LawTalkers - Meet your new thread, same as the old thread.

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Mark Twain, The Greatest American Humorist, Returning Home, New York World [London, 10/6/1900]

............. There is the case of the Philippines. I have tried hard, and yet I cannot for the life of me comprehend how we got into that mess. Perhaps we could not have avoided it -- perhaps it was inevitable that we should come to be fighting the natives of those islands -- but I cannot understand it, and have never been able to get at the bottom of the origin of our antagonism to the natives. I thought we should act as their protector -- not try to get them under our heel. We were to relieve them from Spanish tyranny to enable them to set up a government of their own, and we were to stand by and see that it got a fair trial. It was not to be a government according to our ideas, but a government that represented the feeling of the majority of the Filipinos, a government according to Filipino ideas. That would have been a worthy mission for the United States. But now -- why, we have got into a mess, a quagmire from which each fresh step renders the difficulty of extrication immensely greater. I'm sure I wish I could see what we were getting out of it, and all it means to us as a nation.

Next you'll be comparing Iraq to Vietnam.

Hank Chinaski

08-28-2007 10:04 PM

They had me at "barbershop quartet."

Quote:

Originally posted by taxwonk
Atticus wasn't using the man's sexual orientation as the basis of his humor. He was finding the humor in the fact that yet another Republican who has made political hay out of being anti-gay has been exposed as being full of shit.

Atticus, Ty, Shifter, and I, as well as the others who have joined this thread aren't making fun at Craig's expense for hitting on a man. If you can't get past the sexual orientation, then that's your baggage, not ours.

especially here you should STP. i won this one, Hands down.

now you give me aother 378-21

taxwonk

08-28-2007 10:04 PM

Winner

Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
In two mere sentences, you insult all of the US Military and the entire Democratic party.

This post should win some sort of prize.

Perhaps an honorable mention. You accomplished the same in one.

taxwonk

08-28-2007 10:37 PM

They had me at "barbershop quartet."

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
especially here you should STP. i won this one, Hands down.

now you give me aother 378-21

Having reviewed the tapes, I have to conclude you not only lost, but you were stomped.

You did, however, concede gracefully once it became apparent you were sawing off the limb you had climbed out on.

Tyrone Slothrop

08-28-2007 10:39 PM

Winner

Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
In two mere sentences, you insult all of the US Military and the entire Democratic party.

This post should win some sort of prize.

It's OK for you to be reactionary -- it's part of your charm -- but don't be stupid. It's hardly becoming. There's no insult to anyone there, except possible Spanky, and he wouldn't respect me if I didn't insult him now and again. And the other thing? What. ever.

Spanky

08-28-2007 10:58 PM

Winner

Quote:

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
except possible Spanky, and he wouldn't respect me if I didn't insult him now and again.

I have to give you that one.:shrug:

SlaveNoMore

08-28-2007 11:10 PM

Winner

Quote:

taxwonk
Perhaps an honorable mention. You accomplished the same in one.

Which one? I love a prize.

Fugee

08-29-2007 12:02 AM

Minnesota law.

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
what law? I can ask someone for sex in the waiting area, but not the restroom? if there is a law your outrage should be there. I'm done. You lose. Next issue.

Here's one of the statutes listed in the arrest report. I think it's the charge to which he pled guilty but I'm not sure how they get here from Craig's actions:

Quote:

609.72 DISORDERLY CONDUCT.

Subdivision 1. Crime. Whoever does any of the following in a public or private place,
including on a school bus, knowing, or having reasonable grounds to know that it will, or will
tend to, alarm, anger or disturb others or provoke an assault or breach of the peace, is guilty of
disorderly conduct, which is a misdemeanor:
(1) Engages in brawling or fighting; or
(2) Disturbs an assembly or meeting, not unlawful in its character; or
(3) Engages in offensive, obscene, abusive, boisterous, or noisy conduct or in offensive,
obscene, or abusive language tending reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others.

The other one is Section 609.746 and I think even more of a stretch.

Notwithstanding the weak case, I share Lester's glee in the exposure of hypocrisy. If you have a secret life, it would be generally advisable not to take public political stands against the very behavior in which you yourself engage.

Tyrone Slothrop

08-29-2007 01:34 AM

Minnesota law.

Quote:

Originally posted by Fugee
Here's one of the statutes listed in the arrest report. I think it's the charge to which he pled guilty but I'm not sure how they get here from Craig's actions: The other one is Section 609.746 and I think even more of a stretch.

Notwithstanding the weak case, I share Lester's glee in the exposure of hypocrisy. If you have a secret life, it would be generally advisable not to take public political stands against the very behavior in which you yourself engage.

That's some pretty weak shit, but of course he had to plead guilty and hope that it never came out. Not that that was such a hot option, either.

SlaveNoMore

08-29-2007 02:09 AM

Minnesota law.

Quote:

Fugee
Notwithstanding the weak case, I share Lester's glee in the exposure of hypocrisy. If you have a secret life, it would be generally advisable not to take public political stands against the very behavior in which you yourself engage.

Does Edwards stump speech about helping the poor count?

sebastian_dangerfield

08-29-2007 02:18 AM

Minnesota law.

Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Does Edwards stump speech about helping the poor count?

They should boil that scumbag in poison oil. Of all the loathsome shystering swine fouling up politics in this country, his class warfare shit sets him at the very lowest of the low.

Thank God the prick's unelectable.

sebastian_dangerfield

08-29-2007 02:21 AM

Appropros of Nothing

Quote:

Originally posted by Diane_Keaton
This reminds me of Sebby.

That's fucking hysterical. Thank you.

Fugee

08-29-2007 02:25 AM

Minnesota law.

Quote:

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Does Edwards stump speech about helping the poor count?

I've been ignoring presidential candidates & their speeches so you'll have to help me out. What did he say and what does he do?

If he talked about helping the poor but in his private life gouges the poor (i.e. is a slum lord, overcharges them, etc.), then yes it would count.

Atticus Grinch

08-29-2007 03:43 AM

They had me at "barbershop quartet."

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
if you were truly a champion of gay rights, you would be bothered that he got arrested at all.

Your complete conflation of "being gay" with "soliciting sex from a stranger in a public place" is so completely telling of your own discomfort that I think you should start backpedalling . . . now.

eta Motherfuck! STP.

Atticus Grinch

08-29-2007 03:50 AM

Think Rush. No, the other Rush.

Quote:

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I've answered all this, other than to say i am surprised you think it okay for cops to arrest people for proposing sexual congress between consenting adults.

I believe it is within a state's power to ban publicly proposing sexual congress between consenting adults. In the high school halls, in the shopping malls. FEDERALISM!

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:38 AM.

Page 178 of 334

178

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page