LowerCaseRepublican

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Jun 19, 2005 -> 10:20 PM) "I'm not saying that the phone companies are neccesarily gay themselves" lol I'm really worried about a sandwich marrying a bear.

http://www.eugenemirman.com/showandtell.html Listen to the anti-gay phone company calls. Proceed to laugh ass off.

Start, Control Panel, Display, Appearances, Color Scheme, Apply.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jun 19, 2005 -> 03:34 PM) Going to hell laughing all the way . . . Takes the seat right next to Tex. I read the same thing into it, LosMedias...

QUOTE(winodj @ Jun 19, 2005 -> 02:10 PM) Neither party is very good about getting out of the doctor's office. Just ask the people trying to protect the medical records at Planned Parenthood. Technically, if they wanted to -- Under 215 of the Patriot Act...They can seize any "tangible records" (doctors records, financial records, etc. etc.) And due to the Act, they no longer have to show that the use of Sect. 215 would be probable cause but simply that any evidence would be "relevent" to a possible or ongoing investigation. Of course, if the expanding of the FBI powers goes through Congress, even the feeble FISA court oversight for this goes out the window and the FBI gets administrative subpoenas without any governmental check and balance for their activity.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jun 19, 2005 -> 10:05 AM) About the only thing I dislike about Toby Keith is he is on the wrong side of the Red River Rivalry. Instead of singing I should have been a cowboy, he should be singing I should have been a Texan I imagine "I love this bar" must have been huge. Everybody went nuts during "I Love This Bar", "The Taliban Song" and (of course) "The Angry American". Funniest part of the night was after he was talking about being on tour with Willie Nelson, they wrote a song called "Weed With Willie". So they played the song which was pretty damn funny. Then Toby says: "Hey, if you're seventy-two years old out doing 200 concerts a year, you have the right to smoke anything you want to." I've always been surprised that a pretty lefty hippie like Willie Nelson has been able to get over with a pretty traditionally right wing crowd that, albeit stereotypically, prefers country music.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Jun 19, 2005 -> 11:23 AM) There you go being so all-or-nothing again. Where there is money to be stolen, someone will find a way. It may be an employee embezzeling money, or it mau be someone cheating the system. Or it may be both. How about a system that is designed to not catch cheaters? We talked about school lunches in a different post. KNow how they qualify you for a free lunch in schools? They ask you how much you make, and if you are working. The schools are not allowed to verify that info, they just have to take you for your word. Your kids shows up in the office sick, asks to call mom. School calls the home number, she isn't there. "Oh, she's at work", says the kid. Can the lunch now be taken away? Nope. It is a program set up to help those in need, being abused by people, and the beauracratic idiots who set the program up in the first place. Where is the accountability? Social Security, once designed to help us when we retire, now also helps drug addicts and people with disabilities. PLus, long ago the funds got co-mingled with the general revenue to prevent a budget shortfall, thus contributing to its almost inevitable demise as the money we all pay into SS goes to fund roads in Arkansas or a dam in Kentucky instead of what it was intended for. Locally, riverboat casino revenues go towards school funding. Well, they still go there, but the more they increased, the more they took away from other sources, leaving the total funding the same, or in some cases, less. Then current gov. Blago tries to tax them to death, resulting in layoffs, cutbacks (in the riverboats) and a DECREASE in the revenue generated from them, despite his much higher taxes. Even more locally, look at Chicago with the Hired Trucks crap, or even just the asphalt scandals. Where there is money to be made, someone will try and find it. Not everyone is bad, but there are enough to make you wonder. Oh, and I will agree with you that inefficienceies are not limited to governmental employees/programs. I have come across many places that I wonder how they are still in business. I wonder how much of the cronyism and corruption that goes on in government is due to the incredibly high cost of advertising and running a political campaign. Television advertising, radio spots, flyers, etc. etc. etc., it costs a pretty penny. So more and more our candidates of both parties are being forced to pander to make contributors give them cash (usually in exchange for promoting that contributor's agenda) To run for President now, you need to be a Steve Forbes type with millions in your own private coffers to use or pander to large donators. And wouldn't you know...Congressmen who get a whole ton of money from major interests seem to vote and promote an agenda for those interests (even at times when it is at the public's expense) Since the public technically owns the airwaves, candidates should be given free time on TV for advertisements and debates for all candidates instead of the insipid 2 party stuff (Greens, Constitution, Libertarians, et al...) That way, they have no incentive to be forced to pander like they do. It gives them a better opportunity to create their own platforms instead of having their arms twisted by needing lots and lots of campaign contribution cash. I believe our government is competent -- they just need somebody (i.e. the informed public and the media) riding their ass to keep them in line when they do go about overstepping their bounds.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8246860/ I dunno if it is the "first" but the first one being publicized. Quite unfortunate. BAGHDAD, Iraq - An Army National Guard staff sergeant has been charged with premeditated murder in a “fragging incident” that killed two senior officers at a U.S. base near Tikrit last week, the U.S. military said Thursday. Army officials told NBC News that Staff Sgt. Alberto B. Martinez had been disciplined by the two officers, a possible motive for the attack. The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, did not disclose the nature of the disciplinary action. Fragging is military slang for intentionally killing a comrade in a wartime setting

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jun 18, 2005 -> 10:50 AM) That has got to be a party +1 Toby Keith was a whole lot of fun. He put on a very good live show. Singing along with all the songs is quite a great experience.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jun 18, 2005 -> 12:10 PM) Too bad we don't have quick capital punishment laws. It would have been interesting to dig him up and revive him. "Mere factual innocence is no reason not to carry out a death sentence properly reached." - Antonin Scalia :puke

I got a free ticket and a free ride to the Toby Keith concert tonight at Tweeter.

Sen. Frist, repeating a false headline in the Washington Times, accused Sen. Durbin of saying Guantanamo is “a death camp." Durbin never said that. Frist also falsely claimed that Durbin said our service members are “committing genocide and war crimes.” Durbin never said that either. Most outrageously, Frist essentially accused Durbin of encouraging suicide bombers. Shows how much our Senate pays attention. f***ing impotent idiot bureaucrats.

I watched "The Testament of Dr. Mabuse" a few nights ago. Anybody who wants to see a good (yet old) thriller should give it a rent. Granted it is 2 hrs. and entirely in German. Fritz Lang did a fantastic job with the film.

Convicted of 22 counts and they get ROR? WTF is that?

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 16, 2005 -> 08:14 PM) Nice try APU. Their Habaes Corpus claims were DENIED by the Supreme Court. The Court holds: But dont take my word for it. Its right at the top of the freekin document. http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f...law/quirin.html http://movies.crooksandliars.com/foxnewssu...e_050612-01.wmv

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 16, 2005 -> 08:10 PM) I dont care where they do the trials as long as they follow the precedents set forth by the Supreme Court and try them under military commissions. Vid of the FNC debate re: Gitmo http://movies.crooksandliars.com/foxnewssu...e_050612-01.wmv

QUOTE(sec159row2 @ Jun 16, 2005 -> 07:50 PM) he's "former" CIA... why??? I'd much prefer to trust the person I voted for, President Bush, than some guy who no longer works for the CIA... If I didn't trust him I wouldn't have voted for him... it's a shame that the democrats or liberals haven't learned from the nov. elections... it's pretty simple.. 51% conservative.. 49% liberal.. the liberals lost and will continue the attack until 2008, and if they run hillary... just more evidence that the democratic party ignored the results from 2004... man I wish there was a game tonight... I'm bored... Porter Goss, the new head of the CIA had a "shakeup" which essentially was a purge from the CIA of all agents that disagreed with the current war on terror policy. A lot of agents "resigned" as a result. And Gitmo isn't a left right issue. There are a lot of conservatives talking about the need to close down Gitmo and that these trials can be done here in the United States. Bill Kristol, for instance, makes a compelling case for it as well. It's a shame that the hardcore Bush supporters can't see where he is overstepping his bounds in numerous sectors in regards to the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. f***, even Bob Barr sees it. /proudly.voted.libertarian.in.04

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 16, 2005 -> 07:40 PM) I've already explained it in this thread and others and this is the last time I plan on doing it. The proper way to deal with enemy combatants is to try them before military commissions. This has been validated by the Supreme Court back in 1942 and has not been overturned or reversed since then. The ACLU and Amnesty and all these other whining leftist hypocrites whine and complain about people being held there without a trial yet they continue to deny them a day in court by throwing up legal challenges to the military commission process effectively halting it in its tracks. Nuke, the DoJ has never brought charges at all against most of these detainees at all so it is difficult to try them without bringing charges. Not to mention this little gem from Quirin: The Supreme Court said, in cases challenging trial by military tribunals convened by President Roosevelt during and after W.W. II that "neither {the President's] Proclamation nor the fact that they are enemy aliens forecloses consideration by the courts of petitioners' contentions that the Constitution and laws of the United States constitutionally enacted forbid their trial by military commission." Gitmo is US jurisdiction so the applications of Odah vs US apply and a writ of habeas corpus can be given to every inhabitant of Gitmo then.

QUOTE(sec159row2 @ Jun 16, 2005 -> 07:37 PM) a few points to note on this nonsense... and none of this justifies what is going on... just some notes... 1. Does anyone know what happens in cook county jail??? I'd rather be at gitmo.. 2. These prisoners have more freedom to practice their "cult" ( I can't refer to what they worship as a religion) in gitmo than they would if they were on the other side of the island in havana... 3. They are not holding the afgan boys choir, or bagdad symphony orchestra these are individuals who have sworn an oath to kill us... when they are let go they will return to kill us... 4. IMO these individuals forfeit any human right when they pay homage to al queda... Janet Reno would have just torched the whole cult... 5. And it is nice to see the california and florida members agreeing/defending/supporting these comments from Durbin, 'cause YOU DON"T VOTE HERE!!!! the democratic party in illinois is in deep do-do... the democrats in Chicago are going, if it hasn't already started, to chop up the Daley empire so bad and all the RED to Chicago's south will not put up with Durbin. 6. if you support durbin you had better move here soon.... :banghead :banghead :banghead Yeah, badmouth Durbin but don't badmouth the soldiers in the FBI report detailing the abuses. And Sec, if they're so guilty then perhaps the government can charge them or even begin trials. I mean, since there is so much evidence. Saddam had torture chambers set up too for people that were looking to attack him. Just because the thinly veiled threat of attack is there does not justify inhumane conduct. Certain good aspects of Gitmo do not completely block out the bad. There are abuses going on -- I don't care how many Congressmen want to parade the menus in front of us there. If we want our soldiers who are captured any possibility of surviving, the abuses at Gitmo make that much more difficult. As Wonkette put it: All this bruhaha about the conditions at Gitmo. Look, the detainees have never been denied fruit. Water, maybe, trials, definitely. But they've got more fruit than Miami Beach. Also, apparently, a beautiful view. Yesterday Sen. Jeff Sessions, R- Ala., "expressed impatience at Democrats who called for more legal rights for detainees. He said the newly constructed facility at Guantanamo was on 'a beautiful site' and 'would make a magnificent resort.'" Of course! A resort! With, uhm, very late check-out: "As for the detainees held there, 'some of them need to be executed,' Sessions said." We look forward to the t-shirts: "My daddy went to Gitmo and all I got was this lousy t-shirt because he's dead now." And if liberal Dick Durbin is too liberal for you to be a critic of Gitmo, how about arch conservative Bill Kristol? He stated that many of the JAGs in the military, many senior members of the National Security Council and the Defense Department are upset with the handling of Gitmo and treatment of detainees in general. He went on to say "Do we think that we need to hold people outside of US jurisdiction to run the war on terror? Why can't they be at the base in South Carolina or Texas?" He went on to state that the rules that apply in US jurisdiction would be perfectly adequate for holding "terrorists" also saying that we have terrorists in US jails and are doing alright holding them there. The whole reason they were at Gitmo, Kristol stated, was that the US wanted to keep these people out of US jurisdiction but the Supremes ruled that it is in US jurisdiction so there is no reason to keep detainees there. It is good to know that there are Americans who will readily say "Whatever you say government! We'll believe you! You obviously have our good at heart and are doing everything to safeguard that!" because obviously the government of the United States has never done anything criminal **cough COINTELPRO, Watergate, Palmer Raids etc. cough**

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 16, 2005 -> 06:10 PM) Milligan applies to U.S. citizens, not foreginers captured in combat against our troops. Stop trying to lump in U.S. citizens with foreginers. The Supreme Court has already validated the military tribunals in the form the Bush Administration wants to use them so saying they are entitled to treatment under U.S. law is wrong. When the Supreme Court reverses itself then you have a point. Until then you are totally and completely wrong. Nuke, the thing is that the DoJ is not saying where these people are coming from at all. The government will not say where the detainees at Gitmo are coming from saying "Well, just trust us." And as a person who proclaims to be a small government conservative, I would peg you as one of the people who would be at the very least apprehensive about the policies of government to secretly arrest and detain a person with no end in sight with no timetable for bringing charges or giving them access to counsel or family. Given the track record of government in general for decades (Palmer Raids, COINTELPROs, etc.), it isn't too far to suggest that perhaps the government's activities are less than noble.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 16, 2005 -> 05:18 PM) Horrible examples with OJ and MJ. As I'm so fond of saying, if you have big money in Cali you can buy your own justice. For the last time. WE ARE TRYING TO TRY THESE PEOPLE!!!! We have military commissions set up to deal with these people and it is YOUR SIDE which is stopping that process from going forward with your legal challenges. It's extremely hypocritical of the left to whine about these people being there without trial when they themeslves are holding up the process. :rolly Secret closed door tribunals (completely flying in the face of Milligan) where defendants have no access to counsel or due process rights. That sounds so Constitutional to me Nuke, you can't break this on a left/right continuum. Mel Martinez, Bob Barr, Ron Paul, Bill Kristol, etc. have joined the ranks of supporting the Constitution over mere party loyalty. These secret military tribunals are anti-thetical to the Constitution as is the holding of suspects in Gitmo (a.k.a US jurisdiction according to the SC) for years without charges, access to counsel or family. If one is in US jurisdiction, then US criminal law applies.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jun 16, 2005 -> 05:34 PM) No. How is demanding swift justice being hypocritical? You are the ones complaining about these people being there so long without trial yet you delay the process again and again. The proper way to deal with terrorists and suspected terrorists who are not American citizens was set forth by the Supreme Court in the 1940's as I clearly outlined in the Gitmo thread from the other night. What is the problem with going with a clearly defined precedence? Why is it so important to afford people who are trying to destroy our country and kill our citizens rights they are not entitled to? They're innocent until proven guilty. You don't just get to throw out the Constitution when we're scared of a possible threat. Jose Padilla has been in a cell for years waiting to be even charged with a crime. The Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that he must be charged and tried. The DoJ is still fighting that on appeal and he is still in a prison. How is waiting years upon years for a f***ing trial the least bit Constitutional? Gitmo is under US jurisdiction and as the Milligan case clearly shows, you can't have military tribunals for people arrested under criminal law when civilian courts are functioning.

http://newclips.crooksandliars.com/Countdo...avo_autopsy.wmv Olbermann takes on the Shiavo autopsy. Lots of vid clips of some pretty nutty statements made by certain people and the Schindlers' attorney tries to spin the autopsy results -- the Schindlers are going to more doctors and are planning to sue again.

Kick ass for the Section 215 limits. What scares me is the possibility of giving the FBI what is known as "administrative subpoenas". Right now, the US government and Department of Justice must go in front of a FISA court to get the warrants for Sneak n' Peek and for the seizing of "tangible records". Of course, thanks to the Act, there is no longer probable cause needed to get the warrants but rather the simple mere "relevency" to an ongoing investigation. A FISA review court even stated that the PATRIOT Act provisions may not cut the mustard for meeting the 4th Amendment requirements but "they almost certainly come close." I guess I missed the almost certainly come close provisions when I read the Constitution. If the administrative subpoena powers get through, the FBI will no longer need to go to the FISA courts to get permission for their warrants to seize records/supposed evidence.