Discussion:
OT: Stupid Politicians
(too old to reply)
h***@webtv.net
2005-07-08 17:34:52 UTC
Permalink
So first thing at work yesterday we get the news of the terrorist
bombing's in London. First let me say our prayers go out to the people
of London. I've had the chance to work with some guys from Scotland Yard
in the past and they're top notch. Here's wishing them godspeed in
catching these vile little shits. So we get a call from our County
Commissioners and they want us to take our canine units to all the major
transit stations and check all the buses & trains for explosives. Well
the first problem with this is none of our dogs are bomb dogs. They say
that's okay, nobody knows that, just take the dogs up & down the
platforms & people will feel better. The real bitch is we should have
dogs trained for this & other such stuff. The County got twenty million
bucks from the feds for "homeland security" but they spent about 200K of
it on pistols & radios & bullet proof vests they were going to buy
anyway and laundered the rest of it into some lame convention center
project. Oh well, if we do get any terrorists here maybe they'll have
some pot on them too & the dogs will hit on that. Now I know there's no
indication of anything happening here in middle America like it has in
London, Madrid & New York, but am I so wrong in thinking money for
homeland security should actually be spent on homeland security ? Then
again I thought the tobacco settlement money would really be spent on
health care for smokers.
bvoiced
2005-07-08 17:52:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@webtv.net
So first thing at work yesterday we get the news of the terrorist
bombing's in London. First let me say our prayers go out to the people
of London. I've had the chance to work with some guys from Scotland Yard
in the past and they're top notch. Here's wishing them godspeed in
catching these vile little shits. So we get a call from our County
Commissioners and they want us to take our canine units to all the major
transit stations and check all the buses & trains for explosives. Well
the first problem with this is none of our dogs are bomb dogs. They say
that's okay, nobody knows that, just take the dogs up & down the
platforms & people will feel better. The real bitch is we should have
dogs trained for this & other such stuff. The County got twenty million
bucks from the feds for "homeland security" but they spent about 200K of
it on pistols & radios & bullet proof vests they were going to buy
anyway and laundered the rest of it into some lame convention center
project. Oh well, if we do get any terrorists here maybe they'll have
some pot on them too & the dogs will hit on that. Now I know there's no
indication of anything happening here in middle America like it has in
London, Madrid & New York, but am I so wrong in thinking money for
homeland security should actually be spent on homeland security ? Then
again I thought the tobacco settlement money would really be spent on
health care for smokers.
Excellent point. The only people you're going to catch is a bunch of
your fellow AGB'ers. At least you'll finally get to meet them. Too
funny. And a little sad. I would love to see a bunch of real bomb
sniffing dogs out there.
tdodge
2005-07-08 17:59:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@webtv.net
but am I so wrong in thinking money for
homeland security should actually be spent on homeland security ? Then
again I thought the tobacco settlement money would really be spent on
health care for smokers.
or that your social security money would be spent on
social security benefits.
jbaxe
2005-07-08 21:29:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
Post by h***@webtv.net
but am I so wrong in thinking money for
homeland security should actually be spent on homeland security ? Then
again I thought the tobacco settlement money would really be spent on
health care for smokers.
or that your social security money would be spent on
social security benefits.
At least the Lotto monies are going for a great education for our children!
Yeah right. Jeff
John Shaughnessy
2005-07-08 21:34:33 UTC
Permalink
LOL! Voting down the lottery here is probably the only time I've ever sided
with the Christian Conservatives.
--
Learning funk bass? visit www.js3jazz.com/store.htm
Conservatives are not necessarily stupid,
but most stupid people are conservatives."
- John Stuart Mill
Post by jbaxe
Post by tdodge
Post by h***@webtv.net
but am I so wrong in thinking money for
homeland security should actually be spent on homeland security ? Then
again I thought the tobacco settlement money would really be spent on
health care for smokers.
or that your social security money would be spent on
social security benefits.
At least the Lotto monies are going for a great education for our children!
Yeah right. Jeff
tdodge
2005-07-08 21:36:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by jbaxe
Post by tdodge
or that your social security money would be spent on
social security benefits.
At least the Lotto monies are going for a great education for our
children! Yeah right. Jeff
or seat belt laws would *only* be enforced in conjunction with
another violation. 'member that one?
now, it's a fund-raiser. Financing by fine.
John Shaughnessy
2005-07-09 07:25:15 UTC
Permalink
Oh, didn't you get that memo? It's an "active" violation in many states
now - maeanig they can stop you just for that. And anything else they find
is fair game too...
--
Learning funk bass? visit www.js3jazz.com/store.htm
Conservatives are not necessarily stupid,
but most stupid people are conservatives."
- John Stuart Mill
Post by tdodge
Post by jbaxe
Post by tdodge
or that your social security money would be spent on
social security benefits.
At least the Lotto monies are going for a great education for our
children! Yeah right. Jeff
or seat belt laws would *only* be enforced in conjunction with
another violation. 'member that one?
now, it's a fund-raiser. Financing by fine.
John Shaughnessy
2005-07-08 17:53:38 UTC
Permalink
Nope, You're dead on. Welcome to the club.
--
Learning funk bass? visit www.js3jazz.com/store.htm
Conservatives are not necessarily stupid,
but most stupid people are conservatives."
- John Stuart Mill
Post by h***@webtv.net
So first thing at work yesterday we get the news of the terrorist
bombing's in London. First let me say our prayers go out to the people
of London. I've had the chance to work with some guys from Scotland Yard
in the past and they're top notch. Here's wishing them godspeed in
catching these vile little shits. So we get a call from our County
Commissioners and they want us to take our canine units to all the major
transit stations and check all the buses & trains for explosives. Well
the first problem with this is none of our dogs are bomb dogs. They say
that's okay, nobody knows that, just take the dogs up & down the
platforms & people will feel better. The real bitch is we should have
dogs trained for this & other such stuff. The County got twenty million
bucks from the feds for "homeland security" but they spent about 200K of
it on pistols & radios & bullet proof vests they were going to buy
anyway and laundered the rest of it into some lame convention center
project. Oh well, if we do get any terrorists here maybe they'll have
some pot on them too & the dogs will hit on that. Now I know there's no
indication of anything happening here in middle America like it has in
London, Madrid & New York, but am I so wrong in thinking money for
homeland security should actually be spent on homeland security ? Then
again I thought the tobacco settlement money would really be spent on
health care for smokers.
gorgon
2005-07-08 18:14:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@webtv.net
So first thing at work yesterday we get the news of the terrorist
bombing's in London. First let me say our prayers go out to the people
of London. I've had the chance to work with some guys from Scotland Yard
in the past and they're top notch. Here's wishing them godspeed in
catching these vile little shits. So we get a call from our County
Commissioners and they want us to take our canine units to all the major
transit stations and check all the buses & trains for explosives. Well
the first problem with this is none of our dogs are bomb dogs. They say
that's okay, nobody knows that, just take the dogs up & down the
platforms & people will feel better. The real bitch is we should have
dogs trained for this & other such stuff. The County got twenty million
bucks from the feds for "homeland security" but they spent about 200K of
it on pistols & radios & bullet proof vests they were going to buy
anyway and laundered the rest of it into some lame convention center
project. Oh well, if we do get any terrorists here maybe they'll have
some pot on them too & the dogs will hit on that. Now I know there's no
indication of anything happening here in middle America like it has in
London, Madrid & New York, but am I so wrong in thinking money for
homeland security should actually be spent on homeland security ? Then
again I thought the tobacco settlement money would really be spent on
health care for smokers.
I work closely enough with law enforcement agencies to have a front
row view of this kind of thing on a regular basis. I have a great
deal of respect for many front line men and women in law enforcement,
but much of what the "brass" does is assinine. The waste of "homeland
security" funds on unrelated projects makes me sick.


gorgon
jeffb
2005-07-08 18:21:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@webtv.net
So first thing at work yesterday we get the news of the terrorist
bombing's in London. First let me say our prayers go out to the people
of London. I've had the chance to work with some guys from Scotland Yard
in the past and they're top notch. Here's wishing them godspeed in
catching these vile little shits. So we get a call from our County
Commissioners and they want us to take our canine units to all the major
transit stations and check all the buses & trains for explosives. Well
the first problem with this is none of our dogs are bomb dogs. They say
that's okay, nobody knows that, just take the dogs up & down the
platforms & people will feel better. The real bitch is we should have
dogs trained for this & other such stuff. The County got twenty million
bucks from the feds for "homeland security" but they spent about 200K of
it on pistols & radios & bullet proof vests they were going to buy
anyway and laundered the rest of it into some lame convention center
project. Oh well, if we do get any terrorists here maybe they'll have
some pot on them too & the dogs will hit on that. Now I know there's no
indication of anything happening here in middle America like it has in
London, Madrid & New York, but am I so wrong in thinking money for
homeland security should actually be spent on homeland security ? Then
again I thought the tobacco settlement money would really be spent on
health care for smokers.
I haven't always agreed with you but I do on all this. I don't want to
FEEL like I'm being protected I want to BE protected. I'm a big tough
guy who can look after himself one on one but this isn't and I need
your services. How are you supposed to do that job when this is what
you're given to work with? Some asshole is sitting in an office using
terms like "risk management" without understand what they mean.

jeffb
mcnewsxp
2005-07-08 19:44:08 UTC
Permalink
anybody got any ideas on how to make it better?

besides kill em all i mean.
tdodge
2005-07-08 20:55:59 UTC
Permalink
you talking about politicians?
if so..(for the US)
1. term limits
2. pay and benefits tied to the fiscal performance
of the legislative body they are a part of. Spend more than
the years income, lose that percentage of pay and benefits.
go 20% over, lose it all.
Post by mcnewsxp
anybody got any ideas on how to make it better?
besides kill em all i mean.
Brian Running
2005-07-08 21:05:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
2. pay and benefits tied to the fiscal performance
of the legislative body they are a part of. Spend more than
the years income, lose that percentage of pay and benefits.
go 20% over, lose it all.
Hoowee, I don't know about that one, T. Odds are a policy like that
would immediately lead to the biggest tax increases in history.
tdodge
2005-07-08 21:34:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
2. pay and benefits tied to the fiscal performance
of the legislative body they are a part of. Spend more than
the years income, lose that percentage of pay and benefits.
go 20% over, lose it all.
Hoowee, I don't know about that one, T. Odds are a policy like that would
immediately lead to the biggest tax increases in history.
mebbe..have to refine it a bit, I guess...constitutional tax limit?
..naaa...won't work, either.
got courts that don't give a damn about that irritating document.
bvoiced
2005-07-09 02:56:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
Post by tdodge
2. pay and benefits tied to the fiscal performance
of the legislative body they are a part of. Spend more than
the years income, lose that percentage of pay and benefits.
go 20% over, lose it all.
Hoowee, I don't know about that one, T. Odds are a policy like that would
immediately lead to the biggest tax increases in history.
mebbe..have to refine it a bit, I guess...constitutional tax limit?
..naaa...won't work, either.
got courts that don't give a damn about that irritating document.
The courts are one third of our constitutional democracy. Legislative,
Judicial, and the Presidency. You knew this, right? If the court sez
NO-NO we have options. If the president sez NO-NO we have options. If
the Legislature sez NO-NO we have options. If a bunch of numb-nuts
citizens say you can't vote for so and so because they have been in
power too long........? I swear to god, what happened to the study of
civics in our public schools.
tdodge
2005-07-09 03:12:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
The courts are one third of our constitutional democracy. Legislative,
Judicial, and the Presidency. You knew this, right? If the court sez
NO-NO we have options. If the president sez NO-NO we have options. If
the Legislature sez NO-NO we have options. If a bunch of numb-nuts
citizens say you can't vote for so and so because they have been in
power too long........? I swear to god, what happened to the study of
civics in our public schools.
legislative, judicial, and executive.
each branch to have a check, but no branch is checking
the judiciary. Congress could and should, but won't. Congress could
actually overturn decisions, but won't. In the term just ended,
the parts of the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments were
nullified by 5 unelected, unaccountable individuals. Ya know who decided
the Supreme Court holds sway over what is constitutional?
/quick quiz.
bvoiced
2005-07-09 03:41:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
The courts are one third of our constitutional democracy. Legislative,
Judicial, and the Presidency. You knew this, right? If the court sez
NO-NO we have options. If the president sez NO-NO we have options. If
the Legislature sez NO-NO we have options. If a bunch of numb-nuts
citizens say you can't vote for so and so because they have been in
power too long........? I swear to god, what happened to the study of
civics in our public schools.
legislative, judicial, and executive.
each branch to have a check, but no branch is checking
the judiciary. Congress could and should, but won't. Congress could
actually overturn decisions, but won't.
Uh, that would be Congress and the majority of states.


In the term just ended,
Post by tdodge
the parts of the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments were
nullified by 5 unelected, unaccountable individuals.
That's what happends when folks like Reagan, Nixon, and Bush appoint
justices.

Ya know who decided
Post by tdodge
the Supreme Court holds sway over what is constitutional?
Earl Warren?
Post by tdodge
/quick quiz.
tdodge
2005-07-09 04:08:33 UTC
Permalink
"bvoiced" <***@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message news:bvoiced-***@newssvr14->> legislative, judicial, and
executive.
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
each branch to have a check, but no branch is checking
the judiciary. Congress could and should, but won't. Congress could
actually overturn decisions, but won't.
Uh, that would be Congress and the majority of states.
only required to amend.
also, amendments can be added/deleted in a constitutional convention.
a convention could nullify the entire document, and write a new one.
Control of the courts is the province of Congress.
Post by bvoiced
In the term just ended,
Post by tdodge
the parts of the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments were
nullified by 5 unelected, unaccountable individuals.
That's what happends when folks like Reagan, Nixon, and Bush appoint
justices.
Judgues supporting those decisions should be impeached by Congress,
particularly the ones concerning the 5th and 14th. The decisions are in
direct
conflict with the constitution, but because no one checks the courts, they
override the document.
Their oath is to uphold the US Constitution. The 14th amendment was
disregarded
in favor of "consulting international law" (opinion written by O'Conner).
An amendment can be nullified only by another amendment, not by law or
judicial decision. That section of the Constitution has also been
disregarded.
Post by bvoiced
Ya know who decided
Post by tdodge
the Supreme Court holds sway over what is constitutional?
Earl Warren?
/buzzer sound
wrong.
SCOTUS decided arbitrarily that they would decide what is
constitutional. The case was Marbury vs Madison.
The decision was never called into question by congress.
bvoiced
2005-07-09 04:23:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
executive.
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
each branch to have a check, but no branch is checking
the judiciary. Congress could and should, but won't. Congress could
actually overturn decisions, but won't.
Uh, that would be Congress and the majority of states.
only required to amend.
also, amendments can be added/deleted in a constitutional convention.
Duh!
Post by tdodge
a convention could nullify the entire document, and write a new one.
Control of the courts is the province of Congress.
Post by bvoiced
In the term just ended,
Post by tdodge
the parts of the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments were
nullified by 5 unelected, unaccountable individuals.
That's what happends when folks like Reagan, Nixon, and Bush appoint
justices.
Judgues supporting those decisions should be impeached by Congress,
particularly the ones concerning the 5th and 14th.
Well they didn't.

The decisions are in
Post by tdodge
direct
conflict with the constitution, but because no one checks the courts, they
override the document.
Their oath is to uphold the US Constitution. The 14th amendment was
disregarded
in favor of "consulting international law" (opinion written by O'Conner).
An amendment can be nullified only by another amendment, not by law or
judicial decision. That section of the Constitution has also been
disregarded.
Please explain what the fuck you're talking about. Thank you.
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
Ya know who decided
Post by tdodge
the Supreme Court holds sway over what is constitutional?
Earl Warren?
/buzzer sound
wrong.
SCOTUS decided arbitrarily that they would decide what is
constitutional. The case was Marbury vs Madison.
The decision was never called into question by congress.
Judicial activists everywhere. I'll just vote for my best choice.
OOOPs. Here in California (state elections) I can't. Thank you very
much, Republicans. Although they seem to be rethinking term limits
based on whatever their current political positian. Hmmm! Goes up,
goes down.

Please explain to all "Marbury vs. Madison". And while you're at it
"Jim Crow". Oh, never mind. That was dumped.
tdodge
2005-07-09 04:50:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by tdodge
Judgues supporting those decisions should be impeached by Congress,
particularly the ones concerning the 5th and 14th.
Well they didn't.
no shit, and it's their job
Post by bvoiced
The decisions are in
Post by tdodge
direct
conflict with the constitution, but because no one checks the courts, they
override the document.
Their oath is to uphold the US Constitution. The 14th amendment was
disregarded
in favor of "consulting international law" (opinion written by O'Conner).
An amendment can be nullified only by another amendment, not by law or
judicial decision. That section of the Constitution has also been
disregarded.
Please explain what the fuck you're talking about. Thank you.
easier for you to read the Constitution rather than have me explain it.
It's not complicated, or very long. There is a part about "corruption of
the blood"
that could have you scratching your head, though. I think it's in the
section
dealing with treason.
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by tdodge
Ya know who decided
Post by tdodge
the Supreme Court holds sway over what is constitutional?
Earl Warren?
/buzzer sound
wrong.
SCOTUS decided arbitrarily that they would decide what is
constitutional. The case was Marbury vs Madison.
The decision was never called into question by congress.
Judicial activists everywhere. I'll just vote for my best choice.
OOOPs. Here in California (state elections) I can't.
what..no write ins in CA? serious question..can't you write-in?
Thank you very
Post by bvoiced
much, Republicans. Although they seem to be rethinking term limits
based on whatever their current political positian. Hmmm! Goes up,
goes down.
I think term limits are a good idea. The President was term-limited
in my lifetime...FDR was the last non term-limited President, I think.
/I'm a little fuzzy on that, but it hasn't been too long.
Same arguments hold for Senators and Representatives. When they
have nothing to lose, it's easier to vote conscience instead of party line,
just so you can keep you job.
Post by bvoiced
Please explain to all "Marbury vs. Madison".
One of the most famous cases in American history..
brought a significant shift in the checks and balances.
SCOTUS appropriated power that was not granted to it.
use google. It's gonna be a long read, though...the decision is
still a source of heated discussion.
bvoiced
2005-07-09 19:36:46 UTC
Permalink
Uh oh. My fault. Why am I letting myself get hooked into this topic.
I was just commenting on term limits. Won't happen again. I DO think
Earl Warren was a true American hero, though. Ha, gotta run.
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by tdodge
Judgues supporting those decisions should be impeached by Congress,
particularly the ones concerning the 5th and 14th.
Well they didn't.
no shit, and it's their job
Post by bvoiced
The decisions are in
Post by tdodge
direct
conflict with the constitution, but because no one checks the courts, they
override the document.
Their oath is to uphold the US Constitution. The 14th amendment was
disregarded
in favor of "consulting international law" (opinion written by O'Conner).
An amendment can be nullified only by another amendment, not by law or
judicial decision. That section of the Constitution has also been
disregarded.
Please explain what the fuck you're talking about. Thank you.
easier for you to read the Constitution rather than have me explain it.
It's not complicated, or very long. There is a part about "corruption of
the blood"
that could have you scratching your head, though. I think it's in the
section
dealing with treason.
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by tdodge
Ya know who decided
Post by tdodge
the Supreme Court holds sway over what is constitutional?
Earl Warren?
/buzzer sound
wrong.
SCOTUS decided arbitrarily that they would decide what is
constitutional. The case was Marbury vs Madison.
The decision was never called into question by congress.
Judicial activists everywhere. I'll just vote for my best choice.
OOOPs. Here in California (state elections) I can't.
what..no write ins in CA? serious question..can't you write-in?
Thank you very
Post by bvoiced
much, Republicans. Although they seem to be rethinking term limits
based on whatever their current political positian. Hmmm! Goes up,
goes down.
I think term limits are a good idea. The President was term-limited
in my lifetime...FDR was the last non term-limited President, I think.
/I'm a little fuzzy on that, but it hasn't been too long.
Same arguments hold for Senators and Representatives. When they
have nothing to lose, it's easier to vote conscience instead of party line,
just so you can keep you job.
Post by bvoiced
Please explain to all "Marbury vs. Madison".
One of the most famous cases in American history..
brought a significant shift in the checks and balances.
SCOTUS appropriated power that was not granted to it.
use google. It's gonna be a long read, though...the decision is
still a source of heated discussion.
svtbass
2005-07-10 02:08:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
Uh oh. My fault. Why am I letting myself get hooked into this topic.
yeah i am hooked in here too.. it just so much damn fun ............haha
svtbass
2005-07-09 14:33:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
That's what happends when folks like Reagan, Nixon, and Bush appoint
justices.
Judgues supporting those decisions should be impeached by Congress,
particularly the ones concerning the 5th and 14th. The decisions are in
direct
conflict with the constitution, but because no one checks the courts, they
override the document.
Their oath is to uphold the US Constitution.
Many decisions made by and implemented by bush are in direct conflict with
the constitution. including most of the patriot act or maybe all of it. We
have congess people saying that the constitution is an Outdated document.We
have a major problem in this country and that is almost all citizens are
asleep at the wheel... And congress and senate are in the pocket of the
highest bidder, supremem justices are old and seem to owe someone a favor
and and then they quit... leaving a mess for generations to sort out.. what
about that 5/4 ruling of iminent domain recently saying that the Gov has the
right to take your Private poperty to a land deveoper that can pay higher
taxes... THAT IS IN DIRECT VIOLATION of the constitution... That is only one
instance. People say that it will not be misused.. Fuckin bullshit ... Did
you know that there are over 10,000 homes in the USA that have been effected
by that unconstitutional ruling... there are a few hundered homes not far
from where i live in Texas right now that are being taken fom the owners to
build a Baseball stadium that will be owned by private owners. THAT IS IN
DIRECT VIOLATION of the constitution.
I was driving home from a gig a few months back,, I cop pulled me over,
searched me ,ashed if he could search my car and I said no- he did it anyway
against my will,didnt find anything as i knew, made me do a sobriety test( i
dont drink on gigs) , said i could go after about 45 minutes of this
bullshit, and when i got home the two fresh $100 bills that i got piad with
were missing from my wallet. The only conclusion is that the cop took them
when he was going through my stuff completetly. The whole fucking system is
out of line.
b***@iwaynet.net
2005-07-10 12:54:13 UTC
Permalink
You are kidding, right?
Hey, maybe Germany, maybe Russia, maybe even Mexico, but everybody
I've ever said anything too has always assured me "It can't happen
here!"

Benj
pd
2005-07-09 13:40:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
The courts are one third of our constitutional democracy. Legislative,
Judicial, and the Presidency. You knew this, right? If the court sez
NO-NO we have options. If the president sez NO-NO we have options. If
the Legislature sez NO-NO we have options. If a bunch of numb-nuts
citizens say you can't vote for so and so because they have been in
power too long........? I swear to god, what happened to the study of
civics in our public schools.
legislative, judicial, and executive.
each branch to have a check, but no branch is checking
the judiciary. Congress could and should, but won't. Congress could
actually overturn decisions, but won't.
Uh, that would be Congress and the majority of states.
In the term just ended,
Post by tdodge
the parts of the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments were
nullified by 5 unelected, unaccountable individuals.
That's what happends when folks like Reagan, Nixon, and Bush appoint
justices.
You are kidding right? the decision to allow a town to take over a
private person's land if the "tax revenue" has greater potential was
decided by the left leaning members of the supreme court.
Post by bvoiced
Ya know who decided
Post by tdodge
the Supreme Court holds sway over what is constitutional?
Earl Warren?
Post by tdodge
/quick quiz.
bugeye
2005-07-09 14:00:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
The courts are one third of our constitutional democracy. Legislative,
Judicial, and the Presidency. You knew this, right? If the court sez
NO-NO we have options. If the president sez NO-NO we have options. If
the Legislature sez NO-NO we have options. If a bunch of numb-nuts
citizens say you can't vote for so and so because they have been in
power too long........? I swear to god, what happened to the study of
civics in our public schools.
legislative, judicial, and executive.
each branch to have a check, but no branch is checking
the judiciary. Congress could and should, but won't. Congress could
actually overturn decisions, but won't.
Uh, that would be Congress and the majority of states.
In the term just ended,
Post by tdodge
the parts of the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments were
nullified by 5 unelected, unaccountable individuals.
That's what happends when folks like Reagan, Nixon, and Bush appoint
justices.
You are kidding right? the decision to allow a town to take over a private
person's land if the "tax revenue" has greater potential was decided by
the left leaning members of the supreme court.
It sounds like you are kidding yourself. The majority of those justices
concurring with this decision were appointed by Republican presidents.
Check it for yourself.

That decision was consistent with positions taken by the Republican Party
over many years. Let the local governments decide, right? The Federal
government and US Supreme Court shouldn't interfere, right? This decision
by the Supreme Court represented a literal interpretation of the
Constitution (another Republican mantra...Remember
"no-Constitutional-right-to-privacy" Bork?), and amounted to the witholding
of any Federal interference in local decisions. And this is to be blamed on
"left-leaning" philosophy!? That is really ironic.
Post by bvoiced
Ya know who decided
Post by tdodge
the Supreme Court holds sway over what is constitutional?
Earl Warren?
Post by tdodge
/quick quiz.
pd
2005-07-09 14:08:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by bugeye
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
The courts are one third of our constitutional democracy. Legislative,
Judicial, and the Presidency. You knew this, right? If the court sez
NO-NO we have options. If the president sez NO-NO we have options. If
the Legislature sez NO-NO we have options. If a bunch of numb-nuts
citizens say you can't vote for so and so because they have been in
power too long........? I swear to god, what happened to the study of
civics in our public schools.
legislative, judicial, and executive.
each branch to have a check, but no branch is checking
the judiciary. Congress could and should, but won't. Congress could
actually overturn decisions, but won't.
Uh, that would be Congress and the majority of states.
In the term just ended,
Post by tdodge
the parts of the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments were
nullified by 5 unelected, unaccountable individuals.
That's what happends when folks like Reagan, Nixon, and Bush appoint
justices.
You are kidding right? the decision to allow a town to take over a private
person's land if the "tax revenue" has greater potential was decided by
the left leaning members of the supreme court.
It sounds like you are kidding yourself. The majority of those justices
concurring with this decision were appointed by Republican presidents.
Check it for yourself.
That may be true, but that doesn't mean that they themselves weren't
left leaning.

Those voting FOR this:

Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority.

He was joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader
Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.

Breyer: appointed by Clinton
Ginsberg: appointed by Clinton
Kennedy: Reagan
Souter: Bush

Those who voted AGAINST it:

"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party,
but the fallout from this decision will not be random," O'Connor wrote.
"The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate
influence and power in the political process, including large
corporations and development firms."

She was joined in her opinion by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, as
well as Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

Rehnquist: Nixon
O'Connor: Reagan
Thomas: Bush
Scalia: Reagan
bugeye
2005-07-09 14:28:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by bugeye
Post by pd
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
The courts are one third of our constitutional democracy.
Legislative,
Judicial, and the Presidency. You knew this, right? If the court sez
NO-NO we have options. If the president sez NO-NO we have options.
If
the Legislature sez NO-NO we have options. If a bunch of numb-nuts
citizens say you can't vote for so and so because they have been in
power too long........? I swear to god, what happened to the study of
civics in our public schools.
legislative, judicial, and executive.
each branch to have a check, but no branch is checking
the judiciary. Congress could and should, but won't. Congress could
actually overturn decisions, but won't.
Uh, that would be Congress and the majority of states.
In the term just ended,
Post by tdodge
the parts of the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments were
nullified by 5 unelected, unaccountable individuals.
That's what happends when folks like Reagan, Nixon, and Bush appoint
justices.
You are kidding right? the decision to allow a town to take over a
private person's land if the "tax revenue" has greater potential was
decided by the left leaning members of the supreme court.
It sounds like you are kidding yourself. The majority of those justices
concurring with this decision were appointed by Republican presidents.
Check it for yourself.
That may be true, but that doesn't mean that they themselves weren't left
leaning.
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority.
Who appointed Stevens?

Um...I could be wrong......could it be...........

....................a REPUBLICAN???????
He was joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader
Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.
Breyer: appointed by Clinton
Ginsberg: appointed by Clinton
Kennedy: Reagan
Souter: Bush
That would make 3 of the 5 justices who were appointed by Republican
presidents.
"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party,
but the fallout from this decision will not be random," O'Connor wrote.
"The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate
influence and power in the political process, including large corporations
and development firms."
So, now, we're accusing "left-leaning" officials of favoring the wealthy?
The irony continues.

I happen to love the fact that O'Connor concluded her dissenting opinion
with the important point that you quote.
She was joined in her opinion by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, as
well as Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
Rehnquist: Nixon
O'Connor: Reagan
Thomas: Bush
Scalia: Reagan
svtbass
2005-07-09 15:03:15 UTC
Permalink
who really cares who the fuck appointed them... they are obviosly not doing
for the good of the people... they are doing for the good of big bizz. its
tea party time
Post by bugeye
Post by bugeye
Post by pd
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
The courts are one third of our constitutional democracy.
Legislative,
Judicial, and the Presidency. You knew this, right? If the court sez
NO-NO we have options. If the president sez NO-NO we have options.
If
the Legislature sez NO-NO we have options. If a bunch of numb-nuts
citizens say you can't vote for so and so because they have been in
power too long........? I swear to god, what happened to the study of
civics in our public schools.
legislative, judicial, and executive.
each branch to have a check, but no branch is checking
the judiciary. Congress could and should, but won't. Congress could
actually overturn decisions, but won't.
Uh, that would be Congress and the majority of states.
In the term just ended,
Post by tdodge
the parts of the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments were
nullified by 5 unelected, unaccountable individuals.
That's what happends when folks like Reagan, Nixon, and Bush appoint
justices.
You are kidding right? the decision to allow a town to take over a
private person's land if the "tax revenue" has greater potential was
decided by the left leaning members of the supreme court.
It sounds like you are kidding yourself. The majority of those justices
concurring with this decision were appointed by Republican presidents.
Check it for yourself.
That may be true, but that doesn't mean that they themselves weren't left
leaning.
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority.
Who appointed Stevens?
Um...I could be wrong......could it be...........
....................a REPUBLICAN???????
He was joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader
Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.
Breyer: appointed by Clinton
Ginsberg: appointed by Clinton
Kennedy: Reagan
Souter: Bush
That would make 3 of the 5 justices who were appointed by Republican
presidents.
"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party,
but the fallout from this decision will not be random," O'Connor wrote.
"The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate
influence and power in the political process, including large
corporations and development firms."
So, now, we're accusing "left-leaning" officials of favoring the wealthy?
The irony continues.
I happen to love the fact that O'Connor concluded her dissenting opinion
with the important point that you quote.
She was joined in her opinion by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, as
well as Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
Rehnquist: Nixon
O'Connor: Reagan
Thomas: Bush
Scalia: Reagan
pd
2005-07-09 15:15:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by svtbass
who really cares who the fuck appointed them... they are obviosly not doing
for the good of the people... they are doing for the good of big bizz. its
tea party time
And b/c they can get the tax revenue, they are doing it for Gub'ment.
Post by svtbass
Post by bugeye
Post by bugeye
Post by pd
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
The courts are one third of our constitutional democracy.
Legislative,
Judicial, and the Presidency. You knew this, right? If the court sez
NO-NO we have options. If the president sez NO-NO we have options.
If
the Legislature sez NO-NO we have options. If a bunch of numb-nuts
citizens say you can't vote for so and so because they have been in
power too long........? I swear to god, what happened to the study of
civics in our public schools.
legislative, judicial, and executive.
each branch to have a check, but no branch is checking
the judiciary. Congress could and should, but won't. Congress could
actually overturn decisions, but won't.
Uh, that would be Congress and the majority of states.
In the term just ended,
Post by tdodge
the parts of the first, fifth and fourteenth amendments were
nullified by 5 unelected, unaccountable individuals.
That's what happends when folks like Reagan, Nixon, and Bush appoint
justices.
You are kidding right? the decision to allow a town to take over a
private person's land if the "tax revenue" has greater potential was
decided by the left leaning members of the supreme court.
It sounds like you are kidding yourself. The majority of those justices
concurring with this decision were appointed by Republican presidents.
Check it for yourself.
That may be true, but that doesn't mean that they themselves weren't left
leaning.
Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the majority.
Who appointed Stevens?
Um...I could be wrong......could it be...........
....................a REPUBLICAN???????
He was joined by Justice Anthony Kennedy, David H. Souter, Ruth Bader
Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer.
Breyer: appointed by Clinton
Ginsberg: appointed by Clinton
Kennedy: Reagan
Souter: Bush
That would make 3 of the 5 justices who were appointed by Republican
presidents.
"Any property may now be taken for the benefit of another private party,
but the fallout from this decision will not be random," O'Connor wrote.
"The beneficiaries are likely to be those citizens with disproportionate
influence and power in the political process, including large
corporations and development firms."
So, now, we're accusing "left-leaning" officials of favoring the wealthy?
The irony continues.
I happen to love the fact that O'Connor concluded her dissenting opinion
with the important point that you quote.
She was joined in her opinion by Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist, as
well as Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.
Rehnquist: Nixon
O'Connor: Reagan
Thomas: Bush
Scalia: Reagan
b***@iwaynet.net
2005-07-10 13:03:13 UTC
Permalink
You got it svtbass!

The ploy is that those pulling strings from behind the scenes try to
make it out to be "left vs right", "R vs D", "Liberal vs Conservative",
"up vs down", you name it!

So then while all the stupid "sheeple" are out there arguing with each
other, and chasing their own tails, they slowly move in and grab
everything.

The point is that so long as everyone keeps judging people by LABELS
rather than ACTIONS you might as well get ready to put your serf outfit
on, grab a hoe and hit the fields.

Benj
svtbass
2005-07-10 15:43:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@iwaynet.net
You got it svtbass!
geeeez. I don't know if I got it... but certain things seem to be that
way...to me at least... I like the way you say sheeple.. I am familiar with
that term....thanks
i seems to me that whoever THEY are... well They like to keep the masses
scared, and snapping at each others throats constantly.. the boogie man is
going to get you shit... then no one notices or has the idea to want to find
out why the Supreme Court would make a clear un-constitutional rulling like
they did last week about iminent domain...a complete twist on iminent
domain... but it is happening in Houston, a familt business of 50 years,,,,
swept up by the city to give to a private land developer to build condos..
in arlington TX, houses scooped up to make a new baseball stadium for
private owners,,, in Conneticut to make condos... Colorado has a few hundred
homes being swept up by gov to be given away...
In Short Let me tell you how it worked in Connecticut .. A few years ago
the private land developer wanted to build a shopping mall and condos on
water front property.. The people did not want to sell..Even at market
prices.. The Developer had the property condemed.. That drove the land value
with their houses way down.. go figure.. so now perfectly OK property is
condemed land... property value plumets... a few years go by still the
people do not want to sell.. some houses have been in families for decades
and one older couple lived there forabout 60 years...
so then the supreme court finaly made their decision... turns out at this
time that not only do the people loose their homes and property.. but now
since they were on condemed land their propery that they could have gotten
tons of money for is near worthless.. so instead of getting lets say 300,00
for their home they get 60,000... to add insult to injury the courts are in
session with the developer to actualy charge to home owners back rent for
living on the condemed property.. that would be about 1500 a month for a few
years... and to top it off they are still liable for their full value
mortgage payments.....Does that sound like USA and a sound constitution...
but that is what these nutty ass blue haired Jugeds have done... Rigt OR
left.. Rep or Dem.. its wrong.. and it is happening all over the country..
There are about 10,000 homes at this time that may get scooped up by land
developers.....look out if you live on the water or near an inland
tributary...
like i said in an earlier post the whole fuckin system is out of line.
bugeye
2005-07-10 17:07:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by svtbass
Post by b***@iwaynet.net
You got it svtbass!
geeeez. I don't know if I got it... but certain things seem to be that
way...to me at least... I like the way you say sheeple.. I am familiar
with that term....thanks
i seems to me that whoever THEY are... well They like to keep the masses
scared, and snapping at each others throats constantly.. the boogie man is
going to get you shit... then no one notices or has the idea to want to
find out why the Supreme Court would make a clear un-constitutional
rulling like they did last week about iminent domain...a complete twist on
iminent domain... but it is happening in Houston, a familt business of 50
years,,,, swept up by the city to give to a private land developer to
build condos.. in arlington TX, houses scooped up to make a new baseball
stadium for private owners,,, in Conneticut to make condos... Colorado has
a few hundred homes being swept up by gov to be given away...
In Short Let me tell you how it worked in Connecticut .. A few years ago
the private land developer wanted to build a shopping mall and condos on
water front property.. The people did not want to sell..Even at market
prices.. The Developer had the property condemed.. That drove the land
value with their houses way down.. go figure.. so now perfectly OK
property is condemed land... property value plumets... a few years go by
still the people do not want to sell.. some houses have been in families
for decades and one older couple lived there forabout 60 years...
so then the supreme court finaly made their decision... turns out at this
time that not only do the people loose their homes and property.. but now
since they were on condemed land their propery that they could have gotten
tons of money for is near worthless.. so instead of getting lets say
300,00 for their home they get 60,000... to add insult to injury the
courts are in session with the developer to actualy charge to home owners
back rent for living on the condemed property.. that would be about 1500 a
month for a few years... and to top it off they are still liable for their
full value mortgage payments.....Does that sound like USA and a sound
constitution... but that is what these nutty ass blue haired Jugeds have
done... Rigt OR left.. Rep or Dem.. its wrong.. and it is happening all
over the country.. There are about 10,000 homes at this time that may get
scooped up by land developers.....look out if you live on the water or
near an inland tributary...
like i said in an earlier post the whole fuckin system is out of line.
And yet there are those who you'd *think* would give more than a rat's
backend, but.....
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/4588.html
pd
2005-07-09 15:12:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by bugeye
So, now, we're accusing "left-leaning" officials of favoring the wealthy?
The irony continues.
No. The left-leaning favors taking over land, so as to collect more tax
revenue, in order to expand big gub'ment.

That is what the left is about. Expanding thepower of gub'ment under the
guise that they want to "help" the little guy.
bugeye
2005-07-09 15:52:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by pd
Post by bugeye
So, now, we're accusing "left-leaning" officials of favoring the wealthy?
The irony continues.
No. The left-leaning favors taking over land, so as to collect more tax
revenue, in order to expand big gub'ment.
That is what the left is about. Expanding thepower of gub'ment under the
guise that they want to "help" the little guy.
Damn! That's reading quite a bit into the Supreme Court decision that's not
there at all. The court made no decision about how big or small the
government should be. What the court decided is that the Consititution did
not prevent the local government from deciding the matter for themselves,
given that eminent domain is permitted in the Constitution, and that there
are no limits spelled out in the Constitution that would invalidate this
'tax revenue' outcome.

Perhaps your criticism can validly be directed at the local government in
this case, but the Supreme Court decision is actually quite faithful to the
same principles that so-called conservatives (Republicans?) have been
promoting for years (but only when it suits them, it would appear). When
those same principles appear to lead to an unfortunate decision such as this
one, now it's the "Lefties" that should be blamed. Yeah right. To rule
against the local government in this case, the Supreme Court would have had
to take an "activist" position. But it has been "activist" judges that the
right-wing has been so shrill about in recent years. It's clear that the
right wing doesn't even know where their own logic leads.
tdodge
2005-07-09 16:12:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by bugeye
given that eminent domain is permitted in the Constitution, and that there
are no limits spelled out in the Constitution that would invalidate this
'tax revenue' outcome.
there is a specific limit in the 5th amendment:
"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just
compensation"
"public benefit" was substituted for "public use".
A hotel is not public use.
Now that both sides are pissed at the courts, maybe some congressmen will
have
the balls to do something.
yeah, in my dreams. I contacted mine, representatives and senators.
not like it'll do any good here..my senators are Schumer and Clinton.
bugeye
2005-07-09 16:26:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
Post by bugeye
given that eminent domain is permitted in the Constitution, and that
there are no limits spelled out in the Constitution that would invalidate
this 'tax revenue' outcome.
"nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just
compensation"
"public benefit" was substituted for "public use".
A hotel is not public use.
They could find no wording in the Constitution that would prohibit the local
government from defing 'tax revenue' as public use.
Post by tdodge
Now that both sides are pissed at the courts, maybe some congressmen will
have
the balls to do something.
yeah, in my dreams. I contacted mine, representatives and senators.
not like it'll do any good here..my senators are Schumer and Clinton.
Yep. Mine too. Let's see if they take the Conservative position that the
Supreme Court should avoid "activism" and therefore should avoid reversing
this unfortunate local decision (which also favors the wealthy, as O'Connor
pointed out).
tdodge
2005-07-09 17:37:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by bugeye
They could find no wording in the Constitution that would prohibit the
local government from defing 'tax revenue' as public use.
must be something in the water in DC...makes people lose command
of the english language.
One wasn't even sure of the definition of the word "it".
bugeye
2005-07-10 18:54:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by pd
Post by bugeye
So, now, we're accusing "left-leaning" officials of favoring the wealthy?
The irony continues.
No. The left-leaning favors taking over land, so as to collect more tax
revenue, in order to expand big gub'ment.
That is what the left is about. Expanding thepower of gub'ment under the
guise that they want to "help" the little guy.
I know of a Little Guy who helped himself to some private property a few
years ago:
http://www.mollyivins.com/showMisc.asp?FileName=970509_f1.htm
svtbass
2005-07-10 19:43:29 UTC
Permalink
good research.. well they are doing it again... boy are the tax payer up for
some awakening when all is revealed about the new stadium...
they actuall said on the news that by having these stadiums it will put the
dallas/fw on the same playing field as a new york city or a london....
and the fuckin dumb asses believed that.... i am from NYC... arlington,tx is
no NYC or even an LA for that matter... maybe boise,, or omaha... but not
NYC.... jerry jones want a new stadium so he is taking land from folks that
have been there for decades.. families, homes, neighborhoods.. gone.. the
tax payer foots the bill and has to pay a stadium tax on all car
rentals,hotel stays etc.. and jerry jackass gets a new stadium for his
looser team.. so a few bone heads can knock back a brew and eat a dog and
have excuses why there team lost again....
its not who ya know.. its who ya blow.. and jerry must have seen blowing the
right people..
Post by bugeye
Post by pd
Post by bugeye
So, now, we're accusing "left-leaning" officials of favoring the
wealthy? The irony continues.
No. The left-leaning favors taking over land, so as to collect more tax
revenue, in order to expand big gub'ment.
That is what the left is about. Expanding thepower of gub'ment under the
guise that they want to "help" the little guy.
I know of a Little Guy who helped himself to some private property a few
http://www.mollyivins.com/showMisc.asp?FileName=970509_f1.htm
svtbass
2005-07-08 23:10:41 UTC
Permalink
I don't want anyone to protect me.. I prefer to do it myself. be smart be
aware.. and when you time comes there is nothing you can do about it...
times up...
Term limits is a good idea.. One six year term for president. No re
elections... that re election crap fucks everything up. You get one chance
to do it right. if you fuck up your gone after 6 years.. If you do good you
get a place in history. And if you r are that good and at the top of the
proverbial game by getting to the head of the class as in being the POTUS
(the one not included), well then you ought to be good enough and smart
enough to levitate. so you better not fuck up.. or your fired and the whole
crew that came in with you are fired... lets get some acountabilty
here...stop passing the buck.. that is all you here.. and we let them all
get away with it.
As far as terrorist. I don't believe all the shit we hear on radio or TV..
the news is like a moving national enquirer headline the past few years..
too much double speak and seems Orwellian.. 50% of the shit you hear is
bullshit in my opinion.. read more.. read even stuff that you don't
necessarily agree with, that is the only way to become more rounded and
knowledgeable and yoda like IMHO>
after all we may not all like playing a polka but it is good to know just
incase you get that gig call and you can make $200.. well rounded news is
important too.. and I don't mean the alphabet channels.
I am not saying that if they .. whoever they are, were found to have done a
terrorist act ... that we should not wipe them out... but we should wipe
them out completely.. not bit by bit... but there is so much name calling on
both sides of the aisle, and frankly i am quite tired of it... first cloe
the borders... stop the BS patiot act that makes you and me a suspect... it
is all a smokescreen, from what i have no idea... but it just seems that all
the cards are not on the table..IMHO
Post by tdodge
you talking about politicians?
if so..(for the US)
1. term limits
2. pay and benefits tied to the fiscal performance
of the legislative body they are a part of. Spend more than
the years income, lose that percentage of pay and benefits.
go 20% over, lose it all.
Post by mcnewsxp
anybody got any ideas on how to make it better?
besides kill em all i mean.
tdodge
2005-07-08 23:49:21 UTC
Permalink
50% of the shit you hear is bullshit in my opinion..
pretty generous to set it at 50.
I paid attention one night..in an hour, there
was less than 90 secs of actual news.
svtbass
2005-07-09 01:25:56 UTC
Permalink
I was trying to placate everyone.. so I guess 50% of everything I say is
bullshit.. hahaha
Post by tdodge
50% of the shit you hear is bullshit in my opinion..
pretty generous to set it at 50.
I paid attention one night..in an hour, there
was less than 90 secs of actual news.
bvoiced
2005-07-09 03:36:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by svtbass
I don't want anyone to protect me.. I prefer to do it myself. be smart be
aware.. and when you time comes there is nothing you can do about it...
times up...
Term limits is a good idea.. One six year term for president. No re
elections... that re election crap fucks everything up. You get one chance
to do it right. if you fuck up your gone after 6 years..
Hey! How about we compromise and just say vote the guy/gal out if you
don't like them. What? Did you stay up all night and done thunk this
stuff up all by yourself. You're quite the philosopher. But please
don't codify your dream laden sand lot Reader's Digest philosophy into
MY country's laws. Six years? Where'd you get that.? After some kind
of 3AM fart under your covers? Just allow me to vote for whomever I god
damned well please. If you don't like it, poop your bed. What are you
you? Some kind of "New AGE Master" ready to give us the wisdom. Just
listen to yourself.



If you do good you
Post by svtbass
get a place in history. And if you r are that good and at the top of the
proverbial game by getting to the head of the class as in being the POTUS
(the one not included), well then you ought to be good enough and smart
enough to levitate. so you better not fuck up.. or your fired and the whole
crew that came in with you are fired... lets get some acountabilty
here...stop passing the buck.. that is all you here.. and we let them all
get away with it.
As far as terrorist. I don't believe all the shit we hear on radio or TV..
the news is like a moving national enquirer headline the past few years..
too much double speak and seems Orwellian.. 50% of the shit you hear is
bullshit in my opinion.. read more.. read even stuff that you don't
necessarily agree with, that is the only way to become more rounded and
knowledgeable and yoda like IMHO>
after all we may not all like playing a polka but it is good to know just
incase you get that gig call and you can make $200.. well rounded news is
important too.. and I don't mean the alphabet channels.
I am not saying that if they .. whoever they are, were found to have done a
terrorist act ... that we should not wipe them out... but we should wipe
them out completely.. not bit by bit... but there is so much name calling on
both sides of the aisle, and frankly i am quite tired of it... first cloe
the borders... stop the BS patiot act that makes you and me a suspect... it
is all a smokescreen, from what i have no idea... but it just seems that all
the cards are not on the table..IMHO
Post by tdodge
you talking about politicians?
if so..(for the US)
1. term limits
2. pay and benefits tied to the fiscal performance
of the legislative body they are a part of. Spend more than
the years income, lose that percentage of pay and benefits.
go 20% over, lose it all.
Post by mcnewsxp
anybody got any ideas on how to make it better?
besides kill em all i mean.
svtbass
2005-07-09 14:41:14 UTC
Permalink
Bvoiced . now you are OT.. stick to the issuse instead of attacking
another.. or I will have to unleash the power of my Yoda force on you.
Well it seems none of them can get anything done in 4 years.. They just get
warmed up and try learn how to work the phone in the oval office,, then they
get a little done right before they have to leave office.. or get re
elected.. so one 6 year term they get warmed up and maybe get someting done
too. so what is your problem with ONE 6 year term. or do you prefer to have
a monarchy that goes on and on and on..
Post by bvoiced
Post by svtbass
I don't want anyone to protect me.. I prefer to do it myself. be smart be
aware.. and when you time comes there is nothing you can do about it...
times up...
Term limits is a good idea.. One six year term for president. No re
elections... that re election crap fucks everything up. You get one chance
to do it right. if you fuck up your gone after 6 years..
Hey! How about we compromise and just say vote the guy/gal out if you
don't like them. What? Did you stay up all night and done thunk this
stuff up all by yourself. You're quite the philosopher. But please
don't codify your dream laden sand lot Reader's Digest philosophy into
MY country's laws. Six years? Where'd you get that.? After some kind
of 3AM fart under your covers? Just allow me to vote for whomever I god
damned well please. If you don't like it, poop your bed. What are you
you? Some kind of "New AGE Master" ready to give us the wisdom. Just
listen to yourself.
If you do good you
Post by svtbass
get a place in history. And if you r are that good and at the top of the
proverbial game by getting to the head of the class as in being the POTUS
(the one not included), well then you ought to be good enough and smart
enough to levitate. so you better not fuck up.. or your fired and the whole
crew that came in with you are fired... lets get some acountabilty
here...stop passing the buck.. that is all you here.. and we let them all
get away with it.
As far as terrorist. I don't believe all the shit we hear on radio or TV..
the news is like a moving national enquirer headline the past few years..
too much double speak and seems Orwellian.. 50% of the shit you hear is
bullshit in my opinion.. read more.. read even stuff that you don't
necessarily agree with, that is the only way to become more rounded and
knowledgeable and yoda like IMHO>
after all we may not all like playing a polka but it is good to know just
incase you get that gig call and you can make $200.. well rounded news is
important too.. and I don't mean the alphabet channels.
I am not saying that if they .. whoever they are, were found to have done a
terrorist act ... that we should not wipe them out... but we should wipe
them out completely.. not bit by bit... but there is so much name calling on
both sides of the aisle, and frankly i am quite tired of it... first cloe
the borders... stop the BS patiot act that makes you and me a suspect... it
is all a smokescreen, from what i have no idea... but it just seems that all
the cards are not on the table..IMHO
Post by tdodge
you talking about politicians?
if so..(for the US)
1. term limits
2. pay and benefits tied to the fiscal performance
of the legislative body they are a part of. Spend more than
the years income, lose that percentage of pay and benefits.
go 20% over, lose it all.
Post by mcnewsxp
anybody got any ideas on how to make it better?
besides kill em all i mean.
bvoiced
2005-07-09 18:27:36 UTC
Permalink
I thought the topic was originally police dogs? Then I thought it was
term limits. I was responding to the term limits discussion. If I put
a few beers in my tummy then someone comes along and tells me I'm too
stupid to vote for whomever I want and they would like to shield me from
my own stupidity by installing term limits...well I consider that kind
of a "peronal attack". Wouldn't you? Those that are for term limits
need to relize that is excactly what they are doing. Oh, I know they
don't think that is what they are doing. But it is and they should be
called to the carpet because of it. Two year limit, 4 year limit, 6
year limit? Where do these numbers come from. Who thinks them up and
why. Should we begin an in-depth and contorted debate on the "RIGHT"
number of years? The bottom line is...you get to vote to throw out
anybody you want at the end of their term. If somebody is too stupid to
throw out an idiot that's really their problem. I don't need any
artificial constraints put on me by anybody to decide who or when a
plitician should go. I vote, then I live with the peoples decision.
That's called democracy. Pretty simple. Monarchy? Does not compute.

Again. We've always had term limits. They're called elections.

I am a little concerned about Yoda and the force, however. Must make
nice.
Post by svtbass
Bvoiced . now you are OT.. stick to the issuse instead of attacking
another.. or I will have to unleash the power of my Yoda force on you.
Well it seems none of them can get anything done in 4 years.. They just get
warmed up and try learn how to work the phone in the oval office,, then they
get a little done right before they have to leave office.. or get re
elected.. so one 6 year term they get warmed up and maybe get someting done
too. so what is your problem with ONE 6 year term. or do you prefer to have
a monarchy that goes on and on and on..
Post by bvoiced
Post by svtbass
I don't want anyone to protect me.. I prefer to do it myself. be smart be
aware.. and when you time comes there is nothing you can do about it...
times up...
Term limits is a good idea.. One six year term for president. No re
elections... that re election crap fucks everything up. You get one chance
to do it right. if you fuck up your gone after 6 years..
Hey! How about we compromise and just say vote the guy/gal out if you
don't like them. What? Did you stay up all night and done thunk this
stuff up all by yourself. You're quite the philosopher. But please
don't codify your dream laden sand lot Reader's Digest philosophy into
MY country's laws. Six years? Where'd you get that.? After some kind
of 3AM fart under your covers? Just allow me to vote for whomever I god
damned well please. If you don't like it, poop your bed. What are you
you? Some kind of "New AGE Master" ready to give us the wisdom. Just
listen to yourself.
If you do good you
Post by svtbass
get a place in history. And if you r are that good and at the top of the
proverbial game by getting to the head of the class as in being the POTUS
(the one not included), well then you ought to be good enough and smart
enough to levitate. so you better not fuck up.. or your fired and the whole
crew that came in with you are fired... lets get some acountabilty
here...stop passing the buck.. that is all you here.. and we let them all
get away with it.
As far as terrorist. I don't believe all the shit we hear on radio or TV..
the news is like a moving national enquirer headline the past few years..
too much double speak and seems Orwellian.. 50% of the shit you hear is
bullshit in my opinion.. read more.. read even stuff that you don't
necessarily agree with, that is the only way to become more rounded and
knowledgeable and yoda like IMHO>
after all we may not all like playing a polka but it is good to know just
incase you get that gig call and you can make $200.. well rounded news is
important too.. and I don't mean the alphabet channels.
I am not saying that if they .. whoever they are, were found to have done a
terrorist act ... that we should not wipe them out... but we should wipe
them out completely.. not bit by bit... but there is so much name calling on
both sides of the aisle, and frankly i am quite tired of it... first cloe
the borders... stop the BS patiot act that makes you and me a suspect... it
is all a smokescreen, from what i have no idea... but it just seems that all
the cards are not on the table..IMHO
Post by tdodge
you talking about politicians?
if so..(for the US)
1. term limits
2. pay and benefits tied to the fiscal performance
of the legislative body they are a part of. Spend more than
the years income, lose that percentage of pay and benefits.
go 20% over, lose it all.
Post by mcnewsxp
anybody got any ideas on how to make it better?
besides kill em all i mean.
bvoiced
2005-07-09 02:49:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
you talking about politicians?
if so..(for the US)
1. term limits
There are term limits. They are called elections. If I want to
re-elect the bastard or bitch that's my business. That's called
democracy. If you think I'm too stupid to make up my own mind and you
feel as though you must place protection "limits" for my own good, well
you can just go to fucking hell. Don't EVER tell me who I can vote for
and who I can't. Is any of this beginning to sink in. If you're too
stupid to know how to vote if your politician has served too many years,
that's your problem. Not mine. People have died for the right to vote
for whomever they want and you sit here willy-nilly and dismiss it. Are
you CRAZY?
Post by tdodge
2. pay and benefits tied to the fiscal performance
of the legislative body they are a part of. Spend more than
the years income, lose that percentage of pay and benefits.
go 20% over, lose it all.
If you don't like what they do, VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE. Jesus Christ.
Just THINK will ya!
Post by tdodge
Post by mcnewsxp
anybody got any ideas on how to make it better?
besides kill em all i mean.
b***@iwaynet.net
2005-07-10 13:30:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
There are term limits. They are called elections. If I want to
re-elect the bastard or bitch that's my business. That's called
democracy. If you think I'm too stupid to make up my own mind and you
feel as though you must place protection "limits" for my own good, well
you can just go to fucking hell. Don't EVER tell me who I can vote for
and who I can't. Is any of this beginning to sink in. If you're too
stupid to know how to vote if your politician has served too many
years, that's your problem. Not mine. People have died for the right
to vote for whomever they want and you sit here willy-nilly and dismiss
it. Are you CRAZY? <

What you say seems to make sense, but there are just a couple of things
wrong.

First point is that our system of government is supposed to be a
*republic* not a democracy. A democracy is a wonderful device
for politicians to stay in power. Just add the part of the people you
can "fool all of the time" to that part you can "fool some of the time"
and you're elected! Note that in a democracy there are no minority
rights. Majority rules! It's so interesting the media has been
hammering away at that word "democracy" for years and years now. So
much so that nobody even questions it anymore.

Don't worry I won't tell you who to vote for. Hell, thanks to the
McCain "campaign reform" law, unless I am "official media" I can't even
tell you of a candidate's VOTING RECORD 90 days before an election
without committing a crime! AND to stay on our OT subject, the supreme
court recently upheld this law!

But even the advantages of encumbent name recognition and secret voting
records isn't enough for these politicians who would be kings. The
Bush administration has pushed through an electronic voting law that
forces all states to adopt untraceable and un-auditable electronic
voting machines (supposedly so that the Florida fiasco isn't repeated,
but really to open the flood gates to "managed" elections). If you
think elecronic voting without any paper records is safe, please accept
my standing offer of showing how easy it is to manipulate electronic
voting software. I will show you all the details for the traditional
suitcase full of money. :)

Bottom line: Power-mongering politicians aren't even satisfied with
democracy! They want assured power. I guess they figure that even
though they have encumbent name reconition, all the media so-called
"news" and even tweeks on the voting software on their side to sway a
"democratic" majority, they still are scared shitless that some wild
shit like YOU might come along who won't vote the way he's told.
....Yeah, better make sure that doesn't happen!

Benj
svtbass
2005-07-10 15:47:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by b***@iwaynet.net
First point is that our system of government is supposed to be a
*republic* not a democracy.
you are 100% correct.... people only know what they hear over and over
again.. its called brainwashing....no one reads anymore.. or they read but
failed the reading comprehension test...
you are right it is a republic,, at least according to the Paper Work that
initiated this Republic

sorry for the rant I had a double gig yesterday and I am toast right
now.....
svtbass
2005-07-10 16:08:22 UTC
Permalink
I was sitting in a cheesy Chinese restaurant yesterday after a gig. I saw
how far a politician will go to get a vote and it again made me sick.. but
first this will piss off allot of you liberals and conservatives but here
goes as I am an American...
I believe that people that come to the USA for the BETTERMENT should and
must learn to speak ENGLISH.. We as a nation should not learn to speak
Spanish... I personally know a little Spanish from high school and college
but that is irrelevant.
There is a biblical story that talks about the Tower of Babble.. I am sure
you all know the story about how after people were speaking many languages
nothing got done...
I am from New York City originally but live in Austin and Denton Texas
now.... the state is over run by what I assume are illegal aliens and many
places do not speech English....
Now back to the main reason I am saying that many Politicians will do
anything for a vote.
So I was in the Chinese place yesterday,, and they had the TV on. .. The
news was on.. And because of the coming hurricane they have the presidents
brother Jeb on the tube... now he was not moving his lips and being over
dubbed with Spanish.. He had a separate news conference where he just spoke
Spanish...
That is pandering.. it is doing the people that have come here no
service.... whether here legally or illegally... if they spoke English the
whole machine would run smoother IMHO... but many refuse to learn English..
my grandfather came to the USA through Ellis Island in NY in 1914 legally..
he came from Europe.. but he learned to speech English and got a job in the
USA and moved up the proverbial ladder and was very successful...
Why cant our politicians stop PANDERING just to get a vote.. And both
parties are Guilty of this behavior..
Post by bvoiced
Post by bvoiced
There are term limits. They are called elections. If I want to
re-elect the bastard or bitch that's my business. That's called
democracy. If you think I'm too stupid to make up my own mind and you
feel as though you must place protection "limits" for my own good, well
you can just go to fucking hell. Don't EVER tell me who I can vote for
and who I can't. Is any of this beginning to sink in. If you're too
stupid to know how to vote if your politician has served too many
years, that's your problem. Not mine. People have died for the right
to vote for whomever they want and you sit here willy-nilly and dismiss
it. Are you CRAZY? <
What you say seems to make sense, but there are just a couple of things
wrong.
First point is that our system of government is supposed to be a
*republic* not a democracy. A democracy is a wonderful device
for politicians to stay in power. Just add the part of the people you
can "fool all of the time" to that part you can "fool some of the time"
and you're elected! Note that in a democracy there are no minority
rights. Majority rules! It's so interesting the media has been
hammering away at that word "democracy" for years and years now. So
much so that nobody even questions it anymore.
Don't worry I won't tell you who to vote for. Hell, thanks to the
McCain "campaign reform" law, unless I am "official media" I can't even
tell you of a candidate's VOTING RECORD 90 days before an election
without committing a crime! AND to stay on our OT subject, the supreme
court recently upheld this law!
But even the advantages of encumbent name recognition and secret voting
records isn't enough for these politicians who would be kings. The
Bush administration has pushed through an electronic voting law that
forces all states to adopt untraceable and un-auditable electronic
voting machines (supposedly so that the Florida fiasco isn't repeated,
but really to open the flood gates to "managed" elections). If you
think elecronic voting without any paper records is safe, please accept
my standing offer of showing how easy it is to manipulate electronic
voting software. I will show you all the details for the traditional
suitcase full of money. :)
Bottom line: Power-mongering politicians aren't even satisfied with
democracy! They want assured power. I guess they figure that even
though they have encumbent name reconition, all the media so-called
"news" and even tweeks on the voting software on their side to sway a
"democratic" majority, they still are scared shitless that some wild
shit like YOU might come along who won't vote the way he's told.
....Yeah, better make sure that doesn't happen!
Benj
tdodge
2005-07-10 16:18:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by svtbass
I believe that people that come to the USA for the BETTERMENT should and
must learn to speak ENGLISH..
here here! Come to America and become American, don't expect
us to adapt to you. The lesson is age old..
"when in Rome" etc
diversity is fine, but there is strength only in unity.
"divide and conquer" is another age old lesson.
How the hell long do you have to exist to have a culture?
I'm an American, with no hyphen.
/for such an awful place, it seems a shitload of people want in,
and not many are trying to escape.
bvoiced
2005-07-10 20:45:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
I believe that people that come to the USA for the BETTERMENT should and
must learn to speak ENGLISH..
here here! Come to America and become American, don't expect
us to adapt to you. The lesson is age old..
"when in Rome" etc
diversity is fine, but there is strength only in unity.
"divide and conquer" is another age old lesson.
How the hell long do you have to exist to have a culture?
I'm an American, with no hyphen.
/for such an awful place, it seems a shitload of people want in,
and not many are trying to escape.
Actually, I think per capita, most folks are trying to get into Canada
and Holland. America being their second choice. If this disturbs you
please have an alcoholic beverage. When I'm in Rome should I speak
Latin? As a person living in California (third generation) I must
inform you that the original language here was Chinese and Spanish.
That wasn't ancient Rome. That was just 150 years ago. When they drew
the border in the mid 19'th century more than a few families refused to
be separated by some arbitrarily ascribed line. Sorry, but it's been
that way ever since. California? Spanish and Chinese. This isn't too
hard to understand, is it? Always been this way and always will no
matter how hard you try to hold your breath until you turn blue. Nobody
here is watching you anyway. I'll never forget the time I was walking
down a street in Koblenz looking for a laundry. I stopped an elderly
couple on the street so I could get directions and asked them if they
spoke English. Their reply "Of course we speak English. We're Dutch".
Man, we were all cracking up for about five minutes. Those fuckers
speak five different languages. Wouldn't it be neat if Americans did?
Cost us some tax money but I'd pay for it just to educate the children.
Oh, you don't want to pay anymore taxes to educate our children? Shame
on you, ludites. Have you ever heard a love song in French or Spanish?
Ever heard of Italian opera? Instead of demanding that folks do what
you say, why don't you just learn a foreign tongue. Kind of like French
kissing, you know. Oh, and if you're worried about losing English,
you're really just a big fat loser. It's becoming the world's main
language. Relax and educate yourself, will ya?
tdodge
2005-07-10 21:21:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
When I'm in Rome should I speak
Latin?
only if you're a time traveller.

better yet, go to Rome and speak english, refuse to learn Italian,
the piss and moan because govt documents, drivers tests,
and menus aren't in your native language, and demand
they all be changed, 'cuz you don't want to bother to learn
Italian.
svtbass
2005-07-10 21:36:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
better yet, go to Rome and speak english, refuse to learn Italian,
the piss and moan because govt documents, drivers tests,
and menus aren't in your native language, and demand
they all be changed, 'cuz you don't want to bother to learn
Italian.
you nailed it... for people that have traveled which it sounds like you may
have... they get it most of the time..
I was in Japan for a while... there is no way they will learn English... you
do allot of pointing and you have to learn the language...
you know .. its not like we are picking people up by the truckload and
making them stay here.. they are taking it upon themselves to come hear...
assimilate... it will be better for all...
bvoiced
2005-07-10 21:36:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
When I'm in Rome should I speak
Latin?
only if you're a time traveller.
better yet, go to Rome and speak english, refuse to learn Italian,
the piss and moan because govt documents, drivers tests,
and menus aren't in your native language, and demand
they all be changed, 'cuz you don't want to bother to learn
Italian.
America was founded by immigrants. We have NO national language.
English was spoken in the original English colonies. Not the rest of
the nation we conquered and now call home. You're just gonna have to
live with the facts dude. You don't mind facts do you? Ain't diversity
great. Where do you live? Idaho? New England? Things just ain't the
same all over our sprawling nation. Live with it. Or should I say
"Love it or leave it". It's not going to change, no matter how much you
pout. Always has been, always will be. Why do you want to so badly
change your America, anyway? Are you not patriotic?
svtbass
2005-07-10 21:49:07 UTC
Permalink
so are you suggesting that we all go back and learn native indian?
also patriotic does not mean following the leader.. at times it means
bucking the system.... like our forefather did...remember the tea party...
Post by bvoiced
America was founded by immigrants. We have NO national language.
English was spoken in the original English colonies. Not the rest of
the nation we conquered and now call home. You're just gonna have to
live with the facts dude. You don't mind facts do you? Ain't diversity
great. Where do you live? Idaho? New England? Things just ain't the
same all over our sprawling nation. Live with it. Or should I say
"Love it or leave it". It's not going to change, no matter how much you
pout. Always has been, always will be. Why do you want to so badly
change your America, anyway? Are you not patriotic?
bvoiced
2005-07-10 22:33:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by svtbass
so are you suggesting that we all go back and learn native indian?
also patriotic does not mean following the leader.. at times it means
bucking the system.... like our forefather did...remember the tea party...
Post by bvoiced
America was founded by immigrants. We have NO national language.
English was spoken in the original English colonies. Not the rest of
the nation we conquered and now call home. You're just gonna have to
live with the facts dude. You don't mind facts do you? Ain't diversity
great. Where do you live? Idaho? New England? Things just ain't the
same all over our sprawling nation. Live with it. Or should I say
"Love it or leave it". It's not going to change, no matter how much you
pout. Always has been, always will be. Why do you want to so badly
change your America, anyway? Are you not patriotic?
I don't think you quite got the quip.
pd
2005-07-10 22:16:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
When I'm in Rome should I speak
Latin?
only if you're a time traveller.
better yet, go to Rome and speak english, refuse to learn Italian,
the piss and moan because govt documents, drivers tests,
and menus aren't in your native language, and demand
they all be changed, 'cuz you don't want to bother to learn
Italian.
America was founded by immigrants.
YAWN
Post by bvoiced
We have NO national language.
B/c you libs refuse to vote for it in congress.
Post by bvoiced
English was spoken in the original English colonies. Not the rest of
the nation we conquered and now call home.
YAWN


You're just gonna have to
Post by bvoiced
live with the facts dude. You don't mind facts do you? Ain't diversity
great.
Not necessarily. Just ask the Ethiopians, or the rest of Africa. What
was wrong with divuuuuuursity as the Europeans came in and colonized Africa?

Where do you live? Idaho? New England? Things just ain't the
Post by bvoiced
same all over our sprawling nation.
Thank god for that.


Live with it. Or should I say
Post by bvoiced
"Love it or leave it".
Yes, you could go live on an indian reservation somewhere...I am sure
that would feel more like home to you.

It's not going to change, no matter how much you
Post by bvoiced
pout. Always has been, always will be. Why do you want to so badly
change your America, anyway?
You mean like how libs want to change the form of government to
socialism from a capitalist republic? Isn't that being "progressive?"
bvoiced
2005-07-10 22:32:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by pd
Yes, you could go live on an indian reservation somewhere...I am sure
that would feel more like home to you.
I have. Loved it. Oh, you didn't know that I have American Indian
blood reletives. Silly you. My wife does too. That makes us about as
American as you can get. Don't it.
pd
2005-07-10 22:39:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
Post by pd
Yes, you could go live on an indian reservation somewhere...I am sure
that would feel more like home to you.
I have. Loved it. Oh, you didn't know that I have American Indian
blood reletives. Silly you. My wife does too. That makes us about as
American as you can get. Don't it.
No, it doesn't. Who was here BEFORE the Indians, or did they just evolve
out of the soil?

Being that you LOVED the reseravation must mean that you really like
living in places where there is a LACK of divuuuuuuursity. Interesting.
tdodge
2005-07-10 22:53:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by pd
Post by pd
No, it doesn't. Who was here BEFORE the Indians, or did they just evolve
out of the soil?
/raises hand..I know.
indians are just immigrants, too.
makes me just as much as a native as them.
bvoiced
2005-07-10 23:59:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
Post by pd
Post by pd
No, it doesn't. Who was here BEFORE the Indians, or did they just evolve
out of the soil?
/raises hand..I know.
indians are just immigrants, too.
makes me just as much as a native as them.
Oh, for crying out loud! Nobody said otherwise. Just relax.
bvoiced
2005-07-10 23:16:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by pd
Post by bvoiced
Post by pd
Yes, you could go live on an indian reservation somewhere...I am sure
that would feel more like home to you.
I have. Loved it. Oh, you didn't know that I have American Indian
blood reletives. Silly you. My wife does too. That makes us about as
American as you can get. Don't it.
No, it doesn't. Who was here BEFORE the Indians, or did they just evolve
out of the soil?
Being that you LOVED the reseravation must mean that you really like
living in places where there is a LACK of divuuuuuuursity. Interesting.
Jesus, pd. You really don't get it, do you?
fretbuzz
2005-07-11 00:02:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
Post by bvoiced
When I'm in Rome should I speak
Latin?
only if you're a time traveller.
better yet, go to Rome and speak english, refuse to learn Italian,
the piss and moan because govt documents, drivers tests,
and menus aren't in your native language, and demand
they all be changed, 'cuz you don't want to bother to learn
Italian.
That would certainly be how most English tourists would behave ;-))
And they'd bitch about not getting beans on toast and a full "English" fry
up for breakfast too
tdodge
2005-07-11 00:07:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by fretbuzz
Post by tdodge
better yet, go to Rome and speak english, refuse to learn Italian,
the piss and moan because govt documents, drivers tests,
and menus aren't in your native language, and demand
they all be changed, 'cuz you don't want to bother to learn
Italian.
That would certainly be how most English tourists would behave ;-))
And they'd bitch about not getting beans on toast and a full "English" fry
up for breakfast too
French, too if Montrealers are any clue. They'd bitch 'cuz Italy is
full of foreigners! :)
/gotta remember the smileys..I get in trouble in these threads.
svtbass
2005-07-10 21:31:38 UTC
Permalink
i can see that you most likely dont live on a border state...try getting you
order correct in a restaurant...try to speak with a store manager that will
understand you... it is not everywhere but it is pevailent.. and have you
spent any large amount of time abroad?
my problem is twofold.. one is that if people are here illegally.. they are
law breakers... period...
hospitals are closing there emergency rooms in citeis in Texas because of
the influx of illegals are driving them to go broke... because they dont
pay... or have no address to send a bill to.. whatever. it is fact if you
care to resaerch.. number two is that they do not assinilate into the USA
and our culture... maybe you dont care that get off from your job on ceazar
chavez day.. but on the founder of this countrys birthday they move to a
monday and not a word is said.. and even better that george washington has
become the evil whiteman.. come on with that PC bullshit... its pure
bullshit... fuck ya feelings if ya get hurt.... grow up.. learn english..
make it a constitutional ammendment...
this is not a personal attach.. i am just speaking in general..
so have to traveled abroad??? have you ever tried to negotiuate money with
someone that does not speak your language? or care too... when in rome as
they say... that is just one of the reasons this place is going down the
shitter.
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
I believe that people that come to the USA for the BETTERMENT should and
must learn to speak ENGLISH..
here here! Come to America and become American, don't expect
us to adapt to you. The lesson is age old..
"when in Rome" etc
diversity is fine, but there is strength only in unity.
"divide and conquer" is another age old lesson.
How the hell long do you have to exist to have a culture?
I'm an American, with no hyphen.
/for such an awful place, it seems a shitload of people want in,
and not many are trying to escape.
Actually, I think per capita, most folks are trying to get into Canada
and Holland. America being their second choice. If this disturbs you
please have an alcoholic beverage. When I'm in Rome should I speak
Latin? As a person living in California (third generation) I must
inform you that the original language here was Chinese and Spanish.
That wasn't ancient Rome. That was just 150 years ago. When they drew
the border in the mid 19'th century more than a few families refused to
be separated by some arbitrarily ascribed line. Sorry, but it's been
that way ever since. California? Spanish and Chinese. This isn't too
hard to understand, is it? Always been this way and always will no
matter how hard you try to hold your breath until you turn blue. Nobody
here is watching you anyway. I'll never forget the time I was walking
down a street in Koblenz looking for a laundry. I stopped an elderly
couple on the street so I could get directions and asked them if they
spoke English. Their reply "Of course we speak English. We're Dutch".
Man, we were all cracking up for about five minutes. Those fuckers
speak five different languages. Wouldn't it be neat if Americans did?
Cost us some tax money but I'd pay for it just to educate the children.
Oh, you don't want to pay anymore taxes to educate our children? Shame
on you, ludites. Have you ever heard a love song in French or Spanish?
Ever heard of Italian opera? Instead of demanding that folks do what
you say, why don't you just learn a foreign tongue. Kind of like French
kissing, you know. Oh, and if you're worried about losing English,
you're really just a big fat loser. It's becoming the world's main
language. Relax and educate yourself, will ya?
bvoiced
2005-07-10 22:11:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by svtbass
i can see that you most likely dont live on a border state...try getting you
order correct in a restaurant...try to speak with a store manager that will
understand you... it is not everywhere but it is pevailent.. and have you
spent any large amount of time abroad?
I live in California. I think that qualifies. In San Francisco it's
quite helpful if you can speak a little Italian, Spanish, Chinese, and
Irish. Especially if you want to eat. Oh, and I've been abroad many
many times in my 54 years. Lived abroad for about six of them.
Post by svtbass
my problem is twofold.. one is that if people are here illegally.. they are
law breakers... period...
I have emigrated to a different country. You have no idea of the
machinations involved. No matter where. If you tried to immigrate
legally, ANYWHERE, you would never make it. You are living in a Fox
News dream world. Every emmigrant/immigrant worth their salt skirts a
roadblock here and there. I did. So did your ancestors. Listen to me.
Pay attention. I know of what I speak. You do not.
Post by svtbass
hospitals are closing there emergency rooms in citeis in Texas because of
the influx of illegals are driving them to go broke... because they dont
pay... or have no address to send a bill to.. whatever. it is fact if you
care to research..
We are the only industrialized country in the world without socialized
health care. Of course it costs us an arm and a leg. All other
industrialized countries pay half of what we pay in GNP for health care.
Look it up. We have met the enemy and they are us (Pogo). Of course, I
guess you could just shoot someone with the flu in the head. Problem
solved.


number two is that they do not assinilate into the USA
Post by svtbass
and our culture... maybe you dont care that get off from your job on ceazar
chavez day.. but on the founder of this countrys birthday they move to a
monday and not a word is said..
I live in California. What culture are you talking about. Chinese?
Mexican? We have no New England culture here. Never did. The more
holidays, the better. I spoke to Chavez more than a few times. A very
smart and decent man. Definitely the kind of guy you would want to name
a holiday after.

and even better that george washington has
Post by svtbass
become the evil whiteman.. come on with that PC bullshit... its pure
bullshit... fuck ya feelings if ya get hurt.... grow up.. learn english..
make it a constitutional ammendment...
I think you're losing it here. It IS beer Sunday, however. I'm
cracking one right now.
Post by svtbass
this is not a personal attach.. i am just speaking in general..
so have to traveled abroad??? have you ever tried to negotiuate money with
someone that does not speak your language? or care too...
See above.

when in rome as
Post by svtbass
they say... that is just one of the reasons this place is going down the
shitter.
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
I believe that people that come to the USA for the BETTERMENT should and
must learn to speak ENGLISH..
here here! Come to America and become American, don't expect
us to adapt to you. The lesson is age old..
"when in Rome" etc
diversity is fine, but there is strength only in unity.
"divide and conquer" is another age old lesson.
How the hell long do you have to exist to have a culture?
I'm an American, with no hyphen.
/for such an awful place, it seems a shitload of people want in,
and not many are trying to escape.
Actually, I think per capita, most folks are trying to get into Canada
and Holland. America being their second choice. If this disturbs you
please have an alcoholic beverage. When I'm in Rome should I speak
Latin? As a person living in California (third generation) I must
inform you that the original language here was Chinese and Spanish.
That wasn't ancient Rome. That was just 150 years ago. When they drew
the border in the mid 19'th century more than a few families refused to
be separated by some arbitrarily ascribed line. Sorry, but it's been
that way ever since. California? Spanish and Chinese. This isn't too
hard to understand, is it? Always been this way and always will no
matter how hard you try to hold your breath until you turn blue. Nobody
here is watching you anyway. I'll never forget the time I was walking
down a street in Koblenz looking for a laundry. I stopped an elderly
couple on the street so I could get directions and asked them if they
spoke English. Their reply "Of course we speak English. We're Dutch".
Man, we were all cracking up for about five minutes. Those fuckers
speak five different languages. Wouldn't it be neat if Americans did?
Cost us some tax money but I'd pay for it just to educate the children.
Oh, you don't want to pay anymore taxes to educate our children? Shame
on you, ludites. Have you ever heard a love song in French or Spanish?
Ever heard of Italian opera? Instead of demanding that folks do what
you say, why don't you just learn a foreign tongue. Kind of like French
kissing, you know. Oh, and if you're worried about losing English,
you're really just a big fat loser. It's becoming the world's main
language. Relax and educate yourself, will ya?
pd
2005-07-10 22:21:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
Post by svtbass
i can see that you most likely dont live on a border state...try getting you
order correct in a restaurant...try to speak with a store manager that will
understand you... it is not everywhere but it is pevailent.. and have you
spent any large amount of time abroad?
I live in California. I think that qualifies. In San Francisco it's
quite helpful if you can speak a little Italian, Spanish, Chinese, and
Irish. Especially if you want to eat. Oh, and I've been abroad many
many times in my 54 years. Lived abroad for about six of them.
Post by svtbass
my problem is twofold.. one is that if people are here illegally.. they are
law breakers... period...
I have emigrated to a different country. You have no idea of the
machinations involved. No matter where. If you tried to immigrate
legally, ANYWHERE, you would never make it. You are living in a Fox
News dream world. Every emmigrant/immigrant worth their salt skirts a
roadblock here and there. I did. So did your ancestors. Listen to me.
Pay attention. I know of what I speak. You do not.
Still, you did and cannot refute his point. If you are here illegally,
you are a lawbreaker. And THOSE people are jumping ahead in the line,
and THAT is why it is so hard to go through the "system" legally. I know
this from PERSONAL experience, and that is all I will say about that.
Post by bvoiced
Post by svtbass
hospitals are closing there emergency rooms in citeis in Texas because of
the influx of illegals are driving them to go broke... because they dont
pay... or have no address to send a bill to.. whatever. it is fact if you
care to research..
We are the only industrialized country in the world without socialized
health care.
Thank goodness for that. Want to wait 3 months for an MRI? How about 2
years for a bypass?

Of course it costs us an arm and a leg. All other
Post by bvoiced
industrialized countries pay half of what we pay in GNP for health care.
Ironically, that is b/c THOSE systems don't have the a) quality and b)
the immigration (illegal) that we have.
Post by bvoiced
Look it up. We have met the enemy and they are us (Pogo). Of course, I
guess you could just shoot someone with the flu in the head. Problem
solved.
number two is that they do not assinilate into the USA
Post by svtbass
and our culture... maybe you dont care that get off from your job on ceazar
chavez day.. but on the founder of this countrys birthday they move to a
monday and not a word is said..
I live in California. What culture are you talking about. Chinese?
Mexican? We have no New England culture here.
Just what is your view of New England culture?
bvoiced
2005-07-10 23:14:32 UTC
Permalink
In article <fumdnY19BYUcAkzfRVn-***@comcast.com>,
pd <***@yourbusiness.com> wrote:1.

1 pd
Post by pd
Still, you did and cannot refute his point. If you are here illegally,
you are a lawbreaker. And THOSE people are jumping ahead in the line,
and THAT is why it is so hard to go through the "system" legally. I know
this from PERSONAL experience, and that is all I will say about that.
1 me

Oh, c'mon. No one does things by the book. We would all still be
living in Africa were that the case. Do you really follow every law in
this country. Of course you don't. Stop picking this law and that just
to tarnish other people. Take a look at yourself. And just listen to
what you're saying. You are embarrassing yourself.


2 pd
Thank goodness for that. Want to wait 3 months for an MRI? How about 2
years for a bypass?

2 me

When I lived in a country with socialized Docs I never had this problem.
Could it be you are just swallowing a bunch of hogwash. I know I had to
wait two months for elective surgery here. And I have good health
insurance. For an American that is. 80 million Americans have to wait
for the ret of their lives because they have little or no health
insurance. If you care so much about waiting, care about these folks
will you? Quiz: What's the difference between three months and never?
Bet you can't give me a good response.

3 pd
Ironically, that is b/c THOSE systems don't have the a) quality and b)
the immigration (illegal) that we have.

3 me

What? You don't think the rest of the world knows shit. Man! You've
got to get out more often. Quality is just as good in Europe. Hey.
Europe, pd thinks you're stupid. And what good is quality if you can't
access it. Think long and hard.


4 pd

Just what is your view of New England culture?

4 me

Don't know. Never lived there. Visited a few times. Lot's of Negro
lawn ornaments. Couldn't quite figure that one out.
pd
2005-07-11 00:45:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
1 pd
Post by pd
Still, you did and cannot refute his point. If you are here illegally,
you are a lawbreaker. And THOSE people are jumping ahead in the line,
and THAT is why it is so hard to go through the "system" legally. I know
this from PERSONAL experience, and that is all I will say about that.
1 me
Oh, c'mon. No one does things by the book. We would all still be
living in Africa were that the case. Do you really follow every law in
this country. Of course you don't. Stop picking this law and that just
to tarnish other people. Take a look at yourself. And just listen to
what you're saying. You are embarrassing yourself.
You are yet ANOTHER *TWES* (time waster energy sucker). After reading
this paragraph, that is pretty obvious.

pd
2005-07-10 22:10:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
I believe that people that come to the USA for the BETTERMENT should and
must learn to speak ENGLISH..
here here! Come to America and become American, don't expect
us to adapt to you. The lesson is age old..
"when in Rome" etc
diversity is fine, but there is strength only in unity.
"divide and conquer" is another age old lesson.
How the hell long do you have to exist to have a culture?
I'm an American, with no hyphen.
/for such an awful place, it seems a shitload of people want in,
and not many are trying to escape.
Actually, I think per capita, most folks are trying to get into Canada
and Holland. America being their second choice. If this disturbs you
please have an alcoholic beverage. When I'm in Rome should I speak
Latin? As a person living in California (third generation) I must
inform you that the original language here was Chinese and Spanish.
That wasn't ancient Rome. That was just 150 years ago. When they drew
the border in the mid 19'th century more than a few families refused to
be separated by some arbitrarily ascribed line. Sorry, but it's been
that way ever since. California? Spanish and Chinese. This isn't too
hard to understand, is it? Always been this way and always will no
matter how hard you try to hold your breath until you turn blue. Nobody
here is watching you anyway. I'll never forget the time I was walking
down a street in Koblenz looking for a laundry. I stopped an elderly
couple on the street so I could get directions and asked them if they
spoke English. Their reply "Of course we speak English. We're Dutch".
Man, we were all cracking up for about five minutes. Those fuckers
speak five different languages. Wouldn't it be neat if Americans did?
Cost us some tax money but I'd pay for it just to educate the children.
Oh, you don't want to pay anymore taxes to educate our children? Shame
on you, ludites. Have you ever heard a love song in French or Spanish?
Ever heard of Italian opera? Instead of demanding that folks do what
you say, why don't you just learn a foreign tongue. Kind of like French
kissing, you know. Oh, and if you're worried about losing English,
you're really just a big fat loser. It's becoming the world's main
language. Relax and educate yourself, will ya?
In otherwords, like a good liberal, you are for getting rid of our
language, borders, and culture.
bvoiced
2005-07-10 22:26:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by pd
Post by bvoiced
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
I believe that people that come to the USA for the BETTERMENT should and
must learn to speak ENGLISH..
here here! Come to America and become American, don't expect
us to adapt to you. The lesson is age old..
"when in Rome" etc
diversity is fine, but there is strength only in unity.
"divide and conquer" is another age old lesson.
How the hell long do you have to exist to have a culture?
I'm an American, with no hyphen.
/for such an awful place, it seems a shitload of people want in,
and not many are trying to escape.
Actually, I think per capita, most folks are trying to get into Canada
and Holland. America being their second choice. If this disturbs you
please have an alcoholic beverage. When I'm in Rome should I speak
Latin? As a person living in California (third generation) I must
inform you that the original language here was Chinese and Spanish.
That wasn't ancient Rome. That was just 150 years ago. When they drew
the border in the mid 19'th century more than a few families refused to
be separated by some arbitrarily ascribed line. Sorry, but it's been
that way ever since. California? Spanish and Chinese. This isn't too
hard to understand, is it? Always been this way and always will no
matter how hard you try to hold your breath until you turn blue. Nobody
here is watching you anyway. I'll never forget the time I was walking
down a street in Koblenz looking for a laundry. I stopped an elderly
couple on the street so I could get directions and asked them if they
spoke English. Their reply "Of course we speak English. We're Dutch".
Man, we were all cracking up for about five minutes. Those fuckers
speak five different languages. Wouldn't it be neat if Americans did?
Cost us some tax money but I'd pay for it just to educate the children.
Oh, you don't want to pay anymore taxes to educate our children? Shame
on you, ludites. Have you ever heard a love song in French or Spanish?
Ever heard of Italian opera? Instead of demanding that folks do what
you say, why don't you just learn a foreign tongue. Kind of like French
kissing, you know. Oh, and if you're worried about losing English,
you're really just a big fat loser. It's becoming the world's main
language. Relax and educate yourself, will ya?
In otherwords, like a good liberal, you are for getting rid of our
language, borders, and culture.
I can't even begin to understand how to reply to this. I'll just let it
be.
pd
2005-07-10 22:37:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
Post by pd
In otherwords, like a good liberal, you are for getting rid of our
language, borders, and culture.
I can't even begin to understand how to reply to this. I'll just let it
be.
Ok. But as we all know intuitively, without language, borders, or
culture, you don't have a country. That sounds what like you are advocating.
bvoiced
2005-07-10 22:50:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by pd
Post by bvoiced
Post by pd
In otherwords, like a good liberal, you are for getting rid of our
language, borders, and culture.
I can't even begin to understand how to reply to this. I'll just let it
be.
Ok. But as we all know intuitively, without language, borders, or
culture, you don't have a country. That sounds what like you are advocating.
Oh shit. Talk about serendipity. I sang that John Lennon song two
nights ago. Just Imagine how strange THAT is.
bvoiced
2005-07-10 17:11:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by bvoiced
Post by bvoiced
There are term limits. They are called elections. If I want to
re-elect the bastard or bitch that's my business. That's called
democracy. If you think I'm too stupid to make up my own mind and you
feel as though you must place protection "limits" for my own good, well
you can just go to fucking hell. Don't EVER tell me who I can vote for
and who I can't. Is any of this beginning to sink in. If you're too
stupid to know how to vote if your politician has served too many
years, that's your problem. Not mine. People have died for the right
to vote for whomever they want and you sit here willy-nilly and dismiss
it. Are you CRAZY? <
What you say seems to make sense, but there are just a couple of things
wrong.
First point is that our system of government is supposed to be a
*republic* not a democracy. A democracy is a wonderful device
for politicians to stay in power. Just add the part of the people you
can "fool all of the time" to that part you can "fool some of the time"
and you're elected! Note that in a democracy there are no minority
rights. Majority rules! It's so interesting the media has been
hammering away at that word "democracy" for years and years now. So
much so that nobody even questions it anymore.
Don't worry I won't tell you who to vote for. Hell, thanks to the
McCain "campaign reform" law, unless I am "official media" I can't even
tell you of a candidate's VOTING RECORD 90 days before an election
without committing a crime! AND to stay on our OT subject, the supreme
court recently upheld this law!
But even the advantages of encumbent name recognition and secret voting
records isn't enough for these politicians who would be kings. The
Bush administration has pushed through an electronic voting law that
forces all states to adopt untraceable and un-auditable electronic
voting machines (supposedly so that the Florida fiasco isn't repeated,
but really to open the flood gates to "managed" elections). If you
think elecronic voting without any paper records is safe, please accept
my standing offer of showing how easy it is to manipulate electronic
voting software. I will show you all the details for the traditional
suitcase full of money. :)
Bottom line: Power-mongering politicians aren't even satisfied with
democracy! They want assured power. I guess they figure that even
though they have encumbent name reconition, all the media so-called
"news" and even tweeks on the voting software on their side to sway a
"democratic" majority, they still are scared shitless that some wild
shit like YOU might come along who won't vote the way he's told.
....Yeah, better make sure that doesn't happen!
Benj
Well, I don't find any disagreement with what you just wrote.
jeffb
2005-07-08 22:36:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by mcnewsxp
anybody got any ideas on how to make it better?
Political office should be like jury duty in that anyone who wants it
too badly is usually ruled out.

jeffb
John Shaughnessy
2005-07-09 07:32:55 UTC
Permalink
My first course of action would be to shitcan "Das Homeland Security". Not
only does it REEK of fascism, but it's just another layer of government
bureaucracy and waste.

The better solution is to form a council of intelligence and security heads
(similar to the Joint Chiefs of Staff) to streamline information sharing and
resource allocation.

Really, with all the CS guys in here alone, how hard is it to
cross-reference database A with database B? Would it take hundreds of
millions to accomplish this task.

And do we REALLY need to curtail individual liberties to accomplish our
goals? The speed with witch the DHS was created should give both liberal and
conservatives pause...
--
Learning funk bass? visit www.js3jazz.com/store.htm
Conservatives are not necessarily stupid,
but most stupid people are conservatives."
- John Stuart Mill
Post by mcnewsxp
anybody got any ideas on how to make it better?
besides kill em all i mean.
pd
2005-07-09 13:44:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Shaughnessy
My first course of action would be to shitcan "Das Homeland Security". Not
only does it REEK of fascism, but it's just another layer of government
bureaucracy and waste.
Blah Blah Blah///liberal talking points version 2.0///blah blah blah

Name me ONE incidence where a citizen's civil rights were violated.

Yet I don't hear you bitching that the supreme court just decided that
private land can be taken over if it has greater tax revenue in the
hands of a town or corporation. You FUCKING communist hypocritical ASSHOLE.
svtbass
2005-07-09 15:01:17 UTC
Permalink
I agree with you Shaughnessy . If you read the constitution and A-B it to
the Patriot Act... The PA promotes fascism... regardless of what PD says...
I am assuming that PD believes that the constitution is a liberal way of
mind, or non American.. PD . you do not need to follow the masses in order
to be an American.. But this is going to open PDs foul mouth pea brain
because she has never been able to think on her own. that being said.
Post by pd
Name me ONE incidence where a citizen's civil rights were violated.
for one, when ever there is a bush rally,, free speech zones are set up a
mile or so away from bush...
That is direct violation of the constitution. the people have a right to
confront and let there grievances be known.. but bush is just too sensitive
to handle that without having another nervous breakdown... so he prefers
that those folks that disagree with him to be held at a distance..

Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Note

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Post by pd
Post by John Shaughnessy
My first course of action would be to shitcan "Das Homeland Security". Not
only does it REEK of fascism, but it's just another layer of government
bureaucracy and waste.
Blah Blah Blah///liberal talking points version 2.0///blah blah blah
Name me ONE incidence where a citizen's civil rights were violated.
Yet I don't hear you bitching that the supreme court just decided that
private land can be taken over if it has greater tax revenue in the hands
of a town or corporation. You FUCKING communist hypocritical ASSHOLE.
pd
2005-07-09 15:14:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by svtbass
I agree with you Shaughnessy . If you read the constitution and A-B it to
the Patriot Act... The PA promotes fascism... regardless of what PD says...
I am assuming that PD believes that the constitution is a liberal way of
mind, or non American.. PD . you do not need to follow the masses in order
to be an American.. But this is going to open PDs foul mouth pea brain
because she has never been able to think on her own. that being said.
Post by pd
Name me ONE incidence where a citizen's civil rights were violated.
for one, when ever there is a bush rally,, free speech zones are set up a
mile or so away from bush...
That is direct violation of the constitution. the people have a right to
confront and let there grievances be known..
Show me where it says this specifically in the constitution.

Also, during the DNC, protesters were allocated to fucking CAGES. Did
you have a problem with that? didn't think so.


but bush is just too sensitive
Post by svtbass
to handle that without having another nervous breakdown... so he prefers
that those folks that disagree with him to be held at a distance..
It's a safety issue dipshit. Being that libanistas are posting on the
net about killing Bush, etc. I think it is perfectly understandable.
Post by svtbass
Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Note
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
And as you said. The people peacefully assembled. Just at another location.
Post by svtbass
Post by pd
Post by John Shaughnessy
My first course of action would be to shitcan "Das Homeland Security". Not
only does it REEK of fascism, but it's just another layer of government
bureaucracy and waste.
Blah Blah Blah///liberal talking points version 2.0///blah blah blah
Name me ONE incidence where a citizen's civil rights were violated.
Yet I don't hear you bitching that the supreme court just decided that
private land can be taken over if it has greater tax revenue in the hands
of a town or corporation. You FUCKING communist hypocritical ASSHOLE.
svtbass
2005-07-09 16:09:46 UTC
Permalink
Pd you have to think bigger ... In my opinion I don't care who is trying to
stop free speech dem or repub.. it is unconstitutional... no ifs, and or
buts.. no excuses...
I am neither dem or a repub.. yes I had a problem with the DNC allowing
cages for people.. they were actually large chain link fences.. the same was
in NY for the GNC.. I was there on bizz and it was nuts.. I tried to get a
look but I thought it was best to stay clear....they had these sound weapons
that you see in Popular Mechanics and are used in Iraq , but trained on
groups of US people.. I did not see them used though... or are aware of them
being used at that time.
I don't want to get into a pissing match with you because you seem to have
way too much time on your hands to just go on and on and on and on and it
becomes pointless and OT debating because you will always play devils
advocate.. And I have a double today and need to get going.. so I cant go
on and on and on and on..
I sent you a copy of the 1st amendment for your viewing pleasure..
Like I said you will try to find anything to argue about . because after I
sent you the 1st amendment you sent.
Post by pd
And as you said. The people peacefully assembled. Just at another location.
Are you really that much of a dumb mutha fucker that you cant read or
understand what it says.. I really think you just try to debate for the sake
of arguing.. you must drive your boyfriend fucking nuts.. I also see what
all the others in AGB are saying about you is fact..
Go play with your keyboard while I go make some $$ by playing my bass PD...
Post by pd
Post by svtbass
I agree with you Shaughnessy . If you read the constitution and A-B it to
the Patriot Act... The PA promotes fascism... regardless of what PD says...
I am assuming that PD believes that the constitution is a liberal way of
mind, or non American.. PD . you do not need to follow the masses in
order to be an American.. But this is going to open PDs foul mouth pea
brain because she has never been able to think on her own. that being
said.
Post by pd
Name me ONE incidence where a citizen's civil rights were violated.
for one, when ever there is a bush rally,, free speech zones are set up a
mile or so away from bush...
That is direct violation of the constitution. the people have a right to
confront and let there grievances be known..
Show me where it says this specifically in the constitution.
Also, during the DNC, protesters were allocated to fucking CAGES. Did you
have a problem with that? didn't think so.
but bush is just too sensitive
Post by svtbass
to handle that without having another nervous breakdown... so he prefers
that those folks that disagree with him to be held at a distance..
It's a safety issue dipshit. Being that libanistas are posting on the net
about killing Bush, etc. I think it is perfectly understandable.
Post by svtbass
Amendment I - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified
12/15/1791. Note
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
And as you said. The people peacefully assembled. Just at another location.
Post by svtbass
Post by pd
Post by John Shaughnessy
My first course of action would be to shitcan "Das Homeland Security". Not
only does it REEK of fascism, but it's just another layer of government
bureaucracy and waste.
Blah Blah Blah///liberal talking points version 2.0///blah blah blah
Name me ONE incidence where a citizen's civil rights were violated.
Yet I don't hear you bitching that the supreme court just decided that
private land can be taken over if it has greater tax revenue in the hands
of a town or corporation. You FUCKING communist hypocritical ASSHOLE.
jeffb
2005-07-09 16:19:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by svtbass
Are you really that much of a dumb mutha fucker that you cant read or
understand what it says..
Yes.
Post by svtbass
I really think you just try to debate for the sake
of arguing..
Yes.
Post by svtbass
you must drive your boyfriend fucking nuts..
You'd have to think so...
Post by svtbass
I also see what
all the others in AGB are saying about you is fact..
Good.
Post by svtbass
Go play with your keyboard while I go make some $$ by playing my bass PD...
A foreign concept to him I'm afraid. One of my first teachers told me
the truth about people hiring their friends and when you don't have
any it's kinda hard to get a paying gig...

jeffb
pd
2005-07-09 15:30:31 UTC
Permalink
I agree with you Shaughnessy . If you read the constitution...
And I am SURE you are for second ammendment, aren't you? I.e., my right
to keep and bear arms?

So, what's with the registrations, or 60 day wait periods, or limits to
how many I can buy at one time, etc.?

Right. Didn't think so.

No, as far as the second ammendment goes, I am sure you are for slicing
and dicing that up, right?

And as far as FREEDOM goes...more money in my pocket means I have more
freedom. Yet you libs LOVE to take money from me, to give to your
constituents to buy their votes, so you can then enslave them to
government programs. As far as FREEDOM goes, it was the Democrats in the
60's who were predominantly against civil rights. It is a DEMOCRAT who
is in the Senate who was in the KKK.

The leftists don't really give a shit about civil rights at all. It is
all a sham to get in Bush's face about SOMETHING else. It is the same
with Women's rights. Not a fucking PEEP out of the National Organization
for Women when Clinton was sexually harassing an intern and clearly
abusing his power as Pres. Not a PEEP about hman rights violations in
third world disctator run coutries. But how DARE we abuse a Koran (that
we gave to the inmate) at Club Gitmo.

The only cause(s) that are consistent is:

eliminating family

eliminating religion

eliminating borders

eliminating culture

eliminating private wealth and ownership

eliminate traditions and historically relevant events

eliminating personal accountability

Once you do this, the Gub'ment looks REALLY attractive. It's Animal Farm
played out in real life.

As far as the PA goes, it just goes to show that the left just doesn't
get the fact that we need these laws to guard against terrorism. In
fact, the left would rather we just forget about 9.11 altogether so they
can along with the business of revising history, and trying their
hardest to gain what semblance of political power back they can.
Incidentally, the PA was voted FOR for many dems in congress.

Ya know, it used to be that politics stopped at the borders. Not
anymore. The left has shown themselves to be in the same boat as the
terrorists. They sound the same, say the same things, and have the same
goal. Power.
h***@webtv.net
2005-07-09 21:00:34 UTC
Permalink
kirkpobass wrote;
when ever there is a bush rally,, free speech zones are set up a mile or
so away from bush...
That is direct violation of the constitution. the people have a right to
confront and let there grievances be known.. but bush is just too
sensitive to handle that without having another nervous breakdown... so
he prefers that those folks that disagree with him to be held at a
distance..


Yeah and once upon a time any citizen could walk right up the White
House lawn, knock on the front door and ask to speak to the President.
Unfortunately, after several assassinations this kind of contact is no
longer possible. As someone who worked security details for rallies for
both Presidential & both VP candidates in last years election as well as
the Clintons, I can assure you this kind of separation of the protesters
go for both parties. In this day and age with the total lack of respect
people display with anybody they disagree with, and all the violent nuts
on both side of the political spectrum it's a must. Just look how
uncivil political discussions get here. I personally arrested a guy
trying to sneak a long bladed hunting knife into a John Kerry
appearance. He claimed he just didn't want to take it all the way back
to his car, so he hid it in his boot, but who knows ?
Midnight Demon
2005-07-09 21:32:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by h***@webtv.net
I personally arrested a guy
trying to sneak a long bladed hunting knife into a John Kerry
appearance. He claimed he just didn't want to take it all the way back
to his car, so he hid it in his boot, but who knows ?
Of course, had Kerry followed the example of the Bush camp, such a guy
wouldn't have been on the list to be allowed into the rally in the
first place ...
svtbass
2005-07-10 02:06:08 UTC
Permalink
just for thought.. .did you know that Bush and Kerry are distant cousins..
Post by Midnight Demon
Post by h***@webtv.net
I personally arrested a guy
trying to sneak a long bladed hunting knife into a John Kerry
appearance. He claimed he just didn't want to take it all the way back
to his car, so he hid it in his boot, but who knows ?
Of course, had Kerry followed the example of the Bush camp, such a guy
wouldn't have been on the list to be allowed into the rally in the
first place ...
svtbass
2005-07-10 02:05:12 UTC
Permalink
If you want to see un civil political discussions.. go to CSPAN.. right
before the Election/shoe in of Mr. Blair about a month ago. They had a
forum where each candidate running sat in a seat and was grilled.. I mean
grilled with hard questions.. not like our debates here. where both bush and
Kerry got softball questions without any follow ups.. The people in the
audience fired away with very tough questions,, and followed up.. Blair and
his counter part were breaking a severe sweat.. I have never seen anything
like it.. our politicians both side of the aisle have it way too easy.. and
it SEEMS I say Seems like as if there is no ACCOUNTABILITY.. but that looks
like our whole society.. no one is accountable for anything. many people
just pass the buck.. and I hate to say it but the president is real good at
it.. he passes the buck on everything.. what ever happened to the strong
Truman type "the buck stops here"... no balls I tell ya.. no balls. .and
pandering. it makes me sick.. I love this country,, and have been very lucky
to be able to travel across the globe a few times and I love the USA.... but
I am really saddened to see that we have become so weak... you do not need
to be able to kill thousands with an army to be strong.. strong comes in
many facets... leadership is one of them..
When you are on a job and you do a big fuck up.. what happens.. you get
fired or demoted..
when politicians fuck up here.. they get a promotion to head of CIA.. or
cabinet member. no accountability.. what am I the only one not sleeping
here.. are people not paying attention to what is going on? maybe i have
finished off all the crazy pills..
Post by h***@webtv.net
kirkpobass wrote;
when ever there is a bush rally,, free speech zones are set up a mile or
so away from bush...
That is direct violation of the constitution. the people have a right to
confront and let there grievances be known.. but bush is just too
sensitive to handle that without having another nervous breakdown... so
he prefers that those folks that disagree with him to be held at a
distance..
Yeah and once upon a time any citizen could walk right up the White
House lawn, knock on the front door and ask to speak to the President.
Unfortunately, after several assassinations this kind of contact is no
longer possible. As someone who worked security details for rallies for
both Presidential & both VP candidates in last years election as well as
the Clintons, I can assure you this kind of separation of the protesters
go for both parties. In this day and age with the total lack of respect
people display with anybody they disagree with, and all the violent nuts
on both side of the political spectrum it's a must. Just look how
uncivil political discussions get here. I personally arrested a guy
trying to sneak a long bladed hunting knife into a John Kerry
appearance. He claimed he just didn't want to take it all the way back
to his car, so he hid it in his boot, but who knows ?
b***@iwaynet.net
2005-07-10 13:41:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by svtbass
When you are on a job and you do a big fuck up.. what happens.. you get
fired or demoted..
Post by svtbass
when politicians fuck up here.. they get a promotion to head of CIA.. or
cabinet member. no accountability.. what am I the only one not sleeping
here.. are people not paying attention to what is going on? maybe i
have
finished off all the crazy pills.. <

Burn down a church, kill the members and then lie about it? Then get
medals and promotions for doing it?
We don't want to hear about it.
<sticks fingers in ears and sings>
La La La La La La La La La La La La !

Bongo
svtbass
2005-07-10 15:51:29 UTC
Permalink
you are not sleeping at least.. you must have had a 5 shot latte'...
that is what i am going for after the gigs yesterday.. all the caffine , and
no gigs today.. so i can get all the jitters i want... haha
Post by svtbass
Post by svtbass
When you are on a job and you do a big fuck up.. what happens.. you get
fired or demoted..
Post by svtbass
when politicians fuck up here.. they get a promotion to head of CIA.. or
cabinet member. no accountability.. what am I the only one not sleeping
here.. are people not paying attention to what is going on? maybe i have
finished off all the crazy pills.. <
Burn down a church, kill the members and then lie about it? Then get
medals and promotions for doing it?
We don't want to hear about it.
<sticks fingers in ears and sings>
La La La La La La La La La La La La !
Bongo
svtbass
2005-07-10 16:14:13 UTC
Permalink
"Real" terrorists are known groups that make concrete demands. They are an
endangered species, if not extinct.

Fake terrorists-covert psy-war units of western intelligence-always invent a
name of an "unknown" group. They have to do this, of course. If they
claimed, say, that the PLO did it, the accused would energetically deny it,
spoiling the show. So they use fictitious identities, which they can mold to
suit the target of convenience.



Some other dead giveaway signs:

a.. Scotland Yard warned Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu half
an hour beforehand not to go to the bomb site, according to an AP wire from
Jerusalem (a slip that was subsequently denied of course, but it was still
up at Al Jazeera).
b.. An MSNBC translator says an error in a verse from the Quran in a
statement by the "unknown" group couldn't have been made by Al Qaeda, and he
thinks it's phony. Blair's proofreaders are falling down on their dossiers
again . . . they ought to be belted or suspended.
c.. Train bombings like London 7/7and Madrid 3/11 are a speciality of NATO
psy-war units. The expert on this since 1978 has been Webster Tarpley, who
shows in his latest book, 9/11 Synthetic Terror, how the bombing of Bologna
Stazione Centrale in 1980 by the so-called Red Brigades is of one cloth with
the Madrid bombings. The supposed "communist terrorist" Red Brigades were
phonies, a patsy outfit created by Lodge P2, the neofascist shadow
government with Italy in its grip. The Madrid train bombing suspects were
police agents, also run by a neo-fascist falange: as Tarpley notes, one
suspect admitted he worked for the old guard, the Guardia Civil, Unidad
Central Operativa.
a.. Another possible motive, says Tarpley, is that the war party want to
push Bush into Iran, but America has no stomach for it. They need another
9/11 so they can occupy both the Iraqi and Iranian oil fields, and hold the
world, all of us, to ransom.


full article
http://www.onlinejournal.com/Commentary/070805Leonard/070805leonard.html
tdodge
2005-07-10 16:20:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by svtbass
a.. Another possible motive, says Tarpley, is that the war party want to
push Bush into Iran, but America has no stomach for it. They need another
9/11 so they can occupy both the Iraqi and Iranian oil fields, and hold
the world, all of us, to ransom.
what a load of crap!
svtbass
2005-07-10 16:27:07 UTC
Permalink
well it is open to debate... just thought I would throw in some new
fodder......
like I say "you don't have to agree with everything that is out there.. but
you will become far more knowledgeable if you read things that you don't
necessarily agree with"...
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
a.. Another possible motive, says Tarpley, is that the war party want to
push Bush into Iran, but America has no stomach for it. They need another
9/11 so they can occupy both the Iraqi and Iranian oil fields, and hold
the world, all of us, to ransom.
what a load of crap!
tdodge
2005-07-10 16:32:04 UTC
Permalink
yeah..and the moon landing was a staged TV show..open to
debate, I suppose.
Post by svtbass
well it is open to debate... just thought I would throw in some new
fodder......
like I say "you don't have to agree with everything that is out there..
but you will become far more knowledgeable if you read things that you
don't necessarily agree with"...
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
a.. Another possible motive, says Tarpley, is that the war party want to
push Bush into Iran, but America has no stomach for it. They need
another 9/11 so they can occupy both the Iraqi and Iranian oil fields,
and hold the world, all of us, to ransom.
what a load of crap!
svtbass
2005-07-10 16:35:47 UTC
Permalink
if you want to lead that one.. be my guest.... i have not heard that story
in a long time.
Post by tdodge
yeah..and the moon landing was a staged TV show..open to
debate, I suppose.
Post by svtbass
well it is open to debate... just thought I would throw in some new
fodder......
like I say "you don't have to agree with everything that is out there..
but you will become far more knowledgeable if you read things that you
don't necessarily agree with"...
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
a.. Another possible motive, says Tarpley, is that the war party want
to push Bush into Iran, but America has no stomach for it. They need
another 9/11 so they can occupy both the Iraqi and Iranian oil fields,
and hold the world, all of us, to ransom.
what a load of crap!
pd
2005-07-10 18:54:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by svtbass
well it is open to debate...
No it isn't. But you can feel free to debate it by yourself if you wish.
Post by svtbass
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
a.. Another possible motive, says Tarpley, is that the war party want to
push Bush into Iran, but America has no stomach for it. They need another
9/11 so they can occupy both the Iraqi and Iranian oil fields, and hold
the world, all of us, to ransom.
what a load of crap!
svtbass
2005-07-10 19:34:36 UTC
Permalink
did i hear a whisper.. what did she say.. is pd back from playing video
games yet.. mmmm
is she the moderator?? pd is the moderator.... mmmm everyone else seems to
ignore her...
Post by pd
Post by svtbass
well it is open to debate...
No it isn't. But you can feel free to debate it by yourself if you wish.
Post by svtbass
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
a.. Another possible motive, says Tarpley, is that the war party want to
push Bush into Iran, but America has no stomach for it. They need
another 9/11 so they can occupy both the Iraqi and Iranian oil fields,
and hold the world, all of us, to ransom.
what a load of crap!
David Coleman
2005-07-10 18:55:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
a.. Another possible motive, says Tarpley, is that the war party want to
push Bush into Iran, but America has no stomach for it. They need another
9/11 so they can occupy both the Iraqi and Iranian oil fields, and hold
the world, all of us, to ransom.
what a load of crap!
Based on what?
The conspiracy theorists are right every once in a while:
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html
...and that was way back in the early '60s.

DC
svtbass
2005-07-10 19:31:10 UTC
Permalink
no need to call it conspiracy when it can be backed up by numerous
documentation from even the alphabet channels ans mainstream news... you may
expect that from fringe news but if you look at all the majors they seem to
work in lock step... stories are verbatim...
Post by David Coleman
Post by tdodge
Post by svtbass
a.. Another possible motive, says Tarpley, is that the war party want to
push Bush into Iran, but America has no stomach for it. They need another
9/11 so they can occupy both the Iraqi and Iranian oil fields, and hold
the world, all of us, to ransom.
what a load of crap!
Based on what?
http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=92662
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/northwoods.html
...and that was way back in the early '60s.
DC
The Wuffler
2005-07-10 23:33:19 UTC
Permalink
Consider!
Get those in power to consider!

Why do these people DISLIKE us so much that they are willing to blow
themselves to smivvs just to score a few westerners?

Nasty in the Woodshed.
Post by mcnewsxp
anybody got any ideas on how to make it better?
besides kill em all i mean.
tdodge
2005-07-11 00:12:36 UTC
Permalink
anybody know if this is near the longest thread record yet?
congrats to all for keeping it contained, too. All is well when
were out in the on topic threads, and this stuff doesn't come along.
Someone complained about the future of this group?
I ain't worried.
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...