LawTalkers
Page 51 of 126 « First 414950 51 525361101 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

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)

Sidd Finch 10-06-2005 03:50 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
Perhaps you did. So what? I did not say "christian values" preclude including curricula that contains explicit sexual descriptions or themes, in part. I said that there is an argument that could be made that the term "christian values" included in the mission statement, as it was in that school's mission statement, could preclude such teaching.

Are you saying that it's not possible that a reasonable person, in the context of sending their child to a school whose mission it is, explicitly, to impart "christian values" couldn't come to that conclusion?
It is certainly possible. He should have asked someone before giving away $3 million. At the end of the day, his undisclosed assumptions do not constitute a restriction on the gift.

Sidd Finch 10-06-2005 03:52 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I understand and sympathise with his desire not to die in Ft. Marcy park. Justice delayed does not have to be justice denied.
Back to the "Clinton is a murderer" song? It's been awhile.

But does this mean that you are no longer too much of a fucking pussy to come right out and say (on an anonymous chatboard) that you believe Clinton actually murdered, or directed the murder, of someone?

taxwonk 10-06-2005 03:54 PM
Calling Penske Out
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I have yet to meet a more close minded intolerant group of people that the American leftists in our present age. Of course their talibanistic creed of PC is a glowing beacon of their intolerance and hatred of the spectrum of cultural and philosphical belief. I wonder why they don't move to Canada? Or FRance?
Just so I'm clear on this...Am I one of those American Leftists, or am one of the "some of my best friends are American Leftists" American Leftists?

sgtclub 10-06-2005 04:07 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Back to the "Clinton is a murderer" song? It's been awhile.

But does this mean that you are no longer too much of a fucking pussy to come right out and say (on an anonymous chatboard) that you believe Clinton actually murdered, or directed the murder, of someone?
Murder? No. Rape - yes.

taxwonk 10-06-2005 04:09 PM
Calling Penske Out
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
This is the biggest who gives a rat's arse of this decade. The real issue is when will Rapist-in-Chief Clinton be indicted.

http://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gifhttp://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gifhttp://www.drudgereport.com/siren.gif


BREAKING...................


FORMER FBI HEAD LOUIS FREEH: CLINTON WAS PROBLEM; 'CLOSETS WERE FULL OF SKELETONS'

No shite. Bring it on already. The country needs to confront this cancerous growth on its history, excise it, and move on to recovery.

MORE TO FOLLOW.................
This post brings up an interesting question. Is lying an absolute wrong?

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:14 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Nixon invented fucking _____.
I'm not asserting that Nixon was a classy guy or brought dignity to the office. I think we can agree that the opposite was true.

Sidd Finch 10-06-2005 04:15 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
Murder? No. Rape - yes.
Club - balls. Penske - no balls.

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:16 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Not Bob
I am saying nothing of the sort. But I would assume that a person sending their child to an Episcopal or Catholic high school would understand that their child would be exposed to at least some literature which includes these themes. Heck, the Song of Songs includes these themes. I also think, however, that it's the parent's perogative to pull the money and/or their kid if she/he is not comfortable with what the school is teaching.

I haven't read the book in question. Nor have I attended the class at the school in which the book was discussed, so I don't know if the book is porn or not, or if the teacher was encouraging the students to engage in conduct Not Consistent with Episcopal Church doctrine. I'll assume (though it is a rebutable assumption) that (a) it is Not Porn, and (b) the teacher was Not NAMBLA recruiting.
And even assuming a and b (which I assume to be correct too) and the rest of your post, I still think a reasonable person could make certain reasonable assumptions about a heightened level of morality in the curricula of a school that asserts the impartation of "christian values" in its mission statement.

Hank Chinaski 10-06-2005 04:18 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Back to the "Clinton is a murderer" song? It's been awhile.

But does this mean that you are no longer too much of a fucking pussy to come right out and say (on an anonymous chatboard) that you believe Clinton actually murdered, or directed the murder, of someone?
Wonk says if the President orders the military to war then they the President has murdered. We all agree Bill did that. Are you and Wonk breaking ranks here?

Sidd Finch 10-06-2005 04:24 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Wonk says if the President orders the military to war then they the President has murdered. We all agree Bill did that. Are you and Wonk breaking ranks here?

Wonk is dealing with Penske on a more philosophical level. Wonk is just that way.

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:25 PM
BREAKING....
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Nonsense. Nobody on the Rabid Right gives a shit about Miers' qualifications. The Right's sole concern is the same as the Left's - they don't know how she'll vote on Roe.

The Right's been fucked over by GOP Presidents who put pro-Roe judges on the bench twice already and doesn't want to get fucked again. Stop bullshitting about how you're concerned about her qualifications. You'd put a donkey on the SCOTUS if its trainers could assure you it would vote against Roe.
I disagree. I assume Bush is not telling the truth when he says he has never discussed abortion with him. I also assume that she has told him she is anti-RvW and would overturn it. That's not my litmus test and I think soime of the commentators are making a more principled argument too. She is not qualified. Period. She could promise to overturn Roe v Wade. Pour a couple of bottles of 85 Lafitte Rothschilde down my gullet and blow me till the cows come home, npi, and I still wouldn't support the nominiation. But I understand that it's hard for a leftie to understand principle.

sebastian_dangerfield 10-06-2005 04:25 PM
Calling Penske Out
 
Quote:
Originally posted by taxwonk
We never discussed rape. Possibly because that is something we both know we agree is an absolute wrong. But you misrepresented where we stand on murder.

You took the position that killing is an absolute wrong. Yet you also claimed that you did not oppose the war in Iraq.

I asked you how you can argue that killing is an absolute wrong, but support a war at the same time.

Your response was that the killers would have to answer for their sins, but that was God's prerogative and not yours.

Which brings me to my next questions.

1. Will Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of the command structure behind the war be punished for their sins? If so, then why should we as a people respect or support these sinners?

2. How about the grunts in the streets? Will they be punished for their sins? Why should we as taxpayers be foreced to pay for this sin? Why should we respect these killers?
Consult Dianetics. Or ask your Ouija board.

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:26 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Fucking pussy terrorist-sympathizer.
"Ping! Pow!

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:28 PM
Calling Penske Out
 
Quote:
Originally posted by taxwonk
We never discussed rape. Possibly because that is something we both know we agree is an absolute wrong. But you misrepresented where we stand on murder.

You took the position that killing is an absolute wrong. Yet you also claimed that you did not oppose the war in Iraq.

I asked you how you can argue that killing is an absolute wrong, but support a war at the same time.

Your response was that the killers would have to answer for their sins, but that was God's prerogative and not yours.

Which brings me to my next questions.

1. Will Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and the rest of the command structure behind the war be punished for their sins? If so, then why should we as a people respect or support these sinners?

2. How about the grunts in the streets? Will they be punished for their sins? Why should we as taxpayers be foreced to pay for this sin? Why should we respect these killers?
Perhaps we are in the early innings of the apocalypse. I am thankful we are on the right side.

Sidd Finch 10-06-2005 04:29 PM
BREAKING....
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
But I understand that it's hard for a leftie to understand principle.

Is this comment directed to the leftie leadership, lefties in general, or lefties in general except for the ones that are "some of your best friends"?

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:30 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
He might also have pictures of them having secret meetings with the Tooth Fairy.
Is that the code name for their RedChinese handler?

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:31 PM
DING!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by taxwonk
Okay, here is another example of where you're confusing me. KIlling is an absolute right, but you are implying that you would use deadly force to protect your property. How can you call yourself aa good person when you are prepared to do wrong?

What "murderers" are you talking about?
Kennedy for one. Clintons are suspect for two.

Hank Chinaski 10-06-2005 04:32 PM
BREAKING....
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I disagree. I assume Bush is not telling the truth when he says he has never discussed abortion with him. I also assume that she has told him she is anti-RvW and would overturn it. That's not my litmus test and I think soime of the commentators are making a more principled argument too. She is not qualified. Period. She could promise to overturn Roe v Wade. Pour a couple of bottles of 85 Lafitte Rothschilde down my gullet and blow me till the cows come home, npi, and I still wouldn't support the nominiation. But I understand that it's hard for a leftie to understand principle.
I had this argument with someone about Scalia decisions- plebecite- my point was so what that he's smart, he needs to write dumber so the rest of us can understand why we have to let people get abortions or whatever.

Why do we limit the supreme Court to great minds when its mostly the dumb people at the impact edge of the law the Court makes?

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:33 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Either he was sane, or he found an Internet chat-board where he could spout similar crap.
I left DC when Clinton arrived. Again, I have principles that I can't compromise.

sebastian_dangerfield 10-06-2005 04:36 PM
BREAKING....
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I disagree. I assume Bush is not telling the truth when he says he has never discussed abortion with him. I also assume that she has told him she is anti-RvW and would overturn it. That's not my litmus test and I think soime of the commentators are making a more principled argument too. She is not qualified. Period. She could promise to overturn Roe v Wade. Pour a couple of bottles of 85 Lafitte Rothschilde down my gullet and blow me till the cows come home, npi, and I still wouldn't support the nominiation. But I understand that it's hard for a leftie to understand principle.
Principles, principle, principles... you wield that word like Bush uses "progress."

Any position can be a principled stance, depending on the speaker's values. I think your right wing social views are looney tunes - card carrying crazy. Given that, what added value does calling your silly position a "principle" add to it? You're trying to create moral high ground for yourself using your own very twisted morals as a baseline. Perhaps thats why Wonk's been slapping you around. You argue from a position of superiority that exists nowhere but between your ears.

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:37 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
It is certainly possible. He should have asked someone before giving away $3 million. At the end of the day, his undisclosed assumptions do not constitute a restriction on the gift.
I don't disagree with that and I am not arguing the legalities, but I can imagine that if you completely piss off a $3M dollar donor, the cost of keeping that donation (assuming no litigation) may ultimately be more than $3M, i.e. lost future money from various donor sources. I don't know the finances of this school, but I do know a little bit about private schools and development campaigns and $3M donors tend to run in packs of other potential donors, so appeasement might not be a bad thing.

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:38 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Back to the "Clinton is a murderer" song? It's been awhile.

But does this mean that you are no longer too much of a fucking pussy to come right out and say (on an anonymous chatboard) that you believe Clinton actually murdered, or directed the murder, of someone?
It means I can't deny that they are people of interest.

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:40 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Club - balls. Penske - no balls.
I gave my answer above. I have made my position clear on the rape, once you a rape someone, I am not sure how much farther your morality and/or humanity has to sink before you kill someone.

sebastian_dangerfield 10-06-2005 04:40 PM
BREAKING....
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I had this argument with someone about Scalia decisions- plebecite- my point was so what that he's smart, he needs to write dumber so the rest of us can understand why we have to let people get abortions or whatever.

Why do we limit the supreme Court to great minds when its mostly the dumb people at the impact edge of the law the Court makes?
We don't. Scalia is Exhibit A.

I recall him saying a few years back at Georgetown that judges should allow their religion to inform their decisions. Thats not smart from a scholarly or common sense perspective. Only a fool utters a view so likely to be met with criticism. And only a fool allows the teeachings of mysticism to meedle with the application of the laws of the state.

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:41 PM
Calling Penske Out
 
Quote:
Originally posted by taxwonk
Just so I'm clear on this...Am I one of those American Leftists, or am one of the "some of my best friends are American Leftists" American Leftists?
Not as far as I know. Yes, although despite the give and take, you may be more of an actual moderate.

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:42 PM
Calling Penske Out
 
Quote:
Originally posted by taxwonk
This post brings up an interesting question. Is lying an absolute wrong?
Under oath, it's absolutely wrong.

sebastian_dangerfield 10-06-2005 04:43 PM
Calling Penske Out
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
Perhaps we are in the early innings of the apocalypse. I am thankful we are on the right side.
Uh, no you're not. Catholics are cultists. When the Rapture comes, you and I, by poor luck of birth, will be cast to Hell with the Jews and Muslims.

Perhaps you can petition The White Trash Base to let us in. I votyed GOP twice. Thats gotta get me somewhere.

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:43 PM
BREAKING....
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Is this comment directed to the leftie leadership, lefties in general, or lefties in general except for the ones that are "some of your best friends"?
In that instance it was directed at Sebby.

sebastian_dangerfield 10-06-2005 04:45 PM
Calling Penske Out
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
Under oath, it's absolutely wrong.
Be sure to run that one past Jesus when you see him...

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:45 PM
BREAKING....
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Principles, principle, principles... you wield that word like Bush uses "progress."

Any position can be a principled stance, depending on the speaker's values. I think your right wing social views are looney tunes - card carrying crazy. Given that, what added value does calling your silly position a "principle" add to it? You're trying to create moral high ground for yourself using your own very twisted morals as a baseline. Perhaps thats why Wonk's been slapping you around. You argue from a position of superiority that exists nowhere but between your ears.
None of that makes her anymore qualified. And she's not.

Tyrone Slothrop 10-06-2005 04:45 PM
White flag?
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
Hell, I'd take Ty over her. No offence.
None taken!

sebastian_dangerfield 10-06-2005 04:46 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I gave my answer above. I have made my position clear on the rape, once you a rape someone, I am not sure how much farther your morality and/or humanity has to sink before you kill someone.
Oh, you can sink plenty far... Like, say... killing 2000 people to test Billy Kristol's daddy's pet theory!

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:46 PM
Calling Penske Out
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Uh, no you're not. Catholics are cultists. When the Rapture comes, you and I, by poor luck of birth, will be cast to Hell with the Jews and Muslims.

Perhaps you can petition The White Trash Base to let us in. I votyed GOP twice. Thats gotta get me somewhere.
I don't buy that. The Catholics invented the religion of the white trash. I am an originalist.

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:48 PM
Calling Penske Out
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Be sure to run that one past Jesus when you see him...
He's with me right now. He said "hi", and also said "to take your hands out of your pants, it's rude to fondle yourself when typing the babyjesus' name".

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:49 PM
White flag?
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
None taken!
Ty! Happy birthday!

sebastian_dangerfield 10-06-2005 04:49 PM
BREAKING....
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
None of that makes her anymore qualified. And she's not.
So, if she came out tomorrow and said "I will vote to overturn Roe," you'd still say no to her nomination. Would you support a nominee who was qualified, but was pro-choice, over Miers?

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:52 PM
Open the closet!!!!
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Oh, you can sink plenty far... Like, say... killing 2000 people to test Billy Kristol's daddy's pet theory!
Although that's still 1000 short of the blood on Clinton's hands from his testing of the theory of "complete abdication of duty to national security for 8 years".

sebastian_dangerfield 10-06-2005 04:53 PM
Calling Penske Out
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Penske_Account
I don't buy that. The Catholics invented the religion of the white trash. I am an originalist.
Neeeeew... the Catholics invented the religion of keeping the trash in check. That shit the trailer folks in the bible belt worship in their stadium churches is the favored myth of the American Inbred. That religion actually empowers those uneducated vermin to start fucking around with politics. The Catholic Church was all about keeping the believers complacent and tithing.

Tyrone Slothrop 10-06-2005 04:54 PM
Give Peace a Chance
 
Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
When people say that, it was good to get rid of Saddam Hussein, and the intentions were OK, but we were just going to make things worse and it was a waste of resources and manpower. I call this the Naive argument. It was Naive for the the US to make it better. Although I don't agree with that argument I can respect it.
What was capital-N Naive was invading Iraq on the premise that we could remake it in our own, democratic image. Hope and faith are not policies. I think it's now clear who was Naive.

Penske_Account 10-06-2005 04:55 PM
BREAKING....
 
Quote:
Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
So, if she came out tomorrow and said "I will vote to overturn Roe," you'd still say no to her nomination. Would you support a nominee who was qualified, but was pro-choice, over Miers?
Yes and sure, although if Bush made that nominee it would be a let down because of the breach of his word. I had no problem with Ginsburg and Breyer when Clinton nominated them. They were qualified and I didn't expect that Clinton wouldn't nominate someone pro-Roe. I don't think that they should have been denied seats because of that view.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:35 PM.
Page 51 of 126 « First 414950 51 525361101 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

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