Breaking news!

[WillyBWright]

Re: Breaking news!

There's that same old BS argument that the Neocons actually believe because the offenders told them so. That's like Nixon saying there was no cover-up. People actually believed him too. The State of Denial is populated by Neocons.

 

[QC]

Re: Breaking news!

Naaaaaaaa QC, it just that the C&P went plum across the page where a person would have to scroll from side to side and get headaches

That's what I meant by particularly ugly I was just lookign to razz you a little

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Breaking news!

Who believes there was no cover up?

 

[QC]

Re: Breaking news!

There's that same old BS argument that the Neocons actually believe because the offenders told them so. That's like Nixon saying there was no cover-up. People actually believed him too. The State of Denial is populated by Neocons.

Who you calling neocon, you head in the sand, law suit lovin', Clinton liberal? I notice in your C & Ps that you managed to miss:

"But there can be no serious dispute that the act of rebutting public criticism, such as that levied by Mr. Wilson against the Bush administration's handling of prewar foreign intelligence, by speaking with members of the press is within the scope of defendants' duties as high-level Executive Branch officials," Bates said.

How can you be taken seriously if you leave out whatever you please if it doesn't support your version of the facts? Also, are you claimng that Plame was covert? Not sure how someone leaks a non-covert identity, and that is not from some Necon list of talking points sir . . .

 

[Plainsman]

Re: Breaking news!

There's that same old BS argument that the Neocons actually believe because the offenders told them so. That's like Nixon saying there was no cover-up. People actually believed him too. The State of Denial is populated by Neocons.

It must be scary in that mind of yours willy. I think I'm starting to feel sympathy for you. What a terrible way to live.

I'd just like to know how she was "outed" willy. I know the facts get in your way and that adds to it being so scary in the real world, but you can get help willy. I'll pray for you.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Breaking news!

We are supposed to be governed by the rule of law, and not the rule of men, 12 feets.
It's an interesting concept to advocate eliminating lawyers in a system designed to be governed by the rule of law.
If we get rid of laws and lawyers, who gets to be in charge in your world? Jerry Falwell? Rush Limbaugh?

It really is "interesting" isn't it? I do think it is, but it should be more than "interesting". Yet, I'm not making it up. It is a matter of historic record. Like it ,or not -- we are govered by lawyers.
And These clowns even BRAG about it!!

A proffession rules you, but instead of being concerned, you find it "interesting" that i call attention to it in the first place! And then,YOU try to lay a guilt-trip (a liberal form of chastising people) on me for not wanting to keep them in there!!!!! It failed... I don't feel guilt. I feel indignation! But ok -- your reaction is "interesting" to me.

The mind of the modern liberal never ceases to amaze and baffle me!
As if I am advocating mass-termination, a pol pot purge or something!! Didn't werk! No guilt... It just torqued me off!

Even more "interesting": is that you condone it in the first place!
I personally do not call that "interesting". My word for it would be "scarey".
I'm just calling your attention to it. But now that you know, I expect you to ACT with your VOTE.. (the way you are to REMOVE them in my system of government).
Jees!! I gotta write you a map?????????? It's called democracy. I expect you now, to do something about it.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Breaking news!

So just do as you're told, PW.

 

[PW2]

Re: Breaking news!

It really is "interesting" isn't it? I do think it is, but it should be more than "interesting". Yet, I'm not making it up. It is a matter of historic record. Like it ,or not -- we are govered by lawyers.
And These clowns even BRAG about it!!

A proffession rules you, but instead of being concerned, you find it "interesting" that i call attention to it in the first place! And then,YOU try to lay a guilt-trip (a liberal form of chastising people) on me for not wanting to keep them in there!!!!! It failed... I don't feel guilt. I feel indignation! But ok -- your reaction is "interesting" to me.

The mind of the modern liberal never ceases to amaze and baffle me!
As if I am advocating mass-termination, a pol pot purge or something!! Didn't werk! No guilt... It just torqued me off!

Even more "interesting": is that you condone it in the first place!
I personally do not call that "interesting". My word for it would be "scarey".
I'm just calling your attention to it. But now that you know, I expect you to ACT with your VOTE.. (the way you are to REMOVE them in my system of government).
Jees!! I gotta write you a map?????????? It's called democracy. I expect you now, to do something about it.

Well, 12 feets, I had to read your response twice, which I don't often do, to realize I don't have a clue in the world what you are talking about.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Breaking news!

That explains a lot more than you think it does, and gives me a clue as to what makes up the liberal mindset... but nevermind that.
Here, I'll repair the syntax for you... That should clear it up

We are supposed to be governed by the rule of law, and not the rule of men, 12 feets.
It's an interesting concept to advocate eliminating lawyers in a system designed to be governed by the rule of law.
If we get rid of laws and lawyers, who gets to be in charge in your world? Jerry Falwell? Rush Limbaugh?

It really is "interesting" isn't it? I do think it is, but it should be more than "interesting". Yet, I'm not making it up. It is a matter of historic record. Like it ,or not -- we are govered by lawyers.
And These clowns even BRAG about it!!

A proffession rules you, but instead of being concerned, you find it "interesting" that i call attention to it in the first place! And then,YOU try to lay a guilt-trip (a liberal form of chastising people) on me for not wanting to keep them in there!!!!! It failed... I don't feel guilt. I feel indignation! But ok -- your reaction is "interesting" to me.

The mind of the modern liberal never ceases to amaze and baffle me!
As if I am advocating mass-termination, a pol pot purge or something!! Didn't werk! No guilt... It just torqued me off!

Even more "interesting": is that you condone it in the first place!
I personally do not call that "interesting". My word for it would be "scarey".
I'm just calling your attention to it. But now that you know, I expect you to ACT with your VOTE.. (the way you are to REMOVE them in my system of government).
Jees!! I gotta write you a map?????????? It's called democracy. I expect you now, to do something about it.

 

[PW2]

Re: Breaking news!

Nope, didn't help!

But thanks anyway. The mind of a conservative seems to work in a different dimension than I am accustomed to, I guess.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Breaking news!

Very true, PW2.
Thank you for trying.

 

[OldMercsRule]

Re: Breaking news!

Nope, didn't help!

But thanks anyway. The mind of a conservative seems to work in a different dimension than I am accustomed to, I guess.

Yup PW2, ya finally said something that makes some sense here. Cornservatives are generally logical, n' they usually use actual facts n' history to draw cornclusions about significant matters of state, they usually use plain n' acurate words in political discourse, they almost always respect the 20 page Cornstatution as written and subsequently amended, and they usually respect both the rights and abilities of individual legal citizens of this Great Country.

Liberals n' Democrats are not cornsistently logical. Why? Ends justify the means!

Liberals n' Democrats rarely use actual facts n' history regarding significant matters of state. They do refer to history to justify unacceptable conduct of Democrats in power. Remember the trashing of Thomas Jefferson, (the first Democrat President), by the Clinton defenders to soften the stench of Bill Clintons' cornduct while in office? Why? The ends justify the means!

Liberals n' Democrats rarely use plain and acurate words in political discourse. Remember what the great Bill Clinton said: (it depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is). John Kerry and leading Democrats claimed the economic performance of the Bush administration was worse then the Great Depression. This is the same John Kerry who called our soldiers terrorists n' stupid fer joining the military to fight for our Country. They now claim that President Bush is the worst President in history as **** Durban just stated this morning. The same **** Durban who stated our soldiers are the same as Nazi storm troopers. The Libs n' Dems claim that we now face a greater threat in this great Country from Islamo Facism as a direct result of our agressive actions then we faced before 9/11. This flies in the face of the fact that we have not been hit at home or the fact that in every war in history both sides escalate matters after first blood. Why? The ends justify the means!

Libs n' Democtats don't seem to like the plain language in our Cornstatution at all as it allows far too much freedom n' personal responsibility. FDR showed 'em how to defeat our system with activist judges, n' the slope has been down hill since that time. They, (Libs n' Dems) now refer to the best line of defence for of all of the US citizens against BIG NANNY GOVERNMENT as a 'living breathing document' and they, (Libs n' Dems) activily work against strict constructionist judges. Why? CORNTROL n' forced DEPENDENCE on NANNY GOVERNMENT. Remember: the Libs n' Dems won't let poor people have voutchers to spend the tax payer funded education dollars for their young on the best schools, as they surely don't want their dim wit minions to engage in critical thinkin'. OH YAH: the ends justify the means!

Is Liberalism a mental disorder? JR

 

[12Footer]

Re: Breaking news!

That's what i said
Amen, JR.

 

[PW2]

Re: Breaking news!

When you going to start with those "fact" based conclusions, JR?
I have not seen any evidence of that yet in your diatribes, and that is truly a "fact" based conclusion.

And 12 feets, you've got me totally confused! The very founding of this country was based upon the rule of law--the success and continuation of the democracy absolutely relies on it--yet you seem to advocate an end to lawyers? Is it only some lawyers you wish to eliminate--namely the ones that may disagree with you? If so that is curious. What is different from that and a monarchy? Which is what the founders expressly wanted to avoid!

What is it you hate about this country, and our democracy that you would wish to undermine it so?

 

[ricksrster]

Re: Breaking news!

When you going to start with those "fact" based conclusions, JR?
I have not seen any evidence of that yet in your diatribes, and that is truly a "fact" based conclusion.

And 12 feets, you've got me totally confused! The very founding of this country was based upon the rule of law--the success and continuation of the democracy absolutely relies on it--yet you seem to advocate an end to lawyers? Is it only some lawyers you wish to eliminate--namely the ones that may disagree with you? If so that is curious. What is different from that and a monarchy? Which is what the founders expressly wanted to avoid!

What is it you hate about this country, and our democracy that you would wish to undermine it so?

So you are saying you have to be a lawyer to be a member of a legislature? The Constitution does not have that requirement. There were some lawyers who signed the Declaration of Independence and attended the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. There were also farmers, merchants, etc. who were equally qualified in attendance.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Breaking news!

And 12 feets, you've got me totally confused! The very founding of this country was based upon the rule of law--the success and continuation of the democracy absolutely relies on it -- yet you seem to advocate an end to lawyers? Is it only some lawyers you wish to eliminate--namely the ones that may disagree with you? If so that is curious. What is different from that and a monarchy? Which is what the founders expressly wanted to avoid!

Typical.
PW, gradiatin lawyer-school doesn't give one any more rights than me!
Any American lawyer should be equal to you and I. I really could care less how many there are in actuality. My basic concern besides their proliferation is the absolute power and control they have an d unleash upon the rest of American society. This already-founded gubment (a long,long time ago btw), was founed by beer drinkers and inventors also.

I think it's fascinating that you fail to comprehend that. I'm certain you are aware of the litigious society they rule over. That is a no-brainer. But what I think may be "confusing" you (yea,like I believe that one), is the overwheming scope of the infestation. They not only control the judicial, but their majority in the halls of the legilative branch as well!! And WTH does our "FOUNDING" have to do with jack?! Liberals are known to call the constitution a "living,breathing document" , but I guess that's only when such silliness promotes THEIR interests. As long as they can sue somebody for something, they don't need a day-job? I dunno, but it's obvious they have no problem with being control by litigious puppetmasteers anyhow. You think it's "confusing", and unheard of that anyone would. So be it, but give me a break!!

The fact that nothing can be done other than to "vote the rascals out" doesn't mean I have to be happy about it. So i will bot be. It's not OK. I've done what i could to call your attention to it in the above post. But according to your persistant twisting and spinning on your skewer, you are "confused". I cannot help you. But in your own words,"The mind of a conservative seems to work in a different dimension than {YOU ARE} accustomed to"

What is it you hate about this country, and our democracy that you would wish to undermine it so?

I am a conservative -- look the word up. Don't make me do it for you.

 

[ricksrster]

Re: Breaking news!

I'll help.
1con?ser?va?tive
Pronunciation: k&n-'s&r-v&-tiv
Function: adjective
1 : [SIZE=-1]PRESERVATIVE[/SIZE]
2 a : of or relating to a philosophy of conservatism b capitalized : of or constituting a political party professing the principles of conservatism : as (1) : of or constituting a party of the United Kingdom advocating support of established institutions (2) : [SIZE=-1]PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE[/SIZE]
3 a : tending or disposed to maintain existing views, conditions, or institutions : [SIZE=-1]TRADITIONAL[/SIZE] b : marked by moderation or caution <a conservative estimate> c : marked by or relating to traditional norms of taste, elegance, style, or manners <a conservative suit>
4 : of, relating to, or practicing Conservative Judaism
- con?ser?va?tive?ly adverb
- con?ser?va?tive?ness noun

 

[WillyBWright]

Re: Breaking news!

There are two kinds of Conservatives. True GOP Conservatives and Neoconservatives. Neocons take the worst of the Conservative ideology and combine that with the worst of the Liberal ideology. True Conservatives prefer minimal governmental influence and prefer to tax only enough to pay for what is absolutely necessary. Neocons claim they are for small government, but their Big Brother policies demand otherwise. They prefer to Borrow money for the big government their policies demand and give tax breaks to disguise their true colors. Sooner or later, the Republican Party is going to fracture and split between the True Conservativism and Neoconservatism factions and form two separate parties. Google Pat Buchannan.

Then there are Conservatives like Footer that are so far to the Right that if the Earth was flat, they'd fall off.

 

[PW2]

Re: Breaking news!

So you are saying you have to be a lawyer to be a member of a legislature? The Constitution does not have that requirement. There were some lawyers who signed the Declaration of Independence and attended the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. There were also farmers, merchants, etc. who were equally qualified in attendance.

Now I'm just curious. Where in anything I have written here or elsewhere could you possibly come up with that conclusion?
The problem with debating with conservatives is they seem to be intent to change the debate to something that they can deal with, as opposed to what was really said.

 

[12Footer]

Re: Breaking news!

PW, Do you really want to get into how many "different types" of LIBERAL there are?

Goodgawd, man! Talk about "confusing" !
You're killin me here.