Offering constructive criticism to the social cripples in our midst since early 2005.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Reality check on the voodoo economics.

I don't even know where to start describing what is wrong with that utterly unsophisticated analysis.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by spookyfish
I'm still trying to figure out whether you're merely agreeing with me or if you're capable of being a wiseass.

I am capable of being a "wiseass" but here I was just trying to support what you were saying.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
This guy knows how to rock n roll:

From the Neil Bush Deposition Archive:

Bush: "I had sexual intercourse with perhaps three or four, I don't remember the exact number, women, at different times. In Thailand once, I have a pretty clear recollection that there was one time in Thailand and in Hong Kong."

Brown: "And you were married to Mrs. Bush?"

Bush: "Yes."

Brown: "Is that where you caught the venereal diseases?"

Bush: "No."

Brown: "Where did you catch those?"

Bush: "Diseases plural? I didn't catch..."

Brown: "Well, I'm sorry. How ... how many venereal diseases do you suffer from?"

Bush: "I've had one venereal disease."

Brown: "Which was?"

Bush: "Herpes."

Brown then interrogates Bush's about his various sex partners:

"Did you pay them for that sex?"

Bush: "No, I did not."

Brown: "Pick them up in a sushi house?"

Bush: "No. ... My recollection is, where I can recall, they came to my room."

Brown: "Do you know the name of that hotel? I may go to Thailand sometime."

Did you make this up? If not where did it come from?

[SlaveNoMore]

Gattigap
Indeed.

OTOH, if Sandy's breach of security by taking copies of his notes led to the death of any agents or other blown operations, I'm sure we'd have heard about it.

Or even photo spreads in Vanity Fair

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by Gattigap
There are a variety of public policy rationales for it. Google reveals one summary that club will particularly like, in that the article argues in favor of changing the law to permit registration of offensive marks. Read away, club.

Thanks. That is exactly how I was thinking about this. This good work will be taken into your account in determining your annual bonus.

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Spanky
Did you make this up? If not where did it come from?

I think it was his divorce proceeding deposition.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Sexual Harassment Panda
I think it was his divorce proceeding deposition.

It was. I remember reading about the Thai hooker incident in the Houston Press.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sgtclub
I don't even know where to start describing what is wrong with that utterly unsophisticated analysis.

In that case, I don't know what to make of your views, or how to respond.

[spookyfish]

Originally posted by Spanky
I am capable of being a "wiseass".

Excellent. You'll fit right in.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
Or even photo spreads in Vanity Fair

Whiff.

Responding to discussions of Rove lying to the press and public that he had "nothing to do" with the outing of a CIA agent with "GodIhateWilsonandtheRovethingdoesn'tmatterbecauseWilsonisalyingassholeandwasaskingforit" is irrelevant, but at least it's somehow connected to the main story line.

Using it to respond to an observation that it's a little hypocritical to savage (say) Sandy Berger for his security breaches while evincing little concern for Rove's (alleged) security breaches in the absence of dead bodies in the street? I'm afraid that even that connection is gone.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Understood, but we are still protecting "offensive" material for purposes of profit.

1) different laws
2) different protections. Copyright isn't a true monopoly--there's no right to exclude, just a right to prevent unreasonable use.
3) this isn't law school--not everything is perfectly in line with everything else.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Andrew Sullivan prints this e-mail from Sana'a, Yemen:

• " Democracy is something a nation has to want, something a nation has to want so much they will shed blood for it. And the Arab world wants democracy as much as they want a hole in the head. They don't get it, they don't care to get it and it seems to be making life particularly shitty for their Iraqi brothers. I don't care what Bush or Wolfowitz or any of that crew have to say, people are not going to embrace this imposed "freedom." I am here, you aren't."

I don't get why you even would post something like this. Do you think of yourself as a racist or a bigot? If you agree with the sentiments of this post you are. If you think Arabs are not capable of democracy you are a racist. It is that simple. Not ready for Democracy? Don't want Democracy? This has been the cry of every tyranical dictator since time started. This exact same argument was made about Japan, Germany, France, Spain, Portugal and almost every Asian nation. Turkey is a muslim nation. So is Indonesia and Malaysia. What person does not want a say in how they are governed. Everyone does. Everyone has an opinion. Sure. Not everyone in Iraq wants a democracty. But only those people that think their opinions will hold sway in a nondemocratic nation. Like the Taliban. Members of the Taliban are against democracy because they know in a Taliban regime what they think is right for the government will prevail. A lot of them sure voted in Iraq. Those people don't want democracy? Or is it possibly the insurgency is a minority, like the Taliban, that thinks that they know what is good for everyone else.

See the problem with the people that are against the war is that they will throw out any argument that is against the war. The problem th some of these arguments are not only weak but are racist and bigoted. If you want to argue - not in our strategic interest - fine - If you want to argue that the country may divide up - fine. But the arguments that Arabs don't want democracy or don't have a culture amenable to democracy, or that the people were better off with Saddam Hussein does not strengthen your argument and reflects much more negatively on the person making the argument than it does on the war.

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
2

[spock] Fascinating. [/spock]

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally posted by Spanky
Did you make this up? If not where did it come from?

Punch "Neil Bush," "divorce," "deposition" into Google.

[SlaveNoMore]

Gattigap
Whiff.

Responding to discussions of Rove lying to the press and public that he had "nothing to do" with the outing of a CIA agent with "GodIhateWilsonandtheRovethingdoesn'tmatterbecauseWilsonisalyingassholeandwasaskingforit" is irrelevant, but at least it's somehow connected to the main story line.

The more and more that comes out, the more it becomes evident that (as Sebby so excellently put) that Rove was, if anything, a middleman, who told Novak (when questioned by Novak) that he also heard Plame worked for the CIA, and who told Cooper, when solicited by Cooper, that he may want to hold off on the Wilson lies, as his wife at the CIA (note - he didnt say covert agent, secret-agent woman, Spies-R-Us, 00Plame) was involved in the selection of Wilson.

Using it to respond to an observation that it's a little hypocritical to savage (say) Sandy Berger for his security breaches

He stole documents, no?

while evincing little concern for Rove's (alleged) security breaches in the absence of dead bodies in the street? I'm afraid that even that connection is gone.

Alleged is the key word. While all the Dems are calling for Rove's head, I'm waiting for any evidence of the security breach. She wasn't covered by the Act, as the evidence shows she was desk analyst for 6 years prior. It was common knowledge in DC she worked for the CIA (if not her role). She's still working there.