I suppose conservatives judges are unreasonable and liberal ones are not.
Posted By: LOL, oh brother. nm on 2005-10-03
In Reply to: Two things I just heard that make her look better all the time! - Libby
x
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Liberal's Pledge to Disheartened Conservatives sm
A Liberal's Pledge to Disheartened Conservatives ...by Michael Moore
To My Conservative Brothers and Sisters,
I know you are dismayed and disheartened at the results of last week's election. You're worried that the country is heading toward a very bad place you don't want it to go. Your 12-year Republican Revolution has ended with so much yet to do, so many promises left unfulfilled. You are in a funk, and I understand.
Well, cheer up, my friends! Do not despair. I have good news for you. I, and the millions of others who are now in charge with our Democratic Congress, have a pledge we would like to make to you, a list of promises that we offer you because we value you as our fellow Americans. You deserve to know what we plan to do with our newfound power -- and, to be specific, what we will do to you and for you.
Thus, here is our Liberal's Pledge to Disheartened Conservatives:
Dear Conservatives and Republicans,
I, and my fellow signatories, hereby make these promises to you:
1. We will always respect you for your conservative beliefs. We will never, ever, call you unpatriotic simply because you disagree with us. In fact, we encourage you to dissent and disagree with us.
2. We will let you marry whomever you want, even when some of us consider your behavior to be different or immoral. Who you marry is none of our business. Love and be in love -- it's a wonderful gift.
3. We will not spend your grandchildren's money on our personal whims or to enrich our friends. It's your checkbook, too, and we will balance it for you.
4. When we soon bring our sons and daughters home from Iraq, we will bring your sons and daughters home, too. They deserve to live. We promise never to send your kids off to war based on either a mistake or a lie.
5. When we make America the last Western democracy to have universal health coverage, and all Americans are able to get help when they fall ill, we promise that you, too, will be able to see a doctor, regardless of your ability to pay. And when stem cell research delivers treatments and cures for diseases that affect you and your loved ones, we'll make sure those advances are available to you and your family, too.
6. Even though you have opposed environmental regulation, when we clean up our air and water, we, the Democratic majority, will let you, too, breathe the cleaner air and drink the purer water.
7. Should a mass murderer ever kill 3,000 people on our soil, we will devote every single resource to tracking him down and bringing him to justice. Immediately. We will protect you.
8. We will never stick our nose in your bedroom or your womb. What you do there as consenting adults is your business. We will continue to count your age from the moment you were born, not the moment you were conceived.
9. We will not take away your hunting guns. If you need an automatic weapon or a handgun to kill a bird or a deer, then you really aren't much of a hunter and you should, perhaps, pick up another sport. We will make our streets and schools as free as we can from these weapons and we will protect your children just as we would protect ours.
10. When we raise the minimum wage, we will pay you -- and your employees -- that new wage, too. When women are finally paid what men make, we will pay conservative women that wage, too.
11. We will respect your religious beliefs, even when you don't put those beliefs into practice. In fact, we will actively seek to promote your most radical religious beliefs (Blessed are the poor, Blessed are the peacemakers, Love your enemies, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, and Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.). We will let people in other countries know that God doesn't just bless America, he blesses everyone. We will discourage religious intolerance and fanaticism -- starting with the fanaticism here at home, thus setting a good example for the rest of the world.
12. We will not tolerate politicians who are corrupt and who are bought and paid for by the rich. We will go after any elected leader who puts him or herself ahead of the people. And we promise you we will go after the corrupt politicians on our side FIRST. If we fail to do this, we need you to call us on it. Simply because we are in power does not give us the right to turn our heads the other way when our party goes astray. Please perform this important duty as the loyal opposition.
I promise all of the above to you because this is your country, too. You are every bit as American as we are. We are all in this together. We sink or swim as one. Thank you for your years of service to this country and for giving us the opportunity to see if we can make things a bit better for our 300 million fellow Americans -- and for the rest of the world.
Signed,
Michael Moore
An Unreasonable Man
Check out the documentary about Ralph Nader called "An Unreasonable Man." I think it is time for us to take back our country. Amazon has it and it is at the library too. Made in 2007.
Judges say Bush must obey the law like everyone else.
March 29, 2006
Judges on Secretive Panel Speak Out on Spy Program
WASHINGTON, March 28 — Five former judges on the nation's most secretive court, including one who resigned in apparent protest over President Bush's domestic eavesdropping, urged Congress on Tuesday to give the court a formal role in overseeing the surveillance program.
In a rare glimpse into the inner workings of the secretive court, known as the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, several former judges who served on the panel also voiced skepticism at a Senate hearing about the president's constitutional authority to order wiretapping on Americans without a court order. They also suggested that the program could imperil criminal prosecutions that grew out of the wiretaps.
Judge Harold A. Baker, a sitting federal judge in Illinois who served on the intelligence court until last year, said the president was bound by the law like everyone else. If a law like the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act is duly enacted by Congress and considered constitutional, Judge Baker said, the president ignores it at the president's peril.
Judge Baker and three other judges who served on the intelligence court testified at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in support of a proposal by Senator Arlen Specter, Republican of Pennsylvania, to give the court formal oversight of the National Security Agency's eavesdropping program. Committee members also heard parts of a letter in support of the proposal from a fifth judge, James Robertson, who left the court last December, days after the eavesdropping program was disclosed.
The intelligence court, created by Congress in 1978, meets in a tightly guarded, windowless office at the Justice Department. The court produces no public findings except for a single tally to Congress each year on the number of warrants it has issued — more than 1,600 in 2004. Even its roster of judges serving seven-year terms was, for a time, considered secret.
But Mr. Bush's decision effectively to bypass the court in permitting eavesdropping without warrants has raised the court's profile. That was underscored by the appearance on Tuesday of the four former FISA judges: Judge Baker; Judge Stanley S. Brotman, who left the panel in 2004; Judge John F. Keenan, who left in 2001; and Judge William H. Stafford Jr., who left in 2003. All four sit on the federal judiciary.
At a hearing lasting more than three hours, the former FISA judges discussed in detail their views on the standards of proof required by the court, its relations with the Justice Department, and the constitutional, balance-of-power issues at the heart of the debate over the N.S.A. program. The agency monitored the international communications of people inside the United States believed to be linked to Al Qaeda.
The public broadcasting of the court's business struck some court watchers as extraordinary. This is unprecedented, said Magistrate Judge Allan Kornblum, who supervised Justice Department wiretap applications to the court for many years and testified alongside the four former judges.
But the most pointed testimony may have come from a man who was not at the hearing: Judge Robertson.
A sitting federal judge in Washington, Judge Robertson resigned from the intelligence court just days after the N.S.A. program was disclosed.
Colleagues say he resigned in frustration over the fact that none of the court's 11 judges, except for the presiding judge, were briefed on the program or knew of its existence. But Judge Robertson has remained silent, declining all requests for interviews, and his comments entered into The Congressional Record on Tuesday represented his first public remarks on the controversy.
In a March 23 letter in response to a query from Mr. Specter, the judge said he supported Mr. Specter's proposal to give approval authority over the administration's electronic surveillance program to the court.
The Bush administration, in its continued defense of the program, maintains that no change in the law is needed because the president has the inherent constitutional authority to order wiretaps without warrants in defense of the country.
Mr. Specter's proposal seeks to give the intelligence court a role in ruling on the legitimacy of the program. A competing proposal by Senator Mike DeWine, Republican of Ohio, would allow the president to authorize wiretaps for 45 days without Congressional oversight or judicial approval.
Judge Robertson made clear that he believed the FISA court should review the surveillance program. Seeking judicial approval for government activities that implicate constitutional protections is, of course, the American way, he wrote.
But Judge Robertson argued that the court should not conduct a general review of the surveillance operation, as Mr. Specter proposed. Instead, he said the court should rule on individual warrant applications for eavesdropping under the program lasting 45 or 90 days.
Acknowledging the need for secrecy surrounding such a program, he said the FISA court was best situated for the task. Its judges are independent, appropriately cleared, experienced in intelligence matters, and have a perfect security record, Judge Robertson said.
He did not weigh in on the ultimate question of whether he considered the N.S.A. program illegal. The judges at the committee hearing avoided that politically charged issue despite persistent questioning from Democrats, even as the judges raised concerns about how the program was put into effect.
Judge Baker said he felt most comfortable talking about possible changes to strengthen the foreign intelligence law. Whether something's legal or illegal goes beyond that, he said, and that's why I'm shying away from answering that.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/29/politics/29nsa.html?ex=1301288400&en=603fa5fc610103fa&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss
It became political when a group of activist judges...
thumbed their noses at the Constitution and legalized abortion from the bench. Let's get the facts straight.
I don't understand why, if you folks are so sure you are right, you get so angry when someone disagrees with you. At least admit what you are giving the right to choose. The right to kill a baby. Because that is what is happening. If left alone the child would mature and be born. It is alive. It is moving, heart is beating, taking nourishment. Alive, no matter how much you deny it. So when you have an abortion, you are killing a child. If you are pro choice, you are pro killing a child.
At least be honest about it.
Your religion is in tatters if you need secular judges to give you salvation.
I thought you already had it.
The so called liberal media is not so liberal anymore...sm
Case and point Fox News is the #1 media outlet via ratings and hardhitting conservative anchors, pundits, and journalists. Other than Hardball, I don't know of another mainstream show that puts the liberal point of view out there and checks this administration and their policies.
liberal hit piece by a liberal deep thinker....
x
Why do you suppose
that Hillary Clinton and John McCain dropped the birth certificate issue. Why do you suppose the media dropped it? I do not believe that those of you keeping this issue going on this forum are medical transcriptionists, thus you should not be allowed to post to a MT forum unless you provide documentnation that you are qualified as a medical transcriptionist. 
I don't suppose...(sm)
you have a source for that claim?
I suppose the Congressional
Saturday, August 14, 2004
Study: Tax burden growing heavier for middle class
Associated Press
WASHINGTON -- President Bush’s tax cuts since 2001 have shifted more of the tax burden from the nation’s rich to middle-class families, according to a study released Friday by the Congressional Budget Office.
The tax rate declined across all income levels -- but more so in the top brackets, the report said.
People in the top 20 percent of incomes, averaging $182,700 a year, saw their share of federal taxes decline from 65.3 percent of total payments in 2001 to 63.5 percent this year, according to the study by congressional budget analysts.
In contrast, middle-class taxpayers -- with incomes ranging from $51,500 to $75,600 -- bear a greater tax burden. Those making an average of $75,600 had the biggest jump in their share of taxes, from 18.5 percent of all payments in 2001 to 19.5 percent this year.
The study, requested by congressional Democrats in May, is expected to provide fodder for the presidential campaign over the fairness of more than $1 trillion in tax cuts Bush has pushed through Congress since taking office.
“George W. Bush keeps trying to mislead Americans into thinking we’re turning the corner, but truth is that he is turning his back on middle-class families,” Kerry spokesman Phil Singer said. “The Bush policies are exacerbating the squeeze that working families have been feeling for the last four years.”
Bush-Cheney campaign spokesman Steve Schmidt said, “Because of President Bush’s policies every American pays less in taxes today than they did before he became president...John Kerry has promised to raise taxes during the campaign. That is the clear choice Americans will have in the fall elections.”
The study found that the effective tax rate for the top 1 percent of taxpayers dropped from 33 percent in 2001 to 26.7 percent this year, a decline of 19 percent. The middle 20 percent of taxpayers saw a decline of 4 percent.
The study is based on figures in 2001 and assumes no changes in wealth distribution from increases in income, dividends or capital gains.
On the Net:
Congressional Budget Office: www.cbo.gov
I suppose my question is. sm
Why do we pick and choose who we help and which cause is noble? We ignored Rwanda, many many more people dead than in Darfur and in a much shorter time. Many more hundreds of thousands maimed. Not a peep out of UN or US. Darfur has become a Hollywood cause as well. Where was Hollywood during Rwanda? I don't get it.
I suppose you'd rather we keep punishing ourselves?
Punishing Americans with higher and higher healthcare costs because we give it free to indigent illegals, hospitals and ERs are forced to take them, then write them off and raise their prices to us, because we don't qualify under our own social programs! We should deprive ourselves and give to them because we care more about their "poor little baby" than our own? Charity should begin at home, and until it does, I don't give a hoot in Hades about some illegal's maternity problems! My conscience is clear about whatever happens to those babies because I didn't get knocked up with them! Indigent irresponsible women who pop out babies like Pez are the real punishers of babies - I'm all about FREE birth control, how about you? I wanna know why YOU care about her babies at the expense of American babies and senior citizens who are forced to choose between food and medication each month - how's your conscience about that?
spoken by someone who KNOWS, I suppose....
so sorry I am not up on methods of drug delivery. Sorry. It was cocaine my mistake. He snorted cocaine. He called it "blow" in his book. So I stand corrected...Obama snorted COCAINE, not CRACK. Make you feel better????
I suppose it depends on who says it...sm
If she said it referring to herself....who cares.
If someone says it about Sarah Palin.....who cares, it will bounce off, as she is neither of those words.
What about when Obama talked about all the small town bitter people holding on to their guns and religion, in his San Francisco speech?
Was that bad? I think it was, and he disenfranchised a whole group of voters, to this day, who would not consider voting for him....
That is perhaps, the phrase that deRothchild was comparing to...not sure, but perhaps...
Sooooo.....to answer your question? which word is worse? Well, both of them are, and there's been plenty of name calling lately. It's getting tiresome, really.
Petty, spiteful, little name calling, which has run entirely too rampant lately in the media, not to mention on this board from time to time.
Might just be very very tired, I suppose.
Beyond this board, what do you suppose
E-C-O-N-O-M-Y. How does it feel to be constantly running away from your own candidate's inept, vacuous dirth of effective policy initiatives while people are losing their jobs, their homes and their life savings? Please explain to me just how all this Obama trashing is addressing the problem you have with a cowardly candidate who by his own admission does not understand econmics and will stoop lower than the stock market plunge to be elected? A better example of "country last" could not be found. If this is any indication of how a McCain administration behaves in a crisis, we can all look forward to a landslide for Democrats across the board. T-minus 25 and counting.
I suppose you are anti-gun as well.
//
Seriously. Why do you suppose women
The onus of birth control is not gender specific. My own son learned this lesson when he was 9 years old when his only cousin was diagnosed with HIV. He takes precautions and asks the right questions. He does not have sex with women who are not willing to show him the pill or discuss openly with him how they would respond to an unwanted pregnancy...and he makes his own views plainly known in no uncertain terms...that he does not feel he is ready for the responsibilities of fatherhood and that he ALSO has the right to make this decision without moral persecution.
Most women share the news of a pregnancy with the father in the hopes that he will take on the responsibilities of fatherhood. The ones who do not more than likely already know what the answer will be. Unwanted pregnancies have a way isolating the mother, blaming her for having gotten pregnant in the first place in much the same way you have inferred in your parting shot (as though the father has suddenly become canceled out of the equation) and giving all sorts of folks license to condemn and weigh in on the decision. In the event that support is forthcoming, most women WILL have the child more often than not.
If that wre the case, why do you suppose that nobody
The Black Panthers remind me of just how far things had to go and how hard they had to fight before black people in this country were given their civil rights. The Panthers are a part of that history and have as much right as anybody to be there. I would not feel the least bit intimidated by their presence and, in fact, would be grateful that we have come as far as we have since those day. Intimidation is in the eyes of the beholder. Get over yourself.
And I suppose you would rather we continue...(sm)
to run that torture chamber in Guantanamo. Yeah, that would be the one where they can hold supposed SUSPECTS for how long without trial? Maybe you should rent the documentary "Taxi to the Dark Side."
I suppose Canada
At least they speak English and I've been there numerous times.
My adult son would probably say Poland as he's been there and it's a nice, friendly, beautiful country with a low cost of living. I might be persuaded to try Poland, but I'd have a hard time learning Polish!
Do you suppose it could be regional?
When Clinton was in, my brother had a construction business and was going gangbusters. I did a drive down the whole California coastline, a trip to Vegas, New Orleans, Manhattan, Aruba, Florida....that's all I can think of....I was a single mom of 2 teenagers, bought a home, eventually bought a newer car and worked 4 days a week as an MT at a hospital then promoted to supervisor (made less money in that position, go figure)
In comes Bush - got remarried, moved to another city, kids are gone, husband professional, I was a supervisor (making $90,000 year between the 2 of us) and we could afford to go out to eat once in awhile. Our house is tiny, we are down to one car, husband is laid off and my health is in the toilet (stress will kill you). I was doing much better before the Bush years and my brother's construction company went belly up shortly after Bush was "elected" and he's been scrambling for work ever since. It's like you and I traded places........
Well, i suppose you told me...
consider me properly chastised.
You suppose incorrectly
Although I'm curious if there is an option for reporting a post because someone recognized you from previous posts.
I didn't take the time to report your posts; your lack of comprehension should continue to shine on the boards.
I guess you can't think for yourself. I suppose the kids that just
got arrested for setting churches on fire were *indoctrinated* even though 2 of them are from a Methodist college? I guess it goes you show YOU fear *indoctriation* because you can't think for yourself.
I suppose this didn't happen
http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/05182006/news/103329.htm
5-19-2006
Phone jam gets Tobin jail time
By Anne Saunders
Associated Press
CONCORD - Former Republican National Committee official James Tobin was sentenced to 10 months in prison Wednesday for his role in an Election Day phone-jamming plot against New Hampshire Democrats.
Tobin, of Bangor, Maine, was found guilty in December on two felony telephone harassment charges. He also was fined $10,000, followed by two years probation. Prosecutors had asked for a two-year prison sentence.
Tobin, 45, was convicted of helping a top state GOP official find someone to jam Democratic get-out-the-vote lines on Election Day 2002. Republican John Sununu defeated then-Gov. Jeanne Shaheen for the U.S. Senate that day in what had been considered a cliffhanger.
Tobin was a regional official of the RNC and of the GOP committee focused on winning U.S. Senate races. He later became New England chairman of President Bush’s 2004 re-election campaign, but stepped down when Democrats accused him of playing a role in the jamming.
U.S. District Judge Steven McAuliffe said Wednesday he was impressed by character witnesses who testified on Tobin’s behalf, but wished Tobin had a better sense of how serious this was.
Tobin apologized to the court, the community and his family, saying he wished he hadn’t gotten involved or acted to stop it.
I have tried to live my life honestly and with integrity, he said.
Bail pending his appeal was denied; Tobin is scheduled to report to prison on June 23.
Why do you suppose he was asked repeatedly
Why do you suppose he was not able to give any? Did you not notice that his facts were not straight (as in false claims) about a governor being a commmander in chief?
I am curious. Why does JM get a pass when he refuses interviews but when Obama does it he is the devil incarnate? Can you say hypocrisy?
Ignorance like this has its place, I suppose.
Canadians are smart enough to figure out that your voice is coming from he far right fringe and is in no way representative of post-Bush America.
Uh, and I suppose those drugs Obama
to him? Does this make our president a criminal? Did he go through rehab and clean up his act? Did he associate himself with clean, wholesome friends, companions and coworkers? Be careful who you call a liar and a hypocrite.
I suppose you think Obama IS qualified?
nm
I have a question: Suppose there would be no religions, would
people and the world be better, worse or same?
I suppose they should cover the mirrors
and rend their clothes in grief instead? They are busting their butts to get things done. I think a little laughter, joy and goodwill is necessary as well as healthy. But, I suspect you would neither understand nor APPROVE of anything you deem "frivolous." The Dow has been up for 4 days running, at least 3 major banks are seeing profits and are stating they no longer require any bailout money.........Bringing in Congress and various insiders for a weekly get-together is a good way to inspire and promote goodwill.....but I guess the WH is something to look at - not live in.
What hate group do you suppose you
##
I suppose that if you did not read the whole post...
you might have found it unclear. I should have written that I am more concerned with lying, if it turns out that he is lying--but further down, I wrote, "However, I am really not sure what religion he is." Again, why don't you bash someone who is disagreeing with you--or is it just fun for you to be contrary?
your comment is so low-life, I suppose that's what you are...sm
Do you think that only republicans can insult democrats?
I never start with mean talk, I only defend myself when slandered.
No conservatives either
The last time I looked at cons board there were no conservatives there either, just extreme right-wing nuts.
I mean conservatives. sm
True conservatives. The ones who don't believe in abortion, believe our money should be ours to spend, are fiscally conservative, and believe in smaller government. The true conservative Reagan Republican. I seriously doubt any of them were there. And yes, libertarians are conservative as well, for the most part. I don't know if they were there are not. The conservative pundits I follow who are libertarian were definitely not there.
If the conservatives think SP is sm
so great, why does the conservative talk radio in my city basically treat her as a sex object, wanting to see her naked or in suggestive clothing, etc.? I even think they put a suggestive picture of her on their web site. I think its so disrespectful and I'm not even going to vote for her! Talk about sexist. Does this go on in other cities? I can understand ratings and revenue but we talking about possibly the second most powerful person in the country and they can't even be respectful! A man isn't treated this way. Maybe conservatives are the ones afraid of a strong woman.
yeah but we aren't suppose to reply! nm
Unlike Huffington Post I suppose...
LOL.
I got it...your way or the highway, (sm which I don't suppose I care if you read or not)
You kept saying affordable health care. Tax refunds for premiums paid is more affordable. You could have had that and had that right now if the Dems would have compromised. They did not. I have no problem with SCHIP as it was. It would still be rocking along fine had the Dems not killed it with their "my way or the highway" attitude. Okay..you don't mind if your taxes go up to give middle class families a break...even if it includes adding more illegals to the program. I do mind if my taxes go to that. You don't mind that people who are paying premiums now and managing to do so will get off private insurance and on a program if that bill had passed. I have a problem with that. Why not give them the tax refund that Bush wanted to for paying those premiums instead of putting them on a program? You still get what you say you want...insured kids. What this all seems to boil down to is that you, and I guess other middle class families who are paying insurance premiums now but think they are too high think the government should pay them for you. I just don't happen to think that is the answer.
Thanks for the debate, thought. I learned a tremendous amount.
The point....which you missed....in bliss I suppose....
was the comment in disproportionate numbers. There is nothing to support that contention. Obviously there is a problem with pedophilia among priests...but not in any more disproportionate numbers than in the rest of the population. Teachers, coaches, daycare workers and owners..next door neighbors and relatives. THAT was the point.
Interesting....and I suppose Obama will define
xx
Depends on what you call racist I suppose
@
And I don't suppose "Great White West"
@
Why do you suppose that Berg the Boob's complaint
Use your noggen. IF he were able to prove (a) that Obama was born in Kenya, (b) that he was an Indonesian citizen whose mother had "renounced" (NOT) his US citizenship, and/or (c) that Obama's HAWAIIAN birth certificate was a forgery...don't you think that a complaint based on "standing," "harm" and/or "disenfranchisement" is a rather convoluted, roundabout way of "getting to the truth?" That burden of proof would be on him and he could not do it because, well...IT ISN'T TRUE
The judge has ruled. If a 34-page rendering is not enough to satisfy you, then Lord knows, there is no reasoning with this pathologic degree of denial. IT'S OVER. Finito. Kaput. Settled. Gone. There's NOTHING there. Period. The end. Time to let it go, already.
Yes, I suppose you've spoken with all of Gitmo
they have told you personally they are ALL INNOCENT......pure as the driven snow....
please stop regurgitating
And by the way, while you're so busy informing yourself, you need to check out old lady Pelosi.....she's about to take away Obama's power to make any presidential decisions.......you up to date on that one? And now, even the most butt head democrats are beginning to open their eyes to her!
You've got to be kidding. I suppose you must reside
at the Astro turf planet. I second signing a a petition to rid this country of Onuto.
You think now? I suppose we'll have to make allowances
When you get better at it, we'll remove your training wheels.
Wear a helmet, though. We wouldn't want you damaging that massive brain.
Why do you suppose the White House WON'T hold a
His true colors are coming through loud and clear. Like I have said all along, he is not a Christian, he is Muslim and he will not hold the ceremony. He will make darn sure he doesn't upset a Muslim brother!
how cruel you are to this woman. Suppose you were pregnant
with a baby doomed to die soon after delivery, how would you THEN decide?
It is always easy to judge from afar, but it turns differently when it hits home!
|
