Waiting for Fitzgerald

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Go back a year and read all you guys gloating about Farenheit 9/11 and how the election was over. You were right.

What is the source (The American Law Institute), is it unbiased, and can a Congressman approach a researcher of his own choice.

Conyers is a nice man, personally, but he's to the left of Ty politically. I find very little convincing from him.

More to the point -- not one's going to read 27 pages of dense statutory analysis. Geez.

eft

S_A_M

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Go back a year and read all you guys gloating about Farenheit 9/11 and how the election was over. You were right.

I don't know how many times a number of us need to say that we don't care for Moore or his movies for it to actually stick with you, and for you to put this article of faith away. Go back a year and read it yourself.

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
In fairness to Penske (now, that feels odd) the picture in question is a pretty well-known photo of certain Palestinians celebrating the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States. Note that the fellow next to her in the picture is offering some type of bread/dip -- which I've read is a traditional food for celebrations.

Thus, while his statements were offensive and over-the-top, he did not call her those names merely because she is a Palestinian.

I don't like what I see in the picture, but am unwilling to classify as "sub-human filth" or "whores" all those who celebrate the deaths of people they do not know but perceive as enemies (even innocents). Too many Americans fall into that mode sometimes, but certainly Nut Penske.

S_A_M

Given the context in which he posted the pictures - in a post about Palestian reactions to Israel's withdrawal - I think my misunderstanding was reasonable.

I therefore withdraw the particular inditement of Penske. However, his body of work on this board is ample evidence of the fact that he is still a racist piece of shit.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Gattigap
I don't know how many times a number of us need to say that we don't care for Moore or his movies for it to actually stick with you, and for you to put this article of faith away. Go back a year and read it yourself.

I remember ty saying he didn't like MM, but really that wasn't my point. the point was that you guys (maybe not you individually, but certainly several posters) thought the movie would break Bush's back. Of course, you yourself were above watching the movie, but the projected impact of the movie on the election was a topic.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I remember ty saying he didn't like MM, but really that wasn't my point. the point was that you guys (maybe not you individually, but certainly several posters) thought the movie would break Bush's back. Of course, you yourself were above watching the movie, but the projected impact of the movie on the election was a topic.

Cite, please.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Captain
While I agree that it's a bizarre decision in a lot of ways, I think the court forced itself into a corner by eliminating other ways of redressing constitutional violations. What good is a constitutional prohibition on an invasion of privacy (an improper search and seizure, for example) without some penalty for a violation of that right? If the court won't mess with sovereign immunity, then the government can't really be held accountable to the constitution, can it? And what good is a constitution that a Government can ignore?

So they latched on to the only remedy left.

But to fix the problem, I think we have to fix sovereign immunity.

(Sorry if this is repetitive, but I think the train of thought had gotten buried before).

I think the basis for the rule is the maxim from Blacksotne's Commentaries: better a hundred guilty men go free than one innocent man hang.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Cite, please.

Just trust me. This is a cocktail party, not a research facility.

[SlaveNoMore]

Sexual Harassment Panda
She will be, after the people read this.

The real question is, if an election was held today, who would win - Bush or Blanco?

Funnier is the recent Zogby poll from last week, which shows that Bush - even with his low approval rating - still beats Kerry in an election.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
that is the biggest who gives a fucking shit in the world. Everyone has to go to the bathroom sometime. These liberals will put no bounds on the level that they will sink to in their psuedo-intellectually smug arrogance to attempt to debase the office of the President and the man who rightfully occupies it.

This from the king of the Clinton photoshops? Partisanship, much?

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Cite, please.

Hank's a little sensitive about being seen as a library-haunting bookworm bitch after the whole Griswold thing. I don't think he'll be doing any research for a while until he feels a bit more secure.

eta: merde!!!

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Quick question (caveat: everything I know about the judicial hearings I learned from the Daily Show):

Did I hear correctly when Biden asked Roberts if he thought it was OK for the government to implant computer chips into people to monitor them?

If so, how, oh how, did Roberts refrain from saying "On a practical note, Senator, I understand that a large number of people find that lining one's hat with tinfoil disrupts the signals from those chips. Just something you might want to consider." Based on that alone, I think Roberts may be the most diplomatically gifted person in federal government service. I could not have contained myself half so well.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
That's exactly it. Where is Ty to defend the relevancy of this photo?

The photo has no relevancy. I can't believe anybody's wasting time on it at all. It's a one-time throw-away line on TDS.

[SlaveNoMore]

baltassoc
You have no idea who that woman is or what she believes. She is to you a "piece of sub-human filth", a "ululating ... whore" and a "terror loving bee-yotch" because she is Palistinian, and for no other reason.

Fuck you, you racist piece of shit. You are not worthy of my contempt.

Actually, that photo of the woman is one typically used by media outlets when they point out that Palestinians celebrated in the streets of Gaza after the 9/11 WTC attacks.

So if calling someone like that a "piece of sub-human filth" makes Penske a racist piece of shit, I'm afraid then, that I am too. So sue me.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Sexual Harassment Panda
She will be, after the people read this.

The real question is, if an election was held today, who would win - Bush or Blanco?

What race? Bush can't run for president again and I can see no reason why he would want to run for governor of Louisiana. That would be a huge step down.

Your post, as usual, is moronic.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Spanky
Set up a system used by every other civilized country whereby if the cops infringe on your rights there is some way to receive compensation from the police or the government.

If the cops screw up, the victim of the crime should not be penalized. The idea that probative evidence would be thrown out really only punishes the victim and not the police.

England doesn't have the exclusionary rule yet I have never heard that defendants rights are abused all the time or that their system is completely unfair.

Our system does not put enough focus on the truth.

The victim isn't punished by the exclusionary rule. Our system of criminal justice is aimed at maintaining order and safeguarding the citizenry. I can think of only one system of justice currently practiced that is aimed at providing retribution for the benefit of the victim. That would be Shari'a.