Yes:
“I blame Congress over the last 50 to 100 years for not standing up and taking its responsibility given to it by the Constitution. The reason the judiciary has been able to impose a separation of church and state that’s nowhere in the Constitution is that Congress didn’t stop them. The reason we had judicial review is because Congress didn’t stop them. The reason we had a right to privacy is because Congress didn’t stop them.”
That’s not some lefty twisting his words… that’s a direct quote from an interview he gave to the ultra-right-wing Looney-Moony Washington Times. (Via Daily Kos.)
I hate to say it, but honesty impels me… whether he embraces the label himself or not, Tom DeLay is, quite technically, a fascist.
fascist is a bit strong. but I will agree that he is making my party look BAD. I spend all day on the air putting republicans in such a great light and then this clown opens his yap and makes my party look bad. if the democrats succeed in running DeLay out of office it will be the republican party that benefits.
Oh, here we go with more deflection.
Dittoes, Rush…
Yeah but Rush, is the Republican party going to run DeLay out of office or keep the albatross around their neck?
That guy is out of his mind.
Read the interview with Delay… very interesting spin.
To quote Delay: “The Democrats don’t want an ethics committee for two reasons.”
Now, that IS a lie. If anything it’s the other way around. Repubs CHANGED the Ethics Rules to protect Delay, the Dems want them changed back, not get rid of them completely.
4: Dave: I am not betting on my party to have the guts to muzzle him. this is Newt in 1994+ all over again…but at least Newt was a smart smart aleck. I am afraid the republicans will not act until DeLay just hurts my party way too much. I love my party. but having an idiot in such a position is really hurting my concentration on the golf course.
The Republicans have come a long way from the days of Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt, this liberal’s two favorite US presidents.
A case of too much pesticide leaking through the gloves and masks, mixed with massive infusions of easy cash in exchange for specific sentences in legislation, topped with a luscious fundamentalist evangelism—distilled into a nefarious ego demanding all others follow him no matter where he goes. Wasn’t there some other fascist type socio-pathic ego maniac who wanted every one to obey his commands, and if they didn’t, he punished them. And as i recall he was short in stature too.
I have a little black mustache drawn on my poster.
spyder @9
Yeah, I wasn’t much of a fan of Robert Reich either…
http://www.nationalreview.com/.....140933.asp
DNC Chair Howard Dean’s younger brother runs the website Democracy for America (DFA), which was created by Dean last year to help manage his presidential campaign. Dean’s younger brother Jim also worked for DFA in its earlier incarnation, Dean for America, during the 2004 presidential primaries. However, in a letter to supporters this week, DFA attacked Tom DeLay for having family members on his payroll.
ethics????
2003- Barbara Boxer directed $15,000 from her “PAC For a Change,” to a consulting firm run by her son. The year before, she funneled $115,000 to the same firm.
2004- Joe Lieberman paid his son Matthew $34,000 and daughter Rebecca $36,000 to work on his presidential campaign.
Great, and Bush just proposed appointing his cousin to be ambassador to France.
http://cnn.com/2005/WORLD/amer.....index.html
How does either have anything to do with DeLay’s big mouth?
and not to exclude the independents there is thi juicy morsel;
Vermont congressman Bernie Sanders has paid his wife and daughter more than $150,000 in campaign consulting fees in the past several years.
Delay is effective at pissing off the deviant party leaders. Just like the Republicans that post on this blog kick your sorry asses all over the place. They make you wet yourself and watch you run home crying to mommy. It has nothing to do with ethics, it’s a cry for help. Dems are moraly bankrupt.
demobuttcracks/chardonnay,
same ol’ denial
I’ll Have The Sandy Berger And A Side Of Lies
The reason the judiciary has been able to impose a separation of church and state that’s nowhere in the Constitution is that Congress didn’t stop them
I don’t know what he is.
However, at a minimum, he doesn’t believe it three branches of government, just 2 I guess.
I am sure he would object to the power of the judiciary to find that a law is unconstitutional.
More specifically, he wants the US to be a religious (Christian) state.
ultra-right-wing Looney-Moony Washington Times.
Yes, run by Rev. Moon. Do a google search or look at :
http://www.perkel.com/politics/moonies/
Scary.
Here’s a fact that I know is true because I pulled it out of my demobuttcrack… Our president used to stand in front of radar transmitters in an effort to keep warm, and that’s why his thinking is F*cked-up most of the time.
Why does everyone hide behind stupid little nicknames? Are you afaid to stand behind your statements? Besides, how would anyone know if I really am…
why would anyone care?
democrat manifesto
communist manifesto
same difference cept throw some of that humanist manifesto in there as not to omit the deviants.
It just tickles me to no end that PRESIDENT George W Bush annoys you all so much. I amuses me to watch your heads explode everytime you are forced to acknowledge that he did, and continues to, best the liberals at every turn.
An of course, we know that’s why you are so rabid to keep Chrissy Fraud in power – she’s your only desperate foothold to relevance.
Let the predictable name calling begin little Liberal Pets.
What a bunch of hypocrits. We have Sandy Berger stealing classified documents to cover up the Clonton incomptence on preventing terrorist attack and now the left wing America haters want us all to worry about a few words by Tom Delay.
Spyder@9,
You ought not speak of Howard Dean like that!
wait, it’s spring fling for liberals;
On March 29, liberals’ intellectual retort to a speech by William Kristol at Earlham College was to throw a pie.
On March 31, liberals enjoyed the hurly-burly of political debate with Pat Buchanan at Western Michigan U by throwing salad dressing.
On April 6, liberals engaged David Horowitz on his ideas at Butler U by throwing a pie at him.
talk about freedom of speech.
VCRW, too bad for Bush 9/11 happened while he was president. The “Blame Clinton” crowd is as pathetic as was reading My Pet Goat while the country was under attack.
Erik @ 21
THE REV. MOON IS IN CONTROL?? ohmy gaw we’d better do something about this! Your web site link seems legit, so now the truth finally comes out. I was awed by the quality of the investigative reporting on your web site link, as exemplified by the hard-hitting summary statement:
“Even though a person has a right to be a Moonie doesn’t make it a legitimate religion. And just because you have the right to be an idiot doesn’t legitimize your idiocy. A pig is still a pig even when it’s set free. It’s just like smoking cigarettes. Just because it’s legal and you have the right to smoke, it doesn’t mean you aren’t going to get sick from it.”
As an historical foot note, I mistakenly stumbled in to a Moonie recruiting session in 1974. It was indeed creepy. And the fellow trying to block the door looked a lot like a certain celebrity lefty blogger.
Too bad 9/11 happened at all.
Too bad Slick Waggin His Willie was too busy unzipping to deal with terrorism when he had the chance.
How many attacks were there under Waggin willie again?
Clinton, in fighting terrorism, spoke big and did little.
In fact, more terrorist attacks occurred on Clinton’s watch, both inside and outside of U.S. borders, than during any other presidential administration in U.S. history:
*The 1993 World Trade Center bombing that killed 6 and injured 1,000
*The 1993 Mogadishu firefight that killed 18 U.S. soldiers
*The 1995 Oklahoma City terrorist attack on the federal building by American extremists that killed 168, wounding several hundred others
*The 1995 Saudi Arabia car bomb that killed 5 U.S. military personnel
*The 1996 Khobal Towers bombing that killed 19 U.S. soldiers, wounding 515
*The 1998 bombings of two U.S. embassies in Africa that killed 231 citizens, 12 Americans and injured 5,000
*The 2000 USS Cole attack in Yemen that killed 17 U.S. sailors, wounding 39
With each terrorist attack, Clinton went before the American people and promised that “those responsible would be hunted down and punished.” However, we now know that nothing came of Clinton’s empty promises but spineless, politically driven, Wag-the-Dog diversions.
In fact, more terrorist attacks occurred on Clinton’s watch, both inside and outside of U.S. borders, than during any other presidential administration in U.S. history
Unless you intentionally fail to consider the daily insurgent attacks in Iraq that have killed thousands of American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqi nationals and are being lead by a man who has proclaimed his solidarity with al Qaeda.
With each terrorist attack, Clinton went before the American people and promised that “those responsible would be hunted down and punished.” However, we now know that nothing came of Clinton’s empty promises but spineless, politically driven, Wag-the-Dog diversions.
Wow, and the irony that bin Laden is still free after Bush has made the same statement literally verbatim countless times since 2001 is totally lost on you isn’t it?
For a troll you’re really bad at what you do.
Oh I see, Waggin Willie had him and let him go but, what the hell, it’s all GWs fault.
For a liberal, you’re typically predictable in your defense of an immature, narcissic mysogynist “married” to a one woman communist government shrew.
If you want to continue to perpetuate lies and myths you’re going to be predictably smacked down every time for it. I’m sorry if that bothers you, but too damn bad!
I’m sure Al Gore would have done better, aren’t you Dave?
Smacked down by a pissant liberal like you?
I hardly think so.
I’m sorry if that bothers you, but too DAMNED bad!
Does anyone teach these children grammar anymore?
It was indeed creepy. And the fellow trying to block the door looked a lot like a certain celebrity lefty blogger.
No. Rev. Moon owns the Washington Times which is far right newpaper in Washington DC.
Yes, smacked down multiple times daily. But you’re apparently a masochist for it because you keep coming back for more.
I’m sure Al Gore would have done better, aren’t you Dave?
Not to infringe on a trademark or anything, but a horse’s ass could have done better.
Hahahahahahaha
Hohohohohohoho
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!
Dave, Dave, Dave, you and the lonny lefty PET LIBS at HA are an amusing little diversion incapable of besting a gnat, let alone a RIGHT THINKING ADULT.
Come back when you grow up, babe.
“The trouble with our liberal friends
is not that they’re ignorant:
It’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”
– Ronald Reagan
There was a much married woman who walked into a bridal shop one day and told the sales clerk that she was looking for a wedding gown for her fourth wedding.
“Well”, replied the sales clerk, “exactly what type of dress are you looking for?”
The bride to be said, “A long frilly white dress with a veil.”
The sales clerk didn’t know quite what to say but she finally said, “Frankly, madam, gowns of that nature are considered more appropriate for brides who are being married the first time-for those who are a bit more innocent, if you know what I mean?”
“Well” replied the customer, more than a little put out. “I can assure you that I am as innocent as the rest of them. Believe it or not, despite all my marriages, I remain as innocent as any first time bride.”
“You see, my first husband was so excited about our wedding he died as we were checking into our hotel. My second husband and I got into a terrible fight in the limo on our way to the reception and have not spoken since. We had that wedding annulled immediately.”
“What about your third husband?” asked the sales clerk.
“Well” said the woman, ” he was a LIBERAL Democrat and every night for four years he just sat on the edge of the bed and told me how good it was going to be.”
Bill Clinton got $12 million for his memoirs.
Over 900 pages!
Hillary got $8 million for hers.
That’s $20 million for memories from two people, who for eight years, repeatedly testified, under oath, that they couldn’t remember anything!
Q: What do you get when you cross a pilgrim with a liberal?
A: A god-fearing tax collector who gives thanks for what other people have.
Q: What happens when you cross a pig with a Democrat?
A: Nothing. There are some things a pig won’t do.
Q: What’s a conservative?
A: A liberal who made it through adolescence.
Question – What is the difference between a liberal and a puppy?
Answer -A puppy stops whining after it grows up.
Q: How many liberals does it take to change a light Bulb?
A: At least ten, as they will need to have a discussion about whether or not the light bulb exists. Even if they can agree upon the existence of the light bulb they still may not change it to keep from alienating those who might use other forms of light.
***
Q:How many liberals does it take to change a light bulb?
A:None. Liberals wouldn’t actually change the light bulb, but they would show compassion for it by talking a lot about how terrible it is in the dark and more funding is needed to improve dim, 60 watt bulbs up to bright and productive 100 watt bulbs.
***
Q: How many liberals does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Let George Bush fix it! It’s his fault it’s dark anyway!
Dave, Dave, Dave, you and the lonny lefty PET LIBS at HA are an amusing little diversion incapable of besting a gnat, let alone a RIGHT THINKING ADULT.
Riiight. You just can’t stand being bested by someone who doesn’t have to resort to calling his opponent a “PET NEOCON” or take the loser route of grammar and spelling critiques.
Come back when you grow up, babe.
You might want to take your own advice. Forum trolling isn’t exactly a trait common to mature “right thinking” adults.
Huge difference between trolling and PARTICIPATING dearie… let’s look at all our posts and count who had substantial ones and who had playbook, name-calling nonsense.
***
The division of the human family into its two distinct branches, liberals and conservatives, occurred some 20,000 years ago. Until then all humans coexisted as members of small bands of nomadic hunter/gatherers.
A thousand generations ago, in the pivotal event of societal evolution, beer was invented. This epochal innovation was both the foundation of modern civilization and the occasion of the great bifurcation of humanity into its two distinct subgroups.
Once beer was discovered, our prehistoric forebears decided it was time to settle down. Making beer required grain, and securing a steady supply of it ordained the invention of agriculture.
After that was accomplished, ancient man quickly, and unfairly, consigned actual cultivation to women.
Men couldn’t just run off, willy-nilly, however. Neither the glass bottle nor the aluminum can had yet been invented, so it was necessary to stick pretty close to home, and the brewery.
This left our male ancestors with a lot of time on their hands, and led to the division of the species, which persists to this day.
Some men tried to conserve remnants of the old way of life (hence the term “conservative”) by spending their days in the open field in the dangerous pursuit of big game animals. At night they would roast their prey at a big barbecue, and afterwards sat around the fire drinking beer, passing wind and telling off color jokes.
Other, more timid, souls stayed closer to home. They are responsible for the domestication of cats and the invention of group therapy. Mostly, they sat around worrying about how life wasn’t fair and concocting elaborate schemes to “liberate” themselves from inequity (thus their designation as “liberals”).
In the evening they gathered around their fire, nibbling on fruit and nuts, sharing their innermost feelings.
Today some liberals try to pretend they’re really sort of conservative, and sometimes succeed in confusing people. The following are a few tips to use in distinguishing the two types.
By definition liberals believe in big government and high taxes. Life is unfair and the government is there to do something about it. Most people are too stupid to spend untaxed income wisely, they say, and high taxes allow liberals in government to do a better job of it.
Conservatives don’t like government, and, aside from the military, wish it would just go away. They hate taxes, regulations, speed limits, and small cars.
Typical conservatives are Arnold Schwarzenegger, Ronald Reagan, Rush Limbaugh and, up there with the Big Man in the Sky, the incomparable John Wayne.
Typical liberals are Dustin Hoffman, Shirley McLaine, Pee Wee Herman, Martin Sheen, Sean Penn, Barbra Streisand, Ted Turner and his former wife, the traitor ***** Jane Fonda.
All conservatives drink beer. American beer.
Some liberals like imported beer, but most prefer white wine or foreign water from a bottle.
Liberals like to drive Volvos and Saabs because they’re made in socialist Sweden. They like to eat weird food because it’s un-American.
Your basic conservative vehicle, especially in Alaska, is the Chevy Suburban. It’s big, it’s American, it’s four wheel drive, and it sucks up the gas. Conservatives eat beef, which they (surprise!) like to barbecue.
Big game hunters are conservative. Interior decorators are liberal.
Liberals invented the designated hitter rule in baseball because it wasn’t “fair” to make the poor pitcher take his turn at bat.
Conservatives, inspired by a remark of the legendary Pittsburgh Steeler linebacker Jack Lambert, believe quarterbacks should be required to wear skirts, so they can more easily be distinguished from real football players.
James Brown and Ray Charles are conservatives. Michael Jackson and Milli Vanilli are liberals.
Most social workers, personal injury lawyers, journalists, and group therapists are liberals. Most ranchers, loggers, professional soldiers, and steeplejacks are conservatives.
Liberal jurors distrust the prosecutors and police. Conservatives figure the defendant must be guilty or he wouldn’t be on trial.
Most conservatives not only believe in the death penalty, they would cheerfully implement it, personally, if called upon to do so.
Liberals think capital punishment is a barbaric relic, and unfair to boot.
Liberals believe Europeans are, generally speaking, far more enlightened than Americans. Conservatives think they’re basically decadent, as evidenced by their complete absence in wars.
Typical conservative movies are “Raising Arizona”, “Patton”, and “Conan the Barbarian”.
Typical liberal movies are “Prince of Tides”, “Last Tango in Paris”, and “The Big Chill”.
The quintessential liberal is the handicapper, the person who decides how much extra weight to saddle the faster horses with in order to make the race “fair”.
The American cowboy, of course, is your basic, full bore conservative. A hundred years ago an Englishman in South Dakota was trying to find the owner of a huge cattle ranch. He rode up to one of the ranch hands and asked, “Excuse me, but could you tell me where to find your Master?” To which the cowboy replied, “That sum***** hasn’t been born.”
Goldy,
At least you didn’t call Tom DeLay a facist. Or even worse, a rascist facist.
http://www.urbandictionary.com.....erm=facist
Dave:
I would just ignore him. Sooner or later they will close whatever public library he is squatting in and he’ll have to go back to bothering people on the street for spare change and sleep under an overpass.
Either that or he’ll eventually go back on his meds.
Why are so many LIBERAL “men” SEXISTS?
Must be that Waggin His Willie sexist, narcissic, mysogynist married to a one woman communist government shrew wanna be syndrome
Okay… you know what ProudAss… ENOUGH! Littering threads with multiple off-topic insults in an intentional effort to destroy any semblence of a forum we still have, is what got JCH thrown into the filter.
Clearly, Tom DeLay’s un-American, anti-constitutional statements are even too stunning for you to defend, so instead, you and Chardonnay and the other trolls are just trying to deflect debate.
That’s fine. But once or twice is enough.
What really gets me, is the way you and others disrepect ME. Not for what I believe (I expect to be disrespected for that) but for my willingness to keep this an open forum where anybody can post. I guess if you can’t refute my arguments with an intelligent debate, you’d rather nobody debate them at all.
Pathetic.
You’re right, Wayne. Sometimes I just can’t help it, I be the first to admit.
Sorry for my part in fueling it, Goldy.
I’m not defending Delay, but I AM waiting for you to admit the ethics problems in YOU OWN PARTY before you continue to pigpile on him and call him names.
That said, nope Delay won’t go.
Broke no laws.
Broke no ethics rules.
Has been extremely capabale of pushing through the GOP agenda, which, after all, is his job.
And THAT is what truly makes you LIBS rabid.
What is it you all are so fond of saying…
Oh yeah
Get over it.
And furthermore, since you are such a “fair and balanced” kind of guy, Goldy, so very concerned with forum littering, let’s take a look and comment about the LIBERAL posters that infect the threads post upon post of vile spew – good ol Don comes to mind – I even counted for you over in ‘paying taxes’ thread @ 52:
51 previous posts, 27 (53%) by libs and of those 12 (44%) by good ol Don:
20- Ain’t that just like a Republican to bitch about paying taxes for his weekly night out.
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 10:28 am
21- What does anyone need a lighter on a plane for? You’re not allowed to smoke on the plane. I guess it’s a “freedom” thing.
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 10:30 am
22- What does anyone need a lighter on a plane for? You’re not allowed to smoke on the plane. I guess it’s a “freedom” thing.
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 10:30 am
23- Even if chards got a job in a whore house, she still couldn’t get laid.
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 10:33 am
24- Oh God, that’s the last time I’m getting on a Boeing plane unless it was built after April 14, 2005.
What did they fire you for Chuck, cheating on L & I?
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 10:34 am
25- What are you trying to desperately fit into, chards? The pants you wore yesterday?
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 10:36 am
26- You don’t have to go to Vegas. Chards will pay you to screw her in her trailer on the dirt road to Black Diamond.
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 10:40 am
28- “what skeletons might be in dirty harry’s closet?”
Ann Coulter? She looks like s/he/it escaped from a gay brothel.
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 10:42 am
29- That’s chards, except she can’t get anybody to do it free. She has to pay them.
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 10:43 am
30- Well this thread started out with great promise but got real boring after the Repug trolls took it over, so I’m going to go do something else today. They know nothing about sex except by reading books. They can’t even get laid in a whore house. Beats me how they reproduce. Must be through some process of virus replication or something like that.
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 10:46 am
42- I don’t go to those places. Here’s why:
1. I don’t want to catch what you’ve got,
2. Those girls in the pictures are Republicans. You can tell by the fake tits. Also by the fact they’re whores.
3. My wife would kill me.
4. I can’t afford it on my meager state pension.
5. I’m wanted in Nevada for a caper there in 1968.
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 11:38 am
43- They don’t deserve it, but they both need it in the worst way, and we should take up a collection for them to get it just for the sake of social peace.
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 11:41 am
57- They don’t deserve it, but they both need it in the worst way, and we should take up a collection for them to get it just for the sake of social peace.
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 11:41 am
58- They don’t deserve it, but they both need it in the worst way, and we should take up a collection for them to get it just for the sake of social peace.
* BIAWsux2 is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dubyasux NLSP
Comment by BIAWsux2*— 4/14/05 @ 11:41 am
Golly, gosh, gee, whiz, I usre don’t see a whole lot of discussion about PAYING TAXES there, Goldy, do you?
Nope, no “intentional effort to destroy any semblence of a forum” there.
No sirreee bob, no refututation of arguments with intelligent debate by good ol Don.
Nothing like a good old double standard… what was that little headline a few days ago… Do as I say, not as I do.
Help me out, Goldy…where in the constitution, bill of rights or federalist papers is the term “separation of Church and State”?
Hey EugenicsBoy @ 58
“I’m not defending Delay, but I AM waiting for you to admit the ethics problems in YOU OWN PARTY before you continue to pigpile on him and call him names.”
Ok, ok. I admit it. There have been some Democrats who have violated ethics and the law. I apologize to you for that.
Ok, guyz and galz pigpile away on Delay!!!!!
Chuck @ 61
The phrase “separation of Church and State” isn’t used directly in any of those. The phrase was coined to condense the meaning and intent of amendment 1 (and the special case given in Article VI, Section 3).
I know, I know, you disagree with the reading. But, you’re wrong.
ProudAss @59,
You don’t like it? Then leave. Go over to Snarkland and enjoy their scintillating debate. I don’t have time to read all the comments here, let alone moderate them, so don’t whine to me about fairness. Life ain’t fair. (Hey… isn’t that the righty agenda anyway?)
Chuck @61,
Separation of church and state is a logical conclusion from the First Amendment. This was, after all, a nation founded by men of the Enlightenment… (gasp) secular humanists, no less.
Goldy@64
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.
So if I want to go to your childs school at lunch on my dime (dont worry I have no such intent) and tell your child of the virtues of my god, if you try to stop me you are prohibiting my free exercise thereof. Sounds like a very one sided deal to me….AND you are abridging my freedom of speech as well.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
But as I know you are going to pick and choose your way through the 1st amendment…lets pick and choose our way through this. No pick to this really “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”. The previous part could have said “Since the moon is made of green cheese, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”.
ProudAss @59,- You don’t like it? Then leave. -Comment by Goldy— 4/15/05 @ 12:04 am
Right.
Is that a version of “It’s my house and you have to play the games I want to play”?
Is bitching at me the Goldy version of ‘lets let the little libs pass on their ethics violations but hey hey hey don’t let Delay fart wrong’?
I repeat:
-I AM waiting for you to admit the ethics problems in YOUR OWN SANDBOX before you continue to pigpile on those who, horror of horrors, call you all on your own duplicity.
and
-Nothing like a good old double standard… what was that little headline a few days ago… Do as I say, not as I do.
EugenicsBoy, you moron. See post 62
Was I addressing you?
No.
And, once again, the sexism/ageims rears it’s ugly head in ASSUMING I am a ‘boy’ and ‘boy’ ASSUMES I am a child.
Now, I’ve addressed you.
Chuck @ 67
“But as I know you are going to pick and choose your way through the 1st amendment”
No, Chuck, nobody around here is picking and choosing. The phrase and its interpertations have been covered by two and a quarter centuries of legal scholars, historians, political scientists, and, yes, even judges.
When you get off your ass, go to grad school, and write an authorative doctoral dissertation on constitutional history/law, I’ll be interested in your interpertations of the constitution and bill of rights, Dr. Chuck. Otherwise, you are just Chuckie venting spleen.
EugenicsBuoy @ 69
I do apologize for assuming your sex.
Was I addressing you?
At post 58, you did not specify who you were addressing. It looks like you just wanted a confession from a liberal. I gave you one.
Chuck,
for further understanding, read the founding fathers statements.
Very enlightening.
not as much religion in those days, as you think.
dj@70
The words were written in simple english, got that pretty much down in 4th grade. The authorative doctoral dissertation on constitutional history/law is what has got us in this complicated mess with a few simple sentances that a grade school child could interpret. Anything further is reading things into the law….
Diggindude@72
Have read the federalist papers and many others, I have no doubt that there wasnt that much religion around…but they wanted to propigate what was around.
52 of the 55 signers of “The Declaration of Independence” were orthodox, deeply committed, Christians? The other three all believed in the Bible as the divine truth, the God of scripture, and His personal intervention.
My political science prof., was a retired chicago police captain.
I was taught to respect the constitution as a living document.
You cant change that in me.
If the document was intended for strict adherence, and not current interpretation, I dont believe the country would survive.
Religion, has no place in government. You can worship anything you want to, without restriction, but if you want to bring it into the public, and government arena, then you have to let them all in.
Do you want buddha statues in the rotunda?
I dont have a degree in constitutional law, but I think I have a clear understanding, of the constitution, and the motivation of the founding fathers reasons to leave room for interpretation.
In my opinion, this room for adaptation, is what makes it the greatest document ever created.
But Chuck @ 73,
If the words are so simple and unambiguous, wouldn’t we all read the first amendment and get the same meaning?
Then how do you explain your rather fringe interpertation?
Diggindude@76
See that is the entire problem with it. The constitution is not a living document ment to bend and flex however you guys want. It is a very simple set of rules set in stone to base our society on. When we start the twist o flex game then it is time to set the constitution to the side, suspend government and go at it to begin anew…however that comes about. That is the only fair way of doing it.
scalia’s interpretation, is ridiculous.
I dont think he gets it at all.
dj@77
Ok you have called my meaning fringe….”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.”
“So if I want to go to your childs school at lunch on my dime (dont worry I have no such intent) and tell your child of the virtues of my god, if you try to stop me you are prohibiting my free exercise thereof. Sounds like a very one sided deal to me….AND you are abridging my freedom of speech as well”.
Feel free to interpret it your way…I am curious as to how the “mainstay” liberal thinks…now remember I am a religious “whako” trying to interpret my rights in a school that is teaching kids american tribal custom and religion, darwin theory (yes theory too many holes) Hindu beliefs, african american religion…but if I were to take the christian faith and pass it on to curious kids at lunch I am somehow violating what the founding fathers ment? Or hurting them? Wouldnt it be more accurate to say that you are violating their education by not allowing the kids to hear my view? (when I figure out my view I will let you know).
Living document,
This is the one most important aspect of the constitution.
In your interpretation chuck, we should all be wearing wigs and buckle shoes.
If the document cannot be adapted to our lives, in any generation, it is worthless, and would need to be re written.
I’ll never be convinced of any other point of view on this.
If you tell my kid anything, you are infringing on my child’s right, NOT to listen to your religion.
You have the right to do unto you, not others.
How would you think you can spread religion to others you have no control over?
Why not, keep ALL religion out of school, and teach it at home, or at you place of brainwashing,..er……. i mean worship.
Control the LIBERAL population: spay/neuter your PET LIB! 31, your numbers add up to a total of 264 deaths in 8 years, GWB has lyingly sent over 1500 or our soldiers to their deaths in less than 3. What’s your point?
Control the LIBERAL population: spay/neuter your PET LIB! @ all posts. Get over it gal. We are all guests here. If you cannot be 50% sane and coherent, why don’t you go back to your bed under uSP’s big desk and keep licking what you enjoy. The spread sheets, the ‘facts’ and whatever else turns you on.
However, we now know that nothing came of Clinton’s empty promises but spineless, politically driven, Wag-the-Dog diversions.
McVeigh getting executed was a spineless, politically driver, wag-the-dog diversion?
Chuck:
If the Constitution is a fixed and unchanging document, then freedom of speech and the press doesn’t extend to tv, radio or the internet and under your precious second amendment, you can have all the flintlocks you want, but modern firearms don’t fall under the protection of the amendment. They didn’t exist when the document was drafted, after all
Pass the powderhorn please.
Chuck @ 80
“remember I am … trying to interpret my rights in a school that is teaching kids [stuff] …but if I were to take the christian faith and pass it on to curious kids at lunch I am somehow violating what the founding fathers ment?”
The scenario you raise isn’t about limiting your right to practice your religion. It is limiting your freedom of speech in schools, and for obvious reasons. Do you want “devil worshipers” meeting up with you children over lunch without your permission (perhaps against your will) and proselytizing? Wouldn’t that interfere with your rights as a parent to (among other things) exercise your religion with your children and bring them up in the culture and faith that you choose?
But, Chuck, if you want to go to the UW or WWU campus and discuss your religion with adult students, go for it. Recruit away. You would no longer be trampling on the rights of parents.
Hmmm… interesting. Let’s look at what Mr. Delay said and see if it passes scrutiny.
“I blame Congress over the last 50 to 100 years for not standing up and taking its responsibility given to it by the Constitution. The reason the judiciary has been able to impose a separation of church and state that’s nowhere in the Constitution is that Congress didn’t stop them. The reason we had judicial review is because Congress didn’t stop them. The reason we had a right to privacy is because Congress didn’t stop them.”
He’s saying that the reason we have a “wall of separation” between religion and the state is because the courts have interpreted the establishment clause to be a wall of separation that was never intended. The same people who wrote the first amendment also established an office of congressional chaplain and established a chaplains corps for the Army. It is clear by their actions that they did not intend to establishment clause of the first amendment to be a wall of separation between religion and the state. Yet, in the past few years federal courts have gone so far as to say that the pledge of allegiance violate the first amendment because it mentions God (a generic God by the way, the pledge does not say “under the Holy Trinity for example). So, it would seem the courts have attempted to turn the establishment clause into a wall of separation that was not written into the constitution.
Then he addresses judicial review, which, though he gets the time frame wrong, does emanate from the supreme court itself. There is no written privilege for the courts to review the constitutionality of any law, it is a privilege that the court has appropriated for itself.
As to the right to privacy, there is none expressly written into the constitution. There is an implied right to privacy if you take the specified rights in the fourth amendment and combine it with the ninth amendment. To go from that implication and base fundamental constitutional law on a right that is not expressly written into the constitution is a problematic venture, as a simple re-interpretation of that implied right would undo years and years of precedent. If you want an expressed right to privacy, then do what every one else who wants a new expressed right, pass an amendment. That’s a much more difficult process than just having a judge invent it, but it would be much more durable as well.
Finally, Mr. Delay is saying that all of these changes have happened because of congressional passivity in the face of court actions. In that regard, he is absolutely correct. It is congress that ordains and establishes all federal courts except the supreme court (Article III, Section 1 of the constitution). The congress has the authority to reconstitute the courts how ever it chooses. That is has not done so is an act of passive acquiescence to the courts actions.
Finally, your charge that Mr. Delay is a Fascist based on his generally accurate observations is interesting. He is the chosen leader of the party that has won the most congressional seats since 1994. He is arguing that it is the elected representatives of the people who should be setting the relationship between the state and the society rather than un-elected judges. I would think that such an appeal to the will of the people over the dictates of un-elected judges would be anti-fascist. In fact, it would seem that those who are espousing that the relationship between the state and society should be set by un-elected “philosopher kings” which the peoples’ representatives (the House of Representatives) have to voice in approving would be closer to supporting a fascist model.
Hmmm… interesting. Let’s look at what Mr. Delay said and see if it passes scrutiny.
“I blame Congress over the last 50 to 100 years for not standing up and taking its responsibility given to it by the Constitution. The reason the judiciary has been able to impose a separation of church and state that’s nowhere in the Constitution is that Congress didn’t stop them. The reason we had judicial review is because Congress didn’t stop them. The reason we had a right to privacy is because Congress didn’t stop them.”
He’s saying that the reason we have a “wall of separation” between religion and the state is because the courts have interpreted the establishment clause to be a wall of separation that was never intended. The same people who wrote the first amendment also established an office of congressional chaplain and established a chaplains corps for the Army. It is clear by their actions that they did not intend to establishment clause of the first amendment to be a wall of separation between religion and the state. Yet, in the past few years federal courts have gone so far as to say that the pledge of allegiance violate the first amendment because it mentions God (a generic God by the way, the pledge does not say “under the Holy Trinity for example). So, it would seem the courts have attempted to turn the establishment clause into a wall of separation that was not written into the constitution.
Then he addresses judicial review, which, though he gets the time frame wrong, does emanate from the supreme court itself. There is no written privilege for the courts to review the constitutionality of any law, it is a privilege that the court has appropriated for itself.
As to the right to privacy, there is none expressly written into the constitution. There is an implied right to privacy if you take the specified rights in the fourth amendment and combine it with the ninth amendment. To go from that implication and base fundamental constitutional law on a right that is not expressly written into the constitution is a problematic venture, as a simple re-interpretation of that implied right would undo years and years of precedent. If you want an expressed right to privacy, then do what every one else who wants a new expressed right, pass an amendment. That’s a much more difficult process than just having a judge invent it, but it would be much more durable as well.
Finally, Mr. Delay is saying that all of these changes have happened because of congressional passivity in the face of court actions. In that regard, he is absolutely correct. It is congress that ordains and establishes all federal courts except the supreme court (Article III, Section 1 of the constitution). The congress has the authority to reconstitute the courts how ever it chooses. That is has not done so is an act of passive acquiescence to the courts actions.
So, you charge that Mr. Delay is a Fascist based on his generally accurate observations. He is the elected leader of the party that has won the most congressional seats since 1994. He is arguing that it is the elected representatives of the people who should be setting the relationship between the state and the society rather than un-elected judges. I would think that such an appeal to the will of the people over the dictates of un-elected judges would be anti-fascist. In fact, it would seem that those who are espousing that the relationship between the state and society should be set by un-elected “philosopher kings” which the peoples’ representatives (the House of Representatives) have to voice in approving would be closer to supporting a fascist model.
damn, sorry for the double post.
Ranger @89,
I am saying DeLay is a fascist because he wants to eliminate judicial review, tear down the wall between church and state, and deny any right to privacy. I am saying he is a fascist, because he wants to diminish the power of the judiciary as an effective check on the executive and the legislative branches. I am saying Tom DeLay is a fascist, because given the chance, he would rule this nation as he rules his own party, as a tyrant and a dictator.
Hitler and “El Duche” were also elected through constitutional, democratic means… and that didn’t make them any less dictatorial… or fascist.
Delay has already started demanding “loyalty oaths” from his fellow Republicans, one more sign of a good fascist.
Fascist (like Nazi) is a word that’s flung about with too much ease these days, like an all-purpose insult. But in this case, it fits. At the very least, Tom Delay is a corrupt, theocratic, homophobic, extremist thug.
Well, I take it that you are admitting the accuracy of his statements, so lets take them one at a time.
First, Congress has the authority under the constitution to create and maintain the judicial system (Article III, Section 1). Because of that it is perfectly legal for Congress to proscribe what issues the courts can and can not adjudicate. Delay doesn’t want to “eliminate judicial review” he is simply pointing out that it is a privilege that the courts hold because congress has allowed them to.
Second, there is no “wall between church and state” to be torn down. The US Government spends monies every year to build and maintain chapels and pay chaplains in the military. The establishment clause says that the federal government shall establish no state religion, it doesn’t say it shall never take any action that recognizes the existence of God or provide monies to support (either directly or indirectly) the free expression of religious beliefs.
Third, there is no expressed right to privacy in the constitution to deny. The implied right to privacy can be wiped away at any time by the same power that put in place, the Supreme Court. It can also be wiped away at any time by congress if it chooses to pass a law restricting the federal courts from reviewing privacy issues, thus restricting the power of plaintiffs to use it as a legal argument in federal court.
If Delay is a Fascist for simply reminding people that the federal courts get their authority from the congress which the constitution gives the power to “ordain and establish” and that the congress should use that power, then I guess you’d call FDR a Fascist for trying to pact the Supreme Court by adding several new seats that he could immediately fill with friendly justices before World War II (thus eliminating the courts check on his efforts to unconstitutionally exercise his executive power).
Well, neither Hitler nor Mussolini ever got over 40% of the vote and Hitler (nor Mussolini IIRC but I would have to check) was never directly elected to any executive office. But I take your statement as a general distrust of the wisdom of the general population and democratically expressed popular will so I will take any future statement from you on the “will of the people” supporting your position as nothing more than hypocritical posturing.
Oh my Gosh! PetShit is the ASS! Is she JCH as well?
ASS: I lied a little about my public school education. First through Seventh grades I was in CATHOLIC school! After that demeaning experience I’ve hardly stepped into a Church since.
I certainly have a lot more respect for the recently deceased Pontiff than I have for you!
You still haven’t responded to Hamlet (III,i) being the “death scene”… Any drama students out there regard that scene as the “death scene”?
Rush @ 1
I think DeLay should stay in Congress where he can do Democrats the most good.
Petshit @ 25
It tickles ME to no end that Gregoire annoys YOU so much! You go girl! :D
VCRW @ 26
Hey you idiot, Berger took COPIES not originals, so how does one “cover up” anything by taking copies and leaving the originals in the file? You are a dolt.
Dave @ 29
Dave, you’ve got it all wrong — 9/11 is the best thing that ever happened to Gee-Dub and his flock of neocon sheep. Without 9/11, Shrub would have been nothing but an absentee president on permanent vacation in Crawford Texas, showing up at the ranch house only for dinner and to sign tax cut bills.
zip @ 30
Zip, are you trying to paint Moon as a lefty? Get real, man! The guy is as hard-right as they come. You are right about one thing, though — he indeed is creepy. Moon has owned the Washington Times for over 20 years, and the paper is unabashedly a propaganda organ for right-wing extremism. It also loses money hand-over-fist — over $50 million a year. Under Moon’s ownership, the Washington Times has lost over ONE BILLION DOLLARS but Moon continues to subsidize it with profits from his other “business” enterprises, consisting mainly of no-wage sweatshops located in Third World countries where followers of Moon’s cult “religion” work for room and board only — no wages — in return for Moon’s promise that he is Jesus Christ in the second coming and they will all go to heaven if they devote their lives to providing him with free labor so he can grow extremely, extremely, extremely rich and live in the lap of luxury, which he does.
Delay is a jackass, no question. But it is not up to the party to put him out of office, leadership yes, office, no. That is up to his district.
On another note, how do you all feel about Christine Gregoire paying her daughter $10,000 to follow her around on the campaign train this year? If you dont believe it, this is off the PDC website. Now how do you respond to that?
CANDIDATE/COMMITTEE VENDOR DATE AMOUNT DESCRIPTION
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 07/21/2004 $1,932.80
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 08/13/2004 $824.50
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 11/01/2004 $824.50
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 11/15/2004 $824.50
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 09/15/2004 $824.50
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 10/01/2004 $824.50
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 12/01/2004 $824.50
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 10/15/2004 $824.50
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 09/01/2004 $592.46
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 10/13/2004 $360.62
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 09/23/2004 $233.12
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 08/25/2004 $206.71
COURTNEY GREGOIRE 11/09/2004 $148.40
zip @ 35
Absolutely no doubt in my mind that Al Gore would have done better. Hell, my dog would have done better.
Petshit @ 41
“The trouble with our liberal friends
is not that they’re ignorant:
It’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.”
– Ronald Reagan
Not to be outdone, the rightys are raising willful ignorance to an art form.
Petshit @ 42 et seq.
I see Petshit learned how to cut and paste this morning.
Petshit @ 50
How could beer have been invented 20,000 years ago? Don’t you wingy idiots believe the world was created in 6 days about 3,000 years ago? And what’s this business about nomadic tribes? Did you suddenly catch a case of evolution? What are you going to post next, the Earth is a sphere?
angryvoter@100
Gets her out of the trailer park I guess.
Wingy Idiot @ 50 continued
“The American cowboy, of course, is your basic, full bore conservative.”
The American cowboy, of course, is a federally subsidized anachronism riding transportation that was outmoded 100 years ago and costing the taxpayers more than he produces.
If you asked the average (i.e., ignorant) conservative which state produces the most beef, he’d probably say Texas. He would be wrong. Only 5% of America’s beef supply comes from west of the Mississippi River, and the nation’s top beef-producing state is Florida. Today’s cattle are raised in feedlots, not on the range. Today’s cowboy ranchers represent a nonproductive lifestyle that couldn’t exist without federal subsidies for water, grazing land, electricity, and farm supports. They cost the taxpayers more than they produce.
In other words, we should all look at that rural western “American conservative” with the gun rack in his pickup and horse trailer in tow as a publicly-financed historical preservation project who exists mainly for the amusement of tourists, because that’s exactly what he is.
Goldy, how come I think that you and fellow progressives are going to be basically repeating many of the same themes DeLay is saying (especially judicial review) when/if the D’s get Congress back and the federal bench is full of Bush appointees that may be rolling back issues like privacy?
your numbers add up to a total of 264 deaths in 8 years, GWB has lyingly sent over 1500 or our soldiers to their deaths in less than 3. What’s your point? -Comment by jpgee— 4/15/05 @ 4:32 AM
The POINT is NO Americans would have died on 9/11, let alone nearly 3000 of them, had Waggin his Willie done his job instead of fondling his zipper.
The further POINT is NONE of those soldiers would have been put in harms way either if Waggin his Willie had done his job instead of fondling his zipper.
Are you as concerned about the military deaths in Kosovo??
There were up to 5,000 military casualties according to NATO estimates in that little Waggin his Willie diversion.
Your selective outrage is really cute.
Petshit @ 58
Of course there’s ethics problems in both parties. It takes a LOT of money to campaign for even local offices, and you can’t run a campaign with the money small contributors (i.e., average citizens) are able to give. All politicians have to sell out to corporate donors, because that’s the only source of the big gobs of cash it takes to get elected. Union campaign donations, which represent the pooled donations of many workers, are important to Democratic candidates but can’t match corporate donations, and even Democrats are forced to pander to corporate interests. The only exceptions are the rare candidates like Cantwell who are wealthy enough to finance their campaigns with personal resources, and willing to do it. Unless and until we enact public financing of campaigns, our government will continue to be owned by the highest bidder.
Therefore, any consideration of political ethics must necessarily take place in the context of politicians’ dependence on big donors. Under the current system, accepting money from these donors is not, per se, considered unethical. However, quid pro quo exchanges of trade government contracts, favorable legislation, or political favors for cash are illegal. If the money goes into the politician’s (or a family member’s) pocket this is bribery; if it goes into his campaign coffers, it’s still a legal and ethical violation.
Nearly all government bodies have attempted to delineate what is acceptable and what is not acceptable to provide guidance to elected officials and government employees. Congress is no exception. Actions that violate the ethics rules that Congress has adopted to govern its membership are, per se, ethical violations. Actions that violate laws or expose the member to criminal prosecution are also ethical violations, because it is unethical to break the law.
DeLay’s ethical lapses are even more egregious when placed in the context of a system that looks the other way at politicians’ dependence on big donors who are looking for favorable treatment and defines as “unethical” only the most blatant, line-crossing behavior that verges on bribery and criminality.
Petshit @ 59
Would it make you happy if I put all my comments in one post taking up 200 lines like yours, instead of splitting them up into a couple dozen 2 or 3 liners?
What you didn’t mention is that most of my posts are responding to troll posts, so for every post of mine there is a troll post. If the troll posting dropped to nothing, my posting would drop to almost nothing.
Your move.
Chuck @ 61
What’s in the Constitution is a guarantee of freedom of religion. How can you have freedom of religion without separation of church and state? Many things that aren’t expressly stated in the Constitution are necessarily implied from it, because things that are expressly stated couldn’t exist without those necessary implications.
Chuck @ 65
“So if I want to go to your childs school at lunch on my dime (dont worry I have no such intent) and tell your child of the virtues of my god, if you try to stop me you are prohibiting my free exercise thereof. Sounds like a very one sided deal to me….AND you are abridging my freedom of speech as well.”
There’s an old saying that your freedom to swing your fist stops where my nose starts. You DON’T have a right to proselytize to my child in my living room, nor do you have a right to use the public school (where my child is a captive audience) for this purpose either, because that interferes with my rights to raise my child in the religion of MY choosing.
You DO have a right to go to any church you please, to proseltyze on the street corner, to believe what you wish and speak your mind whenever and wherever it does not interfere with the rights of others. But your “freedom” does not include any right to impose your beliefs on others.
Chuck @ 66
Actually we do infringe on the right of some people to keep and bear arms — namely, convicted felons. How does a literalist like you justify that? Under the bare wording of the First Amendment, we can’t keep aliens from possessing firearms either, because the First Amendment says “people” not “citizens.” The fallacy of your thinking is that there’s no place for reason, judgment, context in reading the Constitution. What is lost on you is that the Constitution is a set of guiding ideas and principles, not a set of ordinances and regulations.
Chuck @ 78
As Diggindude pointed out, if the Constitution is so “simple” why do so many people disagree so much over what it say?
So we can expect you to admit to the egregiousness of Dirty Harry ethics, can we?
http://www.latimes.com/la-na-s.....;cset=true
http://www.latimes.com/media/a.....306315.pdf
Good ol Harry’s not insane – he’s just really good at screwing the system.
I’d rather keep on delay.
http://houseofscandal.org/
AV @ 100
Gregoire’s daughter didn’t “follow her around on the campaign train.” Courtney worked in the campaign office, doing office work for 40+ hours a week, same as a regular job. She worked for her paychecks, and did the same work as other campaign staffers who were being paid for their time. You get paid for your time when you go to work, don’t you? It’s unreasonable to expect her to work for free just because her mother was the candidate.
Dubyasux@117
Yea like I said it kept her out of the trailer park….
I’ll call your Delay and raise you a Boxer, Pelosi, Schumer and her of the indicted fund raiser, Hitllary Robem Cheatem.
Dubyasux@ 117
I think both you and AV are out of line for offering opinions on any candidtaes kids.
Quite frankly it’s no-one business.
ASS @ 119
You’re Opus Dei Supernumerary aren’t you?
Of course, you don’t have to answer that but it would certainly explain a lot of your intolerance and hostility especially towards female Democrat pols. What do you think of Olympia Snowe or Christine Todd Whitman?
You still haven’t responded to Hamlet (III,i) being the “death scene”.
Chuckies a girl?
Who knew?! – So he’s dresses in reverse drag?? WOW creativity in liberal circles is alive and well and living in Seattle.
Opus Dei Supernumerary ?
Been reading your Dan Brown have you? Of course, you’re hungry to believe anything that validates your “demeaning experience”.
What comes next Johnny boy, after insulting Catholics?
Ass @ 122
Nope. Not from Dan Brown. I’ve known of the sect’s work for over 20 years.
So what do you think of Snowe and Whitman? You’re not going to answer that one are you?
As for insulting Catholics – I have some respect for the Jesuits – do you?
Now what was that about the soliloquy being in the “death scene”?
Of course you “have some respect for the Jesuits” they are the most liberal of all the orders and think they are above the rules of whatever diocese/Bishop they are under. The Jesuits over at Gonzaga are a prime example of that: they “counsel” their student of things that are in direct violation of the Church – and yes, I can site specific examples from personal knowledge.
And, before you get all pissy, I have a cousin who happens to BE a Jesuit.
Whitman – she was ok at her job but a RINO.
Snowe – I haven’t paid much attention to her.
Dubyasux @117,
Again, you spout off about something with out doing fact checks, or is it intentional?
FACT : Unions outspend business in this state nearly 2 to 1. Throw in the tribes, environmentalist and teachers and it is almost 5 to 1. Now, before you start your name calling and deflection, go to the PDC and do a little research. They taught a research course at your corospondance law school didnt they? How about ethics? Or were you absent that day?
Oh God, she may be ours but she’s from Massachusetts – that pretty much says it all.
don @ 117, you asked-
As Diggindude pointed out, if the Constitution is so “simple” why do so many people disagree so much over what it say?
and the answer is….comprehension. liberals have a tough time comperehending facts. you twist what the constitution says. the separation of church and state languange is one of the key goals in the “HUMANIST MANIFESTO I, II, III” starting in the 30’s.
see link
http://www.americanhumanist.or.....esto1.html
“[A] wall of separation between church and state” was first used by Roger Williams and popularized by Thomas Jefferson in a 1802 letter to the Danbury Baptists (a religious minority concerned about the dominant position of the Episcopal church in Virginia). His intention was to assure this religious minority that their rights would be protected from undue external interference. The phrase was first quoted by the United States Supreme Court in Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (1879), but it was not until Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1 (1947) that the phrase became a definitive part of Establishment Clause jurisprudence. (Everson also was the first case to interpret the Clause as imposing a restraint on the states as well as the federal government – based upon the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.)
was courtney gregoire also the daughter that worked on maria cantwells campaign and now for her in the senate? I know there are two gregoire daughters.
W @117,
How many volunteers put in more hours without getting paid? How is it that Chrissys daughter in law school gets paid and others dont? She was following mommy around to all her stops, doing not much at all.
and….don’t forget the husband, Mike Gregoire. A paid investigator for the AGO.
Control the LIBERAL population: spay/neuter your PET LIB!@122
WTF are you talking about?
Hey Chuck @ 130,
I’m wid ya on this one. WTF?
are we still talking about ethics or facsism?
Sen Cantwell was scolded by the FEC for failing to disclose $3.8 million in bank loans. According to a February 19, 2005 AP article, Cantwell did not disclose her bank loans until January 2001, breaking FEC law that requires candidates to disclose such information before the November election. Sounds like Paul Berendt! Cantwell’s office has dismissed the issue as an “inadvertent reporting error,” oh, an innocent mistake. The people of Washington State deserve a senator who can at least be honest with the FEC!
ass @ 124
Fair enough Ass but perhaps you might revisit the scripture’s revelations about that most deadly of deadlies called PRIDE because to this most severely lapsed Catholic’s eyes – PRIDE is something you seem to have in spades. Matthew (7:1-5) could apply here as well.
But if you indeed belong to the order I’m thinking of – you’ll only do what they tell you to do anyway.
Oh yeah – and brush up on your English Lit.
Fellow HA’ers – here’s to thinking for yourselves and that most cherished of American values – Liberty.
your references to the scriptures to win your argument are so elroy. is elroy 101 part of your liberal indocrination?
Chardonnay @ 132
“The people of Washington State deserve a senator who can at least be honest with the FEC!”
But she WAS honest with the FEC. She was just tardy. Perhaps you meant to say that “the people of WA deserve a Senator who is timely!” I agree. I hope Cantwell gets an appropriate fine for her disorganization/tardyness.
I will probably vote for her anyway, however. . . .
Just speakin’ from the heart White Wing Whine. Sue me. We’re all sinners – did ya forget?
I notice quite a bit of pride in your postings as well. At least you don’t tend to embarass yourself quite as much as the Ass did in her recent spews.
dj, there you go with your language. what maria did was considered “TARDY?” please write Harry Reid and tell him that what Tom Delay did was normal then. Speaking of tardy, did the WA State Dem party pay their fine for filing late? I am still wondering about the money they put up for the hand count. did they ever get that back?
FYI- sandy berger made copies?? once again you prove to lie.
john, are you talking about
Control the LIBERAL population: spay/neuter your PET LIB!
?
actually john, I admire everything that PERSON has posted. Freedom of speech right? are you against freedom of speech? and remember john, that person is a person despite race, creed, sex, bla bla bla. please show some tolerance. you all sling it.
don’t take yourselves so damn seriously.
Whiner @ 138
Did you hear me call for you or ASS to be banned? Nope. That’d be like old Snark @ (u)SP.
Spew away. Just don’t expect some of us to lie down and take it like a battered spouse. I suppose one day you’ll just get bored one way or the other and declare victory at your favorite winger site.
Chardonnay @ 137
Poor, confused person of unspecified gender.
“write Harry Reid and tell him that what Tom Delay did was normal then.
Ummm. . . read my post again. I said that Cantwell should be fined for her tardyness! Same for Delay. I said nothing about late reporting being normal.
“Speaking of tardy, did the WA State Dem party pay their fine for filing late? I am still wondering about the money they put up for the hand count. did they ever get that back?”
I don’t have any idea, Chardonnay. I am not a member of the Democratic party. But, the question about refunding the hand-recount money is a good one. I am curious as well. Anyone know?
“FYI- sandy berger made copies?? once again you prove to lie.
I’ve never mentioned Berger on this blog before.
My goodness. . . you are all worked up into a tizzy. Breathe deeply, Chardonnay. . .
after 6 bottles of MD2020 that proud theocon (or Talibaptist probably) has passed out. Wow, so early in the after noon this week Chard, last week you made it to the evening.
John, care for a little biblical tit for tat?
I won’t even make you google it
Job 15:5-7
“For your guilt teaches your mouth,
And you choose the language of the crafty.
“Your own mouth condemns you, and not I;
And your own lips testify against you.”
Ass @ 142
Ahh. Job. One of the most difficult of the Ketuvim. Nice choice.
Ahh. Job. One of the most difficult of the Ketuvim. Nice choice. -Comment by John— 4/15/05 @ 6:13 pm
Um Johnny boy… I believe the word you were trying so hard to impress your playmate with is:
Ketubim n : the third of three divisions of the Hebrew Scriptures
Nice try.
ass @ 144
‘scuse me ass. I prefer the New Testament over the Tanakh myself and I don’t often go past the Gospels these days.
How can you possibly expect more from a inveterate pagan sinner such as myself?
Adieu
LOL
So you pick and choose your biblical references like you pick and choose your moral outrage – how liberal of you!
OMG… and of course, you’d pick FRENCH – too perfect!
Buono ciao l’uomo piccolo!
French, Italian and Mexican blood runs through my veins dear. I rarely give it a second thought.
Ciao y adios tambien.
Ass – Knew that would get a rise out of you. Why do you play so close to the winger script? I’ve got French, Italian and Mexican blood running through my veins – no one I know gives it second thought.
Ciao y buenas noches señora del dragón.
Me think-o Ass-o spout-o bullshit-o.
angryoldfrigid vinegar @ 135 you all have to realize that Elroy was stale fridig vinegar’s 1st husbands name. She still has fantasies about him as that is her only experience with a male!!!!
French, Italian and Mexican blood runs through my veins dear. I rarely give it a second thought.
Comment by John— 4/15/05 @ 7:42 pm
So you’re a snobby phony (French), short macho (Italian), illiterate itinerant great at yard work – [by the way you were late last week to spread that mulch we ordered] (Mexican), eh?
And by the way – whoop de friggin do.
I’m Italian and Austrian – born of pure Italians and Austrians, only 2nd generation American.
Lookee here folks, she’s a bigot as well..
Lookee here folks, ANOTHER pissant liberal.
whisks unmercifully:dilate praisers,stick solo!decking revival rations
orchestra decipher adjective puncturing bunted!dwindled plundered
codings repeaters nonportable:milkers brazenness gills?cofactor!O’Brien?