|
And if you don't like it they hey fuck you
CNN | Submitted by: Buddy List
"President Bush defended using government wiretaps without court authorization to monitor terrorism suspects and urged the Senate to renew the USA Patriot Act during his year-end news conference Monday. The president said he intends to continue using secret international wiretaps to monitor activities of people in the United States suspected of having connections to al Qaeda."
|
From: guntotingliberal [GunTotingLiberal]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 13:50
Secret wiretaps save lives. And they will never be abused so it's a win-win situation. Siege! (Heil!) "The president said he intends to continue using secret international wiretaps to monitor activities of people in the United States suspected of having connections to al Qaeda." Translation: I will continue to break the law and use the Constitution to wipe my ass for as long as I am in charge.
From: blackmagic [Blackmagic]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 13:50
The only thing more hilarious than this in itself is the fact that noone is going to do anything about it. lol America
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 13:51
The Bill of Rights -- Fourth Amendment The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Bush says that the Constitution is just a "godamned piece of paper". Personally I think it is a bit more than that. We shall see come next Nov. how many others feel the same way.
From: abaratar [abaratar]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 13:53
Yo, this link is not working, but without reading the article I must still say that these new laws are awful and have been used on many occasions against people that were not suspected of terrorism, They need to be scrapped ASAP. They US is these laws to still money from foriegn banks. Hence the american govermnent has used these laws to remove the sovernty of all banks around the globe. plus lots of other privacy BS
From: bigshlong [EB]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 14:01
When I heard the Attorney General back W up, I was not shocked. Of course he is going to agree with his boss. He wasn't nominated for nothing!! And I remember when Clinton was impeached because he wanted to cover up a BJ. I am starting to wander why the whore did not was the dress with the man chowder. On the other hand, W is clearly breaking the law, and I don't see congress making a fuzz. America, be afraid, be very afraid. W has us by the balls. Democrats, unfortunately you are the minority, so it is understandable. It clearly shows that the republicans have the power and the balls.
From: theallseeingear [Bavid Dyrden]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 14:06
Next year's article: "Lawyers working on President Bush's impeachment charges have mysteriously disappeared"
From: marlysfan [Guy Incognito]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 14:09
It's a sad thing that I am neither surprised nor outraged. This is what I've come to expect from the current administration. Seriously, nothing's shocking since the PATRIOT Act.
From: wiegehtesdir [Jimmy Jingo]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 14:12
If you think this is bad...Just wait until we find out what else the maroon from Bum Poke, Texas is up to. It's never just 1 thing when you have power mongers like this in charge! Seig Heil! Bushit!
From: thehammerspake
[the perpetually unhappiest]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 14:13
hey, dear American ladies and gentlemen, it may be very presumpous of me, a no good foreigner, a goddman chinese commie bastard, but,just to share a little insight into american politics, I'd say: stay optimistic; America still has a lot ahead of itself. American economy, yes, may have sapped and may never be able to return to that kind of prosperity right after world war II, unless there will be a non major american damage invovled world war III, but it still remains strong, despite septemeber 11, and hurrican katrina, as Greenspan points out few months earlier. The whole american economy may not be growing as fast as say China or india, but it is still a dominant powerhouse. Personally, i think american education system sucks. I went to high school and everyday white people discriminates me while black people hit me. (oh but God has mercy on me and has seen my unhappiness, so he sent me to Johns Hopkins, where no black people dare to hit me, and no white people dare to shout "chink!" out loud. And here's lots of Chinese too, so if there happen to be another massacre committed in the name of ethnic cleansing, i will be running faster at least than those chinese girls at there) However, American remains the leader of science and technology. This can be seen from its college. I swear by god, no one who graduated from an american public high school has the ability to catch up with any of the science and math courses offered at Johns Hopkins (except the poor jews and Chinese). It's so really really difficult. I 'd say it;s the most challenging class i have ever had. I have asked college friends in China and they were al frustrated with some of the problems. So it's very clear that american still remains an intellectual giant. in terms of technology, everyone knows that third world countries such as China adn Brazil have no chance. Look, I didnt' even know what the hell was an expansion video card. So relax superior people, your country still rock like crazy! And i love your country too, at least i am not killed by japs or tortured to death in a chinese prison. thank you all veddy much
From: wino [wino]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 14:22
Wasn't it only last week some of the members here were telling us there is no slippery slope, that the new police powers are seldom used and never abused, that the day the government started doing this sort of thing would be the day they admit things have gone too far, and that they would be the first to stand up against their government then etc etc etc etc
From: zebrabob [zebrabobsgotabigone]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 14:36
I was going to say something here...real smart and pithy...hopefully with a biting sting of constitutional outrage...but my meds just kicked in... Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
From: jhigh
[apathy incarnate]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 14:38
I, for one, welcome King George and our new dictorial overlords. Not. But, in response to azdollarbill, above that said we shall see come next November who feels the same way, well, I wish it were so. Even if the dems take over congress and the casa blanco I don't see anything much changing. But, in my opinion, the two parties have much more in common in the last decade or so than they are different. Signing off on the patriot act w/o reading it, supporting free trade (bye bye american jobs and tax base), supporting the invasion of Iraq (Iraq sucks but didn't have much if anything to do with 9/11) on and on ad nauseam... They may talk the talk but both parties fail to walk the walk.
From: gargoyle1
Date: 19-Dec-2005 14:45
He violated the law and constitution. He should be impeached, prosecuted and shot, in that order. I will even pay for the bullet.
From: uppitynegro
[Uppity Negro]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 14:57
Election fraud. A deliberate effort by surveillance efforts in Maryland to keep information away from John Kerry that would have guaranteed that he would have been elected. The information was a combined non-national information and national information. Including a valid assertion of an NSA employee being corrupted. Further, the national information component was, and is, an illegal application of technology and surveillance tactics to at least several citizens and possibly many hundreds. Which makes it now imperative that these activities be fully disclosed. Election Fraud charges are more than valid. John Kerry still doesn't know, neither does John Edwards or Tom Daschle. Nor the people of this country. Yet. UN - staying in town!
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:17
Komendant Shrub is the only president in US history to sign EACH AND EVERY bill that called for more federal spending. Not that I'm either one, but I'd rather be a "tax-and-spend" democrat than a "spend-and-spend" repuglican. BTW, http://www.becomearepublican.com is great for a few well deserved laughs.
From: rockspin [Dopeman]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:29
Thank you for that superb waste of time...
From: flayed [Flayed]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:32
Hey thehammerspake [the perpetually unhappiest], don't get too down on yourself. I've always found the average Oriental to be much more gracious and polite than the average Westerner. I have nothing but respect for your people. But about Bush. Honestly, I can see this country returning to the times of Mccarthyism and the Red Scare at an alarming pace, and I can see my freedoms slowly dissapearing one by one. And while this infuriates me, there's one thing I simply cannot let pass: that George W.'s address to the country last night made me wait 17 minutes for the new episode of Family Guy. Damn you Mr. Bush.
From: canadagirl78
[God, make me chaste. But not yet.]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:35
A god damned piece of paper, eh? Hee. I love seeing public officials fuck up- and it doesn't matter where they're from or what their stances are, it's just nice to see. (and before anyone starts swiping at me, PM Paul Martin had an aide who said publicly that Canadians shouldn't get a Universal Day Care cheque cuz we'd spend it on popcorn and beer- and it was just as funny a fuck up) "At an end-of-the-year news conference, Bush spent much of his time answering questions about the program, which bypasses the normal procedure of attaining a court warrant and is designed to intercept communications between suspected terrorists in the United States and other countries." Okay, Law and Order has taught me many, many things about laws in the US (NY specifically), and I must ask a fairly obvious question: Why no warrant? I mean, if it's a matter of having evidence against a person, then there should be no reason why a warrant wouldn't be given. If there's not enough evidence to attain a warrant, then maybe there's a reason why there should be no surveillance, no? Isn't that what the whole reason for warrants in the first place, to make sure the gov't isn't being too obtrusive into the lives and bedrooms of the people? Am I missing something? Even more concerning, especially after Marc Emery, is why the international wiretaps? Last time I checked, the US's jurisdiction ends at the borders (or is supposed to), so how much protection is the average non-US citizen going to get when being monitored by US officials? Where will these people be dealt with should an arrest be made? In their own country (where the activity is taking place) or in the US (where the laws are)? Why the bloody fuck has no one impeached this asshole yet? From the first day since Renquist decided the presidency, this administration has been mired in scandal, impropriety, corruption, and incompetency at an ethereal level. Can someone, anyone, please explain to me why this guy is still in charge? If I fucked up at my job as bad as he has at his, what with the lies and the bad information and the sitting reading kids books while the country is under attack, I'd've been fired LONG ago. Any of us would've been fired from our jobs if we showed even one tenth the incompetence and arrogance Bush has, yet he keeps going. I don't get it. Has anyone ever explained to George that there are three branches of gov't for a reason? Has anyone explained the checks and balances and why they're there? Someone, quick, send that boy a copy of "America: A Democracy Inaction!"
From: backuptheholler
[Junebug James]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:39
I'm finding many references on the Internet that Dubya called the Constitution a GDPOP, but nothing definitive, for example, someone in attendance at the meeting putting their ass on the line instead of being an anonymous source. But by the same token, I'm not finding it debunked on any of the usual "urban legend" sites either. Why isn't the media pursuing this and getting more sources? Ah, still running around with their tails between their legs (but at least some of them finally seem to have gotten their heads out of their asses over this pitiful excuse for a prez.)
From: flayed [Flayed]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:42
canadagirl78, I demand you cease your logical arguments! Mr. Bush has no time for such things. As a Canadien, you have no idea what it's like to be under constant siege from invisible, undetectable, and maybe non-existant terrorist forces.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:44
From: fashionofchrist [Schizophonic] Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:12 How many of you are aware that our Thief-In-Chief recently refered to our Constitution as "just a god-damned piece of paper"? Just thought I'd add that. From: fashionofchrist [Schizophonic] Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:14 oops... apologies to az, guess I should have read the thread first. my bad. -------------------------------------------------------------------- Don't sweat it. In fact, the more times it gets repeated, the better. I see that his poll numbers are up to 47%. Now that is something to wonder about. I mean could 10% of the people actually be fooled by all of his "we are winning in Iraq" bogus bull shit? It's nice that they had an election, shit we have them too. Now let's see a week go by with no GI's killed, or no innocent Iraqis blown to bits, & there might actually be a reason for it to go up.
From: greenneon21 [phillip]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:48
heres whats really funny folks.. when the next attack comes, and it will.. and we knew who was going to do it, we knew they were planning something, and we didnt stop it because we couldnt wiretap, we couldnt track their messages, we couldnt do a damn thing to gain any information before they struck.. who will you blame then? who will you cry out in rage towards? what answer will you have when you ask why didnt we stop this before it happened? when we could have gathered info.. when we could have learned from phone calls or secret emails.. i sit here thinking just what people will say.. what great silence the dems will be sitting in when they tried their best to stop us from stopping another attack.. when people upset now and saying what they are saying now.. how silent you will be when 9/11 in '06 or '07 or '09 happens.. so just a little thought before you jump on the dem band wagon in shouting down bush..
From: badweatherman [a hard rain's gonna cum]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:53
What does the paper mean if the people it represents won't rise up off their sofas and turn off theirf TVs and stop surfin porn to BRB got IM
From: tsentsen [tsentsen]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:59
The man who would be 'king'. This is nothing new. The american & british gen-pop have been spied upon for the last several decades. Bush is just being dis-honestly honest about it so when and if the time comes he can say "I tol' ya'll so". Hey hammerspake...sorry you had such a rough time. Not all U.S. citizens are such creeps.
From: canadagirl78
[God, make me chaste. But not yet.]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 16:01
From: greenneon21 [phillip] Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:48 heres whats really funny folks.. when the next attack comes, and it will.. and we knew who was going to do it, we knew they were planning something, and we didnt stop it because we couldnt wiretap, we couldnt track their messages, we couldnt do a damn thing to gain any information before they struck.. who will you blame then? who will you cry out in rage towards? ________________________________________________________________________ Um, the Bush admin had all the info for 9/11, even without the wiretaps. And George went on vacation instead of reading the memos that warned of the impending attack. Yes, the US will be attacked again, naming yourselves as leaders of the free world tends to put a big target on your backs. The people will blame whoever the hell they want to, as they did during Pearl Harbour and 9/11. Having the info doesn't stop the attack, acting on the info stops the attack. Maybe 9/11 could've been prevented if there were FBI agents investigating reports of people who didnt' want to land or take off in flight schools- but they were busy investigating a presidential rimjob instead. ___________________________________________________________________________ what answer will you have when you ask why didnt we stop this before it happened? when we could have gathered info.. when we could have learned from phone calls or secret emails.. i sit here thinking just what people will say.. what great silence the dems will be sitting in when they tried their best to stop us from stopping another attack.. __________________________________________________________________________ Uh, those people who were pushing so hard to get Clinton's blowjob impeachment and ignoring the threat to your country didn't work weren't democrats. __________________________________________________________________________ when people upset now and saying what they are saying now.. how silent you will be when 9/11 in '06 or '07 or '09 happens.. so just a little thought before you jump on the dem band wagon in shouting down bush.. ___________________________________________________________________________ Bush deserves to be beaten - not just down but up and sideways and in fucking circles. Florida elections, 9/11, WMD's, Patriot Act, the tax breaks for the uber-rich and the record deficit, Katrina, the Patriot Act II, the list of his fuck ups goes on and on like a Yoko Ono song. Pick even one month of his presidency when he wasn't either messing up or on vacation- can't be done. (And I don't hate republicans, before you start freakin out, I believe John McCain is probably the best person to ever even consider running for president.)
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 16:10
greenneon, Here comes the clue train, last stop, YOU: Our existing intelligence gathering agencies gave the bush administration advanced warning of an impending attack on US soil - 9/11. Bush claims he never got the memo. Seems our intelligence agencies were in fact working fine to protect us. Seems it was clearly the ADMINISTRATION'S FAULT that we were unprepared for such an attack. Trumping our constitution in order to protect our citizens is a bullshit argument. It's like bush is saying, in order to protect our democracy, we have to destroy it. Seems like a pretty fascist move. I'll happily continue to bash Bush and call him on his administrations bullshit for one simple reason. HE FUCKING DESERVES IT. The man is not a leader. He is a failure, as his track record indicates. The fucker even has a criminal record. He lies, and then claims ignorance. He appoints cronies to important positions (see Mike Brown/FEMA), rearranges our federal disaster management system and wonders why we've lost tens of thousands of american lives in NOLA. He didn't even know what happened until the damage was done. He claims IGNORANCE. IGNORANCE IS NOT AN EXCUSE. Furthermore, he swore an OATH to protect and uphold our constitution, which he has subverted through the Patriot Act, and now he's trying to side-step the courts and simply wants a free pass to wiretap any and all citizens. He has called the constitution "just a god-damned piece of paper". Quit apologizing for him already. He's clearly a liar, and a fuck-up. Christ man. How many more people need to die needlessly before you wake up and smell the shit-storm? How many civil liberties do we give up before we stop considering this country a free republic rather than a facist state? Get real or get lost.
From: wulfgartheblack [Wulfgar the Black]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 16:35
From: theallseeingear [Bavid Dyrden] Next year's article: "Lawyers working on President Bush's impeachment charges have mysteriously disappeared" ________________________________________________________________________ The article will never make it into print. The reporters writing it will be 'detained' [in Central America they say 'disappeared']. I'd guess the Coronation will be around Easter of '08. Long live the King!
From: thumsum
[Giv' em some thumb]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 16:40
This will be my only Christmas time post, work is almost at 24/7 mode. Love all you guys, I'll be back from the occasional lurk in the new year. I just wanted this one comment. If you think about it rationally, Bush is using the fear of terrorism to deny you people(don't get me wrong, it's everyone using the net as well) your long fought for rights for the sake of his own political control. If using fear as a tool is known as anything, it is terrorism. What does that make him out to be and what does is say about all of our freedom? Fuck anyone who tries to stop me and you saying what we want. Shit, I'd kiss Aryan before i helped people stop him from expressing himself(ok, if he mellowed a bit it would help, but hay, I if i want to call him a honkey toss pot thats up to me too). To finish, love you guys, love freedom, fuck the people who silence.
From: necrophiliac [coldone]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 16:40
wake up it's 1984. now get back into line, show your papers. Bill of rights is just so much toilet paper. bush wipes his ass with it every day. Heil Bush
From: wulfgartheblack [Wulfgar the Black]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 16:48
Canadagirl, No warrants because there is no evidence. No arrests - same again. No trials - ditto. No impeachment because the people who could do it are all in with King George and might be hanged with him.
From: thumsum
[Giv' em some thumb]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 16:51
oh, big love to all you regular posters canada, tsen, conspiracy, tera, guntot, wulf, doczzz, necro, robo(thats what you get for bringing a merry christmas to a political disscusion), jesus, dyna, mike, azdoller, popo, cao(-y), backup gargoyle, seeingear, sneaky and even aryan you giant nutter. Oh, and everyone i missed who makes my evenings less boring. Come to England, I'll apologise and get you a drink.
From: snyznyk [snyznyk]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 17:15
Those who fail to learn from history- This reminds me of WWII (The Big One) where the U.S. government interned all the Americans of Japanese decent in the interest of fighting the war against the evil axis. After decades we ended up paying millions in reparations to these innocent citizens. In 10 to 20 years we will be paying billions in reparations to compensate the lawful citizens who were victimized by King George. Thanks ass hole! Next time try a court order and save us the lawsuits.
From: unkleweaser [Dennis M. Hoban]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 17:32
Why isn't the so-called "liberal" media pulling back the curtain and revealing The Wizard for the conniving, cowardly, drug-abusing, lying, election-fixing humbug he really is? Where are you, I. F. Stone, when we really need you?
From: ronniejay [ron]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 17:47
Hey, George is the man if anybody has a problem with him just try filling his shoes for one day !
From: jayjg [Jayjg the Jew]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:08
Bush is pure evil but at least he pretends to like Jews.
From: hillbilly1981 [Joe]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:12
As I've said before, people will bitch when you do too much, too little, or just the right amount. You cannot trust the media, not one bit, they sell nothing but controversy, it worked with Jerry Springer the same theory carries throughout. The majority of Americans want controversy, that's what they get. Personally I don't think Bush is the greatest, but if you look in history, the media didn't sell controversy, they sold good christian cleanness (lol and bleh). Lincoln did a lot of sneaky, bullshit things too, but he's seen as a hero to many. It's time for people to start thinking for themselves instead of relying on the media to tell them the "facts". And by the way, those of you that cannot drive, stay of the damned roads.
From: americanartist [Red W. Blue]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:14
How many 9/11's do we have to endure before you people realize that the terrorists will only stop killing people when one of two things has happened? 1. The United States (and really the whole world-including China, heh) becomes a strict Islamic state (and that means everyone). or 2. We're all dead. Our civil liberties are worthless if we are dead! If you are dead and pushing up daisies, if you're sucking dirt inside a casket, do you know what your civil liberties are worth? Zilch, zero, nada. You aren't even here! Ask the families, ask the people who were in the World Trade Center towers right before they were attacked if they are more concerned with the loss of their civil liberties than the loss of their lives.
From: grandhoohah [James]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:27
Would anyone happen to have a credible link to Bush's comment about the Constitution? I can't seem to find one as of yet. BTW...in case my work prevents me from coming back on here: Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!! Thanks to everyone for making this forum a lot of fun! Peace to all!
From: grandhoohah [James]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:32
I found a few about Bush's comments....here's at least one in case anyone wants to check it out. http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml
From: backuptheholler
[Junebug James]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:34
americanartist: Just to repeat that which has oft been repeated... "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Benjamin Franklin
From: backuptheholler
[Junebug James]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:39
thumsum: Look forward to your return. We'll keep a straight jacket warm for you. Happy winter solstice, merry christmas, etc. etc. canadagirl: As a Jewish friend of mine said yesterday...life is good when a Jew can receive a Christmas card from a Muslim and it's OK. (It's the fundies who ruin it for everybody else with all their whining.)
From: weghalbert [the_mad_hatter]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:47
Bush seemed angered that the program was revealed in an article in Friday's editions of The New York Times. "My personal opinion is it was a shameful act, for someone to disclose this very important program in time of war," Bush said. "The fact that we're discussing this program is helping the enemy." (((BUT IT IS OK TO LEAK BY WAY OF A NEWSPAPER A CIA AGENT FOR REVENGE BY WAY OF #1 CRONY KARL ROVE,,,IN A TIME OF WAR,,, COME ON you GOP dumbass sheep,,,defend "DUBYA THE DUMB"""""
From: bigfishee [bigfishee]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:51
F$%#ing goddamn Democrats! Are you the one being tapped? Are your civil liberties being compromised in any way? Exactly, no. So why complain about it. Fact is the the Pres is doing what he needs to do to keep the war over there, and not in our backyard. Can't you people see anything?
From: cynic78 [Aldhran Vicotnik]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:53
I'm pretty sure Bush is the Antichrist.
From: tucanscrew
[three's more fun]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:56
From: unkleweaser [Dennis M. Hoban] Date: 19-Dec-2005 17:32 Why isn't the so-called "liberal" media pulling back the curtain and revealing The Wizard for the conniving, cowardly, drug-abusing, lying, election-fixing humbug he really is? Where are you, I. F. Stone, when we really need you? ------ There is no liberal media anymore. The media is now part of corporate America and is therefore a conservative enterprise donating money left and right to keep the powers in power. Look at you large city papers, by and large they are owned by Hearst, Belo, Tribune, Gaylord or Gannett. Clearchannel is a good example of the lock corporations have on radio. At one point there were actually laws limiting the media outlets one company could control, lest they unduly influence the electorate. I guess these were just goddamned pieces of paper too because they were rescinded. Belo Corp owns the newspaper, the ABC affiliate TV station and two radio stations in the Dallas, TX market. Gannett controls the Detroit Free Press, The Detroit News and USA Today---all three newspapers available in the Detroit market. The liberal media is like God, it died a long time ago but few people have noticed.
From: ciaochowbella
[I didn't do it and I wasn't there when it happened]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 19:02
Arrrgh! Ok, I have a plan, guys. All I need to bring down the prez is 40mg. of Valium, a web cam, two 14 yr old Laotian boys, a leather love-suit, and a goat. At this point, all I need is the boys. Anybody know where I can find them? Find me those boys and we can be Dubya-free by January. Now, that would be extra Christmas-y
From: jester5150 [jester5150]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 19:14
From: ronniejay [ron] Date: 19-Dec-2005 17:47 Hey, George is the man if anybody has a problem with him just try filling his shoes for one day ! _________________________________________________________________________ Ronnie...you are indeed an idiot. I'l love to fill his shoes...with concrete...close to a pier.
From: koreanholiday [ACH]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 19:21
Damned if you do & Damned if you don't. The government, including both the Clinton and Bush Administrations, was accused of failing to prevent 9/11. Failure to gather proper intelligence at the proper time. They were damned. The government now tries to gather information to try to prevent another 'incident' They are damned.
From: pdgtl
[Phillip Navarro]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 19:25
From Capitol Hill Blue http://www.capitolhillblue.com/artman/publish/article_7779.shtml The Rant Bush on the Constitution: 'It's just a goddamned piece of paper' By DOUG THOMPSON Dec 9, 2005, 07:53 Last month, Republican Congressional leaders filed into the Oval Office to meet with President George W. Bush and talk about renewing the controversial USA Patriot Act. Several provisions of the act, passed in the shell shocked period immediately following the 9/11 terrorist attacks, caused enough anger that liberal groups like the American Civil Liberties Union had joined forces with prominent conservatives like Phyllis Schlafly and Bob Barr to oppose renewal. GOP leaders told Bush that his hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. “I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.” “Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.” “Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!” I’ve talked to three people present for the meeting that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called the Constitution “a goddamned piece of paper.” And, to the Bush Administration, the Constitution of the United States is little more than toilet paper stained from all the shit that this group of power-mad despots have dumped on the freedoms that “goddamned piece of paper” used to guarantee. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, while still White House counsel, wrote that the “Constitution is an outdated document.” ------------------------------------------------- There is folks, in black and white. Just think. You put this man into office twice. Be sure to practice your goose step http://360.yahoo.com/pdgtl
From: tucanscrew
[three's more fun]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 19:41
From: pdgtl [Phillip Navarro] Date: 19-Dec-2005 19:25 There is folks, in black and white. Just think. You put this man into office twice. ------- Posted on Friday, but bears repeating: From: tucanscrew [three's more fun] Date: 16-Dec-2005 23:43 I hated Bush when he was the manager of the Texas Rangers. I didn't vote for him for governor and I goddamn sure didn't vote for him for president. He was, is and will always be a lowlife scumbag piece of shit. He was a piss poor excuse for a man before he ever ran for public office. I, alas, haven't been surprised by anything he has done while in office (except for choking on a pretzel, even I gave him credit for being smart enough to eat).
From: rottenaugratin
[Rotten au Gratin]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 19:53
"blackmagic [Blackmagic]:"The only thing more hilarious than this in itself is the fact that noone is going to do anything about it. lol America" --------------------------------------------------------------------------- DITTO.
From: guntotingliberal [GunTotingLiberal]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 19:57
Thumsum- Happy Christmas to you and yours. Where are you off to? I might take you up on that offer the next time I'm in the UK. I spent a few summers there and was actually married there a few years ago. We actually MUST go back soon because my wife can't find the marriage certificate but the registrar will supply us with a new one BUT only in person. Seriously though, why won't you be posting.
From: koreanholiday [ACH]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 19:59
Re: The Rant: 'It's just a ***damned piece of paper' "I¡¯ve talked to three people present for the meeting that day and they all confirm..." My reply: Who are the three people? What are their names? What are their exact statements? I'm not stating that the President didn't state such, but I am also quite leary of these unsubstantiated statements that everyone takes for fact. All this hatred towards the President has me concerned. If a democrat is elected next term, watch all hatred to be unleashed towards him/her by the right as a kind of retribution. Clinton was ridiculed and made fun of, but this hatred is too much and quite frankly scary. Remember extremism on either the left or the right is wrong and down right scary. Also, Remember, the next president elected probably won't fix America has neither did Bush nor Clinton. Is it possible we are beyond repair?
From: tucanscrew
[three's more fun]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 20:04
Is it possible we are beyond repair? ------ a president who doesn't use the word strategeries is probably a good start. Dan Quayle could not spell potatoes, but at least he could pronounce it.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 20:57
From: americanartist [Red W. Blue] Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:14 How many 9/11's do we have to endure before you people realize that the terrorists will only stop killing people when one of two things has happened? 1. The United States (and really the whole world-including China, heh) becomes a strict Islamic state (and that means everyone). or 2. We're all dead. Our civil liberties are worthless if we are dead! If you are dead and pushing up daisies, if you're sucking dirt inside a casket, do you know what your civil liberties are worth? Zilch, zero, nada. You aren't even here! ----------------------------------------------------------------- You cowardly fuck! It's ass holes like you who put our shit for brains prez in power, because they were too afraid to vote for somebody who would do the right thing, even if the right thing, might not have been the safest thing. So you cowards have actually made it more dangerous for all of us, by enabling Bush to wage an immoral, illegal war. Some day, all the relatives of all the innocent Iraqis will have their revenge, bank on it.
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:01
Let's compare how many US citizens have been killed by terrorists in US history to how many US citizens were killed by the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, shall we? Maybe we should be waging a war against floods instead... It's one of those things that make you say hmm....
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:14
<I>I found a few about Bush's comments....here's at least one in case anyone wants to check it out. [capitolhillblue.com] </I> Most of the story looks legit and Doug Thompson seems to criticize both Republicans and Democrats so he's not a political nutbag. I would say the story is true as far as Mr. Thompson is concerned, only way it wouldn't be is if those 3 people lied to him. I've been looking for another source since there seems to be a few hundred hits pointing to the chb piece.
From: cdntruthseer
[look past the propaganda]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:14
""From: greenneon21 [phillip] Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:48 heres whats really funny folks.. when the next attack comes, and it will.. and we knew who was going to do it, we knew they were planning something, and we didnt stop it because we couldnt wiretap, we couldnt track their messages, we couldnt do a damn thing to gain any information before they struck.. who will you blame then? who will you cry out in rage towards? "" You sir, are as ignorant as you are sucked-in by the fear mongering. To state it once again, enough information was known prior to 911 to prevent it, and existing laws could have been applied. You have an election stealing (prove to me that it was legit), war criminal (prove me wrong), power-mad (USC is just a piece of paper) tyrant as POTUS. The scary thing about the NSA story is, this is stuff he ADMITS to! Imagine what he's holding back. You impeached Clinton, thinking that he broke the law, now impeach Bush!! High crimes & misdemeanors.
From: greenneon21 [phillip]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:20
From: koreanholiday [ACH] Date: 19-Dec-2005 19:21 Damned if you do & Damned if you don't. The government, including both the Clinton and Bush Administrations, was accused of failing to prevent 9/11. Failure to gather proper intelligence at the proper time. They were damned. The government now tries to gather information to try to prevent another 'incident' They are damned. exactly the point.. clinton had evidence too and did nothing.. bush was in office for 11 months.. too early to do anything but those still in office during clinton could of. bush didnt do a thing to cause 9/11 nor did he do anything to stop it, only because you cant act that quickly.. how do you people think we gathered that info you said we had? duh people you think wiretaps is new? you think we arent watching these people before bush jr was in office? to blame bush is a ignorant thing.. to fault him then in action that gathers info on these same people that we should be watching, because they arent just watching everyone, is not the right thing to do.. and azdollarbill chill the fuck out man.. "You cowardly fuck! It's ass holes like you who put our shit for brains prez in power, because they were too afraid to vote for somebody who would do the right thing, even if the right thing, might not have been the safest thing." and what the hell do you mean "afraid to vote for somebody who would do the right thing, even if the right thing might not have been the safest thing?" what the hell does that mean? do you understand the job of the president? its to protect the people.. to do whats safe for the country.. right thing might not be the safest thing? whats the right thing? sitting on your ass and letting them attack again? yeah thats logical.. sitting there not gathering info and them attacking us again? what should we do then after the next time? just sit there again? yeah thats the safest thing, but is it the right thing?
From: mingemeister [Dick DeGirth]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:20
So what exactly is the problem? Shit sometimes needs to be done. Can any of you honestly claim to be adversely affected by any of the patriot act? If so, then you should probably quit calling for the death of the Great Satan from you suburban Mosques. that will probably make the problem go away. Someday, when ever you all put down the bongs and emerge from your parents basement, you will realize that all the shit that might happen never actually does. I have relatives who really have had there doors kicked in for criticizing their gov'ts, usually by the same communists most of libs idolize. For any of you spoiled upper middle class kids to act like it's going to happen to you strikes me as just silly. If Bush really is who you say he is, why are you still free and posting? It sure as hell not because you can't be found. Get some real jobs and get some better weed. Whatever shit you guys smoke is making you too paranoid.
From: y0mama
[Your Mom]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:25
<i>Let's compare how many US citizens have been killed by terrorists in US history to how many US citizens were killed by the aftermath of hurricane Katrina, shall we? Maybe we should be waging a war against floods instead... It's one of those things that make you say hmm.... </i> But it's okay because most of them were black, right? since when were THEY considered equal-rights-bearing citizens? Oh yea... since over 40 years ago, and by common sense accounts, longer. Right. Guess someone forgot to tell the pres.
From: assgasms [A$$gasms]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:35
Blatently unconstitutional to anyone who ever took ConLaw. What they don't teach you is that Politics always trumps the Constitution, every single time and this will not be the exception. Too many All-American Bubbas think we "jist gotta git them ragheads".
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:36
With a republican controlled congress, impeachment would be hard. It would be a possibility in 2006 IF democrats gain control. I don't like it when 1 party controls both the executive and legislative branches. Gridlock works the best in the federal government. Crap like this makes a great reason not to ban sniper rifles. Joking aside, I wonder why there hasn't been multiple attempts of assassination. Reagan had someone shoot him, Clinton had a few people attempting to (one tried a suicide run in a Cessna (or similar aircraft) and another stand outside of the fence and shoot the White House), the first Bush had Saddam try it, but this Bush seems to be lagging in the number of attempts. Not that I'm advocating violence against the President, it's just that I thought dumb crap like that was becoming a tradition.
From: assgasms [A$$gasms]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:44
melvin69: There's a lot we don't hear about, especially with this group of assclowns in power. And really. Be careful with the assault rifle comments. Even with your "caveat" "I'm not advocating...", we live in dangerous times with very cheap computing power... You (and now me) have probably had our IP#'s logged by a FedBot that monitors sites like this. Not that they have the manpower to go through every single snarky comment... all I'm saying is be aware of what you say and how we're (probably) watched, and it's probably best to keep your wishful thoughts to yourself. (Note to Bot: Not that I'd actually ever THINK anything negative about our fearless leeeeeeeders!)
From: mingemeister [Dick DeGirth]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:50
From: y0mama [Your Mom] Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:25 But it's okay because most of them were black, right? since when were THEY considered equal-rights-bearing citizens? Oh yea... since over 40 years ago, and by common sense accounts, longer. Right. Guess someone forgot to tell the pres. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Would that be the same common sense that tells the planets' least swimmingest motherfuckers to move below sea level; and then, as if they weren't already bad enough, further hinder what little bouyancy they had left with deep fried foods and pork products. You mean that common sense? Next thing you know it they'll be moving into the cold! Umm .....oh yeah, to late. My condolences to the rust belt. And no we ain't gotta git all dem ragheads. Just they ones that mean us harm.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:53
Quote:""You cowardly fuck! It's ass holes like you who put our shit for brains prez in power, because they were too afraid to vote for somebody who would do the right thing, even if the right thing, might not have been the safest thing." and what the hell do you mean "afraid to vote for somebody who would do the right thing, even if the right thing might not have been the safest thing?" what the hell does that mean?" It means that when Bush played the fear card, with his phony terror alerts every time his ratings started to drop, it was cowardly ass holes who were scared into voting for him, even though it went against their economic self interests. Consider Bush's bull shit about:"If we weren't fighting them there, in Iraq, we would be fighting them on the streets here". And just how the fuck does anyone suppose they would get here? Row across the Ocean in a row boat, or how about a raft? Even assuming that they did get here somehow, just what exactly could they do? Shoot up a mall? Like that never happened before in this country? You Bush apologists make me sick. BTW, since Clinton has gotten dragged into the fray, did you know that Clinton put off attacking Afghanistan, because he didn't want to saddle Bush with a war, not of his choosing, if he won the election. Why do you think that Afghanistan was the only thing that Bush did that actually worked? Because he used Clinton's plan. Also, there is a pic that shows Bush holding a folder, ID ing a terrorist threat, while he was vacationing. I don't know if the pic is legit, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was.
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 21:56
y0mama, what does this crap mean? <I>But it's okay because most of them were black, right? since when were THEY considered equal-rights-bearing citizens? </I> http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-bodies18dec18,0,7754290.story?coll=la-home-headlines If it is about Katrina's flood victims well, if an area is 67% black, then chances are there are going to be more black victims than white. Common sense, blame nature or statistics for that fact. The above article states that out of the recovered and identified bodies, 33% are white. The white population of NO is 28%. The article also states that the hurricane affected both poor and rich alike. It also goes on to say that not all whites were rich or all blacks poor. There were poor white people and rich black people that died as a result of the hurricane. For the record, here's another story about the spying: http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/19/D8EJJB200.html Article about Media Bias: http://www.newsroom.ucla.edu/page.asp?RelNum=6664 Though I would like to point out that the news goes for sensational stories to attract advertising from corporations. So in effect, they are working toward corporate America since those are the ones that pay the money.
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 22:05
<I>Also, there is a pic that shows Bush holding a folder, ID ing a terrorist threat, while he was vacationing. I don't know if the pic is legit, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was. </I> Wouldn't that shoot a hole in your rant that Bush was on vacation? If he is holding an intelligence folder then it's obvious that he's working. He just happens to be somewhere else other than the White House. Air Force 1 is equiped to be a command post, don't you think it's possible that other locations are set-up to function as such.
From: dick [Dick Cheney]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 22:10
mingemeister [Dick DeGirth] is a good citizen. He drank his kool-aid. Now how about the rest of you pot-smoking morbid bastards?! What the hell's the problem with you? Don't you believe in Jesus? Don't you watch Fox News? Don't you want your tax cuts? Drink the kool-aid god damn it, or I will have you all lined up against the wall, and have grape kool-aid enemas administered on down the line!. DRINK IT! DRINK IT NOW! (Rotten is tapped assholes. I've got my eye on you.)
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 22:12
I would agree with you, John, if he had actually done something. You know, I and the rest of the country were 100%, well, 98% anyway, behind Bush after 911. What burns our balls, was how he used 911 as an excuse to attack Iraq. To this very day, there are people who think that Saddam was behind 911, thanks mainly to Faux News.
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 22:15
mingemeister, I'm not so much worried about the NSA wiretaps. I'm worried about the fact that Bush openly commited a FELONY while in office by authorizing it. I'm worried that he's going to get away with it. I'm worried that assholes like you care more about Clinton dipping the presidential wick then about someone commiting a fucking HIGH CRIME while holding our most sacred office. Wake up man. Big brother is knocking at your door.
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 22:17
And for the record, Clinton was a fucking asshat too. So don't even give me the tired old "Clinton did this and that argument" ... the fact is he isn't in charge anymore.
From: cannibal
[No Fat Chicks]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 22:23
All of this talk of terrorists just reminded me of something. And now for something completely different! http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=18095&only
From: robwrigley
Date: 19-Dec-2005 22:32
I've been laying low on this one. After last night, I don't really have the energy. Anyone who has been on these boards for the past weeks knows my position on the Constitution, current administration, and the Patriot Act and all it entails. My only comment is: I can't help but think if the previous administration had been a bit more aggressive, and less morally squeamish, we would still have those two big towers in Manhattan. Not that I miss the load-in to Windows on the World. But I did have a few acquaintances there. _________________________________________________________________ But, lets take this somewhere more interesting than accusations of jack-boot fetishism. It was suggested that the Constitution needs to be re-written, or at least, substantially updated. Any suggestions? I proposed a Bill of Responsibilities to go along with the Bill of Rights. I think a more direct form of Presidential election is manageable, and long over-due. Anyone else? Rob
From: hawkweed [crowley]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 22:35
What I dont get is this... If so many of You hate Bush, why the fuck did You vote for the cocksucker AND why are You all just sitting there while this shit goes on?
From: midnightmoonshin [bob]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 22:40
How long before we have Heel clicks and stiff armed salutes? How can we possibly survive another three years of the dictatorship. Maybe the new Iraqi government will send troops to save us from our transgressors.
From: headcase [Wayne]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 22:54
Big F--kin deal ... he was corruptly voted in ... think he's going to act any different ?
From: mingemeister [Dick DeGirth]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 22:57
All I know is that I have come from a shithole country, moved to a neighborhood infested with fuck-ups and will end up much wealthier than my parents. Most of you seem to come frome upper middle class homes, waste your parents money on worthless liberal arts and social science degrees, and will live out the rest of your days in rent controlled studio apartments, wondering why the system won't give you all the shit I earned. It's not the system, it's what you do with it. For those who do shit other than complain, this is the best system in the world, and I have no problems with doing whatever it takes to protect my interests, and since people like me support people like most of you, your interests too. Hell yeah I want a tax cut. Who wants to support a bunch of self hating ingrates? I pay more in fuel taxes a week than most of you conspiracy theorizing latte jockeys make. Why get penalized even more for actually doing shit? I'm not special, I just go about shit the right way, fuck anybody who doesn't. The parasites had their 8 years, now those who pay for them are having a turn. Prior to starting my company, I was in the military, under Clinton and the only plans he seemed to have involved launching poorly aimed cruise missiles, getting as many homos of the "fabulous" variety into the military (butch ones have always been there, nobody seems to mind them)as possible, and having our troops under Foreign command in Yugoslavia, while we made sure the Yugo-Muslims had plenty of protection under which to plan Jihad against Western Europe;and that they didn't have to do it on an empty stomach. Funny how Clinton let his "chosen people" massacre each other in Rwanda, but sent in troops to protect white Europeans?
From: theallseeingear [Bavid Dyrden]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 23:10
I'm getting a little sick and tired of how rotten.com is becoming all about the USA. Look, guys, you're just <b>one country</b> in this fucked-up world, and you're far from being the rottenest one. Sure, you elected a lying moron, but guess what? He's limited to two terms by that "goddamn piece of paper". He'll quit, you'll wise up, life will move on. So, unless he declares Jesus Christ the King of America, get over yourselves. There are bigger issues. Like the rainforests.
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 23:17
bullshit minge. I come from a military family. Not dirt poor true, but definitely lower middle class. I never had an opportunity to go to college. I had to work. And I work hard. Because of that, and because I have a passion for what I do, I now work R&D at microsoft research. I make more in a month than you probably see in three. I love my country. I know how things are supposed to work here and how they are not. I do not want to see it destroyed by apathy, ignorance, and pathetic apologists. Thomas Jefferson warned of this. So did Theodore Roosevelt. So did Eisenhauer. And it's happening. And shitbags like you with your blind acceptence and your apathy are not helping things. You're hurting things. FUCK YOU. This is my country. You should be grateful for all of the things that it has helped provide you. You should be grateful for what you are allowed to accomplish here. And you should fight for it. This asshole administration would have you believe that the terrorists are overseas, but the real terrorists are in the white house. They use fear and manipulation in order to make money off of the backs of blind loyalists like yourself. They want your silence. They want your blind trust. And they expect your ignorance. That is where their power comes from. You owe it to this country to educate yourself as to what is really going on. You owe it to this country to speak out about the wrongs as you see them. Being an informed and vocal citizen is every American's patriotic duty. How dare you shirk your duty as an American. Your silence is their power. If you can't live up to your responsibilities maybe *you* need to leave. We can't afford to carry people like you. Trust in your country always, and it's leaders when they deserve it. - Mark Twain.
From: conspiracy
[Theory]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 23:28
Trust me.... This was happening long before you were told it was happening ... long before 9/11 ... Yep ... It's A Fact My Two Cents... P.S. Sorry I have been away for awhile ... BIG crowd for the holidays ... too many people using the net ... My Two Cents
From: turdwrangler [don]
Date: 19-Dec-2005 23:45
patriot act, define it. (use your imagination; W does) ever feel like you're in "The Matrix" 'cept you're NOT neo and and you ain't gonna win? wake up...
From: breakfast
[i am an astronaut's last meal]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 00:43
dear supposedly representative government that is in name elected by the people to look out for their best interests: i don't pay taxes for you to spy on me or try to convict me of something i haven't done. please fuck the fuck off and do your goddamned jobs without interfering with the rights the constitution affords me. by the way, you may want to consider the blatant illegality of your patriot act which, in my opinion, renders anyone who voted for it unfit for office. dear future "free breakfast" supporters: please start your appeals for clemency now. ask early, ask often.
From: aulduron
[Aulduron]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 00:58
Y'all act like this is something new and it's all Bush's fault. Did you people never read the news in the '90s? Oh wait, politically damaging news doesn't get reported during a Democrats term. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition <i>Extraordinary rendition is an American government term for an extra judicial procedure that sends criminal suspects, generally suspected terrorists, to countries other than the United States for imprisonment and interrogation. Critics have accused the CIA of rendering suspects to other countries in order to avoid US laws prohibiting torture and have called the this "torture by proxy"[1]. Media reports describe suspects being arrested, blindfolded, shackled, and sedated, and transported by private jet or other means to the destination country. The reports also say that the rendering countries have provided interrogators with lists of questions. Although Egypt has been the most common destination, suspected terrorists have been rendered to other countries, such as Jordan, Syria, Morocco, and Uzbekistan. In a number of cases, suspects to whom the procedure is believed to have been applied later appeared to be innocent.[2] According to former CIA agent Bob Baer, "If you want a serious interrogation, you send a prisoner to Jordan. If you want them to be tortured, you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear - never to see them again - you send them to Egypt."[3]</i> <i>The first individual to be subjected to rendition was Talaat Fouad Qassem, one of Egypt's most wanted terrorists, who was arrested with the help of US intelligence by Croatian police in Zagreb in <b>September 1995</b>. He was interrogated by US agents on a ship in the Adriatic sea and was then sent back to Egypt. He disappeared while in custody, and is suspected by human rights activists of having been executed without a trial.</i> <i>Snatches, or more properly "extraordinary renditions," were operations to apprehend terrorists abroad, usually without the knowledge of and almost always without public acknowledgement of the host government.... The first time I proposed a snatch, in 1993, the White House Counsel, Lloyd Cutler, demanded a meeting with the President to explain how it violated international law. Clinton had seemed to be siding with Cutler until Al Gore belatedly joined the meeting, having just flown overnight from South Africa. Clinton recapped the arguments on both sides for Gore: Lloyd says this. Dick says that. <b>Gore laughed and said, "That's a no-brainer. Of course it's a violation of international law, that's why it's a covert action. The guy is a terrorist. Go grab his ass.</b>"[6]</i> Guess it's only bad when Republicans do it.
From: mingemeister [Dick DeGirth]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:01
fashionofchrist [Schizophonic], Why is it that unless I believe everything spouted by career students and the fuckpots down on the Venice Beach boardwalk who sell incense, I don't know whats really going on? I am grateful to live here and for the opportunities I have, with enough real world perspective to know that I would never have had the opportunity any place else. I was raised to love America above all else. Regardless of who's president we are still very lucky to have them. All the things you accuse Bush of are actually being committed by most of the worlds' leaders on a daily basis. Nobody has shit to say about it, except for why doesn't he stop it. If he goes to stop it, then the same fucktards say he's picking on the "pwoor widdle monkey people". Whatever your taste in president, you'll never really do worse than second best. I have little use for a pissing contest of incomes, other than to say I'm glad for you. I'm am willing to bet that I contribute more to the local economy than you do. My business involves tangible things. I buy fuel from local merchants.I buy asphalt and or cement from local plants. The service and repair of my equipment contributes to the economy locally. I buy tires from local merchants. I pay exorbitant fee's to the city and county for my permits. I employ a dozen men, sometimes more. What I generate I only keep a fraction of, but I am very comfortable. Software on the other hand is only theoretical. It requires almost no resources to produce save for electricity and some cd-roms, and often not even then. You do not respect the need to procure resources because you do not require them. You may not gross more than me but I'll guaranfuckintee you keep more. However, your contributions ot the local economy are probably as follows: 1.Admission fees paid to local galleries to watch some "performance artist" paint with a log of shit, followed by dropping a 3 coiler on an effigy of Jesus. 2. Admission to a local coffee house to hear shitty poetry and drink free trade friendly cruelty free(but picked by 8 y.o Sumatran orphans) soy latte. 3. Gassing up the his n' her Prii. ( Nothing against Prii, but I couldn't tow many Bobcats with it.) 4. Organizing protests against people like me who while giving about 80% of our total gross to the local economies of America, are to selfish to give more. 5. Shopping trips to IKEA and R.E.I. 6. a shitload of Red Bull. I had to check a lot of UNIX in the Army, I feel you. Of course the catch is for anyone to benefit from me, they must work. Liberals hate that. But I hold no grudge. When your job gets outsourced to India, I'll hook you up.Actual work might be good for you. Just remember; if a sublitterate dot head takes your job, you weren't that special. I don't have to fear them. Nobody in Mumbai is paving shit in SoCal.
From: aulduron
[Aulduron]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:05
Aww shit, wrong thread. Yeah, it sucks however, before the Patriot Act, we would just use other countries (primarily Britain and Israel) to spy on Americans and share with us. Before we had others spy on Americans during war, we locked up entire ethnic groups to keep terrorism to a minimum.
From: robwrigley
Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:12
To save time, and wear-and-tear on keyboards, I hereby propose the following: A Generic Message for the Rotten.com Forum (Policy or person) is leading inevitably to the destruction (country). (Name of poster), who disagrees with me, is a(n) (fill in wild accusation or insult). Rob
From: breakfast
[i am an astronaut's last meal]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:16
From: greenneon21 [phillip] Date: 19-Dec-2005 15:48 heres whats really funny folks.. when the next attack comes, and it will.. and we knew who was going to do it, we knew they were planning something, and we didnt stop it because we couldnt wiretap, we couldnt track their messages, we couldnt do a damn thing to gain any information before they struck.. who will you blame then? who will you cry out in rage towards? what answer will you have when you ask why didnt we stop this before it happened? when we could have gathered info.. when we could have learned from phone calls or secret emails.. i sit here thinking just what people will say.. what great silence the dems will be sitting in when they tried their best to stop us from stopping another attack.. when people upset now and saying what they are saying now.. how silent you will be when 9/11 in '06 or '07 or '09 happens.. so just a little thought before you jump on the dem band wagon in shouting down bush dear greenneon21: of course more attacks will come. the most simplistic of idiots can see that, or at least be told to see it by his handlers. yes, that is a reference to george w. bush. my point is that this country should clearly identify and then focus upon its threats instead of condemning ordinary citizens without so much as probable cause. we have a government and a military (extending all the way down to local police) in place to defend our rights, not to rescind them because of possibilities. should the united states be vigilant? yes. should it punish its own citizens and many others who visit or work here because it's possible another massive terrorist attack will happen? no. and i will even allow you that another attack is a dead certainty. still, that is not a reason to rescind basic civil liberties and privacy rights that are guaranteed in the constitution. in other words, every american citizen, born or naturalized, has every right to tell the government to shove the patriot act up its ass for the lone reason that it is absolutely unconstitutional. the supposed powers given to the executive branch in said act should actually be submitted to both houses of congress as a constitutional amendment, which would then have to pass both houses and then be passed by a two-thirds majority of the states. it's funny to me how this administration with its supposed mandate from the people to carry on this war and erosion of rights is supremely reluctant to let the people decide the whys and wherefores of its actions. we constantly hear how "democracy" is the order of the day for the united states. why, then, are the people kept from having a democratic voice in these matters? party lines don't matter here (my personal view is that if you are dumb enough to vote major party on either side then you should not be allowed to participate in the process simply because you have demonstratably proven that you are unfit for the task due to a severe lack of being able to discern that both parties want the same thing: power at any cost), what matters is that ANY FUCKING THING the government has done under the patriot act is in violation of our highest laws, goddamned piece of paper or not. outside of rhetoric, this is a country based on rule of law. if we ignore our highest law for whatever reasons then we betray and murder that which we as a nation are supposed to stand for. of course, the laws i'm talking about allow you to disagree with me on this or any other matter. and maybe, just maybe, you should think about that before defending the assault that is ongoing against the very thing that allows you to say what you have to say without getting thrown in jail. or shot on sight.
From: chickenlittle [IToldYouItWasFalling]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:26
There's Auldy! I was getting bored reading through this thread. Too many liberals and not enough conservatives to fuel the fire. Unlike the other Bush apologists here, you at least try to make sense when spewing garbage like "Guess it's only bad when Republicans do it." Do you not remember the Clinton impeachment? What I think people here are trying to say, is that his impeachment was over a blow job. OK. Remember the questioning, the shitstorm? And you will sit there and say nobody noticed cause he was a Democrat. Duh, people noticed Yes, Clinton lied. The American people caught him in his lie. But that was a small thing compared to this. The problem with this current president is that he is dismantling our rights, which means the next one, Republican OR Democrat, might not see fit to give us those rights back. Being the sheep we are, we will eventually forget we had them. That is my long-winded, sniveling, Liberal, atheist view on the current situation. Thank you for skimming through. Whew, I'm gonna go get some air and hug a tree after that tirade
From: blackjack [Jake mcHill]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:33
Azdollarbill writes: Consider Bush's bull shit about:"If we weren't fighting them there, in Iraq, we would be fighting them on the streets here". ----------- The thousand-dollar question; Is Bush just retarded or delusional? Both, in addition he has delusions of grandeur and hears the voice of god commanding him to take civil rights from his people and attack other countries practically on the other side of the earth.. Damn, if we detractors of Bush regime put as much spin on our propaganda as they put on theirs, the whole thing becomes just a sick joke. Oh, wait. That never stopped <i>them.</i>
From: imareplicant [i_am_a_replicant]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:37
Just remember, like all presidents, Bush one day is going to ....have a LIBRARY named after him. Ya know, a repositiory of information about history, science, the arts, literature...everything that bush can't even spell.
From: aulduron
[Aulduron]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:39
<i> Do you not remember the Clinton impeachment? What I think people here are trying to say, is that his impeachment was over a blow job. OK. Remember the questioning, the shitstorm? And you will sit there and say nobody noticed cause he was a Democrat. Duh, people noticed Yes, Clinton lied. The American people caught him in his lie. But that was a small thing compared to this.</i> See, you're making my point for me. There was seriously damaging news about Clinton and his media made it out to be only about a blow job, instead of the fraud, drug smuggling, and the long list of other offenses that started the investigation. I've said it before and I'll say it again, every president should have to go through that independent counsel. <i>The problem with this current president is that he is dismantling our rights, which means the next one, Republican OR Democrat, might not see fit to give us those rights back. Being the sheep we are, we will eventually forget we had them. That is my long-winded, sniveling, Liberal, atheist view on the current situation. Thank you for skimming through. </i> Again, dismantling of our rights has been going on for quite some time. Maybe the reason I'm madder at Clinton is because now it's other people losing their rights, as opposed to the direct attacks on my own personal rights I endured under other administrations.
From: breakfast
[i am an astronaut's last meal]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:43
From: mingemeister [Dick DeGirth] Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:01 fashionofchrist [Schizophonic], Why is it that unless I believe everything spouted by career students and the fuckpots down on the Venice Beach boardwalk who sell incense, I don't know whats really going on? I am grateful to live here and for the opportunities I have, with enough real world perspective to know that I would never have had the opportunity any place else. I was raised to love America above all else. Regardless of who's president we are still very lucky to have them. All the things you accuse Bush of are actually being committed by most of the worlds' leaders on a daily basis. Nobody has shit to say about it, except for why doesn't he stop it. If he goes to stop it, then the same fucktards say he's picking on the "pwoor widdle monkey people". Whatever your taste in president, you'll never really do worse than second best. I have little use for a pissing contest of incomes, other than to say I'm glad for you. I'm am willing to bet that I contribute more to the local economy than you do. My business involves tangible things. I buy fuel from local merchants.I buy asphalt and or cement from local plants. The service and repair of my equipment contributes to the economy locally. I buy tires from local merchants. I pay exorbitant fee's to the city and county for my permits. I employ a dozen men, sometimes more. What I generate I only keep a fraction of, but I am very comfortable. Software on the other hand is only theoretical. It requires almost no resources to produce save for electricity and some cd-roms, and often not even then. You do not respect the need to procure resources because you do not require them. You may not gross more than me but I'll guaranfuckintee you keep more. However, your contributions ot the local economy are probably as follows: 1.Admission fees paid to local galleries to watch some "performance artist" paint with a log of shit, followed by dropping a 3 coiler on an effigy of Jesus. 2. Admission to a local coffee house to hear shitty poetry and drink free trade friendly cruelty free(but picked by 8 y.o Sumatran orphans) soy latte. 3. Gassing up the his n' her Prii. ( Nothing against Prii, but I couldn't tow many Bobcats with it.) 4. Organizing protests against people like me who while giving about 80% of our total gross to the local economies of America, are to selfish to give more. 5. Shopping trips to IKEA and R.E.I. 6. a shitload of Red Bull. I had to check a lot of UNIX in the Army, I feel you. Of course the catch is for anyone to benefit from me, they must work. Liberals hate that. But I hold no grudge. When your job gets outsourced to India, I'll hook you up.Actual work might be good for you. Just remember; if a sublitterate dot head takes your job, you weren't that special. I don't have to fear them. Nobody in Mumbai is paving shit in SoCal. dear mingemeister: i wrote out this long response arguing against most of your points but then i realized that all i really need to do is point out to you that "subliterate" has two "t"s instead of three.
From: imareplicant [i_am_a_replicant]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:46
greenneon21 makes the comment that, in essence, we need to be protected, so let's not bash bush for using any means necessary to do it (I am overstating here, but the core of greenneon21's comments are germane to this). I am not going to jump on greenneon21, won't do any good. But I want to point out that is is precisely that type of mindset that allows for us to be in the danger we are in. Indoctrinization, lack of education (doesnt matter if you have a Phd, if you actually beleive in giving up freedom for safety, you are ignorant), religous dogma, and a host of other issues helped elect, and re-elect bush, and there are millions of americans who still support bush. When greenneon21 makes his post, we need to realize just how much shit we are in, because greenneon21 represents millions with the exact same set of thought waves. Scary, very, very scary.
From: chickenlittle [IToldYouItWasFalling]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:59
What rights did you lose under Clinton Auldy? My issue with Bush is that he is making this legal. Others before him did this, yes. But when it becomes legal it will snowball(hee hee, snowballing) into other areas. Not just terrorism, a very broad term to begin with, but it will mean illegal taps on people in the other "wars" too. Be it Clinton's War on Drugs or what have you. Is Bush tapping my phone, no, I don't think so. But if I found out the government was spying on me, I'm gonna have a damn hard time arguing in court when the warantless wiretap is now, by some wierd logic, legal. But it doesn't really matter anymore, the sky is in fact falling, keep looking at the ground and wear a hardhat. Well, I'm done. Gonna go look at porn and hope the Fed's aren't monitoring me while I tap my own wire
From: breakfast
[i am an astronaut's last meal]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 02:01
From: americanartist [Red W. Blue] Date: 19-Dec-2005 18:14 How many 9/11's do we have to endure before you people realize that the terrorists will only stop killing people when one of two things has happened? 1. The United States (and really the whole world-including China, heh) becomes a strict Islamic state (and that means everyone). or 2. We're all dead. Our civil liberties are worthless if we are dead! If you are dead and pushing up daisies, if you're sucking dirt inside a casket, do you know what your civil liberties are worth? Zilch, zero, nada. You aren't even here! Ask the families, ask the people who were in the World Trade Center towers right before they were attacked if they are more concerned with the loss of their civil liberties than the loss of their lives. dear americanartist: you could have saved a couple paragraphs by simply saying, "better red than dead." you make a good point, though: civil liberties are only useful to the living. if mine get me killed, then that's a chance i have to take. if my supposedly elective and representative government gets me killed through misuse and outright callous disregard for the laws that enforce my right to those liberties then it's a whole different ballgame. people act as though when al-quaeda and islamic jihad are shut down then everything will be perfect. it won't. ultimately, though, if you're willing to give the federal government one ounce of power that it isn't expressly afforded by the constitution, i'd like to sincerely ask you to never, ever vote ever again. in fact, please make sure your entire face is in front of the shotgun barrel before pulling the trigger.
From: imareplicant [i_am_a_replicant]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 02:04
ahhhhhh, Minge says:" was raised to love America above all else. " Exactly! "else" means logic, reason, convergance of evidence, safety, compassion, intelligent discourse, and meaningful education. There is no need to ever argue with the Minges of the world. Osama's followers, as are Bush's, are brainwashed and march lockstep to beat of their disturbed drummer. Their blinders are as thick and distorted as is their social and economic myopia. "HEy, Im an Aermcian, I have an ashalt company and employ people and pay may taxes and elect dangerous sociopaths who share my same ignorance about the world about us. Dont you dare criticize me just because I disagree with you. The world IS flat!" I love America too, and so wish the Minge's of the world we get the fuck out so we could start to rebuild the little things that used to BE america, like, say, the Constition. Oh ya minge, I am willing in a heartbeat to change my views on Iraq, Bush, and anything else in the world provided there is a convergance of real evidence and facts to support the view. Somehow, I beleive that you and your ilk are unable to even process new info, let alone understand what little you have processed already. After all, you have been rasied to "love mAmerica above all else." Why bother with reality when you love something. Fucking scary people...
From: hawkweed [crowley]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 02:16
The problem is Global, as someone pointed out previously. We elect these idiots who, in the final analysis are no better or worse than any of us, and endow them with some kind of collective superiority when, in fact the only gift they possess is the ability to talk complete & utter bullshit. What we need is some kind of computer program, set up to handle economies, law & order, Diplomacy ect and take people out of the equation altogether. We could then get to work on creating the star trekish utopia we all dream of.
From: mingemeister [Dick DeGirth]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 02:28
From: breakfast [i am an astronaut's last meal] Date: 20-Dec-2005 01:43 dear mingemeister: i wrote out this long response arguing against most of your points but then i realized that all i really need to do is point out to you that "subliterate" has two "t"s instead of three. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Fine, I typoed on a word such as subliterate. Imagine how it would have looked had I used all lower case i's in self reference. Only a major asspipe would do that. I guess it beats making a point.
From: jngljim [JIM]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 02:28
To all you dumb ass Bush / govt. hating bastards...news flash...Congress gave the prez this power in 1978...and your love joy Clinton used it and so did Reagan...I saw it was sumed up best early in this thread when a real dumb ass said he got his legal education from a tv series...fukin pussies...30 phone calls monitored and all of ya are screaming...if it was used more (which it should have been) then there would not have been a 9/11...furthermore the article doesn't claim any law was broken nor does it say any CITIZEN'S calls were monitored...remember dumb fucks our counrty is filled w/ illegals just like the 9/11 hijackers..but if you realized that you couldn't be a pussy whiner.
From: tucanscrew
[three's more fun]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 02:48
Quote:""You cowardly fuck! It's ass holes like you who put our shit for brains prez in power, because they were too afraid to vote for somebody who would do the right thing, even if the right thing, might not have been the safest thing." ------ Wrong again shit for brains. Check the election results. Dumbass' brother Fatass along with his whore, Kathrine Harris, put him in power. The supreme court upheld the theft of the election. The second time was incumbent advantage. AZDB thanks for the effort, but you know reason doesn't work on Bush supporters. It's like trying to teach science to fundies.
From: mingemeister [Dick DeGirth]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 02:49
From: imareplicant [i_am_a_replicant] Date: 20-Dec-2005 02:04 ahhhhhh, Minge says:" was raised to love America above all else. " I love America too, and so wish the Minge's of the world we get the fuck out so we could start to rebuild the little things that used to BE america, like, say, the Constition. __ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ____ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ _ But if people like me left, who would rebuild it? It's gonna take more than weed, Starbucks and X-box. Why would liberals want me out? I was born in another country and learned English as a second language. I thought liberals ate that sort of shit up. I guess being self reliant and a legal citizen doesn't apeal to them much.Maybe if my wife would shit out 10 more kids and burden the state with them then I will be a good Democrat-leaning immigrant, voting myself raises. I guess libs hate diversity of thought if its not what they believe.
From: dillhole [Dillhole]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 03:32
What is really funny is that the land of the free is making the same laws as a Taliban regime. And all it took was 2 buildings, some towelheads and 2 airplanes. But on the other hand, you deserve it; you chose that monkey, now live with it.
From: guntotingliberal [GunTotingLiberal]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 04:11
I recall Clinton lobbying some tomahawk missiles towards the TALIBAN in the '90s and fox news spouting some shit about "no war for monica". The liberal news media certainly criticized him and he was much more of a wartime president than Bush and his criminal gang. BTW, I'm not saying it was right when the democrats abducted and tortured foreign nationals in the name of freedom either. It's equally as bad. Problem is, the dems didn't piss all over my flag and wipe their ass with the constitution. They also didn't sacrifice american lives for no reason. Or even a half ass reason. I love also how people blame Clinton for 9/11. ONE MONTH before the attack the Bush Admin. had warning. If you give the chief of police in my team one month warning before a local bank heist it is NOT the previous chief of police's fault from nine months prior. I can see how a teeny tiny bit of blame might be shouldered by an earlier administration but the VAST MAJORITY is Bush's fault. Again, though, enough of beating up Bush, just tell me what he has done that's good for my country?
From: twdldee [twdldee]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 04:16
But this is the only way I can become a celebrity! Quick, commit a crime! Too late, I already have!! I hereby copyright all my communications ©twdldee 2005. They can only be used with my permission, and that permission includes immediate $100,000 payment for each page of transcription. Oh, wait, that shit only applies to the assholes in suits. I love capitalism, especially Southern capitalism. You know the kind, where the subhumans do all the "Invisible Hand" shit.
From: wingedmonkeyminion [Satan Himself]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 04:23
The french had the right idea... let's bring back the guillotine. It worked for king Louis XVI...
From: tucanscrew
[three's more fun]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 04:49
Again, though, enough of beating up Bush, just tell me what he has done that's good for my country? ----- Well, GTL, there was the pretzel choking and falling off the bicycle. Though they didn't quite work out, there was potential. Dream a little dream, ya know.
From: thegreatfellatio [Taicho]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 05:05
I havent posted here in months. When I look at the arguments for the illegal curtailment of civil liberties and the arguments for honoring the constitution, it always seems to boil down to the same mindsets on both sides. Those who love their freedoms and fear their govt (like uh, Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Adams) versus those who love their leader and fear the enemy he created for them (the people who supported Hitler, Mussolini, Mao, Stalin). Once the govt has broken a law, the door is open for them to violate you with it. Period. Once they have taken a liberty, you really dont stand a snowball's chance in hell of getting it back. Are that many people really afraid of some brown man blowing up their walmart? The chances of you personally being injured in a terrorist attack are probably statistically similar to the chances of being struck by lightning while being attacked by sharks. Honestly, if Bush had just been straightforward and said we needed the oil (bc we do) then I would have gone along with it.
From: tsentsen [tsentsen]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 05:22
thumsum...I hope you see this, I'm so sorry I missed your post! We'll miss you much 'til you get back. Until then happy christ~hanna~kwanz~festivus! Now...if only I could firure out a way to get across the pond for that cocktail.....
From: hawkweed [crowley]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 05:23
Whens the next election in the US? Anyone reckon GWB is mad enough to use tactical nukes to get his message across. The Thatch played that card (albeit on a smaller scale) over here with the Falklands & it won her another term. 2006 might be a Year to remember......
From: slamdonkey
[fobiopatel.com]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 05:33
the only good thing republicans did was guantanimo bay and the spreading the prevailing 'fuck islam' mentality. the only good thing muslims did was chicken/lamb and rice on 42nd and 6th in NYC. i forgive each all their trespasses based on these achievements. i can't wait till these fucking reds lose their political clout. as soon as they're all in jail america's gravitas will be restored.
From: commonsense
[please]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 05:37
<i>I, for one, welcome King George and our new dictorial overlords.</i> Simpsons rule. But on to stuff that matters... <i>How to fix the government: Impeach most of the Executive branch.</i> Yeah, we saw how well impeachment works with Clinton. <i>He violated the law and constitution. He should be impeached, prosecuted and shot, in that order.</i> I keep seeing people saying that Bush isn't the first one to break these laws. I don't think that's the issue here. The former presidents who broke the law should have been prosecuted too. If I have to follow the law, then everyone has to. Being president does not put you above the law. <i>How many of you are aware that our Thief-In-Chief recently refered to our Constitution as "just a god-damned piece of paper"? </i> I have seen many references to it. Can anyone show me a credible source for this? Someone showed a link to a story where he said it (and a lot of other things too), but I've never heard of Doug Thompson. Is he credible? <i>when the next attack comes, and it will.. who will you blame then?</i> How about the people who do the attacking? Or does that make too much sense for you? <i>Congress gave the prez this power in 1978...</i> Really? Can you show me the bill, law, sticky note, whatever, that gives him this power? ---------------------------- The world is a very dangerous place. It always has been, and it always will be. Part of the reason the USA is the USA is that we (our forefathers) did not like tyrannical governments sticking their noses in where they don't belong. No amount of 'security' will make the world safe. There will always be ways around security. That is a truth that every person needs to come to grips with. Please remember that Al Quida has claimed the lives of 0.00001% of American citizens with their two attacks on the World Trade Center buildings. Have they ever hit us in the continental USA other than that? In 2001 a total of 2,416,425 deaths were reported in the United States. Almost 3,000 of them were caused by terrorist attacks. This means that approximately 0.001241% of all deaths in the USA in 2001 were caused by terrorist attacks. Compare this to the 20,000,000 deaths Russia took while fighting the Nazi's. Doesn't all this 'terror' and reaction-ism seem just a little bit silly now? Bin Ladden's stated goal with the 9-11 attacks were to make the USA a 'police state'. He has done this. He has won. There have been no more attacks on US soil since 9-11 because there is no need for them. The 9-11 attacks started the snowball down the hill and its getting bigger and moving faster and it's about to run us all over. Civil liberties are guaranteed in the Constitution. I've read it over and over and I can't find the words, "when it's convenient" anywhere in there.
From: bigshlong [EB]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 05:58
"Our civil liberties are worthless if we are dead! If you are dead and pushing up daisies, if you're sucking dirt inside a casket, do you know what your civil liberties are worth? Zilch, zero, nada. You aren't even here! Ask the families, ask the people who were in the World Trade Center towers right before they were attacked if they are more concerned with the loss of their civil liberties than the loss of their lives. " Good point, how about doing it legally, getting a warrant instead of spying. Why is Bushy afraid of getting a warrant??
From: poopstain [poop stain]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 06:17
IMPEACH BUSH! He is violating the law he wasn't elected king, emperor, or potentate. Congress didn't wipe away 229 years of law and the Consititution with the authorization to go after Al-Qaeda. IMPEACH BUSH! IMPEACH BUSH! IMPEACH BUSH! Nixon with his crummy break in and cover up was nothing! The REAL danger to our democracy is the likes of Bush and his criminal gang!
From: dirtbomb [The Downfall]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 06:21
Anyone who finds this shit acceptable is in luck! The government might have some great positions opening up for Zyklon B handlers pretty soon. Man, logically fallacies are even more fun to make when you know which one you're making. Yee-haw! Merry fucking Christ-Bar-B-Que! But hey atleast when the country falls apart they won't be able to tell me I can't smoke the dosia anymore right? And my probation will be null too.
From: canadagirl78
[God, make me chaste. But not yet.]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 06:30
To all the posters who're (somehow) still defending Bush and the secrecy machine: * You will never ever be 100% safe. None of us are. Ever. No matter what laws are passed, no matter how many secret wiretaps there are, no matter who they toss in jail without a trial or defense attorneys. * Blaming Clinton for something that happened almost a year after he left office is kind of pathetic. Protecting the country from a terrorist attack wasn't his job anymore- it was Bush's. * Wiretaps are fine and dandy, but the question remains the same: if the police or law enforcement officers have enough evidence that a wiretap would be beneficial, then there's no reason a warrant wouldn't be granted. If there isn't enough evidence to get a warrant, then maybe there's a reason for it. (As in the person isn't doing anything wrong) * The next question also remains: how is the US supposed to prosecute international offenders? how can any of us that aren't American expect that we will have anything even resembling fairness or justice or due process? Remember what part of the Patriot act is: anyone engaged in civil disobedience, who attempts to manipulate or persuade public perception against the establishment is guilty of domestic terrorism. Yeah, that could've been Rosa Parks or MLK. Could be us right here. No reason for arrest, no lawyer, no public confirmation that we've even been arrested, until charges are filed, which is indefinite. http://www.aclu.org//safefree/resources/17343res20031114.html Excellent links for the ACLU's analysis of Patriot Act I & II. Scary shit, I tell you. (On a side note, can anyone find any specifics on this New World Order? I've googled, but somehow, all I get are references to it but no definition of it.)
From: canadagirl78
[God, make me chaste. But not yet.]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 06:49
"Patriot Act 2 is fundamentally flawed because it relies on a false premise - that America can be safer if we do away with basic checks and balances. By undermining the role of the courts, Congress and the press in providing a real check on executive power, Patriot Act 2 directs its ire at the institutions of our democracy instead of at the terrorists that threaten it. In so doing, it threatens to undermine the rights of ordinary people and, ironically, the war against terrorism." - ACLU The war is no longer against terrorism, it's against dissent.
From: commonsense
[please]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 06:52
Canadagirl, http://www.threeworldwars.com/new-world-order.htm http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&start=4&oi=define&q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Order_(conspiracy) http://www.google.com/url?sa=X&start=3&oi=define&q=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Order_(political) I hope those help.
From: thaimaixhu [Thai Mai Xhu]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 07:23
Typical. When are we going to convert these pricks to NeoConVicts?
From: cunnilinguist [cazzodurissimo]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 07:34
God Bless PRESIDENT BUSH, his first priority is protecting American Citizens, period.
From: jediofporn [Wicked Meat Saber]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 07:47
Doesn't anyone question why there hasn't been any other succesful attacks, or more attempted attacks? Our borders are insecure fuckfests where anyone can damn nearly skip through, let alone sneak through with explosives (big) or vials of chemical or biological weapons (small). Our security forces on the city and state levels are over-worked and/or too concerned catching us going 5 miles over the speed limit to fill their quotas. They would probably not know what to look for. Our federal security offices spend too much time deciding what is important enough to pass on instead of actually passing it on. What we end up with are dozens of events weekly that could result in larger casualty turnouts than 9/11 with less effort and risk with low chance of getting caught. Add to that the ease of transmitting messages. Anyone actually think that messages can't be sent across phone, paper, Internet undetected? Messages could be inserted inside other media and transmitted, or the code could be worked up ahead of time using letter and/or word substitution that relies on hard copy possession of the code key. Words like "wrench" could take on a whole new meaning and wouldn't get caught by any of the Fedbot programs. C'mon..open up your thought processes. One attack and the land of the free starts tossing aside its Constitutional rights. I cannot help but think that either there were more clandestine actions behind that attack, or someone saw an excellent opportunity to ignore the warning and exploit the result. Aside from that, I keep getting freaked out when I see or hear that damn Clinton/Bush (mummified version) on that damn commercial about tsunami relief. Two incredibly rich motherfuckers asking others to give money. Blind loyalty is ridiculous. Our forefathers (those who wrote that goddamned piece of paper) were branded as traitors once upon a time and their conversations were most likely a helluva lot more "unAmerican" than what goes on in these boards, so everyone who likes to call those speaking openly here as "unAmerican", unpatriotic, etc...suck a dick. The media is after ratings and controlled by Big Corp. You can't trust them to tell you the right fucking time, nonetheless the truth. There is nothing that can be done to fix it. The avenues that could be used to right the wrongs are clogged by blind loyalists or owned by those who are benefitting from the current situations.
From: canadagirl78
[God, make me chaste. But not yet.]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 07:51
Thanks, Commonsense. They indeed help, although I'm not sure they'll help my hopes for peaceful sleep. cunninglinguist, you've got to be kidding, right? President Bush isn't making your country or your people any safer- if anything, he's pissing off the next generation of suicide bombers and highjackers, both foreign and homegrown. All he's doing is making your people look like pathetic sheep- not because you are but because that's how he treats you all. Think about it: between the pictures of Abu Grahib, the stories of the illegal and inhumane treatment at Gitmo, the end runs around your constitution and the safe guards that were in place to keep him from becoming a fascist dictator- all of these things are lessening your countries influence and appearance of importance. He's directly pissing off the people that want to hurt you, and he's making it harder for anyone to believe he's doing this for any reason beyond he wants to. If you are a police chief and arrest five men for whatever, and the arrests are surrounded in scandal, do you think anyone believes those arrests are going to accomplish anything? Of course not. And the next five that are arrested, same thing. It's like the boy who cried wolf. he keeps using 9/11 and terrorism as an excuse to do whatever the fuck he wants to, and the excuses are losing their meaning.
From: cunnilinguist [cazzodurissimo]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 08:25
Canadagirl, let's just say we disagree on this subject and leave it at that.
From: jediofporn [Wicked Meat Saber]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 08:46
To the God Bless GWB person: I find it hard to believe that if there were a God, they would feel compelled to give any kind of blessing to our president. The last time God had anything to do with a Bush, I believe it was burning, as will this one if religious theory is correct. Bush is not about saving American lives. Bush is about an agenda. The first term, his first priority was getting reelected. Now, I guess his agenda is to defend his actions while attempting to accomplish Republican Party goals while hopefully setting it up so that whoever is wanted to be his successor doesn't have as much fallout to deal with. Stop thinking that your government gives two shits about you, the little person. By little person, I mean anyone who is "not them" or not related to them. You are a statistic and a source of government income...period. If you're so in love with our government's ideals, why don't you become more endearing to them and pick up a weapon and join in the "good fight". They'll point to you and your missing appendage while they rant on about how "they" are doing all they can to make people safe. P.S. Am I the only one who sees the benefit in fighting the terrorists in our own streets? Easier on logistics and much simpler to pick them out of the crowd. Also harder to bury IED's in the road when the roads are all paved. Since it's so far away, only the really committed ones will com to the fight, making the job quicker.
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 08:52
<I> What burns our balls, was how he used 911 as an excuse to attack Iraq. To this very day, there are people who think that Saddam was behind 911, thanks mainly to Faux News. </I> Yeah, that's not good. There were other reasons for a war (or at least an escalation of diplomacy) that would have been both true and legitimate but those were swept aside for some bs. Lying or allowing a lie to influence public opinion is a very bad thing for presidents to do. Though, it isn't the first time it's happened. Just the first time in recent memory that a president has been caught in it because of incompetence. One reason that Reagan and Clinton were great presidents (to their respective fan base) is they were great actors. Bush is far from being even an ok actor. The first 2 were great for controlling the media with their charisma. The latter just pisses them off.
From: thaimaixhu [Thai Mai Xhu]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 09:08
WHAT I REALLY WROTE TO CHOWCHOW: Your reply was excpected to be rude. Though I did apologise, and did mean it, I see that you are simply not a forgiving person. This is ok with me. I am quite familiar with southern women, spending most my timme in Georgia and Texas. You madam are not anything at all like the southern women I know. Your claim or being a professional writer is laughable. When would you find the time? It seems you spend your days and nights at your computer, logged in to Rotten.com making "snappy" come-backs to other posters. Tell me, what Paper do you write for? Or do you wish to claim to be the author of some best selling novel? No dearest. You live in a small house trailer, just south of Hope. You are on the government dole. You weigh just over 300 lbs. Your heat is provided by wood, dangerous in an old trailer. Fires happen you know. You have a single piece of plywood for a roof over your front porch, where two rather old dogs rest. The overstuffed recliner is a nice touch. Does anyone ever cut your grass? Your ancient automobile gets you to the dollar store where you buy sodas and sweetbreads. You shop at the cheapest places you can, with food stamps. Does it hurt me that my apology is not accepted? Hardly, I laugh at people like you. How Christmas-y I did drive by her fabulous dwelling this morning. Sad.
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 09:12
<I>It was suggested that the Constitution needs to be re-written, or at least, substantially updated. Any suggestions? I proposed a Bill of Responsibilities to go along with the Bill of Rights. </I> Any reason why it should be updated? If you really think about the products you use, the older stuff is alot more sturdy and lasts a very long time. My parents' first clothes washer and dryer set bought in 1972 lasted until the 90's. The first few years after I started raising a family, I went through about 3 dryers and 2 washing machines. Same thing with cars, 50 years ago they were built and lasted 20+ years and rolled over the odometer a few times (99,999 miles being max). Cars built with the last 20 are lucky to last even 10 years. You get 100,000 miles on them and it's past time to buy a new one. So even if the Constitution is old, why should it be outdated and re-written? What is outdated about it? Perhaps it's outdated because it restricts the government too much. Actually though, I could see changing 1 part of it, but that could be done by a new amendment rather than a re-writing. That part would be to increase the number of Congressmen to double or triple the current number. It'll increase the total salary but my thinking would be it would decrease the effect of corporate money and lobbying. In order to keep the citizens free, power needs to be spread out to as many people as possible while still being efficient. I think the current balance concentrates too much power into too few people. When less than 700 people control a population of 300 million, crap like what Bush is doing happens. 100 senators were good when there was alot less people.
From: commonsense
[please]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 09:24
<i>Any reason why it should be updated?</i> I personally don't think the constitution needs to be rewritten, but this idea does touch one one I've had for a long time. I think that at the state and local levels, we should change the jobs of at least some law makers, and make them law reviewers. Please refer to this site to understand what I mean: http://www.dumblaws.com/ Because so many retarded laws are on so many books, I think that we need to give the current law makers something better to do than make it illegal to hunt whales in Oklahoma or tell women to get their husband's permission before getting their hair cut. I think that the people who have law maker's jobs right now should go over the laws on the books and decide if they are relevant or needed anymore. Keep them in their jobs for their terms, or till they retire. There's a LOT of work ahead of them if they do this. Do not hire so many law makers in the future. We have plenty, and a much smaller crew of law makers can decide on the new laws we will need in the future.
From: cunnilinguist [cazzodurissimo]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 09:28
Jedi, that's a pretty jaded outlook. Personally, I kinda liked Bill Clinton, Any man who likes getting his dick sucked as much as he does can't be all bad. I think that I would enjoy hanging out at a bar and having a few beers with him. Now let me tell you what I don't like about him. He didn't retaliate for the 93 WTC attack. He didn't retaliate for The Cole being attacked and for our embassies in Africa. This was undoubtedly, at least in my opinion, taken as a sign of weakness and precipitated 911. We need to hit back at terrorists and HIT BACK HARD, over and over again.
From: kittie
[veil of honesty, how convoluted can you get?]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 09:41
uh-huh minge everyone who gets their nickers in a twist over this is a starbucks xbox pothead. i'd try to make a sentence but whatta waste of time. low-blows we insult eachother in lieu of counter arguments this country is not kampuchea so shut up yall. pundits will be first against the wall when i get a fake ID and a gun license. media bias is a wasted argument, aulduron. i hope you've seen that.
From: greyfox [grey]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 09:43
Giving up all our liberties completly will make a terrorist strike a tiny bit more difficult. But think: postsoviet russia had terrorist attacks. Israel has more security and more terror atacks than any other nation. even east germany had terrorist attacks... and yet, the USA, the least secure industrial nation in the world has had only two real terrorist attacks succeed in 20 years. exchanging freedom for safety loses you both.
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 09:45
<I> Do you not remember the Clinton impeachment? What I think people here are trying to say, is that his impeachment was over a blow job. OK. Remember the questioning, the shitstorm? And you will sit there and say nobody noticed cause he was a Democrat.</I> I've always wondered why there was such a big deal over the blowjob part and the media's attack on Clinton because of it. Some times I think this is the reason. The media knew it was given Clinton a pass on alot of shit so just before he left office, they threw everything against him, not to mention it took the focus of whatever military action he was doing at the time. Many people respond to criticism of the media's pass of Clinton with bringing up 1 thing the media attacked him on very close to the end of Clinton's 2nd term. The media downplayed much of Clinton's fuckups, and played up his accomplishments for 6 years. The bit at the end was just for show and does not erase the prior media conduct. Although most people will only remember the last thing done. The media is kind of like an wife beater. They'll beat the crap out of a woman then tell her that they're sorry and they love her, then the woman says when defending her man,"But he says he loves me." The media will cover up a bunch of crap, then come out with an overblown story. Afterwards the public will only remember that last story.
From: robwrigley
Date: 20-Dec-2005 09:54
Okay, quick show of hands: Who lives in a city that's been attacked by terrorists? Who has had buildings they've worked in regularly get his, and destroyed by multiple terrorist attacks? How many friends or co-workers have you lost to terrorist attacks? ________________________________________________________________ As far as I am concerned, you are all talking out of your asses. You are more concerned with your own petty concerns than innocent folks getting killed. If any of you actually had to worry about this shit when you go to work, you might change your attitudes. To put it an other way: President Bush and Co., breaking into your home and carting you away to some secret prison, leaving you in the dark, and forcing you to listen to...hmm...lets say White Stripes records endlessly...because you don't like his policies is, at best, a vague, distant, silly notion. Fuckwads flying things into buildings or otherwise attacking this country is a very, very real prospect. If we have to lock down our borders, and stomp the civil liberties of a few folks here and there, hey, fuck it. I'm going to trust the government to do the right thing. Damn...I said I wouldn't get involved in this argument....one last comment: Slavery, Jim Crow, Japanese Internment Camps, McCarthy Trials, etc: Folks, this country is much more liberal than it has ever been in the past. And, in the event of a real war, it is going to get a lot more conservative. ________________________________________________________________ And now, a quick 180-degree turn: Ming, one conservative to another: You're embarrassing yourself, me, and anyone else who ever voted Republican. I don't agree with many of the folks on this board, but many, if not most, are good, hardworking citizens. Spouting off the trash you spout makes you just as bad as the 'phantom liberals' you rail against. Hysterical, irrational claims from either side of the fence to no one any good. Rob
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:04
<I>* Blaming Clinton for something that happened almost a year after he left office is kind of pathetic. Protecting the country from a terrorist attack wasn't his job anymore- it was Bush's.</I> If my wife left the front door open and my dogs got out before I had a chance to close it, I would blame her. Any president only has a set amount of time, it takes time to absorb all the information needed to make an informed plan. Considering the amount of areas a president is required to deal with, it takes even more time to get everything in order. After the president decides what to do about something, it'll take even more time for those changes to be implemented. Not trying to defend Bush from any criticism, but lets spread the criticism where it belongs. Clinton had more time to do something about the security of airliners than Bush. Much of Bush's information came from Clinton. So why shouldn't we blame Clinton? We could lay part of the responsibility of Hurricane Katrina on FEMA and Bush, but the blame spreads to state and local government as well. Same with 9/11, Bush takes part of the blame and Clinton the rest. Clinton's policies and people were still in place when Bush took over. That's the way the government works. We only elect the top person for the executive branch. After than the heads of the agencies are appointed by that person and everyone else is hired and promoted from within. It takes years to completely change any agency and when it does, it's a big "scandal" because a president kicked out many of the former politically biased people and put "his men" in.
From: robwrigley
Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:08
Gee, melvin, you make some good points. But don't you think you post would be more effective if you added some insults, slurs, wild accusations, and hit the 'Caps lock' key once in a while? Rob
From: jediofporn [Wicked Meat Saber]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:16
From: cunnilinguist [cazzodurissimo] Date: 20-Dec-2005 09:28 "Jedi, that's a pretty jaded outlook. Personally, I kinda liked Bill Clinton, Any man who likes getting his dick sucked as much as he does can't be all bad. I think that I would enjoy hanging out at a bar and having a few beers with him. Now let me tell you what I don't like about him. He didn't retaliate for the 93 WTC attack. He didn't retaliate for The Cole being attacked and for our embassies in Africa. This was undoubtedly, at least in my opinion, taken as a sign of weakness and precipitated 911. We need to hit back at terrorists and HIT BACK HARD, over and over again." I have to agree with you on that one, cunnilinguist. I am a pretty jaded guy. I'd like to say that all will change with time, but it probably won't change for the better. Personally, I liked Bill Clinton too. I'm up for a blowjob or rimjob just liek the next guy and would have no qualms about doing so while on the phone with other heads of state. I would probably hoist a few shots with the guy as well. And by your name, I could tell that I would have at least a shot or two with you as well since we both probably share an interest. However, it bothers me to see or hear him with elder Bush on those commercials. In fact, it bothers me when anyone with oodles of money asks those with less to give unless they've already given a proportionate amount themselves, maybe more (they'd make most of it back in interest in just a few months anyway). I can understand why Clinton didn't launch full-fledge "wars" against everyone who does the US wrong. There are things we probably won't ever know, such as the CIA breaking ties with people first so they don't get egg on their faces, other operations and agendas being fulfilled before the war would ruin the situation, etc. I honestly don't think a full-fledged war is the way to go. How do you fight terror? With terror of course. Take the time to find out who the assholes are, where they live, etc. Track them down and get the hang of their lifestyles. Then...crash in with a spec ops team late some night and snatch the fuckers from their beds, leaving nothing but their heads with their penises stuck in their mouths (a huge insult to say the least). The evidence of the act would echo through the extremist community quickly and strongly. The US won't fuck around. They won't give your cause the attention you want. They will simply castrate you and disfigure your corpse, removing you from the equation in a brutal and unmerciful manner. There are spec ops troops who itch to partake in missions with extreme danger, it's why they're trained. They live for it. You only send in the army when you wish to take land and hold it, otherwise you're doomed to fail (see Vietnam). You send in the spec ops soldiers when you have pinpoint targets you need taken out (like in this case). What Bush and company are doing boils down to either gross incompetence or high treason. Only the future will reveal which it happens to be. And yes, I am jaded. I've been the troop who would openly give their life for their country, I've been the citizen who wanted the American dream and the perfect life for his family, and I am now a man who has willfully removed the blinds from his eyes and sees the problem of blind loyalty to a government whose primary purpose is to gain more power and keep it. Politics should not be a "career". It should be a service. But that's no longer the way it plays out. Thank you for the non-flaming reply, cunnilinguist. A rarity on these forums, for sure and the only way to exchange ideas with any kind of efficacy.
From: brainspore [Brainspore]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:18
<i>Not trying to defend Bush from any criticism, but lets spread the criticism where it belongs. Clinton had more time to do something about the security of airliners than Bush. Much of Bush's information came from Clinton. So why shouldn't we blame Clinton?</i> I find it interesting that many conservatives don't hesitate to blame Clinton for 9/11 but think spreading the blame back to George Sr. is going too far. Isn't he the one who chose to back Iraq against Iran and Bin Laden against the Russians? Besides, we DID stop major terrorist attacks under Clinton's watch. Remember the foiled LAX millenium bombing plot? And when he sent cruise missiles to take out Bin Laden's training camps, Republicans said he was just trying to distract the public from the Lewinsky affair.
From: kittie
[veil of honesty, how convoluted can you get?]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:21
melvin69:"The media knew it was given Clinton a pass on alot of shit so just before he left office" what, did they all sit down at a conference table and decide that they were gonna collectively make up for all the shit they didn't give him? look what you started bernard goldberg...
From: cynicalbitch
[Angelina's thong]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:24
The one thing I keep thinking reading all of these posts is, the very last amendment they will try to gut will be the second one. That's the time I believe that we will wake up and realize how truly fucked we are. At that time the US will become like another USSR. Split up among tribal factions, at war with each other. Pray and pass the ammunition.
From: ryry [god damn it bones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:24
to the people who claim we no longer need the patriot act because there have been no more attacks on American soil since 9/11. i believe its because the activities of the government have managed so far to stop any more attacks ,not because the terrorists(how can you tell unless you are watching them)have stopped trying to bring about the demise of our country. what is the difference between a terrorist and anybody else? you talk like you have a clue who is out to harm you hopefully their actions will get them caught before they can go through with their attack and that does include what they say on the phone over seas. if you commit no crime why do you care in the least? the only reason you might care is if you are up to no good ,legally ,morally or what ever. those with nothing to hide sleep well and the fact that my government is monitoring activities of people in the United States suspected of having connections to al Qaeda not only makes me feel safer ,i believe that it in fact does make our country safer. well i think that is great and the only reason you might not like it is you have something to hide enjoy cuba ,i here its a really nice place
From: theallseeingear [Bavid Dyrden]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:35
>> "if you commit no crime why do you care in the least? >> the only reason you might care is if you are up to no good ,legally >> ,morally or what ever. Wow... you have absolute trust that the FBI are all perfectly honest people. I wonder why you think that? Here's a plausible answer for you: say I have the same name as a terrorist (that happens a LOT, google for "no-fly list"). So I get wiretapped. An FBI agent hears me discussing a new software product. He's got shares in a rival firm, so he leaks the news. As a result, they beat us to the punch and we lose millions.
From: ryry [god damn it bones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:46
canadagirl78 [God, make me chaste. But not yet.] whoa now young lady nicely put but all bullshit the patriot act has stopped yet another terrorist and from the article he is a canadian. his whole fuckin family are terrorists yet your asswipe government lets them come and go as they please. his brother ,who is canadian has killed american marines why are these people walking the streets or still there for that matter your country needs the wake up call ,not mine so its you people we have to start watching is it . no wonder you dont like the security act http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051220/ap_on_re_ca/canada_terror_arrest
From: commonsense
[please]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:53
<i>I find it interesting that many conservatives don't hesitate to blame Clinton for 9/11 but think spreading the blame back to George Sr. is going too far. Isn't he the one who chose to back Iraq against Iran and Bin Laden against the Russians?</i> I'm conservative, but I do not blame Clinton for the attacks. I blame the hijackers. What ever happened to personal responsibility?
From: ryry [god damn it bones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:58
From: theallseeingear [Bavid Dyrden] Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:35 >> "if you commit no crime why do you care in the least? >> the only reason you might care is if you are up to no good ,legally >> ,morally or what ever. Wow... you have absolute trust that the FBI are all perfectly honest people. I wonder why you think that? well who should i trust? the government or the terrorists . this patriot act is in its infancy and it will be a hard road ahead till we figure out the best way to deal with it but we have all seen how terrorists act for a long time against other countries they want to destroy and that is nothing new. the terrorist(muslim) is one evil mother fucker as far as i am concerned and cannot be trusted as far as you can throw him. you want the patriot act rescinded but if it was and you or your family are killed by muslims terrorists then you would be screaming for blood and blaming the government. it is a cycle that will not be broken any time soon unless you know how to stop the violence,and if you do i will vote for you
From: jediofporn [Wicked Meat Saber]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 11:08
From: ryry [god damn it bones] Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:24 to the people who claim we no longer need the patriot act because there have been no more attacks on American soil since 9/11. i believe its because the activities of the government have managed so far to stop any more attacks ,not because the terrorists(how can you tell unless you are watching them)have stopped trying to bring about the demise of our country. what is the difference between a terrorist and anybody else? you talk like you have a clue who is out to harm you hopefully their actions will get them caught before they can go through with their attack and that does include what they say on the phone over seas. Ryry, I'm having trouble picking a place to start on what you posted. First of all, we live in a society where one does not have to actually commit a crime in order to be accused, ousted, and humiliated. Later, the media will conveniently gloss over their retraction/story correction/update and your life will "conveniently" never be the same. No one wants their privacy invaded. It's not about having their day to day lives bared to the world, its about having mistakes (non-illegal) and secrets (again, non-illegal) put into the spotlight. If you have neither, you haven't even begun to live yet. I do have something to hide. I love porn. I love seeing women getting all freaky naughty with other women. I love seeing two, three, or four women ganging up on one guy. Not illegal in any sense, but if it becomes public knowledge that I like these things, my uber-religious boss might not see me fit for that promotion that I have more than earned over the years. Another thing is, what makes you think the government will stop at just monitoring those who may or may not be terrorists? Have they given you reason in the past to think of them as trustworthy, honorable, virtuous human beings? What planet have you grown up on and why did you come here? Of all things that could help validate Bush and company would be the revealing of plots that have been thwarted by their enhanced security. Details would not necessarily be needed, so nothing would have to be revealed that would be a guarded secret. Yet no reports have come. I define a terrorist as one who uses terror in order to further their own cause. Terror inducing methods could be death and destruction, fear of losing rights and privileges, or of having humiliating or private matters revealed to the public at large. Al Qaeda uses one method. I'm betting our government has no qualms with the others. Lastly, why would the terrorists stop attacking us? Have we stopped doing the things they dislike? No, we've increased a good portion of them. We've stepped foot once again in their sacred land and have brought our western traditions with us. They have more reason now to attack us than before, yet they haven't. Don't feed me the line about "maybe the government agencies have stopped them". When have you known any government agency that refused to tout its successes? Better yet, when has Bush ever refused to tout his own successes (not many of them, but he's made a spectacle out of every one, hasn't he?) The government isn't stopping them, they just aren't happening. Why? Because they're fighting in Iraq? That makes no fucking sense. They're terrorists, not soldiers. Terrorists don't want a "fair fight", they want shock and awe that comes from killing large groups of civilians. I would have an easier time accepting it if you said they stopped attacking because we've become what they wanted us to become. It would certainly make more sense.
From: ryry [god damn it bones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 11:17
jediofporn [Wicked Meat Saber] its a case of getting them BEFORE they are able to commit the act ,not after. how else would you suggest they stop them without infringing on our rights in for a penny in for a pound, either we want to stop terrorism as a whole or we allow it to continue. i cant really see them going after porn cuz it has nothing to do with terrorism except the gay porn maybe(haha) i see a lot of people bitching but no one has yet come up with a better idea on how to protect this country
From: iguanac64 [Itchy Carter]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 11:19
I'll try to keep responses short since there's so much juicy stuff here =). "F$%#ing goddamn Democrats! Are you the one being tapped? Are your civil liberties being compromised in any way? Exactly, no. So why complain about it. Fact is the the Pres is doing what he needs to do to keep the war over there, and not in our backyard. Can't you people see anything?" - bigfishee Many American citizens who may or may not have done anything are tapped every day. Signing a law that negates any sort of oversight (even the little already there) gives them a lot more power to abuse. There's already plenty of stories about authorities abusing this power...now they get more power. If you think we can afford fighting in other countries indefinately to lure enemies of America to fight in other places, you're deluded. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The government, including both the Clinton and Bush Administrations, was accused of failing to prevent 9/11. Failure to gather proper intelligence at the proper time. They were damned. The government now tries to gather information to try to prevent another 'incident' They are damned." - koreanholiday Fact is...they had the information to prevent 9/11. 9/11 *most likely* would never have been stopped by anything contained in the Patriot Act or any of these types of provisions. 9/11 capitalized on the Administration (and in part past administrations) being asleep at the wheel. I know a lot of you don't remember what Bush was like before 9/11. I remember him being a total "hands-off" type President regarding foreign affairs until he was forced to by 9/11. After Clinton spent the last 6+ months of his final term working hard for an Israel/Palestinian peace treaty...Bush Jr's word to the Middle East before 9/11 was "Work it out yourself...not our problem" (paraphrased). Unfortunately, this single conflict is the main motivating reason for people to join groups like Al Qaida. Bush couldn't have been more wrong. The chance one of these un-authorized (by any sort of judicial oversight) wiretaps vs a wiretap where you have to prove someone is doing something illegal is going to find the next 9/11...so close to zero I couldn't even venture the odds. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "All this hatred towards the President has me concerned. If a democrat is elected next term, watch all hatred to be unleashed towards him/her by the right as a kind of retribution. Clinton was ridiculed and made fun of, but this hatred is too much and quite frankly scary." - koreanholiday Heh...you don't think "hatred" is a good word for what conservatives felt for Clinton? Clinton got it every bit as bad as Bush. It's your perspective that has changed. That or let's not feign concern here... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "So what exactly is the problem? Shit sometimes needs to be done. Can any of you honestly claim to be adversely affected by any of the patriot act? If so, then you should probably quit calling for the death of the Great Satan from you suburban Mosques. that will probably make the problem go away. Someday, when ever you all put down the bongs and emerge from your parents basement, you will realize that all the shit that might happen never actually does. I have relatives who really have had there doors kicked in for criticizing their gov'ts, usually by the same communists most of libs idolize. For any of you spoiled upper middle class kids to act like it's going to happen to you strikes me as just silly. If Bush really is who you say he is, why are you still free and posting? It sure as hell not because you can't be found. Get some real jobs and get some better weed. Whatever shit you guys smoke is making you too paranoid." - Mingemeister As you see parts of the Patriot Act trickle down into normal laws you will see more abuses. I'm worried that my fucking idiot of a neighbor is going to see my well repair contractors go out to fix my well and he'll call the police to tell them I have a meth lab in my back yard (like he's done...among ripping the phone wiring out of the phone box next to my house and poisoning my dogs)...tap my phone...maybe hear my visiting idiot brother in law make some pot deal on my phone...then have my house siezed under drug forfeiture laws. I've heard plenty of stories like this on the Rotten pages. The authorities have plenty of power already. Hell...substitute "brother-in-law" with kids. As much control you might think you have over them, they will find ways to circumvent you and experiment with drugs if they want to. I saw some cop on one of these reality police enforcement type shows telling a lady he was going to sieze her house because her son was busted with pot. I work my ass off trying to keep drugs out of my household esp after seeing my bro-in-law pretty much destroy his life with pills...but you can never have 100% control over everything...you're deluded if you think you do. Incidentally: 1) Haven't touched drugs in 10+ years...they overcomplicate your life. 2) Little college education due to having to work as soon as I left my parent's house...mostly technical training 3) Prolly grew up lower-middle class...or upper-lower class money-wise. 4) Been in Network/Server administration for 10+ years...pretty solid career. 5) On year 7 of my 30 year mortgage w/ a family of 4 Your gross generalizations are just dumb. They show how disconnected you are from reality. If you look at what looks like a normal family and think "Oh...they must believe like I do because they're normal"...then yeah...your world view is going to pretty fucked up. At one point my mother-in-law found out how many people were smoking weed in the neighborhood she'd lived in for 30+ years. She was absolutely shocked..."They were all so normal looking!" For someone who sounds like they're bashing Communism, you sure seem to support the tactics their government uses to keep the citizens oppressed. Communism sounds nice in theory, but it doesn't work in real life. Only the far-far-far left support it as an actual form of government (there's never been a true large scale Communist gov't to date...if you state Russia or China it proves your ignorance). You're adopting the tactic I've mostly seen Rush Limbaugh using. Taking the most extreme examples of something you can find that is against what you believe and attribute it to everyone you don't agree with. I listened to his show for nearly two years because the job I had driving computers around the city made me drive a vehicle that only had AM radio. It's both funny and scary to listen to. Funny because he's so rediculously full of shit...scary because many people believe any word out of the man's mouth. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: iguanac64 [Itchy Carter]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 11:19
"If so many of You hate Bush, why the fuck did You vote for the cocksucker AND why are You all just sitting there while this shit goes on?" - Hawkweed Don't look at me...the one good thing in my personal life that GWB has done for me is actually motivate me to vote for President. I was a pretty apathetic voter...mostly figured one guy was as bad as another...until GWB. I voted against him, but it didn't really matter...I live in Texas! =). I'd do it again if I could, tho... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Prior to starting my company, I was in the military, under Clinton and the only plans he seemed to have involved launching poorly aimed cruise missiles, getting as many homos of the "fabulous" variety into the military (butch ones have always been there, nobody seems to mind them)as possible, and having our troops under Foreign command in Yugoslavia, while we made sure the Yugo-Muslims had plenty of protection under which to plan Jihad against Western Europe;and that they didn't have to do it on an empty stomach." - mingemeister "Poorly aimed cruise missiles" /shrug "getting...homos...into the military" - The policy changed nothing as you already had plenty of homos in the military. It just kept JAG's from making homo-hunts that wasted taxpayer money, has done nothing long-term to bring down military morale, and was mainly used selectively to persecute people who someone didn't like on the sole basis of them being homosexual...not their actual military performance. "Yugoslavia" - Wow...criticizing the one military action Clinton got right. It had concrete goals, it was successful, and it was short once we got involved. I have yet to see many news reports of Muslims in Yugoslavia going crazy and being a world threat...Maybe I'm not relying on Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity enough for my entire world view. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Guess it's only bad when Republicans do it." (regarding Extraordinary Rendition). - Alduron It's not right whoever does it. It *is* something I'm willing to tolerate on a very discretionary basis under "The nasty things you sometimes have to do as a government." In the situation you described it looked like the guy was likely to be executed in Egypt anyway. Additionally...the guy was a well known terrorist. This is in contrast to the Extraordinary Renditions we hear about now where the guy is a small fry and has not been tried and found guilty of anything. I wouldn't cry if this happened to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Instead we get folks like Khaled Masri http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/03/AR2005120301476_pf.html This is the problem with "no judicial oversight." ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- "See, you're making my point for me. There was seriously damaging news about Clinton and his media made it out to be only about a blow job, instead of the fraud, drug smuggling, and the long list of other offenses that started the investigation." The fraud allegations were pretty much Whitewater...this pretty much covers his "other offenses" part as well. How many tens of millions of dollars did we spend on that to find out nothing? With as many hardcore political enemies as Clinton had...I find it hard to believe that there was no one stepping forward with enough info to prosecute him. Yeah...money talks and bullshit walks...but still. Drug smuggling? Oh-my-fucking-god...you are not referring to the tape produced by Jerry Fallwell that was so completely debunked and full of shit are you? The one where Clinton was rewarded with the Presidency because he let the CIA smuggle drugs out of an airport in rural Arkansas? Vince Foster's "suicide"...etc? http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/presidents/bill-clinton/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Anyway...I tried to keep it short...I promise =)
From: jediofporn [Wicked Meat Saber]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 11:29
Rob, Your posts are ones that I almost always read through entirely. Not because I agree with them, but they because they usually contain a decent amount of common sense and clear, concise thought. I fail to see what you are trying to say with this last post though. I understand that your job may take you into buildings that could be considered targets. I understand that you had friends that may have been killed or injured in 9/11. I can certainly sympathize with your view. I don't understand how you can exclude the opinions, views, and valid points of others when they don't have those same life circumstances. No one knows where the next attack will come if it does. With the exception of those living in rural areas out of the way of government institutions, bases, etc, nearly every one of us could be affected by the next one. Fuckwads flying into buildings is still a threat, but not the likely course of action in another attack. We have put a lot of spotlight onto airplanes, so the likely course of action will be other methods of terrorism. Chemical agents, biological agents, etc. Trivializing the threat felt by others or aggrandizing your own does not succeed in proving those others "wrong" or yourself more "right". It does make you seem more concerned with your safety than everyone's rights. We have come quite a way from mistakes in the past, but that does not give us credence to sit back and declare the job done. We must remember the past injustices and always safeguard against more being done in the future. I found this to be the most unnerving part of your post: "I'm going to trust the government to do the right thing." Because they trust you to do the right thing? Because they've done the right thing in the past? Because they know what your idea of "right" is? Perhaps they've done something in the past that has earned this trust from you? You stated that you have no problems with some people's rights being violated if it makes you safer. What if it's your rights that are mistakenly walked all over and violated? Will you change your tune after the home videos of you and your wife having sex (just an example--you could also drop 'excerpts from your private journal' in there) hit the 'Net? Or will you say, "Hey, I understand guys. It's no big deal, we're making the world safer, right?" The sad thing is, they've already proven they can and will abduct people, take them to who-knows-where, and torture them during interrogation. They will not allow them legal counsel or even declare charges against the individuals. I bet they've never made a mistake and incorrectly abducted someone to take to these places, right? Once we give in on one of these rights, it makes it easier for the next one to be taken away. Where does it stop? This government (circa, Bush) has done nothing to make me feel capable of trusting them. They now want carte blanche to go into whoever's lives they feel they need to, minus a warrant. No.
From: jediofporn [Wicked Meat Saber]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 11:48
Ryry, My point stands that there has been nothing since the "shoe bomber" to reach the news. Do you really think that a government who is hard pressed for some good news to feed the people would refrain from even off-handedly commenting on a minor victory? How do I expect them to stop terrorists without infringing on our rights? It's called probable cause. When you take away the need for a warrant to invade the privacy of someone's life, you open that power up to exploitation and misuse. Once you take out the warrant, there is no guidelines you can hold that agency up to in order to declare misuse. I don't see them going after porn at first, however the more our government leans to the far right and into the realm of religion, the more likely it could happen in the future. You could say, "Eh, if it gets to the, we'll get rid of the Act," but we all know that it will be harder to remove the Act than it will have been to get it going in the first place. Especially if the powers enabled by the Act start being used by the powers that be to influence the detractors into dropping the effort to remove the Act. Power plays like that can, and do, happen. My biggest point is this: We have been given no examples of how successful the Patriot Act has been. The lack of any attack attempts does not proclaim the Act successful in the past. We have been given examples of how the government has been trampling on the rights of others (Abu Ghraib, Gitmo). Not enough validation on the Act or the gov'ment for me. In for a penny, in for a pound....ask yourself what the hell we're buying, lol. I enjoyed your post and I can see how gay porn could be construed as terroristic in intent. Nothing like the threat of something going in the "out" hole to cause shock and awe..lol.
From: kittie
[veil of honesty, how convoluted can you get?]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 11:49
we assume the government left unchecked will abuse its powers and this is as unchecked as i can remember maybe you can remember better. people are presumed innocent but don't tell me that to a cop. ryry, i'm sure you'd convince more people if you didn't tell them to go to cuba. i hate you, i hate you, i hate you
From: robwrigley
Date: 20-Dec-2005 12:04
Well, I'll have to keep this short as I have Christmas-y stuff to do, but, quite simply: Yes. I am willing to put up with that kind of shit for now. And, yes, I am willing to trust my government to do the right thing, morally if of very questionable leaglity. I don't believe in 'fair fights'. I think if folks want to use the freedom of the U.S. to work against it, there is no pressing reason to allow them to do so. They want to break laws...well, we can play that game too. And we have more guns and money to do so. If I thought anyone on this (very liberal) message board was going to be carted off, I wouldn't be as enthusiastic. As it is, the administration is going after folks whom they believe are legitimate threats. I happen to agree with most of their policies. I think Bush is a good man, with a pretty wife, and beautiful daughters, and comes from a good family. I think he is doing his best under some VERY trying circumstances. To put it another way, I am willing to put my faith more in folks who put their names, reputation, and safety on the line a lot quicker than trust the opinions of folks who post messages on the Internet. That covers all politicians, weather I agree with them or not. Taking responsibility goes a much longer way with me than anonymous criticism. On a final note (I said this would be short...damn): I ALSO believe in hysterical, knee-jerk liberalism. It is a point I should have made in my post at Ming. It's just that kind of radical response to authority that pulls this country back into the center. Without the Garafollas, Chomskys, and Daily Rotten posters in the U.S., the Imperialist like myself, red-necks like Ming, and Iron-fisters like President Bush would pull this country too far in the other direction. I have faith in all this swirling craziness that this country will swing back the other way...I just don't think it is time yet. We still have a few more countries in the world we need to knock around first. Pardon me while I strap on my jack-boots, and put Wagner in my portable CD player. I'm off to the UPS... Rob
From: canadagirl78
[God, make me chaste. But not yet.]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 12:11
From: ryry [god damn it bones] Date: 20-Dec-2005 10:46 canadagirl78 [God, make me chaste. But not yet.] the patriot act has stopped yet another terrorist and from the article he is a canadian. his whole fuckin family are terrorists yet your asswipe government lets them come and go as they please. __________________________________________________________________________ I read the article, yet fail to see anywhere that says the Patirot Act had anything AT ALL to do with the guys arrest. Matter of fact, he was arrested by Pakistani intelligence agents in Islamabad and deported back here- but nice try with the flaming semi-truth and all. (and no, his whole family aren't terrorists: "Abdurahman has said he grew up in an "al-Qaida family" but he swore off the family's radical beliefs and worked as an American agent in Guantanamo Bay." I'm sure the US army would love to have al-Quida working in Gitmo. __________________________________________________________________________ Ryry cont'd: his brother ,who is canadian has killed american marines why are these people walking the streets or still there for that matter your country needs the wake up call ,not mine so its you people we have to start watching is it . no wonder you dont like the security act ______________________________________________________________________________ I don't like any country's laws that disallow freedom of speech- yours, mine or JayBobDimsung from the Ivory Coast. And further semi-truths: the 19 year old brother is suspected of murder- ONE marine died, not marines plural. And 'these people' aren't walking the streets- they're in Gitmo. And if you think for one minute there aren't al-Quida cells in the US, you seriously need to crawl out from the rock you're living under. AQ and other terror groups are EVERYWHERE, which is why terrorism will never die. One group of people will always want to kill another group of people, for whatever reason you can imagine. If you think that 'watching us'- all of us- is an option, you have fun in your little paranoid world. Terrorism and terrorists will never go away, no matter how many liberties are taken away, no matter what laws are passed or who your gov't eavesdrops on. You guys tap the phones and the net, they'll go back to communicating in snail mail, which would be even harder to detect as you can't open people's mail. Yet.
From: theallseeingear [Bavid Dyrden]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 12:22
>>>> you have absolute trust that the FBI are all perfectly honest people. >>>> I wonder why you think that? >> well who should i trust? the government or the terrorists . You should trust the laws of your country that are written down for all to see, and the judicial system if it truly enforces those laws. History shows that when you stray from this path, life gets worse for most citizens. >> this patriot act is in its infancy and it will be a hard road ahead >> till we figure out the best way to deal with it but we have all seen >> how terrorists act for a long time against other countries they want to >> destroy and that is nothing new. Well, yes, we all knew that. >> the terrorist(muslim) is one evil mother fucker What are you saying? All terrorists are Muslims? All Muslims are terrorists? Because if you're just saying that Muslim terrorists are evil, well, we knew that. >> and cannot be trusted as far as you can throw him. But who's asking you to trust terrorists? >> you want the patriot act rescinded but if it was and you or your >> family are killed by muslims terrorists then you would be screaming for >> blood and blaming the government. If I were killed, actually, I'd be pretty quiet. And if my family were killed by terrorists, I like to think that I would blame the terrorists. >> it is a cycle that will not be broken any time soon What cycle? You have not described a cycle.
From: canadagirl78
[God, make me chaste. But not yet.]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 12:26
And to the few posters who've come out with "I'll trust my gov't" type statements: If you were to meet a young woman, would you give her your power of attorney? You barely know this woman, you have no idea if she's up to no good, and furthermore, there's no way to make sure she's held accountable for her actions- would you go ahead and trust her to act in your best interests- would you sign a letter allowing her to have control of your assets, your residence, your mediacl care? If you wouldn't do so with a woman you just met, why would you do so with your gov't? Why would you trust them to act with your best interests at heart? Because they're nice people and want to do what's best for you? What in any government's past would give you the idea they would ever look out for anyone than number one (ie: not you)? Just because you are in the land of the free doesn't mean there aren't people- your own people- who'd fuck you for everything they can. Not even because you deserve it, but because you might just be collateral damage to achieving their goals. Anyone who just trusts their leaders to act in their best interests hasn't read enough history books. The statment 'absolute power corrupts absolutely' isn't bullshit.
From: chrissyilstrap [Chris Ilstrup]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 12:54
If you didn't vote, it's your fault. Kill yourself. Make it a murder suicide and kill a Christian first
From: uppitynegro
[Uppity Negro]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 13:15
What's this story all about? Came in late to this controversy. Bottom line: Were any jelly doughnuts injured so as to deprive Dunkin' Donuts visitors of nourishment? Will Dunkin' Donuts, 7-11, and other purveyors to the police community still be allowed to sell these sugar laden delectibles and coffee? Will we have to register donuts! UN
From: darthphiber [darth phiber]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 13:20
From: greenneon21 [phillip] heres whats really funny folks.. when the next attack comes, and it will.. and we knew who was going to do it, we knew they were planning something, and we didnt stop it because we couldnt wiretap, we couldnt track their messages, we couldnt do a damn thing to gain any information before they struck.. who will you blame then? Who has pulled the wool over your eyes? It is common knowledge that we knew what was going to happen and didn't do crap about it because the egos and political agendas of certain folks. Where do you see emails being protected from snooping from anyone? Cellular traffic? let's be honest, we employ technology and have for years to protect our interests foreign and domestic. You can blame the idiot in office, his hand selected cronnies and the religious right who put him there. I'll start designing you a new ribbon to slap on the back of your suv.
From: jimbojakkjonsun [john smyth]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 13:21
I don’t give a goddamn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it my way.” “Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.” “Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,” Bush screamed back. “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!” ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ got that off capitolhillblue.com
From: aulduron
[Aulduron]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 13:22
Clintons took away my second amendment, greatly loosened my 4th amendment and his appointed judges are still trying to disable my first amendment rights to free speech and freedom of religion. <i>How many tens of millions of dollars did we spend on that to find out nothing? </i> We never found out he did nothing, we couldn't convict him because witnesses and co-defendants kept getting murdered, committing suicide, dieing in accidents, co-defendants took the rap for him, and executive privleges. But hell, we should start spending tens of millions trying to convict <b>every</b> president, yes, that includes Bush, as soon as they're elected. If anyone deserves the loss of due processes we're enduring, it's politicians. As for media bias, just read the stories and skip all adjectives and adverbs, then discount all opinions (words like good or bad or quagmire) only then will we find unbiased stories. As for placing blame, guess who signed the Iraq Liberation Act, whose stated purpose was: "to establish a program to support a transition to democracy in Iraq." and "This act <b>required</b> the President to designate one or more qualified recipients of assistance, with the primary requirement being opposition to the present Saddam Hussein regime" and authorizes The President " to direct the drawdown of defense articles from the stocks of the Department of Defense, defense services of the Department of Defense, and military education and training for such organizations" That was Bubba. Guess who signed Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act into law which "imposes a limit for all appeals relating to the right to writ of habeas corpus in capital cases and reduces the length of the appeal process by sharply limiting the role of the federal courts. Habeas corpus is the means by which inmates can test whether their convictions or sentences were obtained in violation of the United States Constitution." among other things that are generally thought to be devised by Bush. No, it wasn't Hitler, it was her husband Bill. Who signed The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act which "imposes a limit for all appeals relating to the right to writ of habeas corpus in capital cases and reduces the length of the appeal process by sharply limiting the role of the federal courts. Habeas corpus is the means by which inmates can test whether their convictions or sentences were obtained in violation of the United States Constitution."? Go ahead and blame Bush, but remember the others who share same blame.
From: s1mps0n [Smarter Than You]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 13:27
This whole thing is fucked. Some people seem to think that just because the government has been stomping all over our rights for 200 years it is alright and "nothing new" well that if bullshit. I am going to tear this whole dystopian edifice down! I am going to baptize everyone in fire! Who is with me? Come with me!
From: s1mps0n [Smarter Than You]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 13:32
Now I am sure my phone is tapped. As was my intention because now some dip shit at the NSA will be listening in on the daily minutiae of my life. Hope he doesn't tell my sister that what I got her for her birthday. Or tell my boss I make personal long distance phone calls from my office phone... Fascist douches.
From: aulduron
[Aulduron]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 13:37
I'm not saying it's alright. People are placing blame, but they're not placing it the correct places. I'm trying to redirect it to where it belongs. And now you know...the <i>rest</i> of the story.
From: tydas [patriot x]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 13:43
I don't think anyone is arguing that we should not go after the assholes with bombs on their backs however... I think people in general are lying sacks of conniving shit who will fuck over their grandma if given a chance. The reason we have all of these rules in the Constitution is to have checks and balances over the government, police, CIA etc..If they feel they can act at their leisure then the numerous assholes who occupy those positions will fuck over people for whatever reason, not to catch terrorist. The people in power need to feel a presence over their shoulder so they will act in a decent manner...
From: max101 [Batton]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 14:02
It's been going on for over 40 years, LOL. Why is it all of a sudden a big issue now? Alert BC had one of the largest listening posts in the world employing Canadians to spy on Americans for generations. If US citizens what it changed, then vote on it, simple eh? Want something to complain about? How about the US Treasury fabricating evidence and using ex-US special forces to conduct military like operations on US soil, against law-biding US citizens? Unofficial estimates places the lives lost at just over 4000 (mainly women and children). Of course that was under Clinton and during peace time, so I guess it doesn't count. I wonder why the media is overlooking/covering up "estrogen" + "shorten the lives of". The report is still there, but now buried under an algorithm (abuse of search engines). Over 18,000 US women had their "lives shortened", in other words died from, hormonal replacement. The same research firms/manufactures are also in the liberal top ten list for donations. Now that's a real conspiracy and one that is forced on the so called free thinkers and compassionate types
From: iguanac64 [Itchy Carter]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 14:33
Alduron - re: 2nd and 4th amendment rights declining under Clinton I'm sure I'm the exception here in Texas, but aside from laws which mostly just seem to have made history checks to sell guns necessary and banning automatic/assault weapons...I don't really see many 2nd amendment violations. I'm not going to say that there aren't some hardcore liberals that have tried to push the laws as far as they can, even in what is considered the "Liberal Heaven" from 1992-1996 they couldn't get most of what they wanted. 4th amendment rights have been waning more and more since the 50's (McCarthy+Drug War). Seems Clinton might not have done enough to restore those rights, but I don't believe I saw them get any worse under Clinton. re: Clinton witnesses dying Read the Vince Foster section of Rotten.com. Most of these lies and exhaggerations were spread by Jerry Fallwell in an 80 minute tape that allegedly exposes everything! "The Foster "murder or suicide" investigation revolved around a variety of claims, made by journalists in and out of the mainstream, but mostly out. The claims can generally be divided into two major categories for useful contemplation. Category one is outright lies, category two is gross distortions. First, the lies:" http://www.rotten.com/library/bio/usa/vince-foster/ re: Clinton supporting anti-Iraq policy He believed like the Bushes that Saddam was a threat. The sweet part is that the only reason he was a threat was because we propped him up and built him up as a bulwark against Iran under Reagan/Bush. If we hadn't sided with the Saudis (the nationality of all 17 of the 9/11 hijackers) against Iraq he would still be our best bud...Kurd massacre or no. I think Clinton's been pretty up front with the fact that he thought Saddam was a threat...even if a lot of liberals have no clue what his position on Iraq was. Clinton was more in favor of sanctions than outright regime change, tho. re: Clinton signing Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act /shrug. Reducing the amount of appeals and forbidding them in the first place are two different things. I think most death penalty proponents agree that the appeals process is way too long. Nothing super controversial there. Denying trials/appeals as in the case of Jose Padilla is a violation of the rights provided by the Constitution. I'm sure Clinton has signed anti-terrorism acts in his 8 years...I'll bet before 9/11 they were a lot more innocuous, tho...
From: hai
[koo]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 14:34
Tinfoil hats! Good God, reading post after post of silver hat wearers! When did this forum become the dumping ground of ridiculous spew? After eleven days, we'll concentrate on other sleights. But, first things first.
From: mingemeister [Dick DeGirth]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 14:37
Why is it that so many of you are worried about Bush sending in "jack booted thugs " on anybody who's free speech displeases him? Wasn't the last president to do that Clinton? Kouresh posed no threat to national security, except maybe his back taxes were poorly needed by some some bitch in Harlem w/ 12 niglets. Same goes for Randy Weaver. Redneck? Absolutely. Asspipe? No doubt. But he was a threat to no-one except deer, elk and nigras, in the unlikely event one ever wandered by in that part of Idaho, or any part of Idaho for that matter. Jack Booted Thug attacks on citizens: Clinton/Reno: at least 2 Bush/Ashcroft/Estrada: 0 Like they say. Scoreboard! Byotches.
From: aulduron
[Aulduron]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 14:49
I never said Clinton or anyone in his adminstration were behind any murders. But they died none the less. Coincedence or conspiracy, it doesn't matter, they're dead just the same. Nor did I say those bills were bad.
From: incubus [Hugh Wang]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 15:09
"Here's a plausible answer for you: say I have the same name as a terrorist (that happens a LOT, google for "no-fly list"). So I get wiretapped. An FBI agent hears me discussing a new software product. He's got shares in a rival firm, so he leaks the news. As a result, they beat us to the punch and we lose millions." ------------- "Dude, I TOLD you this new AOL 10.0 was a good idea!" "Yea, man! It fucking ROCKS!"
From: iguanac64 [Itchy Carter]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 15:12
I have no idea why Koresh and Weaver were treated the way they were. That was definately perpetrated by jack booted thugs and I haven't seen a single liberal say what happened to those guys was right. Out-of-control authorities seem to be the number one suspect. As if they don't have enough power to do what they want...giving these people even more unregulated power is not the way to stop this crap.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 15:20
This thing has really blown up in Bush's face. CNN ran a clip, where Bush promises to never use wiretaps without a court order. How do you spell LIAR? Chuck Hagel, & Olympia Snowe, both Repugs, have joined with 3 Dems, to request a Senate Hearing on the matter. Sen Boxer, with Sen Arlen Spector's blessing is going to explore possible impeachment proceedings. I still don't believe that an actual impeachment is possible, at least not until Nov. 2006. I see Clinton's name keeps popping up. IMO, I think Clinton is a slimeball, but he was also the best prez we have had since Ike. The prosperity that we enjoyed during his terms, was real, not built on a house of cards like Bush's economy. What do you all think is going to happen to the economy when the interest rates rise to the point that people will no longer be able to afford to tap their home equity, or when the housing bubble pops, & people see their equity disappear? What if the Chinese call in their debt? How would they be paid? The Great Depression of 1929 happened just that way. The us held the debt of the Brits, who had over extended themselves. The US decided to call that debt in, & a worldwide depression followed. Bush has put us into a similar situation, where our destiny is not in our hands. The rich get richer, at the expense of the entire world, if it happens, which I sincerely hope it doesn't.
From: jimbojakkjonsun [john smyth]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 15:23
so we all agree bush bad clinton alright osoma bad sadam realy bad why r there trials for him? as many witnesses as there r they shoud try him for 1 murder and give him the death penalty but bush wants to prove he is winning the war on iraq which hes not. sorry to get off subject but why r all fucktards talking about how much money they make/have? most i bet r 40 something dudes living in their mamas basement whacking off trying to sound cool for this forum. just my christmacy thoughts.
From: canadagirl78
[God, make me chaste. But not yet.]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 15:28
This should help all of us "tin foil hat" wearers: http://www.rotten.com/library/conspiracy/information-awareness-office/ PS: tin foil hats only act as an antenna, not only do they not block those radiation rays, they actually fine tune and direct them. http://www.i-am-bored.com/bored_link.cfm?link_id=13914
From: robwrigley
Date: 20-Dec-2005 15:30
Canadagirl: That was about the silliest argument on this board yet. If the cute young lady ran for the office (Power if Attorney), and was elected to it, then yes, I think its the voters duty to trust her to do her job. Otherwise, they should not have voted for her. If I hire someone to do a job, then have to stand over them every second to make sure they do their job correctly, they get fired. I just went through that this weekend....but that is another story. Rob
From: mingemeister [Dick DeGirth]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 15:30
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones] Date: 20-Dec-2005 15:20 I see Clinton's name keeps popping up. IMO, I think Clinton is a slimeball, but he was also the best prez we have had since Ike. The prosperity that we enjoyed during his terms, was real, not built on a house of cards like Bush's economy. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dot.Com bubble anyone? Not only was it not real, it didn't even leave any assets from which to partially recoup losses. You can't sell off binary to help pay creditors.
From: thaimaixhu [Thai Mai Xhu]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 15:48
Ryry is a New York screaming Jew. He wouldn't mind if all rights were stripped from we goyam. Ryry, go fuck yourself with a candy cane. How Hannookei.
From: tucanscrew
[three's more fun]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 15:52
From: cunnilinguist [cazzodurissimo] Date: 20-Dec-2005 07:34 God Bless PRESIDENT BUSH, his first priority is protecting American Citizens, period. -------- I don't think so. Prioritie List: Protect Big Oil Protect Haliburton Declare war on bad man that threatened daddy Change law to eliminate "pesky rights" Drill for oil on federal land Cut old growth forests Provide jobs for cronies Provide tax cuts to super rich Stack Supreme Court Eliminate Abortion Make sure fags don't marry Run up deficit that will take two centuries to pay off Line pockets Piss on the poor and disenfranchised then slap 'em with you dick for good measure and.... if there is any time left, protect citizens.
From: canadagirl78
[God, make me chaste. But not yet.]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 16:05
"If the cute young lady ran for the office (Power if Attorney), and was elected to it, then yes, I think its the voters duty to trust her to do her job. Otherwise, they should not have voted for her." you are absolutely right. However, when you have no means to directly fire that young woman, and must in fact rely on her best friends to make sure she does her job properly, you are really screwed if she decides to fuck you over, no? Trust doesn't exist in a vaccuum; just because you choose to vote for one yutz over another yutz doesn't mean they are trustworthy. This is my point: we've all seen many, many reasons that many, many elected leaders should be not just fired but have their asses thrown in jail (Canada is going through this as we speak). We, as the people of Canada, can't decide to overthrow our gov't, even though we knew what they were up to- we had to wait until other elected officials made a non-confidence decision (kinda like an impeachment, if anyone doesn't know) to get the pigs out of office. We, the private individual, have no recourse that we ourselves can partake. When an elected leader is surrounded by their own friends, and decide to fuck over the people who they are supposed to be working for, the people have little chance but to hope that the other elected officials (friends and sometimes beneficiaries) will stand up for us. That, to me, is just leaving too much to hope for.
From: simon
[simon]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 16:11
I would encourage everyone to call and write their State Rep. and Senators about this today. Tell them if nothing is done about this then our government, setup to protect the liberties of the people, has failed. That it is not an issue of political party associations, but a matter of preserving the fundamental principals our country. They have a sacred duty to server the people of this country and nothing else. And if they feel our liberties are not worth preserving then they have no place working for us.
From: ryry [god damn it bones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 16:11
thaimaixhu [Thai Mai Xhu] From: thaimaixhu [Thai Mai Xhu] Date: 19-Dec-2005 10:40 ryry: in case you haven't understood, I took an unpopular stance and argued an unpopular case. It was not personal. You on the other hand have a problem letting go. In that case you are now a non-entity. I shall not respond to your postings, however vile. It seems you go to the gutter quickly, perhaps it is your home. You no longer exist. hey you dumb fuckin slant eye fuckbag what happened to" i will never reply to ryry again " see you are full of shit asswipe and if are such a computer genius then you atleast would be closer to the truth than what you are and listen up asshole you are wrong why dont you get your security to come to my place cuz motherfucker i need the laugh. i love the gutter cuz you get to meet the most interesting assholes there any way fuck off you halfwit
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 16:20
Mingemeister said:"Dot.Com bubble anyone? Not only was it not real, it didn't even leave any assets from which to partially recoup losses. You can't sell off binary to help pay creditors." OK, but that was caused by dumb as shit investors,looking to get something for nothing(greed), not any government policy. Clinton had the government's responsibility going on all 8 cylinders. Imagine, a surplus, over his last 3 years. An actual surplus, the next time the US will run a surplus will happen when hell freezes over. The amazing thing about it was that once a surplus is attained, it is self perpetuating, because the debt requires less & less money to service, hence freeing up that money, creating an even larger surplus. Bush has created the opposite effect. The larger the deficit, the more the debt grows, & the greater the need for money to service it. Right now, the debt service is taking about a third of all the money budgeted each year, just to pay the interest. We get absolutely nothing in return for that money, but the bankers are loving it. BTW, I probably shouldn't say this, but now is the time to get back in. Intel is looking very attractive right now. Remember, you all didn't here it from me, lol.
From: weetodded [Wee Todd Ed]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 16:31
i hayud a peece uf wiyur bud dey tookt iyut awhey becawse sumbuddy cood gits un i pokt owt.
From: snyznyk [snyznyk]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 16:35
Tinfoil hats! Good God, -------------------------- I’m rather proud of my Tin Foil Hat. I made it myself.
From: max101 [Batton]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 16:54
heh, did you know that the Democrats founded the KKK or that many founding members of the Republican state parties where black? The US liberals have a long very history of lies and deceit, conducting a no-holds-barred war against the US Constitution. The current party has a more subtle approach, but it's goals have never changed. From the genocidal tendencies of abortion (12% representing 37% of the national average) to the hi-jacked womens movement, there is nothing, nadda, zip redeemable throughout their history. CNN and ALL Turner owned media are nothing more then a 24/365 campaigning outlet for the democratic party. They are more similar to late night infomercials then any real form of journalism. Disreputable through and through. BTW, it's ok to dislike someone for the color of their skin, it's all about what you do with it. If you're American, then it's not an issue, if you're not, then what the hell are you doing here in the first place. Clinton is a disgrace, when that fucker dies, I'm going to have a gay-ole-time pissing on his/her grave. They are both lower then child rapist and killers.
From: flayed [Flayed]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 16:57
I would like President George W. Bush to die. No punch line here. Just death.
From: flayed [Flayed]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 17:06
(I'm curious if I'll receive a visit from some men in black after making the above statement. If I do, I'm so moving to Canada.)
From: diademsofdeath [mmmm]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 17:08
On reading all the posts in this thread it becomes apparent that whilst alot of people can constructively denounce bush and his slow manipulation of your rights and freedoms that got him to where he is at this point in time, it smoke screens once again underlying questions that America should be persuing. If i had 2 cents for everytime i heard somebody repeat some forcefed medial shit onto a public forum id be a rich man, it was apparent long ago that a well balanced media serves 1 true purpose and that is to remove the ability for people to analyze and form their own conclusions on things. Thus allowing them to deal with problems, this might be just 1 reason america is waiding around in a big shit lake and slowly drowning. It is my pure opinion that people need to go back to the events of 911 (the catalyst that sparked this whole mess) and start over trying to understand what actually happened there. The government headed by yours truly couldnt proclaim fast enough that this was an attack on 'The American People'. Thus setting up the main base of the mind set of the public which has allowed him to get this far into it. It is my pure opinion from my own observation and research that it was not an attack on the people of america but a direct strategic attack on the economic, political and militant interests and epicentres of america. People want to stop living in fear, remove the threat of real terorism like 911, first they need to truely understand why 911 happened in the first place, then deal with the issues, otherwise this shit is doomed to get thrown in a repeat loop and keep going around in circles. Im not saying you cave and give organisations like alquaida what they want so they wont attack your precious country , but you have to understand that times are indeed dire when people are willing to fly themselves and people they dont even know into building. It is easy to say they are fanatical, crazy, mind washed, by religion or whatnot, but in reality deep down you just know theres alot more to it.
From: jediofporn [Wicked Meat Saber]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 17:41
From: darthphiber [darth phiber] Date: 20-Dec-2005 13:20 From: greenneon21 [phillip] "heres whats really funny folks.. when the next attack comes, and it will.. and we knew who was going to do it, we knew they were planning something, and we didnt stop it because we couldnt wiretap, we couldnt track their messages, we couldnt do a damn thing to gain any information before they struck.. who will you blame then?" ----------------------------------------------------- When/if it happens again, I'll blame the terrorists. If it happened due to a lack of action on someone's part, I will also hold them responsible. If they knew an attack was imminent and knew who was involved, they have enough for a warrant to tap their phones, search their houses, give them cavity searches. No need to start stripping freedoms or rights. Dramatic situations don't always call for dramatic action.
From: oneballjohnny [OneBallJohnny]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 17:47
OneBallJohnny [FuckYou] - How can this bastard get away with such a travesty? He gutted the Constitution and still no one has impeached him. Fuck him and fuck republicans I'm moving into the woods and becoming a hermit. At least there I won't have to hear about all of this and get pissed off everytime I do.
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:10
Dunno if anyone else saw this on the drudgereport but here it is. http://www.drudgereport.com/flash8.htm The summary of it is Clinton and Carter signed executive orders as well ordering searches without warrants. <I>CLINTON ADMINISTRATION SECRET SEARCH ON AMERICANS -- WITHOUT COURT ORDER CARTER EXECUTIVE ORDER: 'ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE' WITHOUT COURT ORDER Bill Clinton Signed Executive Order that allowed Attorney General to do searches without court approval Clinton, February 9, 1995: "The Attorney General is authorized to approve physical searches, without a court order" Jimmy Carter Signed Executive Order on May 23, 1979: "Attorney General is authorized to approve electronic surveillance to acquire foreign intelligence information without a court order." WASH POST, July 15, 1994: Extend not only to searches of the homes of U.S. citizens but also -- in the delicate words of a Justice Department official -- to "places where you wouldn't find or would be unlikely to find information involving a U.S. citizen... would allow the government to use classified electronic surveillance techniques, such as infrared sensors to observe people inside their homes, without a court order." Deputy Attorney General Jamie S. Gorelick, the Clinton administration believes the president "has inherent authority to conduct warrantless searches for foreign intelligence purposes." Secret searches and wiretaps of Aldrich Ames's office and home in June and October 1993, both without a federal warrant. END </I> It doesn't make it right, but it has precedent. It also shows a bit of slipping down the slope. Carter's was a bit limited, Clinton a little less so.
From: koreanholiday [ACH]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:28
From: flayed [Flayed] Date: 20-Dec-2005 17:06 (I'm curious if I'll receive a visit from some men in black after making the above statement. If I do, I'm so moving to Canada.) No men in black are going to visit you; however, you seem to be in a delusional stance of paranoia. Furthermore, moving to Canada may not be a bad idea~! There seems to be a lot of paranoid, pot smoking quote unquote intellectuals up there that have the solutions to the world's problems particularly America's.
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:37
<I> what, did they all sit down at a conference table and decide that they were gonna collectively make up for all the shit they didn't give him? </I> I've always thought the media has a pack mentality. One person comes up with something and the rest rush to outdo them. Most of your news stations only parrot what they get from Reuters, AP, or another one I forgot the name of. Whether or not they actually planned it, that's the way it works out. Anytime someone says the media gave a pass to Clinton on plenty of shit, the rebuttal is about his blowjob. I think the liberals are the only ones actually obsessed with Clinton's dick. Everyone else says it was about lying, same thing the dems are trying to get Rove and crew for right now.
From: thaimaixhu [Thai Mai Xhu]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:37
I don't seem to have responded to any ryry post, just made mention of it's location and religion, no response to it's posting at all. Jews certainly go to the gutter quickly don't they? ryry jewjewbee (Golum) remains a non-entity. Bring peace to the planet Nuke Israel Then New York Hannuka-y
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:39
Oh, I worked for the FBI for a few months back in my teens. The people that work there are like everyone else. The agents tend to be a bunch of puffed up asshats. Think of your local police, just with a suit and fed power.
From: flayed [Flayed]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:39
koreanholiday [ACH] No men in black are going to visit you; however, you seem to be in a delusional stance of paranoia. Furthermore, moving to Canada may not be a bad idea~! There seems to be a lot of paranoid, pot smoking quote unquote intellectuals up there that have the solutions to the world's problems particularly America's. ---------------------------------------- A few corrections: I don't smoke pot. I don't even really drink (primarily because I'm a lightweight and get sick way too easily). Also, I'm glad that I strike you as an "intellectual", but I've never actually made the claim myself. Lastly, in my opinion I do have the solution to all the world's problems. I imagine most people feel the same way about their opinions.
From: cumcatatafish [Allison Wonderland]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:44
apparently studying history in america does nothing for the country. oh wait bush got into harvard through fame and wealth, go figure. do the terms "mccarthyism" and "blacklisting" ring a bell to anyone in this situation? everyone must have a national ID by 2008. glad im lucky enough to live in california
From: jngljim [JIM]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:49
I think they should monitor this web site and laugh at you liberal nut jobs..hahahahaa
From: hatrix [Watch me pull a rabbit out of my...]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:53
I see your Hannuka-y and raise you a Kwanza-y. I don't know why everyone is so upset. It would seem by the general reaction to shrubbie's felony and various other crimes that no one cares. So why should we?
From: koreanholiday [ACH]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:57
From: cumcatatafish [Allison Wonderland] Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:44 Correction: Bush didn't attend Harvard..
From: koreanholiday [ACH]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 19:00
From: flayed [Flayed] Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:39 koreanholiday [ACH] No men in black are going to visit you; however, you seem to be in a delusional stance of paranoia. Furthermore, moving to Canada may not be a bad idea~! There seems to be a lot of paranoid, pot smoking quote unquote intellectuals up there that have the solutions to the world's problems particularly America's. ---------------------------------------- A few corrections: I don't smoke pot. I don't even really drink (primarily because I'm a lightweight and get sick way too easily). Also, I'm glad that I strike you as an "intellectual", but I've never actually made the claim myself. Lastly, in my opinion I do have the solution to all the world's problems. I imagine most people feel the same way about their opinions. _________________ I said quote unquote intellectual. If you don't smoke pot, you may not fit in there either but you could still move~!
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 19:08
All of you who are scared shitless of a terrorist attack, consider this: A whole lot of Americans gave their lives for the very freedoms that you would just give up, for security. Besides being a false security, you cowardly fucks are spitting on the graves of each & every dead KIA, from Valley Forge, on up. Even though they are fighting for a lie, the KIA's from Iraq are in this category as well. I wonder what they think, as they watch from their graves, about what Bush is doing?
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 19:11
<I>OK, but that was caused by dumb as shit investors,looking to get something for nothing(greed), not any government policy. Clinton had the government's responsibility going on all 8 cylinders. Imagine, a surplus, over his last 3 years. An actual surplus, the next time the US will run a surplus will happen when hell freezes over. The amazing thing about it was that once a surplus is attained, it is self perpetuating, because the debt requires less & less money to service, hence freeing up that money, creating an even larger surplus. Bush has created the opposite effect. </I> You missed the whole point about the dot com bubble. That bubble was what was responsible for Clinton's surplus. People were investing money into start-up companies and making money with them as well. All of that generated money to grow a business. Growth means more people are hired. This cycle went throughout the 90's in the tech sector. Once that bubble popped, those investors lost money, companies lost money. People were laid off and stopped buying products. Those companies had to cut back laying even more people off. This resulted in an increase in government monies to unemployment and other welfare aid. It also resulted in less revenue for the government. In effect, less tax money and more welfare was what happened. It wasn't Bush that did it, but economic forces. Clinton's figures and surplus was based on that bubble. Once it popped, those numbers were no longer valid. The recession started in Clinton's last year in office but you don't hit a recession overnight. Look at the stock market for 2000 - 2001, you'll see a nice downward slope. Bush was sworn in near the bottom of the slope. It has since turned upwards and unemployment is close to the same rate as before the bubble burst. People that watch the market would call it a market correction. The tech stocks were overvalued during Clinton's term. Near the end of it, people realized it thanks to a microsoft vice-president saying he thought tech stocks were overvalued (think that's who said it).
From: ryry [god damn it bones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 19:19
From: thaimaixhu [Thai Mai Xhu] Date: 20-Dec-2005 18:37 I don't seem to have responded to any ryry post, just made mention of it's location and religion, no response to it's posting at all. Jews certainly go to the gutter quickly don't they? ryry jewjewbee (Golum) remains a non-entity. Bring peace to the planet Nuke Israel Then New York Hannuka-y yes asshole please talk shit about nuking the U.S.A fuck off while i drop a dime on you fuckstick get that hook out your yap jap you are with out a doubt the dumbest fuck on this site i thought you were going to some other site where your intellect and ideas were appreciated like retard.com
From: limpy [Tequiza]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 19:41
Off topic But who cares? Thai: We are not all as lucky as you. You are well educated,well financed,never have to worry about the Yen. Plus to be one of the "Trust Babies." Good for you. Set for life. Never any worries. From a poor peasants point of view. You are a spoiled,arrogant,insecure,trouble making little shit. And sometimes you like to argue. A little advice. Don't bring Saki to a Whiskey fight. Get It!!
From: diademsofdeath [mmmm]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 19:56
Oh and even though im not a US citizen i still cant pass up an oppurtunity to throw a handful of my shit at bush over his whole 'its only a piece of paper' thing. Even though i don't revere the US Constitution as the Code of Humanity as some do, i still can't understand where dipshit George gets off saying that, especially seeings as he likes to create little bits of paper to fuck with you poor americans, and others abroad, AKA. Patriot ACT I and II, not quite sure under what laws that operates lol, maybe the same one that aloows you to walk into another country and do what the fuck you like to their people and president, regadless of the arguments to do so. Well id personally like to turn around to the law enforcement officials when they come a knockin and say, "go fuck yourself, its only a stupid piece of paper", later when i would be submitting my plea bargain to the judge, i wouldnt be able to speak over the jury who would be to loud laughing at my god damn igneous fucking stupidity. Seriously though, someone should do something, this guy is representing you fuckers to the rest of the world, even though i firmly believe that he's a puppet president and hes got some elusive world dominearing satan wannabe's hand lodged firmly in his asshole, plotting the course for his ultimate agenda, at least this satan wannabe could get someone whos not see through like old bush, man that guy cant even act without fucking up anything. I dunno, seems to be working a charm tho !
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 19:56
John, I agree with you that a sitting president has very little control when dealing with market forces, especially in the long term. Oh they can start a war here, & run up a deficit there, but in the long term the markets will survive. Unfortunately, we do not live in the long term, we live in the here & now. I do follow the market, & have made a modest fortune, by not predicting, but rather following trends. Right now the trend is what? The only thing I would be buying right now is techs, because they never came close to gaining what they lost, & because the ones that pay dividends are going to keep on paying, & going up. The problem with the dotcom bubble bursting, was that it brought down the good ones along with the garbage. The ones who survived are well worth buying now.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 20:23
mmmm said:"hes got some elusive world dominearing satan wannabe's hand lodged firmly in his asshole, plotting the course for his ultimate agenda," Oh I know the dude, it's GFY Cheney. For those not in the know, Cheney told a member of Congress to go & fuck hinself, & the name stuck rather well to Cheney. He is also Bush's VP, but it is he, who actually has the power. Bush is just his front man.
From: max101 [Batton]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 20:38
LOL, the bubble was fund managers buying stock at 10,000 times earnings. Sheesh... Arthur Anderson anyone? Your retirement plan is likely managed by an investment firm. These firms knowingly (most likely anyways) made poor investments in companies like Nortel (who went from 118 to 1.18 in a short 2 months--->Canadian Pension Plan) and made an absolutely fantastic income charging your retirement plan extraordinary amounts of money. With a little bit of clever paper work, some of these agencies were collecting over 110% of the original nest egg and writing it off in market losses. Clinton *success* in the markets is entirely based on the massive fraud directed by fund managers and falsified earnings. The bubbles' burst is cannot specifically tied to Clinton himself, but it can be positively accredited to him and his failures to act.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 20:55
Enron alone cost investors how many billions? That happened on Bush's watch. I'll tell you all something, say what you want about Clinton, you have to admit, that back in those days, wasn't it nice, that the only thing we had to worry about was Monica blowing Bill.
From: max101 [Batton]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 21:03
But Enron did happen under Clinton... so did Arthur Anderson and all the rest. Comparing Enron to Arthur Anderson is like comparing Manuel Noriega, Panama to WW III. Same with a lot of other stuff that'll be offloaded on to us over the next 20 years.
From: aulduron
[Aulduron]
Date: 20-Dec-2005 23:35
<i>, wasn't it nice, that the only thing we had to worry about was Monica blowing Bill.</i> Or the Chinese using our missile technology against us, or selling it to N.Korea or Iran or...
From: georgedublubusch
[Head pooBa]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 02:58
From: flayed [Flayed] Date: 20-Dec-2005 17:06 I would like President George W. Bush to die. No punch line here. Just death. (I'm curious if I'll receive a visit from some men in black after making the above statement. If I do, I'm so moving to Canada.) ----------------------------------------------------------- I have read your e-mail My guys are watching you!
From: wingedmonkeyminion [Satan Himself]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 04:36
Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...
From: dillhole [Dillhole]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 05:40
You Americans live up to your stereotypes  The redneck inbred scared white supremacist": Bush is good, we should give up liberty and kill those terrorists. Democrats are no good treehuggers" The hippie liberal douche: "Bush is evil, lets eat Tofu" I am a southpark fan but I thought they exagerated but if I read some posts here I see it isn't. What I see from over here is fear. You are all very afraid with a president who has the braincapacity of a drunk retard. Don't get me wrong I like USA but you guys need to stop fighting over that führer in the White House. Maybe try and get your country together. What if you used that money for the war on iraq for helping American people? Either way you turn it that war is just stupid. The republicans jell:"If you are against the war you are a goddamn hippie,yeeehaw" but then if you ask them why they need a war they say to bring peace to the Iraqi people. How gay-ass-hippie is that? Maybe there are more important issues in your country than terrorism. Try using less gas, get your economy working, you have the largest drug problem in the world, poverty and environmental crap. Don't you see they are making you stupid and ignorant about the real problems in life?
From: jngljim [JIM]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 08:44
FREE HANDJOBS FOR EVERYONE!...Oh that was under Clintons admin....I wonder what Hillary will be doin in the oval if she makes prez? She is a closet lesbo ya know....and that ole puckered face of hers...oh hey I know it will be fre IRS audits for all non commies again...hahhahaha
From: brainpus [@theColiseum]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 09:38
Dear Dillhole: Are you that French kid from South Park that everyone spits on? What I see from over here is that your Euro-pussy Union is steadily being Muslim-ized. Soon your smelly Euro-hairy-armpit women and your Euro-smug offspring-in-training will be eunuchs and concubine for your Islamic overlords. This will probably be an improvement for your Euro-trash image.
From: iguanac64 [Itchy Carter]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 10:29
Of course, Bush's penchant for signing every spending bill put before him, his habit reducing taxes despite spending more, and waging very expensive wars in other countries have nothing to do with the government's current financial problems. The deficit was lowered because Republicans led the charge in the mid 90's with Democrats finally seeing the light and joining them not too long after. God, the current administration almost makes me wish Newt and crew were still trying to make the government better for the people. Seems that whole Republican revolution of the 90's has been subverted. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Regarding the post earlier about Democrats starting the KKK and whatever. I remember when I found out about slavery in school. I came home and announced to my parents that there was no way I could be a Democrat...I'm a Republican! After a little talking with them and learning more about our political process...it looked to me like at some point the views of both parties flip flopped. Where the Democrats used to be the party of the rich, business, KKK...etc...conservatives have taken over those domains. You see very few democratic members of the KKK anymore. The racist skinheads I knew growing up were definately more right-wing than left wing...the same guys rooting for GWB to go over and kill some ragheads (just on general principle I'm sure). The Republicans have definately taken over the big business and the rich areas. These comments just make it look like you're ignorant of the last 50 years of politics.
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 11:31
For the many posters that don't seem to understand the way the economy works (minge, and many others, you know who you are): The general economic forcast (with respect to recession vs. boom) has always been a SINE WAVE. Short of eliminating all of the controls which FDR put in place with the "New Deal", no president, no administration has the power over it which you guys seem to suggest. It goes up, and it goes down. The greater the boom, the greater the following recession. Don't get me wrong. There is of course, certain things that can be done to reign it in, but it's pretty much limited to decreasing or increasing the arc of the aforementioned sine wave. It could even be reasonably argued that spending the nation into debt, as is being done in the current administration may increase the height of the next boom. The factors that are going in to this are many and complex, and I have admittedly simplified it as much as possible. If you want to understand a bit more about the dynamics of economics, try reading the essay ay http://www.taxwisdom.org - admittedly it's slightly politically biased, however, it is a VERY reasonable and well researched in spite of that. Stop using the economy to bash or praise Bush or Clinton. It damages your credibility.
From: mingemeister [Dick DeGirth]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 11:34
From: iguanac64 [Itchy Carter] Date: 21-Dec-2005 10:29 Regarding the post earlier about Democrats starting the KKK and whatever. I remember when I found out about slavery in school. I came home and announced to my parents that there was no way I could be a Democrat... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The Democrats still control slavery. They just replaced the whips with welfare checks.
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 11:37
mingemeister, without a social safety net (including welfare), we'd be launched back in to a president hoover-esque era. Surely you aren't implying that we eliminate these programs? I'm all for responsible reform, where needed, but to imply that welfare=slavery makes you appear to be extremely ignorant indeed. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Remember that.
From: silencer [Chad Irvin]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 13:52
Bush has finally come unglued. He was a decent president for the first four years of his campain, but since then he's gotten out of control. I think he dug himself a hole and now realizes how deep it's gotten. He can't climb out of it. I agree with the war in Iraq (I'll be going there soon), but I don't in any way-shape-or form agree with spying on anyone. I don't care if it was Osama himself. If you suspect them as a terrorist, then take them down for questioning.....oh, I forgot! That would be racial profiling. My fault! What a country we live in....
From: dillhole [Dillhole]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 14:54
No you can more like call me cartman: fat, racist and easily pissed off BTW you refer to Pip and he's English I have my privacy, I can go for free to a doctor, I drive an Audi, can get drunk or stoned anytime I want to, I live at about 1km from the Stella Artois Brewery and there isn't a towelhead in sight, I got a good steady job like almost everyone I know. only 3000 people die here a year and I have never heared a gunshot in my life. And I should care what you think of me?
From: brainpus [@theColiseum]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 16:16
Now I know why you are called 'DILLHOLE'.
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 16:46
max101 says, "I wonder why the media is overlooking/covering up "estrogen" + "shorten the lives of". The report is still there, but now buried under an algorithm (abuse of search engines)." OMG. Are you really suggesting that we just eliminate hormones altogether in post-menopausal women? Jesus Christ man, you are incredibly gullible if you think that would help lengthen the lives of women. Wow. how misinformed can you get... How do you think their bones will hold up after 6 months? a year? five years? (if they live that long).. not to mention the numerous other ill-effects that this would cause. You are so ignorant and full of shit on this issue that it's not even funny.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 16:57
Enron happened when Bush was the prez. Look it up. Ronnie Raygun gave rocket technology to the Chinese, you can look that up as well. So here we are, waiting for rotten to update, and we are still sniping at one another here. Oh well, it beats what got posted yesterday.
From: wingedmonkeyminion [Satan Himself]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 16:59
I agree with Itchy Carter about how the two parties have flip-flopped positions over the years: and moderation is supposed to be found within a dichotomy that uses only one more choice than a dictatorship? Think about it. No country can practice a democracy effectively by limiting itself to such narrow choices of governance. Then we go around labeling each other liberal or conservative while forgetting to be grateful for the little we have. Hate your job? then quit, but don't blame loss of income on the corporate conservatives. Don't like the way your beloved nation is going? adapt, but don't blame the "liberal media" for causing things which need to be. Better to be a core centrist than a moderate. We're all reactionary, in believing that the size of government should be reduced, and the dependency of other individuals should not be allowed to overly tax the financial system. But we are diverted from the issues by tirades against each other; we alienate each other with insults. While those in power stay in power. And is power an enviable thing to have? My two cents. A working class hero is something to be.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 17:26
I was watching NBC news, and it appears that the Abramoff scandal has hit the MSM. They gave a brief overview, stated that Abramoff might cooperate to get a lighter sentence, & if he does, De Lay will be dead meat. Now we all know that there is a helluva lot more to this than that, but hey, it's a start.
From: max101 [Batton]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 17:56
fashionofchrist [Schizophonic] "OMG. Are you really suggesting that we just eliminate hormones altogether in post-menopausal women? Jesus Christ man, you are incredibly gullible if you think that would help lengthen the lives of women. Wow. how misinformed can you get... How do you think their bones will hold up after 6 months? a year? five years? (if they live that long).. not to mention the numerous other ill-effects that this would cause. You are so ignorant and full of shit on this issue that it's not even funny." FYI, a sizable minority them who had their lives shortened were under 35 and were taking supplements, as marketed to supplements through eg. CNN reporters for physical appearance improvements. There is no study that conclusively proves taking supplements prevent or slow bone loss. Which is odd considering how much pressure there is to use the hormone. Estrogen has few redeeming factors. One, it lets you have a girlish figure after 40. Two, a derivative can prevent pregnancy. Estrogen is a PCB and it should be limited or banned entirely. Poisoning my kids so you can behave like a slutty 13 year old girl doesn't cut it.
From: max101 [Batton]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 18:07
Estrogen apparently lowers cognitive processes. When you hear about large numbers of boy/girl fishes estrogen is the most likely cause. Some women of the fascist radial type have identified their female selves with the hormone to such an dysfunctional extent dysfunctional that they can be legally declared criminally insane (with the proper encouragement---it's fun).
From: melvin69
[John Bong]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 18:33
<I>Enron happened when Bush was the prez. Look it up. Ronnie Raygun gave rocket technology to the Chinese, you can look that up as well. </I> The point about Enron was that it started during Clinton's term. They weren't caught screwing with the books until Bush's term. The democrat big wigs hammered on the fact that Enron and Bush Co had connections and that Enron was caught during Bush's term so it was a result of Bush being president. Most of that though is political bullshit (wonder if that is redundant). Enron was doing it for years even before Bush was even heard about for president. Then there's the BS that a president is going to affect people cooking the books. Businesses do that crap all the time, doesn't matter who is president. Someone said republicans suck. They're only partly right, the political parties suck.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 19:49
Today's rotten sucks, yesterday's rotten sucked, both the parties suck. Is there anything which doesn't suck? How about this thread?
From: mingemeister [Dick DeGirth]
Date: 21-Dec-2005 20:40
From: fashionofchrist [Schizophonic] Date: 21-Dec-2005 11:37 mingemeister, without a social safety net (including welfare), we'd be launched back in to a president hoover-esque era. Surely you aren't implying that we eliminate these programs? I'm all for responsible reform, where needed, but to imply that welfare=slavery makes you appear to be extremely ignorant indeed. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. Remember that. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3 or 4 years of aid are a safety net. 3 or 4 generations of aid is dependance. Dependents will always vote for those upon whom they depend. Sounds like a captive vote to me.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 22-Dec-2005 09:08
How come Corporate welfare, in the form of grants, tax breaks, & lucrative contracts are OK, but people who cannot afford medical, rent, or even food, even though they work, get stepped on? So Bush wants to diminish Food Stamps, & other social programs, but give lavish tax cuts for the rich, & a token to the middle class. When will people realize what he is doing? He is waging the very class warfare that he accuses the Dems of doing.
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 22-Dec-2005 09:55
mingemeister, Many states (including mine) have moved to a "Work First" style program. In essence, it provides job and life skill training, as well as other resources for finding jobs. In Washington, you must be actively enrolled in the job training, and actively looking for work in order to claim cash benefits. It appears to be working very well. BTW, Washington is, and always has been a liberal state. Also, you have a fixed amount of TANF (cash benefits) you are able to claim in a lifetime - for better or for worse. 3 or 4 generations my ass. Maybe if you weren't such a blind Bush loyalist you could pull your head out of your ass long enough to see what's really going on. God damn you are such a puppet. They must have had some really shitty schools where you grew up.
From: yooyooma [Jamie]
Date: 22-Dec-2005 10:27
The only thing funnier then all this is that you American's voted this moron in again, for a second term....live with the decisions this asshole makes, live it, love it, you did it to yourself.
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 22-Dec-2005 11:37
yooyoo, actually, Judge Renquist voted him in the first time... As for the second time, well as PT Barnum said: "There's a sucker born every minute"... I'm sure Diebold had a hand in it, too.
From: brainpus [@theColiseum]
Date: 22-Dec-2005 12:03
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones] Date: 22-Dec-2005 09:08 How come Corporate welfare, in the form of grants, tax breaks, & lucrative contracts are OK, but people who cannot afford medical, rent, or even food, even though they work, get stepped on? So Bush wants to diminish Food Stamps, & other social programs, but give lavish tax cuts for the rich, & a token to the middle class. When will people realize what he is doing? He is waging the very class warfare that he accuses the Dems of doing. AZ$: Because corporations give the money back to political parties in the form of donations. (Writing checks to yourself out of the treasury is bad PR). Poor people don't give the money back. Corporations are an asset. Poor people are a liability. We are a capitalist nation (meaning one that is built around money). Politicians bless the people who keep them in power. That happens in any system. If we weren't such successful capitalists we would have been conquered by now. France is the perfect example of a country that provided housing and medical care for immigrants and look what happened: riots. The former Soviet Union is another example of a country that guaranteed jobs, housing, and medical care. (Even when things were good they stood on line for food and other items). They went bankrupt trying to keep up with capitalists and lost territory and influence in the process. The lower you go on any country's food chain, the more suffering and grumbling you encounter. Take New Orleans for instance. If that was Florida, money would have poured in faster than the water. Government agencies aren't exactly tripping over each other to rebuild a city below sea-level. Capitalism's way of thinning the herd. But I digress.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 22-Dec-2005 12:35
Brainpus said:"Because corporations give the money back to political parties in the form of donations. (Writing checks to yourself out of the treasury is bad PR). Poor people don't give the money back. Corporations are an asset. Poor people are a liability. We are a capitalist nation (meaning one that is built around money). Politicians bless the people who keep them in power. " And you consider this to be a good thing? I wonder when the Abramoff scandal ends up with most of them joining Cunningham in jail, if they will think that accepting bribes, & favors, in return for favorable legislation was really such a good idea. There are a few pols, who actually do work for the people. Unfortunately they are few, & far between. People vote for the rich, because they feel that rich people will not be tempted by graft. Too bad their greed supercedes everything else, like they can take it with them. Most of them have more money then they could possibly spend in 10 lifetimes, yet they want more...more...more!
From: iguanac64 [Itchy Carter]
Date: 22-Dec-2005 13:54
AZ$B - Heh...I don't think Brainpus was praising the system...just describing it. Melvin - Enron was Enron's fault. My biggest problem is the low sentences these guys who steal millions+ get. 10 years for Skilling? In China, these guys would likely be executed (don't feel like looking up the link for the Bank bigwigs in China who got the death penalty for a huge cash scandal). Ok...let's look at the penalty for stealing $1000. Now multiply the penalty by 1000. Anyway...Blaming Bush is pointless. The creative accounting started under Clinton...and the other stuff can mostly be explained away as politics. Minge - Welfare as it was designed was doomed to failure and has set up the segment it was supposed to help for failure. The reason...it penalized you heavily for trying to leave it. It also provided very little in the way of tools get off of it. Little to no job training. No motivation TO get schooling/job training. The way it is now, it has gotten better in some respects and worse in others.It's become a fight between Republicans who would just scrap the whole damn system and Democrats who feel the can't relent an inch or the Republicans will take it all. The big problem is that no one can find some space in the middle to make it better.
From: brainpus [@theColiseum]
Date: 22-Dec-2005 14:10
Dearest AZ$: Here's why you're not going to take this to heart. The capitalist government that you criticize doesn't pounce on the shadowy parts of the economy that contain, among other things: drugs, gambling, hookers, illegal workers, cash businesses, just to name some of the bigger ones. Perhaps not you specifically, but the users of this 'underground economy' far outnumber politicians, crooked or otherwise. They are your friends and neighbors doing what people do when it comes to money. The government of this country knows all of this goes on. This is a part of the economy that is hidden from view but would have serious financial consequences if it were destroyed. They're leaving the system alone for the most part, so long as it continues to function. Try not to criticize the people right next to you too harshly. People participate in and benefit from this system without knowing it.
From: azdollarbill [Jim Jones]
Date: 22-Dec-2005 15:14
brainpus, I am very much a Capitalist. I draw the line where Big Business calls the shots. Big Business should concern itself with making money, honestly, & efficiently. There is no need to circumvent the law, despoil the environment, or start needless wars. Unless of cause one considers greed to be an asset, rather than a detriment. BTW, I make my living playing the stock market. Today I lost $125, ouch, & the market finished up too. Note to self: don't sell short into a rising market.
From: butter [Frank]
Date: 23-Dec-2005 03:12
Two stolen elections, and instead of burning Washington to the ground, the American people just kept their head in the feedbag. If you dislike George, you are to going to really really hate it when Jeb "wins" in 2008.
From: brainpus [@theColiseum]
Date: 23-Dec-2005 06:09
From: butter [Frank] Date: 23-Dec-2005 03:12 Two stolen elections, and instead of burning Washington to the ground, the American people just kept their head in the feedbag. If you dislike George, you are to going to really really hate it when Jeb "wins" in 2008. 'Stolen' is such an unfriendly word. The engineers prefer 'crafted'. They couldn't have a Jew in Chez Whitey while fighting a war against an Islamic country (the Jews still have to go around to the back door. This must burn somewhat since blacks have been using the front door for some time now). Go back a few clicks and see what's in the feedbag: drugs, gambling, whores, a monster sports/entertainment industry, etc., and oh yeah, money. Some people call this greed. The engineers prefer 'profit motive', (and as a bonus the immigrant labor is paid nowadays, for the most part). I doubt it's going to be Jeb in 2008. There needs to be a disconnect. I bet they give it to Hillary (not that I'm a Hillary fan but she didn't look bad in the days of Spy mag). They'll run Jeb only if they want Hillary to win. But it will probably be her and Giuliani in upcoming elections. Rudy skipped front-office politics to establish his power base. Jeb is on the bench unless something changes. Hillary is her party's only hope. They look impotent without her. They've been unable to field a viable candidate up to now. She's their shining star and will make a good diversion for the public, friend and foe alike. She's recognized, cunning, and importantly, squeaky clean after surviving all the investigations. Her people are careful not to let her speak too much, at least for the time being. And also, if you manage to make it down to Washington with a book of matches please don't burn the Smithsonian.
From: katybear864 [Katelyn]
Date: 23-Dec-2005 08:04
Why should anyone care if he's doing this unless they have something to hide? I dont care if the gov't reads my emails and listens to my calls...im not a terrorist! lol and the 4th amendment "but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the persons or things to be seized" we have a cause....we dont want to die lol...and im guessing since its supported by the president we should go along with it its different in the case of cops which would do this secretly to arrest innocent people....bush isnt gonna do anything except find terrorists it sucks that the NYtimes printed that b/c now the terrorists will up their security b/c they know that the gov't is listening to them...the NY times people would rather have bush lose the war than have their families live
From: fashionofchrist
[Schizophonic]
Date: 23-Dec-2005 13:06
katybear864, How short-sighted can you get? You are not looking at the big picture. The president commited a FELONY high crime while in office. That Katy, is grounds for impeachment. The scary thing is, he probably won't get impeached, so it begs the question "What rights do we give up next?" Seriously, how can you sit there and defend someone who swore an OATH to uphold and protect our constitution, then blatantly fails to abide by it at every turn? Do the rest of us Americans a favor, and continue to sit in front of Fox News on election day.
From: brainpus [@theColiseum]
Date: 23-Dec-2005 13:28
Dear Schizo You're talking way over your audience's head. Dear Katy Does your mom know you're on the computer?
Updated: 26-Feb-2008 15:00
| 
