Waiting for Fitzgerald

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Senator Sam Brownback says he and other conservatives have ``a great deal of skepticism'' about Harriet Miers, President Bush's latest nominee for the Supreme Court.

The Kansas Republican is disappointed Bush did not pick a candidate with more of a track record. He had urged Bush to nominate someone who opposes the Roe vs. Wade decision legalizing abortion.

Brownback compared the nomination of Miers -- Bush's White House counsel -- to that of Supreme Court Justice David Souter. Souter was nominated to the high court by the first President Bush and was believed to be a conservative, but he later turned out to be liberal on the bench.

Brownback is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

If Brownie dings her, the bottom will fall out fast. Pray it so, please babyjesuschristsuperstar.

How? Brownback and his partner in crime, Coburn, are marginalized lunatics. Even in their own party, they're considered fringe elements, no matter how much centrist psoturing they've done lately. Brownback should run for Pres. I need a fucking laugh.

[Replaced_Texan]

Ya'll really don't like states' rights at all, do you?

(eta: fixed link)

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
BREAKING.......

By 1979, Harriet Miers, then in her mid-30s, had accomplished what some people take a lifetime to achieve. She was a partner at Locke Purnell Boren Laney & Neely, one of the most prestigious law firms in the South.

But she still felt something was missing in her life.

The NEW YORK TIMES is set to splash the "something" on Page Ones on Wednesday, newsroom sources tell the DRUDGE REPORT.

"She decided that she wanted faith to be a bigger part of her life," Hecht said. "One evening she called me to her office and said she was ready to make a commitment," to accept the babyJesusChristsuperstar as her savior and be born again, Hecht said. Miers became an evangelical Christian and began identifying more with the Republican Party than with the Democrats who had long held sway over Texas politics.

MORE TO FOLLOW.........

I saw this. What a fucking bad job of planting backfill to ease the concerns of the base. So fucking transparent.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Ya'll really don't like states' rights at all, do you?

story expired - what was it?

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
My point is that there are some moral absolutes, right and wrong outside of objectivity. The dimwit party leadership sees everything as grey and the liberal rabble rousers in the Media and Hollyweird perpetuate this notion. Maybe you don't drink that strain of kool aid.

Some moral absolutes? And you accuse me of being a relativist? Either acknowledge, as you just have, that we are all relativists and stop talking like one of those whackadoos on a street corner with the "Jesus is Coming" sandwich board, or back up your prior posts' assertion: that there is absolute Right and Wrong, and each act is one or the Other.

which part do you have a problem with, TK as a manslaughterer, Clinton as perjurer, Byrd as a racist or Clinton as a sexual harasser/abuser cum rapist (npi)? this is the part where the dems moral relativism perplexes me. If the CEO of a large company committed the sex crimes of a Clinton, the left wing socialists would be clamouring for his scalp and decrying the behavioural excesses of the capitalist greedmongers, but when Clinton rapes and beats Juanita, he's some kind of romanticised demi-god. Why the reluctance to define rape and sexual harassment or Klan membership as with BYrd as objectively wrong and behaviours we won't tolerate in our leaders?

I have two problems with it.

First, you fail to take into account the fact that there are also bad guys in the Republican Party and that it is just plain wrong to make everybody who disagrees with you guilty by association when you aren't willing to bear the same cross.

Second, the fact that you know me personally, and purport to be a friend, and you know for a fact that I am not a murderer, rapist, or racist, which makes you an asshole.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Even Clinton didn't intentionally sell out his cronies. He just abandoned them when it became politically a problem (Zoe Baird, Lani Guinier, etc.)

The problem with the far right is that there's no credible threat to vote differently. The only threat is to stay home. So all that means is that the moderates are the ones up for grabs. It moves the Rs back to the center. If the babyjesusRs say "fuck you" then the rest of the Rs say "fuck you back, we'll go back to grab the moderates with budget-cutting, limited gov't policies" Maybe they can do it, maybe not, but it doesn't help your babyjesus.

Other than Bush I riding on Reagan's coattails in 88 against a midget clown from taxachussets with a main campaign plank based on a lie, when was the last time the Republicans won the White House on the backs of the moderate wing of the party. Love em or hate em, the babyjesi hold the keys to the castle. Think about it, without them we would have President Gore now.

Unless there are 4-8M moderate republicans who have been sitting it out or voting dem the last couple of decades.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Penske_Account

Unless there are 4-8M moderate republicans who have been sitting it out or voting dem the last couple of decades.

I think there are probably 4M in CA alone.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
You know, you need to stop worrying about the babyjesus, and be more concerned about what's going on in your own backyard. How could you let this happen? A fucking tip jar?

1. I'm sort of jaded on the live nude shows;

2. I am more old skool, i.e. I just like to sit back, at a distance and watch. I don't want to talk, I don't want to stuff money in a garter and other than one really drunken night in Chicago a few years ago, I don't do the lapdance thing. As for that one instance, with 20/20 hindsight and soberity as my guide, if I had that grand back, I would order in out-call, get a room at the Four Seasons. Maybe two girls. And use the change to buy a bottle of Opus One.

Although I will say, I have had the displeasure to deal with more than a few of the city council members and hell is too good of a fate for them.

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Given Penske's guilt issues the 4 foot rule will actually help him, and the no tipping thing is real icing.

I like the stripper bars in BC. No tips allowed, beers for a toonie and no cover charge. And full nudity. Socialism does have its benefits, no offence.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Penske_Account
Other than Bush I riding on Reagan's coattails in 88 against a midget clown from taxachussets with a main campaign plank based on a lie, when was the last time the Republicans won the White House on the backs of the moderate wing of the party. Love em or hate em, the babyjesi hold the keys to the castle. Think about it, without them we would have President Gore now.
.

In 1984, Reagan won every state except Minnesota. I don't think babyjesus carried Massachusetts for him. So what you're saying is that Bush I and Reagan both won elections without having to pander to baby jesus. And Bush II won one election by doing so.

We'd have president Gore now if one didn't pander to the right. But if one took a different strategy fro the outset, I assess differently where you'd end up. Yes, you'd lose some votes. But right now the assessment apparently is that you'd lose less votes that way than by continuing to pander.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by dtb
Hmmm.

What if a woman is married, but not to the child's father?

The possibilities are endless.

Wrong board, slut.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
Ya'll really don't like states' rights at all, do you?

(eta: fixed link)

That's news? It was an abomination then, and continues to be. But with l'affaire Schiavo and efforts to federalize anti-abortion laws, was there some doubt on this?

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by taxwonk
Some moral absolutes? And you accuse me of being a relativist? Either acknowledge, as you just have, that we are all relativists and stop talking like one of those whackadoos on a street corner with the "Jesus is Coming" sandwich board, or back up your prior posts' assertion: that there is absolute Right and Wrong, and each act is one or the Other.
.

I disagree with that. Not everything has to be an abolsute, but I also disagree with the liberals guiding principle that there are no absolutes.

Originally posted by taxwonk

I have two problems with it.

First, you fail to take into account the fact that there are also bad guys in the Republican Party and that it is just plain wrong to make everybody who disagrees with you guilty by association when you aren't willing to bear the same cross.

Second, the fact that you know me personally, and purport to be a friend, and you know for a fact that I am not a murderer, rapist, or racist, which makes you an asshole.

I am not sure there are Klansman, rapists or murderers at the top of the R party, but welcome the cites.

I don't accuse you of those things and have the appropriate love and respect for you, unless you are secretly a bagman for the Daleys, then all bets are off.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
I don't disagree with your assessment, but why do you think the political calculus will change? He doesn't have the energy or capital for a fight over a hard-right candidate. If was going to fight that fight he would have started it already.

I think the calculus will change, because if Bush needs to nominate a hard right-winger, instead of just the usual toady, his enslavement to the bible-thumpers will be complete, and apparent.

Please, let it be so.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
You know, you need to stop worrying about the babyjesus, and be more concerned about what's going on in your own backyard. How could you let this happen? A fucking tip jar?

Understatement of the year:

“It will make the clubs less fun.”