LawTalkers

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Waiting for Fitzgerald (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=704)

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 10-27-2005 02:22 PM

Another Shocker!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account

The babyjesi have shown their power. Bush gives us a conservative anti-Roe proponent or he gets cockblocked again@@!
Justice O'Connor may never get to retire.

sebastian_dangerfield 10-27-2005 02:22 PM

Just Curious
 
Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
1) When was the last time a President nominated such an obviously unqualified crony to the position?

2) The harping from the Left makes it clear that either (a) they are royally upset that they couldn't derail her themselves during public hearings, or, more likely (b) they are disgusted because the conservative outcry against a Bush nominee flies directly in the face of their constant accusations that the GOP follows every Bush word like a bunch of lemmings.
The Left is whining because the Right is falling apart, but even as it falls apart, giving the Left what should be its greatest opportunity in years, the Left can't capitalize because nobody wants the pile Big Govt shit its selling.

The Conservative Revolution has begun to splinter. The Big tent of the GOP is unraveling because everyobdy's beginning to look to 2008, and the conventional wisdom is that the best sales pitch then will be "I'm nothing like Bush." The unity is gone, the "vision" derailed in Iraq and NO.

The Dems stand facing a great vacuum they'd like to, but can't, fill. They're stuck pining for LBJ's Great Society, which nobody wants - or should want - anymore.

We have a vacuum, into which only a moderate, cost cutter who favors well-run small govt will be able to make headway. You're as likely to find that in DC as you are to find Elvis and Jim Morrison sharing crumpets and mimosas.

The Left is whining for the same reason it will always whine - because moderate America refuses to listen to it.

SEC_Chick 10-27-2005 02:22 PM

I have here in my hand a list of 242 card-carrying members . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
What was done to the Japanese sucked and was wrong. No question. But that is a side issue.

The point is that during WWII, any German that might have Nazi sympathies was thrown into a concentration camp by the US government. In addition, Nazi sympathisers were interviewed and asked their political views during the 1930s when we were not at war. Not a complaint from the liberals.

Most of the Germans not identified as Nazi sympathizers faced only very mild persecution. My grandmother, whose parents had immigrated through Galveston and joined one of the tightly-knit German communities in Texas, was a schoolteacher in a German-speaking school. Well, it was German-speaking until the war started and they made her teach in English becase it was otherwise subversive.

Oh, and this was the grandmother who attended the teacher's college in San Marcos with LBJ and would regale us with the stories of him getting caught breaking into faculty offices to steal exams.

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 02:23 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I am neither. I have a bad recollection. But you ought to look at your original list, which had a lot more names on it.
Wrong again.

Other than JRB, please explain how any of the other top ten on that list fall into the wacko category? Also, please explain the opposition to JRB, a jurist qualified to sit on a Fed App Ct? Is it racism or sexism or the combo? Certainly bad form to have a republican nominate someone who is a member of two of the demos' largest plantation hostage demographic groups, right?

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 02:24 PM

Just Curious
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
1991.
Do you know what the word "crony" means?

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 10-27-2005 02:26 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Wrong again.

Other than JRB, please explain how any of the other top ten on that list fall into the wacko category? Also, please explain the opposition to JRB, a jurist qualified to sit on a Fed App Ct? Is it racism or sexism or the combo? Certainly bad form to have a republican nominate someone who is a member of two of the demos' largest plantation hostage demographic groups, right?
How am I wrong this time? That your first list didn't have more names on it?

I'm neither explaining nor justifying the opposition. You might like the pope to be nominated. But he couldn't get confirmed. Same for JRB. Why nominate someone, other than a crony, who can't get confirmed? What happened the last time a president made two mistakes? Kennedy.

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 02:26 PM

Another Shocker!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Justice O'Connor may never get to retire.
Wrong again. The babyjesi has shown that they have the crucial swing part of the Republican Senators on their knees. Are you paying attention to what just happened? Bush bowed because he didn't have 51 of the 55 Senators in his party (50 if you count Reid as a yes vote). Those R Senators knows where the power lies, at the Right hand of God.

sebastian_dangerfield 10-27-2005 02:27 PM

Just Curious
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Sexual Harassment Panda
I really was unaware of much harping from the "Left", whomever is encompassed by that term. There seemed to have been much greater and vocal opposition from the religious wingnuts, who were licking their chops over the possibility of a "final showdown" with the liberals over the SCOTUS nomination in the Senate.
The Shrill Left and the Religious Right are tentacles of the same enemy we should all eviscerate from politics. They're both un-American for one simple reason - both want you to do what they, and thhey alone, think you should do, and neither gives a fucking shit what's actually good for you. Alll these fucking Policy Wonks and Jesus Crazies want to do is fashion society in their limited worldview. Fuck both of them. A pox on both their houses, oozing anal chancres to them all.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 10-27-2005 02:28 PM

Another Shocker!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Wrong again. The babyjesi has shown that they have the crucial swing part of the Republican Senators on their knees. Are you paying attention to what just happened? Bush bowed because he didn't have 51 of the 55 Senators in his party (50 if you count Reid as a yes vote). Those R Senators knows where the power lies, at the Right hand of God.
I am watching, and he's just as screwed if he goes far right, because he won't get 51 senators from his own party for that, either. The support of the far right may be necessary, but it's not sufficent.

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 02:31 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
How am I wrong this time? That your first list didn't have more names on it?
You claimed my picks were wackos and that the implied "acceptable" picks were at 10-15. You are wrong. Why can't you admit and retract? Is this like the demo denial that perjury is a crime or rape is wrong?


Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I'm neither explaining nor justifying the opposition. You might like the pope to be nominated. But he couldn't get confirmed. Same for JRB.
You are not explaining or justifying because in a world where Ginsgurg can get 90 plus votes there is no reasonable explaination or justification for shooting JRB down, other than racist sexism by the demo plantation overlourds. Comparing her to the pope just further illustrates the lack of substance to your position.

Bush has no choice but to appease the base that elected him. The chits have been called. If he doesn't pay up, he may as well resign because he will be the lamest of ducks.

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 02:33 PM

Another Shocker!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I am watching, and he's just as screwed if he goes far right, because he won't get 51 senators from his own party for that, either. The support of the far right may be necessary, but it's not sufficent.
dissent. He may lose a couple, the RiNOs from NE, but there are a few blue staters whose recollection of Tom Daschle's fate is better than your recollection of my SupCT nominee lists.

Captain 10-27-2005 02:42 PM

Just Curious
 
Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
1) When was the last time a President nominated such an obviously unqualified crony to the position?

2) The harping from the Left makes it clear that either (a) they are royally upset that they couldn't derail her themselves during public hearings, or, more likely (b) they are disgusted because the conservative outcry against a Bush nominee flies directly in the face of their constant accusations that the GOP follows every Bush word like a bunch of lemmings.
As President, Tyler was expelled from his own party (the Whigs). It's just a bit of precedent in which I thought you might be interested.

mmm3587 10-27-2005 02:42 PM

Proposition 2
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
there is no strict logic to athletic performance and if you had ever competed in running above the level of a casual jog on the waterfront or the St Paddy's Day drunk run you would know that. Sure there may be science that can offer a reasonable prediction, i.e. if someone can run a 36 min 10K then they should be able to run a 17:22 min 5K and a 5:07 mile or whatever. The key word is should. What qualifies is fast twitch v. slow twitch, anearobic v aerobic, the time of day, the weather, dietary/fuel issues et a. It's nonsense to say that someone who can run an 8:30-9: minute mile will be able to, on any given day, under all conditions, to run a 4 minute half. Keep beatin it, but it doesn;t make it true. I assume given your continued reaction that you must be an 8:30/4 minute guy. Congrats on that.
I could probably crawl a 4 minute half, but bragging about fake times on the internet is more your speed. Look, you can take all your stupid slow-twitch/fast-twitch arguments and fantasize about them. I run, and I know many people that run. An 8:30 mile, by definition, is a 4:15 half, unless you are changing your pace, and doing a "lethal kick" on one of the legs, in which case the other one is even faster. Among humans, they can universally exert themselves at higher rates for shorter distances than they can for longer distances. From there, it's just a question of how much more they can exert themselves. If you were a runner, you would know that someone running that slow of a mile is generally able to pick it up a little for a sixth or an eighth of the distance they are maintaining that pace for. That's something I certainly know from my training, my training of others and my pacing in longer races. It's not like they have to pick up the pace very much at all to run a 4-minute half - only 15 seconds over the half mile - it would be different if we were talking about going from 8:30 miles to 3 minute halves or 6:00 miles to 2:30 halves.

Anyway, I guess that your point is that Super Nintendo Master Runner or wherever you get your running knowledge is not that realistic. Is that where you get your batshitinsane political beliefs, too?

Shape Shifter 10-27-2005 02:43 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
You claimed my picks were wackos and that the implied "acceptable" picks were at 10-15. You are wrong. Why can't you admit and retract? Is this like the demo denial that perjury is a crime or rape is wrong?
Perjury is a crime. A serious crime. And Karl Rove should be punished for it to the fullest extent allowed by law.

And rape is wrong. I know. Condoleeza Rice raped me.

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 02:48 PM

Proposition 2
 
Quote:

Originally posted by mmm3587
I could probably crawl a 4 minute half, but bragging about fake times on the internet is more your speed. Look, you can take all your stupid slow-twitch/fast-twitch arguments and fantasize about them. I run, and I know many people that run. An 8:30 mile, by definition, is a 4:15 half, unless you are changing your pace, and doing a "lethal kick" on one of the legs, in which case the other one is even faster. Among humans, they can universally exert themselves at higher rates for shorter distances than they can for longer distances. From there, it's just a question of how much more they can exert themselves. If you were a runner, you would know that someone running that slow of a mile is generally able to pick it up a little for a sixth or an eighth of the distance they are maintaining that pace for. That's something I certainly know from my training, my training of others and my pacing in longer races. It's not like they have to pick up the pace very much at all to run a 4-minute half - only 15 seconds over the half mile - it would be different if we were talking about going from 8:30 miles to 3 minute halves or 6:00 miles to 2:30 halves.

Anyway, I guess that your point is that Super Nintendo Master Runner or wherever you get your running knowledge is not that realistic. Is that where you get your batshitinsane political beliefs, too?
again you experience your ignorance of running and the difference between sprint and distance times. I doubt you are even a jogger (although I could see you as one of those hacks who does a race like the Accenture Triathlon and rides beater bike with an inflatable naked doll attached-I may have lapped you if so), but remind me what year(s) you went to USTAF championships or the Worlds?

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 02:50 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Perjury is a crime. A serious crime. And Karl Rove should be punished for it to the fullest extent allowed by law.

And rape is wrong. I know. Condoleeza Rice raped me.
Your mockery of rape and violence against woman is sad. I thought you were better than this. We may need to re-think your reinstatement into the insurgency.

Shape Shifter 10-27-2005 02:56 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Your mockery of rape and violence against woman is sad. I thought you were better than this. We may need to re-think your reinstatement into the insurgency.
Sure, blame the victim.

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 02:56 PM

Proposition 2
 
Quote:

Originally posted by mmm3587


Anyway, I guess that your point is that Super Nintendo Master Runner or wherever you get your running knowledge is not that realistic. Is that where you get your batshitinsane political beliefs, too?
Ps: So I took my lover's kid out to the track for another workout last nite. Did the spot the half, mile race thing again. The kid is getting faster. My achilles was a little tight so I started slow, didn't nip the kid until the last 100. 6:02 to the kid's 6:11. It may be time for me to start putting the real smack down on this brat.

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 02:57 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Sure, blame the victim.
\
Slave told me it was consensual, no?

Secret_Agent_Man 10-27-2005 02:59 PM

I have here in my hand a list of 242 card-carrying members . . .
 
I hate to interrupt the Board Historian's stirring defense of McCarthyism -- remarkable as it is both for its limited and Hollywood-centric understanding of what actually occurred in America during that time and for its apparent disregard for (among other things) the fact that the Honorable Senator repeatedly flat-out fucking lied on the floor of the Senate for his own political gain.

But . . . here is more from Spanky's friends at the DLC (through my doppelganger Mr. Broder) on how Dems have to stop bitching and actually start to pony up to clean up the fiscal wreckage of the Bush years.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...11.html?sub=AR

S_A_M

Secret_Agent_Man 10-27-2005 03:08 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
You are not explaining or justifying because in a world where Ginsgurg can get 90 plus votes there is no reasonable explaination or justification for shooting JRB down, other than racist sexism by the demo plantation overlourds.
The political world has changed since the early 1990s Penske.

Nowadays it is respectable and expected to oppose nominees on ideological grounds rather than simply bow to the will of the President. This is particularly true of those whose views are truly well outside the legal and popular mainstream.

Ginsberg was and is quite "liberal" in her views, but she is and was nowhere near as far off-center as Judge Brown. (Remember too, that we're talking of the politics of 12 years ago in the case of Ginsburg.) For you to accused JRBs detractors of racism is the purest nonsense.

S_A_M

Secret_Agent_Man 10-27-2005 03:12 PM

Proposition 2
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Ps: So I took my lover's kid out to the track for another workout last nite. Did the spot the half, mile race thing again. The kid is getting faster. My achilles was a little tight so I started slow, didn't nip the kid until the last 100. 6:02 to the kid's 6:11. It may be time for me to start putting the real smack down on this brat.
Better start stretching before the kid has to carry you to the hospital.

S_A_M

Hank Chinaski 10-27-2005 03:17 PM

Proposition 2
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
again you experience your ignorance of running and the difference between sprint and distance times. I doubt you are even a jogger (although I could see you as one of those hacks who does a race like the Accenture Triathlon and rides beater bike with an inflatable naked doll attached-I may have lapped you if so), but remind me what year(s) you went to USTAF championships or the Worlds?
I thought you were in special olympics, no? I've convinced my kids to donate in your name in lieu of Xmas gifts. Let me know if this whole act has been a lie, would you?

spookyfish 10-27-2005 03:17 PM

Another Shocker!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Congrats you and cooter can keep yourselves company in loserland. Say hi to Chuckie Schumer.

The babyjesi have shown their power. Bush gives us a conservative anti-Roe proponent or he gets cockblocked again@@!
You, sir, are full of shit. It is not in the political interest of the Republican party to have Roe overturned. As long as they can jerk-off the babyjesi on the abortion issue and not really give them anything they won't. You think for a minute they are going to want to yank that plank out of their platform with the electorate so closely divided? You're nuts.* Bottom line is that both parties will keep any issue in play that will allow them to stay in power, and if you don't believe that, you have your head in the fucking sand.

* I don't think even fiscal conservatives necessarily like what the Republican party has been selling (on the spending side of the equation, at least) since Reagan's second term. If you can't even sell them, then you need the babyjesi -- or certainly their cash.

mmm3587 10-27-2005 03:18 PM

Proposition 2
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
again you experience your ignorance of running and the difference between sprint and distance times. I doubt you are even a jogger (although I could see you as one of those hacks who does a race like the Accenture Triathlon and rides beater bike with an inflatable naked doll attached-I may have lapped you if so), but remind me what year(s) you went to USTAF championships or the Worlds?
You are pretty fake-impressive on the internet. When do you train if you are so busy posting crazy stuff here? Even fake-internet training takes a little time - do you keep a fake chart of your distances and pretend that you are posting on the board with a wireless laptop while you're "running"?

Look, clearly, logic is not your thing - everyone who communicates with you comes away feeling like they've wasted their time, I'm sure. That's obviously the case here - I've wasted my time trying to convince you of something obvious and clear.

spookyfish 10-27-2005 03:18 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Perjury is a crime. A serious crime. And Karl Rove should be punished for it to the fullest extent allowed by law.

And rape is wrong. I know. Condoleeza Rice raped me.

Heh.

I never did trust her -- something about her eyes. . .

Hank Chinaski 10-27-2005 03:19 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Your mockery of rape and violence against woman is sad. I thought you were better than this. We may need to re-think your reinstatement into the insurgency.
You need to much more careful who you enlist. Remember the Real Jesus got taken down by a diciple. And who got you kicked off here last time?

Hank Chinaski 10-27-2005 03:23 PM

I have here in my hand a list of 242 card-carrying members . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
I hate to interrupt the Board Historian's stirring defense of McCarthyism -- remarkable as it is both for its limited and Hollywood-centric understanding of what actually occurred in America during that time and for its apparent disregard for (among other things) the fact that the Honorable Senator repeatedly flat-out fucking lied on the floor of the Senate for his own political gain.

But . . . here is more from Spanky's friends at the DLC (through my doppelganger Mr. Broder) on how Dems have to stop bitching and actually start to pony up to clean up the fiscal wreckage of the Bush years.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...11.html?sub=AR

S_A_M
What the fuck do the Dems have to do with the Federal budget?

2 things they can do besides bitching-

Get second jobs and donate the earnings to Treasury.

or

Stop spending money on elections that can't win (any presidential/ Southern Senate, etc.) and donate the money to the treasury.

They do understand that Genna Davis or Jimmy Smits winning the White House doesn't really give them power, don't they?

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 03:25 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
The political world has changed since the early 1990s Penske.

Nowadays it is respectable and expected to oppose nominees on ideological grounds rather than simply bow to the will of the President. This is particularly true of those whose views are truly well outside the legal and popular mainstream.

Ginsberg was and is quite "liberal" in her views, but she is and was nowhere near as far off-center as Judge Brown. (Remember too, that we're talking of the politics of 12 years ago in the case of Ginsburg.) For you to accused JRBs detractors of racism is the purest nonsense.

S_A_M
I disagree. Ginsburg was as far left as you can get in mainstream American politics. JRB is no more right than at least 22% of the current Court and possibly 33% incl. Roberts. Her educational experience and professional background as a jurist are impeccable. There is no reason she should not be approved, other than blatant partisan politics. Fortunately I don't think the dimwits have the votes. The wrath of the babyjesi is mighty.

Not Bob 10-27-2005 03:26 PM

I have here in my hand a list of 242 card-carrying members . . .
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Spanky
What was done to the Japanese sucked and was wrong. No question. But that is a side issue.

The point is that during WWII, any German that might have Nazi sympathies was thrown into a concentration camp by the US government. In addition, Nazi sympathisers were interviewed and asked their political views during the 1930s when we were not at war. Not a complaint from the liberals.
As you may not have noted from the wikpedia article:
  • The House Committee on Un-American Activities grew from a special investigating committee established in May 1938, chaired by Martin Dies and co-chaired by Samuel Dickstein, himself named in the Venona project as a Soviet agent. In pre-war years and during World War II it was known as the Dies Committee. Its work was supposed to be aimed mostly at German-American involvement in Nazi and KKK activity. As to investigations into the activities of the "Klan," the Committee actually did little. When HUAC's chief counsel Ernest Adamson announced that: "The committee has decided that it lacks sufficient data on which to base a probe," committee member John E. Rankin added: "After all, the KKK is an old American institution." Instead of the Klan, HUAC concentrated on investigating the possibility that the American Communist Party had infiltrated the Works Progress Administration, including the Federal Theatre Project.

    In 1938 Hallie Flanagan, the head of the Federal Theatre Project, was subpoenaed to appear before the committee to answer the charge that the project was overrun with communists. Flanagan was called to testify for only a part of one day, while a clerk from the project was called in for two entire days. It was during this investigation that one of the committee members famously asked Flanagan whether the Elizabethan playwright Christopher Marlowe was a member of the Communist Party.

    In 1939 the committee investigated leaders of the American Youth Congress, a Comintern affiliate organization.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_U...ties_Committee (emphasis supplied)

All while we weren't at war with any communist state. Not a complaint from the conservatives.

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 03:27 PM

Proposition 2
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
Better start stretching before the kid has to carry you to the hospital.

S_A_M

R u kidding? 6:02 is 3rd gear. But in deference to the educational experience I am supposed to be conferring on the kid we do stretch, although personally I have never been that into it.

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 03:29 PM

Proposition 2
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I thought you were in special olympics, no? I've convinced my kids to donate in your name in lieu of Xmas gifts. Let me know if this whole act has been a lie, would you?
Have them send me the cash and I will apply it appropriately. Also, remind your wife she owes me reimbursement for my plane fare to Detroit for the last go-round.

Not Bob 10-27-2005 03:29 PM

Just Curious
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Captain
When was the last time a President couldn't get a Senate controlled by his own party to confirm a S.Ct. appointment? Roosevelt?
LBJ's nomination of Justice Abe Fortas for Chief -- filibustered by Republicans until after the election. Then Abe resigned and Nixon appointed Warren Burger as Chief and (I think) Blackmun to Abe's AJ slot.

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 03:32 PM

Another Shocker!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by spookyfish
You, sir, are full of shit. It is not in the political interest of the Republican party to have Roe overturned. As long as they can jerk-off the babyjesi on the abortion issue and not really give them anything they won't. You think for a minute they are going to want to yank that plank out of their platform with the electorate so closely divided? You're nuts.* Bottom line is that both parties will keep any issue in play that will allow them to stay in power, and if you don't believe that, you have your head in the fucking sand.

* I don't think even fiscal conservatives necessarily like what the Republican party has been selling (on the spending side of the equation, at least) since Reagan's second term. If you can't even sell them, then you need the babyjesi -- or certainly their cash.
I think different factions of the REpublican party have different views of the issue. I am not disputing that you capture one faction's position above., however, the babyjesi of the party have more principle and moral clarity than that and they are running the show at this point. Plus it is an awful decision and should be turned over on the basis of its incoherency and lack of grounding in the constitution. The Fed Soc wing of the party believes that.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 10-27-2005 03:35 PM

Another Shocker!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
the babyjesi of the party have more principle and moral clarity than that and they are running the show at this point. .
Except that everyone else is beginning to realize the emporer has no clothes.

Captain 10-27-2005 03:35 PM

Just Curious
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Not Bob
LBJ's nomination of Justice Abe Fortas for Chief -- filibustered by Republicans until after the election. Then Abe resigned and Nixon appointed Warren Burger as Chief and (I think) Blackmun to Abe's AJ slot.
Thank you. More recent than I thought.

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 03:36 PM

Proposition 2
 
Quote:

Originally posted by mmm3587
You are pretty fake-impressive on the internet. When do you train if you are so busy posting crazy stuff here? Even fake-internet training takes a little time - do you keep a fake chart of your distances and pretend that you are posting on the board with a wireless laptop while you're "running"?

Look, clearly, logic is not your thing - everyone who communicates with you comes away feeling like they've wasted their time, I'm sure. That's obviously the case here - I've wasted my time trying to convince you of something obvious and clear.
Obviously your ignorance of competitive running and your lack of substantive response to my questions is indicative that you have never been to the top of your so-called sport. Do they have a world championship for joggers? If not you should contact Oprah, she would probably be up for sponsoring one.

Have you ever even made it Boston? I am doubtful, although there may have been a non-merit based lottery for the 100th....

Penske_Account 10-27-2005 03:37 PM

Another Shocker!
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Except that everyone else is beginning to realize the emporer has no clothes.
No, I think the realisation was that Bush has no clothes without the approval of the babyjesi.

Secret_Agent_Man 10-27-2005 03:39 PM

Cooter, you are better than that
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
I disagree. Ginsburg was as far left as you can get in mainstream American politics. JRB is no more right than at least 22% of the current Court and possibly 33% incl. Roberts. Her educational experience and professional background as a jurist are impeccable. There is no reason she should not be approved, other than blatant partisan politics. Fortunately I don't think the dimwits have the votes. The wrath of the babyjesi is mighty.
You really think that 2 0r 3 current justices believe that the Social Security Act, OSHA (and by analogy numerous other government agencies) are unconstitutional?

S_A_M

Secret_Agent_Man 10-27-2005 03:43 PM

Proposition 2
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Obviously your ignorance of competitive running and your lack of substantive response to my questions is indicative that you have never been to the top of your so-called sport. Do they have a world championship for joggers? If not you should contact Oprah, she would probably be up for sponsoring one.

Have you ever even made it Boston? I am doubtful, although there may have been a non-merit based lottery for the 100th....
You guys do both realize that my penis is larger than yours, right?

S_A_M


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:38 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com