LawTalkers

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Making Baby Jesus Cry (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=691)

sgtclub 09-07-2005 11:48 AM

Dumbass?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
2.
Oh hogwash. This country was equally divided during the Clinton administration and 9/11 was but a momentary pause in the partisan bickering that has been our history whenever we have a CE that isn't milk toast.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 09-07-2005 11:53 AM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
The Govt, at any level, will not save your ass anymore.

Rudy in 2008!
That's how it should be.

As for Rudy, what's the campaign slogan: "First 42nd Street; Now Las Vegas and New Orleans"?

Bad_Rich_Chic 09-07-2005 11:53 AM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
The only lesson here is, be warned: The Govt, at any level, will not save your ass anymore.
Anymore?

Tyrone Slothrop 09-07-2005 11:55 AM

Class
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
The goose-stepping in front of the Jewish dorms when he was at Stanford was pretty classy.
On a serious note, I heard yesterday that Rehnquist and O'Connor dated briefly at Stanford. I had never heard this before. What's up with that?

Shape Shifter 09-07-2005 11:55 AM

Dumbass?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
Oh hogwash. This country was equally divided during the Clinton administration and 9/11 was but a momentary pause in the partisan bickering that has been our history whenever we have a CE that isn't milk toast.
Revisionist fuck.

Shape Shifter 09-07-2005 11:57 AM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
Growing tiresome?

Did you appreciate my homage last night? It needed the capper. The new post with no subject line that asked whether anyone on the board could possibly agree with Spanky's position that the school bus shot was The Most Common Picture Associated With The Hurricane and then took some pot shot at Spanky's politics and or personal debating style. Unfortunately the lead up wore me out. He has stamina, I tell you.
But, hey, he raised 20 large for the victims. Who knew he was a Communist fuck?

sgtclub 09-07-2005 12:13 PM

Class
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
On a serious note, I heard yesterday that Rehnquist and O'Connor dated briefly at Stanford. I had never heard this before. What's up with that?
This is true - Fucking remarkable. I always wondered if they got it on. O'Connor has talked about it and seems to suggest it was very innocent, but she's a lady (and a cowgirl) and I wouldn't expect her to say anything different.

Sexual Harassment Panda 09-07-2005 12:25 PM

Class
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
This is true - Fucking remarkable. I always wondered if they got it on. O'Connor has talked about it and seems to suggest it was very innocent, but she's a lady (and a cowgirl) and I wouldn't expect her to say anything different.
He was #1 in his class, she was #3. They were probably in the same study groups.

Gattigap 09-07-2005 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I was at a Vons in San Diego the other day, and was blown away by all the merlots (and the lack of zinfandels) in the wine section. Do Southern Californians drink a lot of merlot?
No.


(Well, not all of us.)

Gattigap 09-07-2005 12:26 PM

Wonkin'
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
That's not what I said, and you know it, or should.
2.

sebastian_dangerfield 09-07-2005 12:30 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Anymore?
I see your point. I pay for, but take little in return from, the govt. However, it is still technically supposed to come to the rescue in time of tragedy. We can’t - shouldn’t move toward strict Social Darwinism or an “each man for himself” system of defense and security against attack/natural disaster. That’d be the end of the nation. Like it or not, you’re stuck with taking care of others. There’s nothing a civilized society can or should do about that. The questions NO raises are:

1. Where does that duty end; and

2. How do we teach people accustomed to a govt safety net for everything that they have to be responsible for their own lives?

I have no answers.

Hank Chinaski 09-07-2005 12:51 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by baltassoc


I have nothing more to say on the topic for now. Except that people who don't give money to the Red Cross are chumps.

(Again, with a few exceptions who have disclosed themselves to me directly, I have no idea who has given what. Hank may be cool. Or he may be a chump. I'll leave that to the board to decide.)
This is an attempt at a joke, right? Please tell me you weren't serious.

Hank Chinaski 09-07-2005 12:53 PM

Dumbass?
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
Oh hogwash. This country was equally divided during the Clinton administration and 9/11 was but a momentary pause in the partisan bickering that has been our history whenever we have a CE that isn't milk toast.
2. i remember some serious anti-Bush hatred election night 2000 and in the weeks thereafter.

Shape Shifter 09-07-2005 12:53 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
This is an attempt at a joke, right? Please tell me you weren't serious.
Speaking of jokes . . .

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/06/kat...ion=cnn_latest

(FEMA sends evacuees to the wrong Charleston)

ltl/fb 09-07-2005 12:55 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I see your point. I pay for, but take little in return from, the govt. However, it is still technically supposed to come to the rescue in time of tragedy. We can’t - shouldn’t move toward strict Social Darwinism or an “each man for himself” system of defense and security against attack/natural disaster. That’d be the end of the nation. Like it or not, you’re stuck with taking care of others. There’s nothing a civilized society can or should do about that. The questions NO raises are:

1. Where does that duty end; and

2. How do we teach people accustomed to a govt safety net for everything that they have to be responsible for their own lives?

I have no answers.
Can someone give an example of a society that has no safety net -- where people are all self-reliant? Because I'm not feeling it.

Hank Chinaski 09-07-2005 12:56 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Speaking of jokes . . .

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/06/kat...ion=cnn_latest

(FEMA sends evacuees to the wrong Charleston)
fuck that. I want an answer from Florence Nightengale.

Hank Chinaski 09-07-2005 12:57 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Can someone give an example of a society that has no safety net -- where people are all self-reliant? Because I'm not feeling it.
Sparta and the Arapahoe until about 1870.

ltl/fb 09-07-2005 01:02 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Sparta and the Arapahoe until about 1870.
Can you send me some kind of article on Sparta that backs this up? They lived near water, yes? Perhaps some discussion of a terrible storm lo those many years ago. TIA.

Actually now I'm curious about the class structure of Sparta, and whether they had something like larger landowners who did the whole "distribute grain to the villagers/farmers from the central stores (collected by the large landowner from the farmers or whatever) in times of bad harvests" type thing.


ETA because for some reason I'm thinking that the Greeks were somewhat like the Romans in that only certain people were citizens, and then there was this whole underclass, possibly bifurcated between free people and slaves, who were sort of dependents of the relatively few big cheeses, and that the big cheeses were responsible for their dependents, and I am not talking about their bio families. But I am not sure.

Hank Chinaski 09-07-2005 01:05 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by baltassoc
I have posted about 10 posts on the subject, most of them clumped around a half hour period, and mostly in response to a particularly asinine postition you insisted on defending. As it was a holiday weekend, I choose to believe you were simply drunk.

This morning, I linked to two documents that seem to be relevant to a discussion of interest to the board, but not particularly to me (i.e. who was more negligent in the early stages of responding to the disaster).

To the extent I have energy to discuss the topic at all, I am much more interested in ongoing, current incompetence (the subject of my multiple posts with you Sunday).
I don't recall one thing you've said on this board, let alone this topic. To be respected on either board one must make one's bones. You can't just start posting a lot and assume you're making sense, or arguing well. The only person who could possibly show up and have immediate credibilty would be my wife. But that is becuase she's proven herself here, and Paigow/SS would flatter her to try and co-opt her talents. The mere fact that she has sex with a well-respected poster would not give her credibilty, in an of itself (please pass on softball- "your wife screws not bob?" harhar).

Quote:

I have nothing more to say on the topic for now.
Most of us had reached the conclusion that you've never had anything to say on topic.
Quote:

Except that people who don't give money to the Red Cross are chumps.

(Again, with a few exceptions who have disclosed themselves to me directly, I have no idea who has given what. Hank may be cool. Or he may be a chump. I'll leave that to the board to decide.)
Your grandstanding about an idea that someone else created is vile. I'm sure the lack of acknowledgements or disclosures to you are quite low due to the grandstanding. Anyone remember Ironweed "shaking the trees" this way?

Hank Chinaski 09-07-2005 01:07 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Can you send me some kind of article on Sparta that backs this up? They lived near water, yes? Perhaps some discussion of a terrible storm lo those many years ago. TIA.

Actually now I'm curious about the class structure of Sparta, and whether they had something like larger landowners who did the whole "distribute grain to the villagers/farmers from the central stores (collected by the large landowner from the farmers or whatever) in times of bad harvests" type thing.


ETA because for some reason I'm thinking that the Greeks were somewhat like the Romans in that only certain people were citizens, and then there was this whole underclass, possibly bifurcated between free people and slaves, who were sort of dependents of the relatively few big cheeses, and that the big cheeses were responsible for their dependents, and I am not talking about their bio families. But I am not sure.
We're having a cheese tasting at my home next weekend. I would invite you if you lived near here. All the invitees are upper crust, but not all will be big cheeses.

Shape Shifter 09-07-2005 01:09 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I don't recall one thing you've said on this board, let alone this topic. To be respected on either board one must make one's bones. You can't just start posting a lot and assume you're making sense, or arguing well. The only person who could possibly show up and have immediate credibilty would be my wife. But that is becuase she's proven herself here, and Paigow/SS would flatter her to try and co-opt her talents. The mere fact that she has sex with a well-respected poster would not give her credibilty, in an of itself (please pass on softball- "your wife screws not bob?" harhar).



Most of us had reached the conclusion that you've never had anything to say on topic.


Your grandstanding about an idea that someone else created is vile. I'm sure the lack of acknowledgements or disclosures to you are quite low due to the grandstanding. Anyone remember Ironweed "shaking the trees" this way?
Atticus?

Hank Chinaski 09-07-2005 01:11 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Atticus?
I have nothing more to say on the topic for now.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 09-07-2005 01:19 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Speaking of jokes . . .

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/09/06/kat...ion=cnn_latest

(FEMA sends evacuees to the wrong Charleston)
It seems like a reasonable mistake, given that half of the federal government is now located in the Mountaineer state.

Penske_Account 09-07-2005 01:20 PM

Justice Janice Rodgers Brown
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
You still think the GOP can win with the white-male vote alone?

And, Penske, why would the Christian-Right want an anarcho-libertarian justice?
She is anti-Roe v Wade.

Penske_Account 09-07-2005 01:22 PM

Class
 
Quote:

Originally posted by sgtclub
Not a bad piece, but that guy has a huge ego. "When [i]I[/] won this case Requist did X". I also don't know why he had to throw in this jab:
  • and reducing the protections accorded the mostly poor people of color who are suspected or accused of crime.

I agree the article was overly self-focused but still more classy than Souter's silence or Dershbagoshits "thug" comment.

Ginsburg's comments were the epitome of class for someone who is of a very different ideological bent.

baltassoc 09-07-2005 01:25 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski


Your grandstanding about an idea that someone else created is vile. I'm sure the lack of acknowledgements or disclosures to you are quite low due to the grandstanding. Anyone remember Ironweed "shaking the trees" this way?
No, he didn't. So what? To each his own. Why does it bother you so much that I cajole people into giving to a good cause?

Seriously, I don't know whether you have given money to the Red Cross or some other suitable charity or not. I'm not calling on you to publicly state that you have. I will assume you have.

Your sensitivity to this issue is quite extraordinary, however.

A couple of days ago you were just as vehement against my suggestion that accepting aid offered by other countries might be a good thing. Do you just have a thing against NO? Do you think they brought this upon themselves?

My vision of you is rapidly becoming one of some macho Kirk Douglas / Charlton Heston type yelling "Don't help him up. He's got to get up on his own."

NO doesn't need no stinkin' boats. Or helecopters. Or generators. Or pumps. Or fresh water. Or help from volunteers. Everything's under control. If they can't pull themselves up by there bootstraps, it just wasn't meant to be. Check. Got it. Let the place burn.

Penske_Account 09-07-2005 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Sounds like Karen Hughes is thinking hard about how to improve the way the U.S. comes across on Al Jazeera.
We should take Al jazeera out. They are co-conspirators of Al Qaeda.

Hank Chinaski 09-07-2005 01:29 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by baltassoc
No, he didn't. So what? To each his own. Why does it bother you so much that I cajole people into giving to a good cause?

Seriously, I don't know whether you have given money to the Red Cross or some other suitable charity or not. I'm not calling on you to publicly state that you have. I will assume you have.

Your sensitivity to this issue is quite extraordinary, however.

A couple of days ago you were just as vehement against my suggestion that accepting aid offered by other countries might be a good thing. Do you just have a thing against NO? Do you think they brought this upon themselves?

My vision of you is rapidly becoming one of some macho Kirk Douglas / Charlton Heston type yelling "Don't help him up. He's got to get up on his own."

NO doesn't need no stinkin' boats. Or helecopters. Or generators. Or pumps. Or fresh water. Or help from volunteers. Everything's under control. If they can't pull themselves up by there bootstraps, it just wasn't meant to be. Check. Got it. Let the place burn.
I'll just drop this. you're heading for needing a sock change, and that wouldn't be practical.

sebastian_dangerfield 09-07-2005 01:41 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by baltassoc
No, he didn't. So what? To each his own. Why does it bother you so much that I cajole people into giving to a good cause?

Seriously, I don't know whether you have given money to the Red Cross or some other suitable charity or not. I'm not calling on you to publicly state that you have. I will assume you have.

Your sensitivity to this issue is quite extraordinary, however.

A couple of days ago you were just as vehement against my suggestion that accepting aid offered by other countries might be a good thing. Do you just have a thing against NO? Do you think they brought this upon themselves?

My vision of you is rapidly becoming one of some macho Kirk Douglas / Charlton Heston type yelling "Don't help him up. He's got to get up on his own."

NO doesn't need no stinkin' boats. Or helecopters. Or generators. Or pumps. Or fresh water. Or help from volunteers. Everything's under control. If they can't pull themselves up by there bootstraps, it just wasn't meant to be. Check. Got it. Let the place burn.
I think he just doesn't like being preached to. He probably gives anonymously.

Penske_Account 09-07-2005 01:43 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by baltassoc
I have posted about 10 posts on the subject, most of them clumped around a half hour period, and mostly in response to a particularly asinine postition you insisted on defending. As it was a holiday weekend, I choose to believe you were simply drunk.

This morning, I linked to two documents that seem to be relevant to a discussion of interest to the board, but not particularly to me (i.e. who was more negligent in the early stages of responding to the disaster).

To the extent I have energy to discuss the topic at all, I am much more interested in ongoing, current incompetence (the subject of my multiple posts with you Sunday).

I have nothing more to say on the topic for now. Except that people who don't give money to the Red Cross are chumps.

(Again, with a few exceptions who have disclosed themselves to me directly, I have no idea who has given what. Hank may be cool. Or he may be a chump. I'll leave that to the board to decide.)
You have not commented on Nagin's fuckups which preceded and set up every other entities' fuck ups.

And why is the Red Cross the end all be all of charitable organizations? I have given to other organizations and am working with a non-red cross organization to bring kids (and possibly families) to Seattle during the period of their displacement so that the kids can attend private schools in seattle during such period. I suppose all the people in this effourt are chumps. I let them all know you say so.

Penske_Account 09-07-2005 01:44 PM

Class
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
The goose-stepping in front of the Jewish dorms when he was at Stanford was pretty classy.
Cite please.

Penske_Account 09-07-2005 01:46 PM

Class
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
On a serious note, I heard yesterday that Rehnquist and O'Connor dated briefly at Stanford. I had never heard this before. What's up with that?
Are you jealous? Her husband is sort of sickly, maybe if you wait him out you still have a chance.

Penske_Account 09-07-2005 01:47 PM

Wonkin'
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Gattigap
2.
dissent. And you both continue to duck the issue. Is Nagin paying y'all?

Hank Chinaski 09-07-2005 01:47 PM

Class
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Are you jealous? Her husband is sort of sickly, maybe if you wait him out you still have a chance.
If his mom does start dating Teddy Kennedy, do you think the 4 of them could sit at the same table? I mean philisophically, not physically.

Penske_Account 09-07-2005 01:49 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Can someone give an example of a society that has no safety net -- where people are all self-reliant? Because I'm not feeling it.

Whether or not there is a historical precedent has no bearing on the validity of the idea. Try thinking outside of your box.

Penske_Account 09-07-2005 01:55 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by baltassoc
No, he didn't. So what? To each his own. Why does it bother you so much that I cajole people into giving to a good cause?

Seriously, I don't know whether you have given money to the Red Cross or some other suitable charity or not. I'm not calling on you to publicly state that you have. I will assume you have.
.
It's arrogant. And who decides what is "suitable"? You? Again, if you are serious, its arrogant and off putting. I wonder if the red Cross knows about the effourts because you may be costing them donations if you are doing this on wide spread basis. The way you wrote the first post had you calling me and anyone else here who gives to another org "chumps" (and ftr there is at leastr one other person here who has pledged to donate to the effourts I am engaged in).

Let me add that none of that is meant to take away from your good intentions and admirable acts in giving money to the red cross or assisting others with giving.

baltassoc 09-07-2005 01:56 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
You have not commented on Nagin's fuckups which preceded and set up every other entities' fuck ups.

And why is the Red Cross the end all be all of charitable organizations? I have given to other organizations and am working with a non-red cross organization to bring kids (and possibly families) to Seattle during the period of their displacement so that the kids can attend private schools in seattle during such period. I suppose all the people in this effourt are chumps. I let them all know you say so.
Nice. I've said repeatedly that I don't care what organization one gives to.

This is the kind of politics of personal destruction I've come to expect from you, though, so I'm not too bothered.

Penske_Account 09-07-2005 01:56 PM

Class
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
If his mom does start dating Teddy Kennedy, do you think the 4 of them could sit at the same table? I mean philisophically, not physically.
When Ted flies coach, does he have to pay for two seats? The pic from the other day showed a lot of spillage into the adjacent seat.

Hank Chinaski 09-07-2005 01:57 PM

Your federal government working for you.
 
Quote:

Originally posted by baltassoc
Nice. I've said repeatedly that I don't care what organization one gives to.

This is the kind of politics of personal destruction I've come to expect from you, though, so I'm not too bothered.
2. I have to agree with this. Penske is a hate sock:(

Hank Chinaski 09-07-2005 01:59 PM

Class
 
Quote:

Originally posted by Penske_Account
When Ted flies coach, does he have to pay for two seats? The pic from the other day showed a lot of spillage into the adjacent seat.
say if the Democratic Senate leadership took a junket to Cuba, would they each get 2 seats? otherwise, can you explain how it would be fair to Leiberman?


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:56 AM.

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