0
   

Let's talk about replacing GWBush in 2004.

 
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 05:05 pm
I never cease to be amazed at just how erudite a group of sophisticates we have here. Shocked Rolling Eyes Laughing
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 05:06 pm
Well...I would just refer all of us back to the "Talk to me like a Redneck" thread. Wink
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 05:40 pm
In today's San Jose Mercury News, there's an article headed "Patriot Act used broadly, US says." The essense of the article is that the Bush administration is using the Patriot Act in "many criminal investigations that have little or nothing to do with terrorism." The San Jose City Council just passed a resolution last week to ignore the Patriot Act from city government. Gets more interesting by the week. I wonder if the Justice Department is going to start jailing the members of the San Jose city government.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 05:43 pm
cicerone imposter wrote:
I wonder if the Justice Department is going to start jailing the members of the San Jose city government.

With Arse-croft one can never be certain! Mad
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 05:47 pm
erudite.....that's one of them big words like mayonnaise ain't it?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 05:51 pm
Yeah, them 1,000 dollar words kind'a gets messy in the sanwich.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 06:08 pm
There's a piece in sunday's ny times re the misuses of the patriot act as well. Police, understandably, want to go get the bad guys. But they did in Chile too. All sorts of constraints are placed on law enforcement for the very good reason that they can, and have (as in the precinct in LA several years ago) tended towards activities which result in injustice.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 06:27 pm
On the issue of environmental rules/safeguards and what they cost...
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/28/politics/28COST.html
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 06:28 pm
All in all, the furor over the potential, and occasional real, abuses of the Patriot Act are a good thing ... much of it is being questioned, revisions and safeguards are being considered and proposed. Like a lot of "Quick Fixes", it could have been thought out a lot better than it was before it was tossed into the mix. I figure it'll undergo a period of adjustment, just as it seems to be doing. I would be most surprised not to see a dispute or two over the act's application or some aspect of its provisions go all the way to The Supremes. A word on The Supremes might be appropriate here, too; regardless who appointed them, they tend to be a rather independent lot, not noted for any particular partisan loyalty. Any number of Chief Executives have been most startled to discover this.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 06:53 pm
There is a discussion of the PATRIOT act going onhere.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 07:14 pm
Nice redirect, bob ... good job. Just to belabor the erudition digression, here's some Vancouver Erudition for ya, blatham:

The Vancouver Museum Current Featured Exhibits

Sex, Drugs, and Rock & Roll get culture ... whooda thunk?

(stumbled across that in what was actually a more or less futile, unrelated websearch for something else, but it was too good to waste)
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 08:16 pm
damn! Missed seeing the show. Guess I'll just have to keep living it.
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 08:20 pm
Blatham, considering your avatar, I was picturing you and Barbie and Skipper wandering stiffly down the streets of Vancouver, Wink
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 08:37 pm
hello, anybody home?

An entire bottle of Sanserre ...................and a pleasant evening it is too......... politicians, what's that?
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 09:00 pm
politicians? are they coaches in the ways of poise and manners?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 09:22 pm
hobit

Actually, what with our liberalized coupling laws, it would be me and gi joe
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Sep, 2003 09:28 pm
erudite?
0 Replies
 
Italgato
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2003 03:02 am
I see Mr. Blatham has not the wit to answer. I thought not.
0 Replies
 
John Webb
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2003 07:20 am
One more body bag and four more injured SO FAR in Iraq today, as the human cost of enriching friends of the Administration continues to rise.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Sep, 2003 08:44 am
Italgato wrote:
I see Mr. Blatham has not the wit to answer. I thought not.


Now there is a DIRECT, PURPOSEFULLY MEAN SPIRITED insult. Clear violation of the TOS.

Someone please inform the bouncer. :wink:
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 11/07/2024 at 09:48:50