Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

Gray Champion? Gore is well on his way to being a Gray Runner-Up in 2008 if he does run!

Hey, they can tap my phone any time; since I've got nothing to hide, I've got nothing to be afraid of (unless the feds think that sympathizing with Terrell Owens in his recent tiff with the Philadelphia Eagles is somehow "subversive"). Why don't these left-liberals get it? This ain't the Watergate era, you know.

Obviously spoken by one who's never had the pleasure. You should remember that innocence, in and of itself, is not a protective shield. Ask anyone that's been wrongly accused, convicted and incarcerated. :evil:

Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

But don't the Democrats realize if they just STFU about this that they'll probably be the ones doing the eavesdropping themselves three years from now?

They should not make the same mistake the Republicans made when they shoved the no-third-term amendment into the Constitution because they were mad at FDR's being elected four times - a mistake that could very well come back to haunt the GOP in 2008 since they may not be able to find a candidate who would do as well as Bush if he were allowed to run again.

Anthony,

The issue isn't about wiretapping, it's about illegal wiretapping. Yes, the idiots out there on Fox News will say it's necessary to wiretap - maybe it is - but that's not the issue, it's the smokescreen. You still, under law, need to get a warrant, even retroactively, to do it.

That means that even in the "Oh my God they're gonna attack us right now" scenario, they can still wiretap, and then three days later get a warrant approved for that wiretap retroactively.

What the president, under the massaging of his minion Attorney General Gonzalez, is saying is that he doesn't need no stinkin' warrants. He doesn't care about no stinkin' laws. The 9-11 resolution gave him all the authority in the world to do whatever he wants in the War on Terror.

And that's why people are upset. They see it as a power grab. And that's why they don't like the idea of Sam Alito sitting on the bench nodding his head yes to future executive branch power grabs. True democrats (small d) want a government that functions, where different branches check the others power - where the Congress passes a law and the President obeys it.

Once that agreement between the branches is violated, and perhaps enabled by cronies on the Supreme Court or in the Legislative branch, then this isn't the USA anymore. This is Mexico. This is one party government masquerading as a functioning democracy. And that my friend, sucks.

Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

But don't the Democrats realize if they just STFU about this that they'll probably be the ones doing the eavesdropping themselves three years from now?

They should not make the same mistake the Republicans made when they shoved the no-third-term amendment into the Constitution because they were mad at FDR's being elected four times - a mistake that could very well come back to haunt the GOP in 2008 since they may not be able to find a candidate who would do as well as Bush if he were allowed to run again.

Anthony,

The issue isn't about wiretapping, it's about illegal wiretapping. Yes, the idiots out there on Fox News will say it's necessary to wiretap - maybe it is - but that's not the issue, it's the smokescreen. You still, under law, need to get a warrant, even retroactively, to do it.

That means that even in the "Oh my God they're gonna attack us right now" scenario, they can still wiretap, and then three days later get a warrant approved for that wiretap retroactively.

What the president, under the massaging of his minion Attorney General Gonzalez, is saying is that he doesn't need no stinkin' warrants. He doesn't care about no stinkin' laws. The 9-11 resolution gave him all the authority in the world to do whatever he wants in the War on Terror.

And that's why people are upset. They see it as a power grab. And that's why they don't like the idea of Sam Alito sitting on the bench nodding his head yes to future executive branch power grabs. True democrats (small d) want a government that functions, where different branches check the others power - where the Congress passes a law and the President obeys it.

Once that agreement between the branches is violated, and perhaps enabled by cronies on the Supreme Court or in the Legislative branch, then this isn't the USA anymore. This is Mexico. This is one party government masquerading as a functioning democracy. And that my friend, sucks.

On topic, I think Hillary's recent "plantation" gaffe might be a big signal that my senator isn't ready for primetime. I think that a 2008 Hillary run could be a nightmare of Culture War proportions.

Bring back Gore! Print his speeches in the history books :lol:

On topic, I think Hillary's recent "plantation" gaffe might be a big signal that my senator isn't ready for primetime. I think that a 2008 Hillary run could be a nightmare of Culture War proportions.

Bring back Gore! Print his speeches in the history books :lol:

Originally Posted by Mary Fitzmas

On topic, I think Hillary's recent "plantation" gaffe might be a big signal that my senator isn't ready for primetime. I think that a 2008 Hillary run could be a nightmare of Culture War proportions.

Bring back Gore! Print his speeches in the history books :lol:

Yes. Hillary is learning the hard way that you can't be a Culture Warrior and save the Republic at the same time.

Originally Posted by Mary Fitzmas

On topic, I think Hillary's recent "plantation" gaffe might be a big signal that my senator isn't ready for primetime. I think that a 2008 Hillary run could be a nightmare of Culture War proportions.

Bring back Gore! Print his speeches in the history books :lol:

Yes. Hillary is learning the hard way that you can't be a Culture Warrior and save the Republic at the same time.

Originally Posted by The Roadrunner

Originally Posted by Mary Fitzmas

On topic, I think Hillary's recent "plantation" gaffe might be a big signal that my senator isn't ready for primetime. I think that a 2008 Hillary run could be a nightmare of Culture War proportions.

Bring back Gore! Print his speeches in the history books :lol:

Yes. Hillary is learning the hard way that you can't be a Culture Warrior and save the Republic at the same time.

Concur.

Originally Posted by The Roadrunner

Originally Posted by Mary Fitzmas

On topic, I think Hillary's recent "plantation" gaffe might be a big signal that my senator isn't ready for primetime. I think that a 2008 Hillary run could be a nightmare of Culture War proportions.

Bring back Gore! Print his speeches in the history books :lol:

Yes. Hillary is learning the hard way that you can't be a Culture Warrior and save the Republic at the same time.

Concur.

Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

But don't the Democrats realize if they just STFU about this that they'll probably be the ones doing the eavesdropping themselves three years from now?

and that's supposed to comfort someone?


TK

Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

But don't the Democrats realize if they just STFU about this that they'll probably be the ones doing the eavesdropping themselves three years from now?

and that's supposed to comfort someone?


TK

Hey, if we're gonna have a war, let's have a war - complete with general mobilization and the full employment that brings, a universal military draft which all classes are subjected to, wage and price controls, windfall profits taxes on the Halliburtons of this world - the whole nine yards.

Let's see how "patriotic" the conservatives will be feeling then; but first you have to get the conservatives out of power, and stressing "rights" over responsibilities during a 4T simply won't get it done.

And don't kid yourselves: Total war is inevitable; the only thing in question is whether the "right" or the "left" gets to direct the war effort.

Hey, if we're gonna have a war, let's have a war - complete with general mobilization and the full employment that brings, a universal military draft which all classes are subjected to, wage and price controls, windfall profits taxes on the Halliburtons of this world - the whole nine yards.

Let's see how "patriotic" the conservatives will be feeling then; but first you have to get the conservatives out of power, and stressing "rights" over responsibilities during a 4T simply won't get it done.

And don't kid yourselves: Total war is inevitable; the only thing in question is whether the "right" or the "left" gets to direct the war effort.

Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

Hey, if we're gonna have a war, let's have a war - complete with general mobilization and the full employment that brings, a universal military draft which all classes are subjected to, wage and price controls, windfall profits taxes on the Halliburtons of this world - the whole nine yards.

Let's see how "patriotic" the conservatives will be feeling then; but first you have to get the conservatives out of power, and stressing "rights" over responsibilities during a 4T simply won't get it done.

And don't kid yourselves: Total war is inevitable; the only thing in question is whether the "right" or the "left" gets to direct the war effort.

Do you have a death wish? Total war is not a euphamism to be thrown around lightly. While I agree that we need to reign-in the rich-and-powerful, setting the world on fire is no way to do it. :evil:

Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

Hey, if we're gonna have a war, let's have a war - complete with general mobilization and the full employment that brings, a universal military draft which all classes are subjected to, wage and price controls, windfall profits taxes on the Halliburtons of this world - the whole nine yards.

Let's see how "patriotic" the conservatives will be feeling then; but first you have to get the conservatives out of power, and stressing "rights" over responsibilities during a 4T simply won't get it done.

And don't kid yourselves: Total war is inevitable; the only thing in question is whether the "right" or the "left" gets to direct the war effort.

Do you have a death wish? Total war is not a euphamism to be thrown around lightly. While I agree that we need to reign-in the rich-and-powerful, setting the world on fire is no way to do it. :evil:

Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

Hey, if we're gonna have a war, let's have a war - complete with general mobilization and the full employment that brings, a universal military draft which all classes are subjected to, wage and price controls, windfall profits taxes on the Halliburtons of this world - the whole nine yards.

Let's see how "patriotic" the conservatives will be feeling then; but first you have to get the conservatives out of power, and stressing "rights" over responsibilities during a 4T simply won't get it done.

And don't kid yourselves: Total war is inevitable; the only thing in question is whether the "right" or the "left" gets to direct the war effort.

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Ludendorff was the chief manager of the German war effort throughout this time, with Hindenburg his pliant front man. Ludendorff advocated unrestricted submarine warfare, which was ultimately an important factor responsible for bringing the USA into the war.

Their so-called Third Supreme Command or "Third OHL", was effectively a military-industrial dictatorship, which largely relegated Kaiser Wilhelm II to the periphery. They meddled with domestic politics to the point of forcing the resignation of government ministers, including the Chancellor himself three times in a row; they then held an effective veto over appointments in the state hierarchy.

Total Warrior--the Model

Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

Hey, if we're gonna have a war, let's have a war - complete with general mobilization and the full employment that brings, a universal military draft which all classes are subjected to, wage and price controls, windfall profits taxes on the Halliburtons of this world - the whole nine yards.

Let's see how "patriotic" the conservatives will be feeling then; but first you have to get the conservatives out of power, and stressing "rights" over responsibilities during a 4T simply won't get it done.

And don't kid yourselves: Total war is inevitable; the only thing in question is whether the "right" or the "left" gets to direct the war effort.

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

Ludendorff was the chief manager of the German war effort throughout this time, with Hindenburg his pliant front man. Ludendorff advocated unrestricted submarine warfare, which was ultimately an important factor responsible for bringing the USA into the war.

Their so-called Third Supreme Command or "Third OHL", was effectively a military-industrial dictatorship, which largely relegated Kaiser Wilhelm II to the periphery. They meddled with domestic politics to the point of forcing the resignation of government ministers, including the Chancellor himself three times in a row; they then held an effective veto over appointments in the state hierarchy.

Total Warrior--the Model

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Do you have a death wish? Total war is not a euphamism to be thrown around lightly. While I agree that we need to reign-in the rich-and-powerful, setting the world on fire is no way to do it. :evil:

You know what, I wanted a total war. After we found out who attacked us on 9-11, I, and most Americans, wanted the US to flood Afghanistan with troops, to ransack every village, explore every mountain, patrol every city, looking for and hunting and finally killing the people that could do that to us.

I stood in this city on December 31, 2001 listening to a man cry to me about how half his friends were dead and he was now surrogate father to three families. And yeah, I wanted a little revenge. I thought for sure we'd catch the guy that killed 2,967 of us in one day. I thought, OK, our airport security screwed up big time on 9-11, but our huge, well financed military will be able to shut down a little mafia of suicide killers.

I was wrong.

We didn't get Bin Ladin. And, much to the GOP's delight, he's still putting out audiotapes, which allows them to smear their adversaries as being "on his side."

Do you have any idea how mad that makes me feel inside. That we waited nearly a month after the attacks to launch our counter attack and spent time dicking around negotiating with the Taliban for them to turn over Bin Ladin?

And where are we today? We are worried about another journalist getting her head lopped off in Iraq. I have to learn the subtleties of Iraqi regional politics, and Al Zawahiri is alive and Bin Ladin is alive, and I am still just a little pissed off that the people that blasted that gigantic hole just a few blocks away from here are still living, and all the people that died there that day are still dead.

And that just sucks.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Do you have a death wish? Total war is not a euphamism to be thrown around lightly. While I agree that we need to reign-in the rich-and-powerful, setting the world on fire is no way to do it. :evil:

You know what, I wanted a total war. After we found out who attacked us on 9-11, I, and most Americans, wanted the US to flood Afghanistan with troops, to ransack every village, explore every mountain, patrol every city, looking for and hunting and finally killing the people that could do that to us.

I stood in this city on December 31, 2001 listening to a man cry to me about how half his friends were dead and he was now surrogate father to three families. And yeah, I wanted a little revenge. I thought for sure we'd catch the guy that killed 2,967 of us in one day. I thought, OK, our airport security screwed up big time on 9-11, but our huge, well financed military will be able to shut down a little mafia of suicide killers.

I was wrong.

We didn't get Bin Ladin. And, much to the GOP's delight, he's still putting out audiotapes, which allows them to smear their adversaries as being "on his side."

Do you have any idea how mad that makes me feel inside. That we waited nearly a month after the attacks to launch our counter attack and spent time dicking around negotiating with the Taliban for them to turn over Bin Ladin?

And where are we today? We are worried about another journalist getting her head lopped off in Iraq. I have to learn the subtleties of Iraqi regional politics, and Al Zawahiri is alive and Bin Ladin is alive, and I am still just a little pissed off that the people that blasted that gigantic hole just a few blocks away from here are still living, and all the people that died there that day are still dead.

And that just sucks.

Back on topic, I think the thing that probably most angered right wingers last week about Gore's speech was that he was proud. If there's one thing they can't stomach, it's a liberal with balls that looks down on them as the pieces of shit they are.

Back on topic, I think the thing that probably most angered right wingers last week about Gore's speech was that he was proud. If there's one thing they can't stomach, it's a liberal with balls that looks down on them as the pieces of shit they are.

Originally Posted by Mary Fitzmas

Back on topic, I think the thing that probably most angered right wingers last week about Gore's speech was that he was proud. If there's one thing they can't stomach, it's a liberal with balls that looks down on them as the pieces of shit they are.

What I have read from the right wing was anger at his anger. It's an irate circle-jerk from what I can tell. :arrow: :arrow: :arrow:

Originally Posted by Mary Fitzmas

Back on topic, I think the thing that probably most angered right wingers last week about Gore's speech was that he was proud. If there's one thing they can't stomach, it's a liberal with balls that looks down on them as the pieces of shit they are.

What I have read from the right wing was anger at his anger. It's an irate circle-jerk from what I can tell. :arrow: :arrow: :arrow:

Originally Posted by TrollKing

Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

But don't the Democrats realize if they just STFU about this that they'll probably be the ones doing the eavesdropping themselves three years from now?

and that's supposed to comfort someone?

The only thing I can readily think of that's as bad as Dubya wiretapping my conversations and enemy-combatantizing me, is Ms. Rodham-Clinton doing it. It's bad enough that MonkeyBoy is leading us up and into the cascade phase. I don't want Clinton being part of the regeneracy, especially with those kinds of powers. She also scares me.

Originally Posted by TrollKing

Originally Posted by Anthony '58 II

But don't the Democrats realize if they just STFU about this that they'll probably be the ones doing the eavesdropping themselves three years from now?

and that's supposed to comfort someone?

The only thing I can readily think of that's as bad as Dubya wiretapping my conversations and enemy-combatantizing me, is Ms. Rodham-Clinton doing it. It's bad enough that MonkeyBoy is leading us up and into the cascade phase. I don't want Clinton being part of the regeneracy, especially with those kinds of powers. She also scares me.