Politics As Usual

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by Gin Rummy
Perhaps President Ronald W. Reagan said it best when he said:

"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free."

So I think it's pretty clear that I'm no fan of Reagan (coughtraitorcough), but this is a pretty amazing quote. You've got to hand to him, he had some good speech writers.

Which turns me to the Bush ad I saw this morning on CNN, lambasting Kerry for (HORROR!) wanting to repeal certain parts of the Patriot Act, including (as mentioned specifically in the ad) wiretaps, supoena powers and surveillance. Now I realize that I'm a dyed in the wool liberal, but isn't this ad a bit of a gamble? Are conservatives who are a little afraid of the coming police state likely to think a vote for Kerry is a vote against increased wiretaps, subpoena powers and surveillance, all committed by the jack booted thugs that are federal law enforcement?
I look at that ad and say to myself, not "that's a clear distortion" as I normally do (being a liberal and all), but rather "Kerry's right." That seems like a poor ad.

Edited to correct homonym.

[baltassoc]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
It's hard to believe that people who buy Hummers could be surprised by the lousy mileage, but there you go.

People who buy Hummers, with very few exceptions, are dumb.*




*This is not so much a commentary on the bug SUV phenomenon, as Hummers themselves. Any way you look at a Hummer, there are alternative vehicles that do almost any task cheaper, smoother, more luxuriously and more fuel efficiently. Excepting, perhaps, driving through the deep backwoods, but how many Hummer drivers will ever take their babies off the pavement, let alone anywhere near an area that would push the limits of a Dodge Durango, Chevy Suburban or Ford Expedition?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Come on. Do you really think heavy trucks--the ones that drag 50 tons of gravel around--should be subject to the same standards? If so, you need to spend a bit to buy a piece of reality. If not, you have to draw the line somewhere. Quibble with congress as to where it drew the line. I have no idea if it's right or wrong. But there it is.

Pickup trucks are fine, I suppose. The large ones. Because very few people buy those to drive to soccer. And, they handily carry winches that can pull people out of huge water mudsucking things in storms that should be on the Weather Channel.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
One day when I was 16 or so, after a night of drinking

Oh my fucking god!! You were drinking at age 16!!!! That is so fucking illegal! You are amoral and irresponsible and should be executed!

[Not Me]

Originally posted by baltassoc
lambasting Kerry for (HORROR!) wanting to repeal certain parts of the Patriot Act, . . . "Kerry's right."

Did you read anything in the news about Padilla yesterday?

You liberals would put Gorelick's wall back up, too, if you had the chance.

[Not Me]

Well I sure hope someone goes after the cosmetologists for charging more for women's hair cuts!

• TRENTON, N.J. (AP) - The state's top civil rights official has ruled that taverns cannot offer discounts to women on "ladies nights," agreeing with a man who claimed such gender-based promotions discriminated against men.
  
  David R. Gillespie said it was not fair for women to get into the Coastline nightclub for free and receive discounted drinks while men paid a $5 cover charge and full price for drinks.
  
  In his ruling Tuesday, J. Frank Vespa-Papaleo, director of the state Division on Civil Rights, rejected arguments by the nightclub that ladies nights were a legitimate promotion. Commercial interests do not override the "important social policy objective of eradicating discrimination," he ruled.
  
  The ruling specifically addressed the weekly ladies nights at the Coastline in Cherry Hill, but it carries the force of a court decision and applies statewide. Vespa-Papaleo said state officials would write formal rules after a public hearing.
  
  The restaurant's attorney, Colleen Ready, did not immediately return a telephone message left Wednesday by The Associated Press.
  
  Courts in other states have issued divergent opinions on such promotions.
  
  Judges in Pennsylvania and Iowa have said similar events are illegal, but courts in Illinois and Washington state have said that ladies nights are permissible because they do not discriminate against men but rather encourage women to attend.

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBSHX2KZUD.html

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Not Me
Well I sure hope someone goes after the cosmetologists for charging more for women's hair cuts!

http://ap.tbo.com/ap/breaking/MGBSHX2KZUD.html

I hope the civil rights commission does something about that glass ceiling, too.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by baltassoc
Now I realize that I'm a dyed in the wool liberal, but isn't this ad a bit of a gamble? Are conservatives who are a little afraid of the coming police state likely to think a vote for Kerry is a vote against increased wiretaps, subpoena powers and surveillance, all committed by the jack booted thugs that are federal law enforcement?
Edited to correct homonym.

Not a chance in the world. They'd vote for Nader first.

[Not Me]

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=38738

• A Ho Chi Minh City museum that honors Vietnam war protesters features a photograph of Sen. John Kerry being greeted by the general secretary of the Communist Party, Comrade Do Muoi.
  
  A snapshot of the display in the Vietnamese Communist War Remnants Museum – formerly known as the "War Crimes Museum" – was acquired over the weekend by Jeffrey M. Epstein of Vietnam Vets for the Truth, a group opposing Kerry's campaign for the presidency.
  
  Vietnam veteran Bill Lupetti took this photograph of a display at a Ho Chi Minh City museum honoring war protesters.
  
  A spokesman with Kerry's national campaign did not return a call from WND seeking comment.
  
  The snapshot of the display, which depicts a July 1993 meeting, was forwarded to Epstein by Bob Shirley, one of more than 200 members of Swift Boat Veterans for the Truth who signed an open letter questioning Kerry's fitness to serve as commander in chief.
  
  Epstein said the picture of the display was taken by Bill Lupetti, a Swift Boat Veteran who currently is visiting Vietnam.
  
  Epstein said the display photograph's "unquestionable significance lies in its placement in the American protesters' section of the War Crimes Museum" in Ho Chi Minh City, the former Saigon.
  
  "The Vietnamese communists clearly recognize John Kerry's contributions to their victory," he said. "This find can be compared to the discovery of a painting of Neville Chamberlain hanging in a place of honor in Hitler's Eagle's Nest in 1945."

[Secret_Agent_Man]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
Why hasn't:
The American government determined who told Chalabi this stuff?

Which is to say, who knows?

A snide partisan comment or two:

(a) They're probably investigating, but hell, they still apparently haven't figured out who at the White House told Novak about Vallerie Plame in 2002, so don't hold your breath.

(b) They may or may not find out, but don't expect an announcement. This administration has shown no signs of enforcing accountability for screw-ups (except for the "screw-up" of being disloyal).

S_A_M

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Not Me
Oh my fucking god!! You were drinking at age 16!!!! That is so fucking illegal! You are amoral and irresponsible and should be executed!

Oh my God, you missed the part you were really supposed to catch! There was driving involved too!! People should not drive and we were!! Except Camels and other non-fueled animals!! Or else we'll all soon be, gasp, riding Camels and wearing towels!! and getting threatened by a crazy guy!!


Ride Camels now or Ride Camels later America!! Its your choice!!

[Say_hello_for_me]

Originally posted by Secret_Agent_Man
A snide partisan comment or two:

(a) They're probably investigating, but hell, they still apparently haven't figured out who at the White House told Novak about Vallerie Plame in 2002, so don't hold your breath.

(b) They may or may not find out, but don't expect an announcement. This administration has shown no signs of enforcing accountability for screw-ups (except for the "screw-up" of being disloyal).

S_A_M

Fair enough, and believe me, I'm not trying to defend the admin or Chalabi on this one. Either they were wrong before or they are wrong now.

Doesn't it seem strange that the first time they hear evidence about Chalabi giving info to the Iranians, its a that its info not in our interests and b the info is that we are listening!!

A gut check just tells me that we are being played now, or maybe the admin is just playing the American public now and are keeping their real evidence hidden. You know, the rock solid, undeniable, hard evidence.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
There was driving involved too!! People should not drive and we were!!

More illegal behavior. You should be executed twice.

Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
Ride Camels

But only if it is legal since all illegal acts are immoral simply because they are illegal.

[Not Me]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...stern_out_door

• Thanks to the ongoing content controversy, Stern's show posted huge gains this past winter in New York (where it was up 22% from fall), Los Angeles and Chicago. On the flip side, the Clear Channel-owned San Diego outlet where Stern aired saw its numbers plummet after the DJ was canned.

[ltl/fb]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/02/us.....ap/index.html

"Hagenbeck said the stop-loss move is necessary only because the Army is also undergoing a major reorganization that requires some units to be taken off-line while they are restructured."

So, while we are undergoing a major military action, we are also (a) cutting taxes and (b) reorganizing the armed services.

This definitely seems logical and efficient.

No, I'm not saying that reorganization is bad per se, but if all these people who would be retiring etc. are being forced to stay not just in the military, but in combat areas, BECAUSE OF the reorganization (and not the military action itself), that seems . . . annoying. Particularly to the families of the people who are killed after they would have retired if they hadn't been forced to stay (if there are any, and there probably will be at least several, and at least some of those will probably die in friendly fire).