Patting the wrists, rolling the eyes.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sgtclub
have another doughnut

Is this the equivalent of "don't worry your pretty little head about it"?

GOD I want a fucking donut.

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Suppose that I sue club because he's using a charcoal grill and making my patio all smoky. I sue under the California common law of nuisance, but I lose. Aggreived, and unwilling to give up, I go to Senator Boxer, who pulls some strings and gets Congress to pass a law saying that the judgment in my particular suit -- and that suit only -- is null and void, and that I can get a de novo trial in federal court.

I don't think the Supremacy Clause was meant to permit this sort of retroactive thing, and it seems like something in the Constitution should bar it. But I don't know wha.

Well, both the Takings clause and Bill of Attainder clause might get you towards your argument. But if not, other than seeming "wrong", doesn't this happen every day--Congress moves wealth from one pocket to another through legislation.

What if the Congress passed a bill saying all gay marriages in Massachusetts are void? Same result? Different because of different const. grounds?

[Spanky]

When are the liberals ever going to get it?

From the Economist:

The reluctant reformers
For the biggest failings in the euro area remain microeconomic, not macroeconomic. There is a reason why Denmark and the Netherlands have higher employment and lower unemployment than Germany and France: it is that the latter two have overly regulated labour markets, tougher hire-and-fire rules and high minimum wages. The evidence that excessive interference to “protect” people in work penalises those who are out of work has seldom been as clear as in Europe over the past five years. As this week's Lisbon scorecard from the Centre for European Reform (CER), a think-tank, shows, a similar story emerges on energy and telecoms liberalisation, competition in financial services, industrial subsidies and the rest: countries that have been fastest to open their markets to competition have outperformed those that have been slowest—notably France, Germany and Italy.

These three countries are still Europe's back-markers on economic reform. Their governments have pushed through some politically painful measures to shake up labour markets, cut pension burdens and increase working hours. But the CER report names Italy as the villain of the Lisbon piece. And Germany and France are leading the opposition to the EU's services directive, intended to liberalise cross-border trade in services. The effort to “protect” services from competition is spectacularly wrong-headed. Services now account for 70% of euro-area GDP, and for all of net job growth in the past five years. An official French report last autumn suggested that opening France's services sector to as much competition as America's could generate over 3m new jobs.

So why are the leaders of France, Germany and Italy so hesitant about reform? The answer lies in domestic politics. France's Jacques Chirac, behaving like a left-winger, is eagerly appeasing union protesters against change (see article). Germany's Gerhard Schröder, struggling with unpopularity, talks of more reforms, but on too timid a scale. Italy's Silvio Berlusconi is nervous about April's regional elections. Even Mr Barroso, opponent of decaffeinated reform, is reluctant to press for stronger measures, fearing that scare stories of American capitalism trumping the European social model may scupper referendums on the EU constitution. Such alarm is specious: if they look north, not west, EU leaders can see Nordic countries doing well and keeping their social model. It is not the Lisbon agenda that threatens the model: it is failure to reform.

[sgtclub]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Is this the equivalent of "don't worry your pretty little head about it"?

GOD I want a fucking donut.

No, it's the equivalent of "have another drink, [you fucking drunk]"

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by Polendina
that sounds kinky, do you look like Hillary?

More like Chelsea. But with a right-to-life fetish.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)
Well, both the Takings clause and Bill of Attainder clause might get you towards your argument. But if not, other than seeming "wrong", doesn't this happen every day--Congress moves wealth from one pocket to another through legislation.

What if the Congress passed a bill saying all gay marriages in Massachusetts are void? Same result? Different because of different const. grounds?

The difference is that my case -- and Schiavo's -- doesn't involve only abstract principles of law -- e.g., all gay marriages in Massachusetts -- but rather the application of law to one particular set of facts. And it's not like a Congressional determination to pre-empt state law before there's an adjudication -- it's an after-the-fact response to a judicial decision that one doesn't like. Boxer wouldn't do the same thing for club, after all.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by sgtclub
No, it's the equivalent of "have another drink, [you fucking drunk]"

Ah. Charming.

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Bo Gritz?

Last I heard he was riding hard to FL fixin' to make him a citizen's arrest on Michael Schiavo. Since then - nada. Did Sheriff Bush cut him off at the pass?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by sgtclub
Gallop did a poll - All groups, DEMS, GOP and Independents, polled believe by healthy margins that she should die.

this is also true about the guys at abu gharib and gitmo- NYT still tries to fix it.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
George Bush, 10/29/04:

• Unfortunately – unfortunately, my opponent, tonight, continued to say things he knows are not true – accusing our military of passing up a chance to get Osama bin Laden in Tora Bora. As the Commander in charge of that operation, Tommy Franks had said, it’s simply not the case.

Hank Chinaski, 10/20/04:

• General Franks takes my side on the Tora Bora issue. Does this mean I win?
  

Associated Press, 3/23/05:

• A terror suspect held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, helped the al-Qaida leader escape his mountain hide-out at Tora Bora in 2001, according to a U.S. government document.
  
  The document, provided in response to a Freedom of Information request, says the unidentified detainee ''assisted in the escape of Osama bin Laden from Tora Bora.'' It is the first definitive statement from the Pentagon that bin Laden was at Tora Bora and evaded U.S. pursuers.

The lesson: Lying works!

This sock was once my partner, and we worked together beautifully. I thus have a difficult decision- the above stupid post and several others over the past few days show the sock is irredeemably brain dead. I want to pull the plug and delete this sock, but RT and Slave, who claim they were responsible for bringing this sock here, say they should have the final say and they are hopeful someday this sock could again make a coherent post- I ask you is a sock who could take a statement from an admitted terrorist as a "fact" something that could be expected to ever again make a coherent post? Thank you. Can we please delete the Ty sock?

[Hank Chinaski]

[

[The Larry Davis Experience]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I ask you is a sock who could take a statement from an admitted terrorist as a "fact" something that could be expected to ever again make a coherent post?

Um, the Pentagon made the statement in question. You'd better retract the "admitted terrorist" thing. They get touchy about that.

Not that I am taking sides on the pressing Ty/euthanasia question. I don't want to offend my base.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by The Larry Davis Experience
Um, the Pentagon made the statement in question. You'd better retract the "admitted terrorist" thing. They get touchy about that.

Not that I am taking sides on the pressing Ty/euthanasia question. I don't want to offend my base.

The Pentagon said this guy told him Osama was there- the only time we all agree on where Osama was is the two times Bubba decided not to pick him up.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
I ask you is a sock who could take a statement from an admitted terrorist as a "fact" something that could be expected to ever again make a coherent post?

Calling a Pentagon official a "terrorist" is unamerican, Hank. Love this country or leave it, pal. Go back to Windsor.

Hank, Hank, Hank!
The Pentagon said this guy told him Osama was there- the only time we all agree on where Osama was is the two times Bubba decided not to pick him up.

Please tell me where in this article that statement is attributed to the terrorist. It's not long -- just read carefully and move your lips, and you'll get through it.

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
the only time we all agree on where Osama was is the two times Bubba decided not to pick him up.

Resist the temptation, Hank. Sure, Penske's Hillary's Big-Ol Butt-themed falcons have been drunkenly circling their falconer for years now, and the NotMes and JustForFuns come and go, but today we've lost Slave too, as he's decided to say it loud and say it proud!

These days we're down to folks like Burger, Spanky, club and bilmore, who either are not (or at least try not to be) trolls, and often contribute thoughtful things from the conservative side of the aisle. I sense that you want to do these things too and resist the temptation to phone it in, but far as I can tell the list of topics you keep the faith on are down to ... uh ... math.