JamieW wrote:Well now, hold up there, Bubba.
Sorry to disappoint, but my name is not Bubba, Gay-John.
I'm not even going to get into my views here,
Yes you are. You just proceeded to contradict yourself before you even started.
as they are not up for your personal inspection,
Yes they are. Just watch me inspect them.
you pompous ass. But let's address what you DID say instead of making hypocritical assumptions.
It would have been more eloquent, had you said making hypocritical assumptions from within your pompous ass, which I am now vomitting back to you.
Ashcroft is an ass. The only way that man would read the Bill of Rights is if you folded it up real nice and put it in a bible.
Now there is a muture and factual statement if I ever heard one. Ashcroft is a decent and ethical man who is following instructions, and doing his best to protect the nation from another 9/11. Hopefully the next attack will be on your house.
To counter your assumption, it is entirely probable that he was not discussing Clinton/Reno because they are not currently in office. Here's a news flash for you, Bush/Ashcroft are. Hmm...I wonder if this might make them topical.
Fat chance. You dimestore thinly veiled liberals are coming out of the woodwork like cockroaches blinded by the supreme light of Bush. There are no true democratic liberals who can berate any aspect of Clinton's many failings. It is not an accident, nor a matter of probability that he failed to mention the horrible police state abuses of Clinton. Nothing to date that Bush/Ashcroft has directly authorized remotely compares to the Clinton/Reno atrocities such as Waco and Ruby Ridge.
You may want to advance beyond high school and research.
I have. I even gave you a direct quote of the First Ammendment, and further details of the comments Jefferson made on the subject 10 years later.
Even the SCOTUS has said you cannot interpret the Constitution without the Declaration of Independence making it a highly relevant document to current Constitutional discussion.
I never said the DofI was not a relevant document. I said that laws are made as determined by the U.S. Constitution. I know this is a difficult concept, which is why I had hoped you could follow the Civics 101 lessons. Alas, I failed to properly instruct you.
Unless your "good authority" is a seance in which Jefferson himself floated above the table and you could see through him, your "good authority" is worthless without endorsement. That "In God We Trust" is on our money does not force a choice for use or require active participation in the wording or belief system and is therefore a pretty useless point.
Ignoring your spiritual fantasies, since everyone knows that Astrology is where the money is....The "In God We Trust" forces everyone throughout the world to confront the fact that the USA Trusts in God, every time they touch it.
I'm sure the Atheist ACLU liberals cringe with every dollar they stuff into their greedy coffers.
Rather than discuss the belief, you'll just attack the people, right?
Wrong. I can do either if the shoe fits.
Well how about you get off of your arrogant horse
I actually do have a horse, but his name is Buster. A palomino, and quite handsome.
and recognize that some people...wait for it, you may want to sit down...have DIFFERENT beliefs than you?
I recognize that others have different beliefs, however wrong they may be.
I know! The horror of it! Perhaps you would be slightly efficient at getting people to respect your views if you offered even the slightest hint of respect of other's views.
Democratic liberals such as yourself are much too angry at having Clinton lost both houses of congress to the Republicans, and his lackey, Gore losing to Bush. They are incapable of respecting anyone other than fellow screeching liberals.
They are not pariahs, nor are the greens.
Yes they are. However you want to measure it....they are pariahs.
And Jesus, boy. Learn to use "pariah" correctly. You don't need to add "who cannot fit into society." You just used the word "pariah."
I enjoyed the effect of being repetitious...as you just did in your feeble attempt in that last quote.
They, like greens and other third partiers, may actually be independent thinkers who do not subscribe to a single party's platform.
Everyone is an independent thinker to a degree. Hitler was independent. Stalin was independent. Karl Marx was independent. Charles Manson was independent. James Jones was independent. Ralph Nader is independent. I'm so happy now that we have established the benefit of independent thinking.
And you, who are clearly an automated republican, have the audacity to accuse someone else of having spoonfed beliefs when that is what your entire belief system is comprised of? I don't know how you people function, let alone create posts that aren't pre-approved by the GOP
Yes, I do have the audicity and tenacity to make these accusations. It would take too long to list my entire set of beliefs, nor would you be able to sleep tonight if you had to read them all. We all function quite nicely, thank you. Especially since we have a majority in the House, Senate, Presidency, and will likely be able to appoint another couple of Supreme Court Justices during the next four years. LOL!
Bush has not been a fabulous president.
Yes he has been a fabulous president, which is why he will be re-elected, despite all of your whining protestations.
Even if he has one failing, it is in communicating the people. Have you seen his approval ratings?
He is communicating with us just fine....only you just see the one sided liberal news media's side of the coverage. Try expanding your horizons. Start by watching Fox News which now has eclipsed the ratings of all Network news departments, and has higher ratings than CNN & MSNBC combined! Power to the People!
Yes. Do you always have this incessant need to frivolously repeat yourself? Unlike Clinton, this president doesn't govern based on the the poll blowing in the wind. We will see how his polls end up as the Iraq war is winding down nicely, and the economy continues to wind up nicely. I don't suppose you are referring to his Poll ratings following 9/11? Nah, I didn't think you could bear to think about those ratings.
This is not indicative of a successful President.
Make up your mind. Either you want me to pay attention to the polls, or you don't. With your confusing flip-flopping, is your last name Kerry?
And I love how Bush inherited a recession from Clinton,
It's true. Check the facts, and the time period of how a recession is defined....dating back into Clinton's term. I'm glad you love it though, that makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.
but who did the first Bush inherit it from?
I give up. Is this "Twenty Questions?"
Clinton as well?
Now I'm worried about you, since you are so filled with Bush hatred that you can't remember the proper order of the presidents.
Accusing someone of just bashing Bush, and then you have the same blinders when it comes to Clinton and the previous Bush.
No, I could find things to praise about Clinton, or any president. Likewise, I can find things to criticize about any president. Liberals are not able to do the same.
Patriot Act doesn't affect you?
Nope. I hate having to repeat myself, as I already said that. My life is EXACTLY the same, except at the airport.
It affects you in the very existence. Just like a repeal of voting wouldn't affect you until you voted. The mere existence of the Patriot Act is an affront to a free democracy.
I love the Patriot Act. I think it is going a long way to protect us from another 9/11, which you apparently prefer. Like I said earlier, I'm hoping the next attack is on your house. It would be just irony.
But you will happily take the rights you are permitted to have by the men in charge. Go ahead and take it, you sheep.
WTF? Did that make sense to anyone?
If you don't think the Patriot Act has affected you, you don't know anything about it.
Unlike your spoonfed liberal armchair analysis, I have actually taken the time to read the entire Patriot Act. I doubt you have the intellectual prowess to read it, but here is the link.
Which sections would you like to discuss in it?
In short, I suggest you take your pompous attitude, your inability to respond with points, your robotic attack on anything that doesn't agree with you and convert it into your native tongue of republican sheep so at least it takes up less space on the forum.
That at least had a modicum of humor in it....but would have been more politically correct had you used the "native tongue of republican elephant..." I enjoy taking up this blessed space on the forum, apparently as you do also.
Instead of typing words, I suggest you use "baah" and save everyone from your worthless, venom filled, point barren drivel.
That is again just more reiterated drivel from your last quote. Try to be more concise, won't you?