent this to every senator on the judicial committee to night, even the Republicans.
————————————-
Thank you for your service. I am puzzled by the vision set forth which has facilitated that party comes before serving and defending the Constitution of America.
This troubles me personally that the Constitution is for the people and not by a political party. During your time in the Senate, you have seen many debates that have moved you to go beyond party lines, but thats where the Constitution holds no boundaries.
Do you as a citizen of the USA have love of the Constitution and hold its words dear to your heart? And as a Senator, did you take an oath to uphold and defend the US Constitution? If so, you are bound by this oath to do so and this is where I am puzzled by the actions of many Senators who rather place their political party before the Constitution.
If the Senate keeps regressing on holding this administration accountable for the deceptions it passes as truth, regardless of which party may be in the white house in the future the same powers that are asserted now, will still be in place for future administrations.
This is an action that must not cross party because its the Constitution that is in need of Congress’s intervention.
I plead to your wisdom of law and human understanding in defending what we are and where we are going as American’s. With out your wisdom and your colleagues intervention, our form of life will cease and Congress will vanish, with out our Constitution.
Regardless of party, Regardless of power…One must be held to uphold and defend the Constitution, Regardless of the outcome and the negative feedback one may consume, The Constitution is the ONLY rule of law, and not ruled by people.
Thank you
July 29th, 2007 at 1:55 amYou will see me in your future Mr P. =)
Rattle Rattle -RGB
July 29th, 2007 at 1:56 amComment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:52 am
The point is, that you are willing to trust a professional with your livelihood, and possibly your life. You are not so deluded that you think you know-it-all and can do-it-all.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:56 amWhy do you have to be clueless? I research my symptoms all of the time to be sure I am not wasting mine or my doctors time. Believe it or not she likes an informed patient
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 1:52 am
Excellent point. Fits right into the “government of the people, by the people’ argument, doesn’t it?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:57 amThe point is, that you are willing to trust a professional with your livelihood, and possibly your life. You are not so deluded that you think you know-it-all and can do-it-all.
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 1:56 am
I won’t cut my own hair either :)
July 29th, 2007 at 1:58 amYou will see me in your future Mr P. =)
Rattle Rattle -RGB
Comment by Socrates reborn — July 29, 2007 @ 1:56 am
I look forward to it. :-D
July 29th, 2007 at 1:58 amExcellent point. Fits right into the “government of the people, by the people’ argument, doesn’t it?
Comment by Zooey — July 29, 2007 @ 1:57 am
————–
Ha!
No, it doesn’t. I thought you said you were tired…
are you sleep-blogging?
July 29th, 2007 at 1:58 amHa!
No, it doesn’t. I thought you said you were tired…
are you sleep-blogging?
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 1:58 am
I said I was tired of you.
Thanks for caring.
Goodnight.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:00 amExcellent point. Fits right into the “government of the people, by the people’ argument, doesn’t it? Comment by Zooey
Tis okay Zooey. Mr P has, unlike m12, a mind of his own. =)
I will leave this at that.
Goodnite Mr President.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:02 amComment by The American People — July 29, 2007 @ 1:55 am
eww… dude, your syntax is excruciating
July 29th, 2007 at 2:02 amGoodnight, Roy son of Sophroniscus reborn
July 29th, 2007 at 2:04 amMr. P I wish I could stick around and see what you were trying to get me to concede to but I am tired and in need of my pillow.
Good night and good luck!!
July 29th, 2007 at 2:05 amGood night and good luck!!
Comment by jules — July 29, 2007 @ 2:05 am
—————–
Thanks!
I wasn’t trying to get you to concede to anything, you are sensible person.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:08 amoops… forgot the “a”
July 29th, 2007 at 2:08 amGoodnight, Roy son of Sophroniscus reborn
Comment by Mr. President
Have you yet read Timaeus and Critias? The bearer of light?
Goodnite Mr P.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:11 amI hate when You Leftist claim racialfairness.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:15 amUs Hispanics we don’t need the help of you Anglo Commie scums!
I won’t even go into their “Bong Hits 4 Jesus” ruling…
As an adult, hanging that kind of banner is OK, but if you’re a student, OUTSIDE OF SCHOOL GROUNDS, your free speech is limited. Students cannot be disruptive or lewd or interfere with a school’s basic educational mission, but their parent’s can.
This supreme court has opened up a new interpretation of free speech: one as an adult (as defined by the “law”) and one as a minor. No longer does freedom of speech apply to all.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:16 amHave you yet read Timaeus and Critias?
I’ve read them all.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:19 amAnd so Mr P, does not Jesus speak of this bearer of light? Or Venus?
July 29th, 2007 at 2:23 amAnd so Mr P, does not Jesus speak of this bearer of light? Or Venus?
Comment by Socrates — July 29, 2007 @ 2:23 am
July 29th, 2007 at 2:29 am—————
I meant I have read all of Plato’s dialogues, I don’t know about Jesus.
I meant I have read all of Plato’s dialogues, I don’t know about Jesus.
Comment by Mr. President
You have read. I see.
GN Mr P.
We will talk again in a few days or more.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:34 amCatch you later, fish!
July 29th, 2007 at 2:43 amI laugh at you Racist Leftists.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:47 amDo any of you know the song Planet Rock!
I’m smoking a splif !
Listening to Old School!
I’m from the hood not you rich Suburban Klowns!
I wonder what is going to happen to Mr. P and M12 when they find out that the ‘enemy†al Qaeda is really someone in the The White House.
if all the lost soldiers and iraqis are justified by destroying the enemies..
how about the trade centers? Is that justified too?
Comment by Lee J. Cobb — July 29, 2007 @ 12:50 am
Wow, got your foil hat on, buddy? ;)
July 29th, 2007 at 2:50 amI’m listening to Big Daddy Kane and Kool G Rap!
July 29th, 2007 at 2:52 amWhat do you Lefist know about that?
How about BDP Crimal Blinded!
July 29th, 2007 at 2:55 amI laugh at you nerdy Leftists claiming you down with Minorities but know nothing about Hip Hop!
“Fifty-five percent of those polled — including majorities of both women and men — approved of the court’s abortion ruling. The decision significantly shifted the court’s abortion jurisprudence, marking the first time justices have upheld a restriction on a specific abortion procedure and one that does not include an exception for a woman’s health.”
——
“But a majority disagreed with the court’s decision that sharply restricted the ability of local school boards to use race when making school assignments to achieve diverse student bodies….”
Maybe because, due to “white flight,” there are so few white children left to bus in largely minority districts it’s safe for whites to agree with it now?
July 29th, 2007 at 2:58 amupright left,
July 29th, 2007 at 3:02 amWhat do you aboutr Eric B and Rakim?
Any real Hip Hop heads here?
July 29th, 2007 at 3:05 amThat is your defense for taking away American liberties? Really?
Hmm? What liberties?
July 29th, 2007 at 9:49 amSo the number of Americans who think the Court is balanced is dropping, and that is a completely non-responsive “answer.â€
http://tinyurl.com/327eeu
That’s Forbes, by the way. “Supreme Court Sides With Businessâ€
Most of the cases decided weren’t even 5-4, and the 2 that were are relatively specific. Why should the court not side with business from time to time?
July 29th, 2007 at 9:51 amComment by The American People — July 29, 2007 @ 1:55 am
I hope you sent this to Chuckie Schumer. He’s trying to overthrow the Presidency by refusing to confirm nominees in advance!
July 29th, 2007 at 9:55 amYou may not have read this entire post, but originally I was objecting to the idea of a strict democracy (as was advocated earlier by Wayne and Egg.), I would much rather have a representive democracy (Republic) with reasonable laws to prevent an uninformed “people†from making hasty decisions.
Comment by Mr. President — July 28, 2007 @ 11:40 pm
For the record, I did not in any way mean to imply that I was advocating a strict democracy and, if I did so, I am sorry. Especially since this seems to have been the trigger which instigated this rather ridiculous thread.
July 29th, 2007 at 10:24 amAs for Mr. P’s doctor analogy:
Most of us can choose the doctor we want to go to, and the remainder are frequently upset when insurance companies limit our choice of doctor. The idea of being able to choose the doctor we want to see is important to most of us. Some choose to see an acupuncturist. Others might turn to a tribal elder (or medicine doctor). Some go to their church looking to be healed. Different people have different ideas of what the perfect “doctor” would be.
Somewhat similarly with our government. We want to be able to choose which politicians will “rule” us. We may very well use some of the same criteria in choosing our political “rulers” as we do in choosing our doctor, e.g., professionalism, past success, education, and how well they relate to us. But we all have different ideas of what the perfect “ruler” would be.
There is a difference in the two choices in that each of us individually gets to choose our doctor, but we collectively choose our “rulers”. Therefore not everybody gets the “ruler” they want.
As far as I can tell, what Mr. P is advocating has more to do with some “objective” idea of what makes a “perfect” doctor. That is to say, if it were indeed possible, there might be a thousand or whatever “perfect” doctors that we could go to, and, since they were all “perfect”, there would be no need for the individual to choose which doctor he or she would visit.
And the same in government. There might be a handful of “objectively perfect” rulers, and since they were all “perfect”, there would be no need for the individual to participate in choosing which rulers he or she would have.
I am sure I have oversimplified somewhat, but my point is there is no “objectively perfect” ruler. I mean, how is it determined objectively who is best fit to rule? Someone, or some group of people, have to make that determination. Who, Mr. P, would make that determination? Would it be some grand wizard, some elite class with the power to force its determination, or would the population as a whole make that decision?
July 29th, 2007 at 10:52 amFor the record, I was not advocating a “strict democracy” in the sense that Mr. P seems to have taken it. I was merely suggesting that for presidential elections, we do away with the electoral colege and go straight to a popular vore for president. I did not say we should do away with our democratic-republican form of goverment. How did you get that idea?
The electoral college is used for one and only one thing, so when I said to get rid of it, and go to a popular vote, that only aplied to the president’s selection. Sorry if people got confused while I was away.
I did not realize that Mr. P’s concerns to me were that the people would not be qualified to vote directly on many of the issues before Congress. That is correct, and I sure as hell wouldn’t want them to. But they can be entrusted with choosing the president directly; we just have to find a trustworthy way to have those votes counted, and electronic voting machines with remotely re-programmable software is not the way to go. And since one’s vote really would count in such an election, more people would turn out, so comparisons to past popular vote numbers would be meaningless.
To try to argue that had we no electoral college and chose the president by popular vote, one party or the other would have won or lost a past election is absurd. The flaw in this argument is that it presumes that the exact same people, and no others, would have voted in either scenario and in the exact same way, and that’s not likely to be the case at all.
July 29th, 2007 at 11:22 amm12 and MP are both traitors and will be hanged until dead soon enough. until then, they should be ignored. Neither one has told the truth in all the time they’ve been wasting oxygen on this board.
Shumer should work hard to block any more treasonous, ignorant appointments by an unelected, deserting war criminal, as Bush is. Gonzo should be impeached, indicted, tried, convicted and sent back to Mexico. the presidency of bushco should indeed be overthrown, but the traitors on the right would rather live in North Korea than the USA. Fortunately, there are very few righties left that still drink the karl-aid, as evidenced by the paucity of their type here. Too bad they’re too cowardly to stand up and fight for their beliefs. Bush has lost two wars because his supporters are cowards, just like him.
July 29th, 2007 at 11:47 amAnyone appointed by the thugs of this crime family are incompetent hacks, just like the trolls who support them. Dubya appointed Harriet Miers before he appionted Alito. Dubya appointed Brownie for FEMA. Dubya appointed all the failed assholes that have served this miserable abomination for the past six years. Anyone he nominates should be shot down.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:21 pmComment by Egreggious — July 29, 2007 @ 10:24 am
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 29, 2007 @ 11:22 am
Good,
Then do you both agree that the whole “by the people, of the people, for the people†rhetoric is meaningless, except in virtue of it’s symbolism?
July 29th, 2007 at 12:34 pmBut they can be entrusted with choosing the president directly
Here is where I disagree.
July 29th, 2007 at 12:35 pmComment by Egreggious — July 29, 2007 @ 10:24 am
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 29, 2007 @ 11:22 am
Good,
Then do you both agree that the whole “by the people, of the people, for the people†rhetoric is meaningless, except in virtue of it’s symbolism?
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:34 pm
No, absolutely not! I have not followed this thread throughout, I only came in at the end to see Egg’s comment. You are, for some reason, persisting in the notion that “of the people, by the people, and for the people” means that we no longer have a republican form of government (not the political party, the representation part). The “people” have chosen to govern themsleves with a republic. That’s all that means. You are twsiting it, I susupect, to start a fight. I told you, put that clebver wit of yours to use fighting the forces of Goodness & Light, and not against us! :)
But they can be entrusted with choosing the president directly
Here is where I disagree.
Comment by Mr. President — July 29, 2007 @ 12:35 pm
Then we’ll just have to agree to disagree, and I hope that you can cope with the possibility that a majority of Americans may also want to do away with the Electoral College for choosing their president, in part, because not enough people get to see the candidates because they all concentrate on “swing states”. Plus, it’s a lot harder to rig elections over the entire country than it is in one key state.
July 29th, 2007 at 1:02 pmTo try to argue that had we no electoral college and chose the president by popular vote, one party or the other would have won or lost a past election is absurd. The flaw in this argument is that it presumes that the exact same people, and no others, would have voted in either scenario and in the exact same way, and that’s not likely to be the case at all.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 29, 2007 @ 11:22 am
Thanks for saying that, Wayne. I had thought more or less the same thing.
July 29th, 2007 at 2:36 pmI hope that you can cope with the possibility that a majority of Americans may also want to do away with the Electoral College for choosing their president, in part, because not enough people get to see the candidates because they all concentrate on “swing statesâ€. Plus, it’s a lot harder to rig elections over the entire country than it is in one key state.
Comment by Wayne A. Schneider — July 29, 2007 @ 1:02 pm
These are good points. I can also see where a candidate might actually pander to the “swing states”, promising them things (like, say, more hurricane research funding in Florida) while perhaps ignoring needs of equal concern in states that don’t matter.
The Electoral College also has the potential to cause a level of animosity within a given state. Upstate New York’s red vote is negated by NYC’s vote. Austin, Texas, has no real say in a presidential election because of the surrounding sea of red. A vote can be very close in a state and still all the votes go to one candidate.
It seems to me that it’s hard to argue that the Electoral College makes for a better, more enlightened vote. How can 50 (51?) parcels of land somehow smarten up the selection process?
July 29th, 2007 at 2:48 pmIt’s a little late for Americans to be complaining about this, after all they elected Bush in 2004, who did they think would end up on the Court? Harriet Miers?
July 29th, 2007 at 2:48 pmUltimately it’s the states with average populations that get screwed by the Electoral College the most. Those with very small or very large populations tend to benefit the most.
July 29th, 2007 at 3:39 pmA few election cycles ago, I calculated that something like 11 states holds the majority in the elctoral college.
Because almost all states use a “winner-take-all” approach to committing electors, a winning candidate could win by only one vote in each of those states, while losing a landslide in the other 39. Such a scenario would give the winner an advantage of a few electoral votes, while losing the popular vote by about 35% to 65%.
Those states have some pretty divergent views, being in the widely separate regions of the country and having very different rural versus urban population distributions. But a candidate who could find that one thread that flows through them all could all but ignore almost 80% of the states. Or, ominously, could ignore them all and rig only 11 states’ elections.
July 29th, 2007 at 4:13 pmThanks, nix.
July 29th, 2007 at 4:38 pm“UNDUE HARM”, indeed. The revolution is near… CFF
July 29th, 2007 at 11:47 pmumm.. when do we get our country back?
July 30th, 2007 at 12:38 amFinally we get a majority in that seems to vote Constitutional law and not their person opinion or some other countries courts opinion and libs are fit to be tied. Thank God. Now maybe we can go a while without the S. court trying to write law like it did for so many years before!
July 30th, 2007 at 12:48 am#568 – “Finally we get a majority in that seems to vote Constitutional law…” Comment by Patriot76 — July 30, 2007 @ 12:48 am
Yeah, you could count the SC naming then-Gov. Bush to the Presidency as “trying to write law like it did for so many years before”.
If only the SC weren’t so “liberal” as to let Pres. Bush destroy the US Constitution!
/sarcasm
July 30th, 2007 at 7:44 amAmerica is doomed.
July 30th, 2007 at 8:00 pmFIRST, SPECTER HAS A PROBLEM..YES THE BULLET THEORY BEING THE FIRST.
(IT WENT IN THE GOVENOR OUT THE SHOULDER UP A HILL, PAST THE NECK AROUND HEAD IN AND OUT AGAIN..WHY DID WE NOT USE THIS TECHNOLOGY IN IRAQ!)
SECOND, SPECTER WANTED TO HAVE THE RECORDS OF ALITO AND ROBERTS CHALLENEGD THE OTHER DAY. DIDN’T HE GIVE THE BIG VOTE FOR THESE TWO ALONG WITH LONG TIME REPUBLICAN STEVENS OF ALASKA? NOW SPECTER QUESTIONING THEIR RECORD?
SEE PART OF ARTICLE SND LINK:
DEMOCRAT CHARGES U.S. JUSTICES “DUPED†SENATE
FRI JUL 27, 2007 6:13PM EDT
FEATURED BROKER SPONSORED LINK
BY THOMAS FERRARO
WASHINGTON (REUTERS) – U.S. CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN ROBERTS AND SUPREME COURT JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO “DUPED†THE U.S. SENATE INTO CONFIRMING THEM, A TOP DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKER CHARGED ON FRIDAY, DAYS AFTER A KEY REPUBLICAN QUESTIONED IF THEY HAD LIVED UP TO THEIR PROMISES.
SEN. CHARLES SCHUMER OF NEW YORK, A MEMBER OF THE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE THAT HELD HEARINGS ON THE TWO, SAID THEY STAKED OUT MODERATE POSITIONS IN CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY BUT BECAME PART OF A CONSERVATIVE BLOC THAT ISSUED RESTRICTIVE RULINGS ON ISSUES FROM FREE SPEECH TO CIVIL RIGHTS.
SCHUMER, IN A SPEECH TO THE AMERICAN CONSTITUTION SOCIETY, TALKED ABOUT THE CONFIRMATION OF ROBERTS AND ALITO IN 2005 AND 2006, RESPECTIVELY.
“WERE WE DUPED?†HE ASKED.
“WERE WE TOO EASILY IMPRESSED BY THE CHARM OF NOMINEE ROBERTS AND THE ERUDITION OF NOMINEE ALITO?†SCHUMER ASKED. “DID WE MISTAKENLY VOTE OUR HOPES WHEN OUR FEARS WERE MORE THAN JUSTIFIED BY THE ULTRACONSERVATIVE RECORDS OF THESE TWO MEN?â€
“YES,†HE SAID.
HIS COMMENTS CAME DAYS AFTER SEN. ARLEN SPECTER OF PENNSYLVANIA, A MODERATE REPUBLICAN, SAID HE INTENDED TO REVIEW THE CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY OF ROBERTS AND ALITO.
THE POLITICO, A WASHINGTON-BASED NEWSPAPER, QUOTED SPECTER AS SAYING HE WANTED TO SEE IF ROBERTS AND ALITO HAD “LIVED UP†TO THEIR PROMISES TO RESPECT LEGAL PRECEDENTS.
HTTP://WWW.REUTERS.COM/ ARTICLE/ POLITICSNEWS/ IDUSN2729913220070727
ISN’T THAT ILLEGAL AND CONSIDERED TREASON IF THEY HAD NOT DONE THINGS BY FOLLOWING LEGALLY PRECEDENT? WASN’T THAT SPECTERS JOB TO LOOK FOR BEFORE HE CONFIRMED THESE TWO? NOW HE’S DOING THE SAME WITH GONZIE??
THIRD, SPECTER HAS ALL OF A SUDDEN GROWN A HEART TO GIVE GONZIE ONE MORE CHANCE?
WAIT ISNT FIXING THE RECORD FORGERY OR TREASON OR SOMETHING? YOU CAN JUST DISREGARD THE LEGAL PROCESS! – OH WAIT… SPECTER HAS AND HE WILL CONTINUE TO BACKTRACK AND DISREGARD… WHY?
NEXT, NOW AN ALL TO YOUNG AND ROBUST HEALTHY CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS HAS ALLEGEDLY HAD A STROKE AND A SEIZURE OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN – MAYBE HAD SOMETHING TO DO WITH SPECTER LOOKING AROUND AND ASKING QUESTIONS HE REALLY DOES NOT WANT TO ASK ABOUT THE “RECORDâ€
LASTLY, IT LOOKS HORRIBLE THAT THESE GUYS ARE REPUBLIANS GETTING REPUBLICANS. SPECTER IS ON GONZIE (BUT GIVING HIM ANOTHER CHANCE), HE’S QUESTIONING ALITO (WHO IS SUPPOSEDLY IN LATVIA TEACHING LAW) AND ROBERTS RECORD AND SPECTERS LONG TIME FRIEND AND LONGEST SERVING REPUBLICAN IN US HISTORY R- ALAKSA STEVENS WAS INVADED BY FEDS FOR ALLEGED “INSIDER†PAY OFFS? BY THE WAY, THE COMPANY (an oil company no less), ALREADY PLEAD GUILTY TO GIVING OTHER LEGISLATORS “DEALSâ€. Oil companies build houses??
SMELLS LIKE A BIGGER STORY TO ME. THERE IS FIGHTING AMOUNG THE SIBLINGS!
I THINK SPECTER IS THE NEW RED HEADED STEP CHILD OF GEORGE!
WHO WILL PUSH THE LAW HERE?
Intersting thing the DEMS LOVE Specter NOW they are saying they were DUPPED??
Specter has to answer alot of questions.
1. why he nominated Roberts and Alito if he wanted to question them later?
2. Why did he NOT report anything in regards to Chief Roberts previous seizures
3. Why was he all for Gonzie being ousted THEN gives a chance to “correct the record”
4. Who is Specter loyal to George who helped him get re elected by the hair on his chinny chin chin OR the DEMS he’s been loyal to for decades
5. What the heck is going on in the Judiciary that they FORGOT to ask all these KEY questions BEFORE all these guys got their LIFETIME Jobs!?
Who will save or QUESTION the legal process of our Judiciary??
July 31st, 2007 at 8:27 amThe will of the people will rule….maybe….hopefully….
August 1st, 2007 at 11:11 amThings cycle and change. America keeps forging ahead. The country will be ok.
August 1st, 2007 at 11:12 amInstead of just wishing for 09… hope indeed you have no legal problems that require these gentlemen’s resolution. They won’t honor anything at all about your life I promise……
August 2nd, 2007 at 11:59 am