NationStates Jolt Archive

1) not every person in the united states is a bible-thumping, god-worshipping christians, stop trying to force your opinions on the rest of us

2) click your heels together and say this until it gets through, a majority is not always right, a majority is not always right

3) liberals are not evil, the left is not out to destroy the nation by the magic of just being liberal. stop treating them like subclasses of human beings

4) a superiority complex never got anyone anywhere, ever

5) you advocate not getting involved in telling businesses what to do, but you want to go into individual lives and make sure they arnt doing anything you disagree with. get your damned priorities straight

6) socialism is not evil, socialism is not evil, socialism is not evil. makgin everything privatised does not fix everything, making everything privatise does not fix everything, making everything privatised does not fix everything

7) activist judges go BOTH ways

8) zell miller is not a democrat, michael moore is not a democrat, and that one lady in florida is not a republican. pointing out crazy old school democrats who are now more loyal to the republican super conservatives does not make you right, refer to point 3

9) free market doesnt work for the same reason communism doesnt work. people are too greedy to hold a free free market in our society, but of course you advocate getting more involved in limiting individual rights than corproate practices so i suppose it doesnt matter

10) prohibition doesnt work, prohibition didnt work during prohibition. weed isnt going to go away, neither will cocaine or heroine. making weed illegal wont develop alot more pot heads, and if it does who cares? when was the last time some one died from smoking pot? not to mention all the crap hemp can be used for

But the GOP is doing fine, seeing as how they expanded their seats in Congress and won the Presidency...it's the other that's scratching its head wondering what the hell went wrong.

11) You must be willing to vote, even if it involves waiting for an hour! If you dont vote your opponents get to make policy.(They also get to laugh at you a hell of a lot)

11) You must be willing to vote, even if it involves waiting for an hour! If you dont vote your opponents get to make policy.(They also get to laugh at you a hell of a lot)

LOL.

12) You must still be willing to vote, even if you are hungry and it is lunchtime. You will eat again eventually. The polls will get to you before you starve to death, or maybe just pick up a sandwich to eat while you are waiting.

Now, please note that the same rules apply for Democrats!

1. Change it to atheists with an entitlement fetish.
6. Change Socialism to Capitalism.
8. Same thing with Rush Limbaugh and Scarboro.
10. Neither does Holland at this point.

I'm all for being tolerent, but as you say tolerance is a two way street.

1 - except there is a separation of church and state, and you may say there isnt, but there is an obligation to not force your religion down people not of that religion's throat, and to do that religion MUST be kept seperate so as not to encourage people to do it

god wasnt added into everything until the 1950s, the ONLY people with en entitlement fetish are the christians

also, last i heard its very legal to sell and use pot in holland, now where you getting it is an itneresting question


13) grow the fuck up jackasses

1 - except there is a separation of church and state, and you may say there isnt, but there is an obligation to not force your religion down people not of that religion's throat, and to do that religion MUST be kept seperate so as not to encourage people to do it

god wasnt added into everything until the 1950s, the ONLY people with en entitlement fetish are the christians


really the only ... I seen all kinds of groups that have what appears to be an entitlement fetish ... wierd thanks for clearing that up

14. genocide is not a very good way to show your ideology to another culture...

13) grow the fuck up jackasses

Oh wow.

You are right. I am totally convinced now. Thanks :rolleyes: .

Oh wow.

You are right. I am totally convinced now. Thanks :rolleyes: .
no no, that was number 13 on my tip list for jackasses, sorry for not clarifying :P

14. genocide is not a very good way to show your ideology to another culture...
What culture have we completely wiped out? The closest we've come to is the Indians, and even that was with the help of British, French, and disease.

13) grow the fuck up jackasses
14)Prove your not a jackass by voting
15)Dont expect to be taken seriously by anyone who takes the time to vote, if you cant be bothered to do so.

14)Prove your not a jackass by voting
15)Dont expect to be taken seriously by anyone who takes the time to vote, if you cant be bothered to do so.
16) spam is illegal
17) dont expect to be listened to if your entire argument is based on falicious insults and no substance

16) spam is illegal
17) dont expect to be listened to if your entire argument is based on falicious insults and no substance
18) You can have all the rhetoric you want, but unless you vote you have no bearing on anything in this country.

hey arammar, do you get a boner every time you make you self feel more important than some one else?

16) spam is illegal
17) dont expect to be listened to if your entire argument is based on falicious insults and no substance
The substance is you have so little faith in your convictions that you choose lunch over voting. I am not being insulting. It is you who have insulted a)every person that took the time to vote and more importantly b)the people that died for you to get that vote.
(As a side note the area I live in hasnt been represented by the party that I vote for since 1955. I still vote)

hey arammar, do you get a boner every time you make you self feel more important than some one else?
I don't believe making yourself more important than someone on an online message board where you can say whatever you want makes you anything other than a member of said online message board.

The substance is you have so little faith in your convictions that you choose lunch over voting. I am not being insulting. It is you who have insulted a)every person that took the time to vote and more importantly b)the people that died for you to get that vote.
(As a side note the area I live in hasnt been represented by the party that I vote for since 1955. I still vote)
1) if you lived in alabama and were an intelligent person, you would believe in lunch over voting

2) yes, you are being insulting your entire point is an insult and everything you have said to me is an insult. grow up

3) the people that died for me to get that vote? last i check my vote was protected, that doesnt mean i have to do anything, nor does not voting nullify any point i havel; HOWEVER, making only falicious points to discount mine DOES nullify your point

1) if you lived in alabama and were an intelligent person, you would believe in lunch over voting

If you were an intelligent person you wouldn't roll over and give up the first time your stomach came a'callin.

alabama
62% bush
37% kerry


i can do math, can YOU

alabama
62% bush
37% kerry


i can do math, can YOU
More like:
31% Bush
18.5% Kerry
50% lazy bastards who would rather eat lunch.

I'm sorry, but that was twice... it's "fallacious".

And I have (some) similar opinions to yours, but it seems to me that you've gone on a political message board, told everybody that you didn't excercise your right to vote because the line was too long, and then went on to make demands of the government and attempted to stand from a moral high ground.

And then when people pointed out that it's hard to take your demands seriously if you won't even vote, you attack them personally.

Because of your views, I want to be on your side, but sadly, you haven't a leg to stand on in this case.

alabama
62% bush
37% kerry


i can do math, can YOU

Just think: If all the bush supporters in the blue states had eaten lunch, and all the lunch eaters in the red states had voted for Kerry. Bush might have not won the popular vote, and you'd be in a much stronger position to make you advice to the GOP argument right now.

As it stands, the people, apparently, have spoken.

The sandwich has a mandate.

1) if you lived in alabama and were an intelligent person, you would believe in lunch over votingNope, you will be hungry every day for the rest of your life, chances to vote are a little rarer.

2) yes, you are being insulting your entire point is an insult and everything you have said to me is an insult. grow up
No you are choosing to be insulted. If I was irresponsible enought to not vote I wouldnt feel quite right protesting when someone called me Irresponsible.When you "grow up" and actually play a part in your society by voting I will listen to you condemning my maturity ;)

3) the people that died for me to get that vote? last i check my vote was protected, that doesnt mean i have to do anything, nor does not voting nullify any point i havel; HOWEVER, making only falicious points to discount mine DOES nullify your point
When you squandered your vote, all your points were nullified, they ceased to be points and became the opinions of someone who clearly thinks he doesnt matter- if you did think you mattered- you would have voted dude.

I'm sorry, but that was twice... it's "fallacious".

And I have (some) similar opinions to yours, but it seems to me that you've gone on a political message board, told everybody that you didn't excercise your right to vote because the line was too long, and then went on to make demands of the government and attempted to stand from a moral high ground.

And then when people pointed out that it's hard to take your demands seriously if you won't even vote, you attack them personally.

Because of your views, I want to be on your side, but sadly, you haven't a leg to stand on in this case.
yeah i realised that after saying it a second time


i do not claim a moreal high ground, and intelligent one perhaps.

his whole claim to superiority is i didnt vote, that is a fallacy of logic itself

freedom of speech is protected by the constitution, i can excercise it without voting, and not voting does not equate to a logical fallacy, thus my point and complaints are not null or void, especially in a state where my vote doesnt count, when we get a direct election then you can criticise non voting republicans in blue states and non voting democrats in red states

No you are choosing to be insulted. If I was irresponsible enought to not vote I wouldnt feel quite right protesting when someone called me Irresponsible.When you "grow up" and actually play a part in your society by voting I will listen to you condemning my maturity ;)
no, i am not, you are insulting me, deacon dave is ALSO harping on my not voting, but thats not everything he says and its not the only thing he says

When you squandered your vote, all your points were nullified, they ceased to be points and became the opinions of someone who clearly thinks he doesnt matter- if you did think you mattered- you would have voted dude.
where do you live? we can go from there

hey arammar, do you get a boner every time you make you self feel more important than some one else?

Why, do you feel less important becasue of his/her posts?

Why, do you feel less important becasue of his/her posts?
i dont feel less important, he just likes making himself feel more superior than i, i was just asking if he has some kind of complex he needs psychological help for

where do you live? we can go from there
A place called Falkirk (Its in Scotland)

yeah i realised that after saying it a second time


i do not claim a moreal high ground, and intelligent one perhaps.

his whole claim to superiority is i didnt vote, that is a fallacy of logic itself

freedom of speech is protected by the constitution, i can excercise it without voting, and not voting does not equate to a logical fallacy, thus my point and complaints are not null or void, especially in a state where my vote doesnt count, when we get a direct election then you can criticise non voting republicans in blue states and non voting democrats in red states

No one is restricting your freedom of speech.

You can post all you want. No-one has to take it seriously, that's all.

1) not every person in the united states is a bible-thumping, god-worshipping christians, stop trying to force your opinions on the rest of us

2) click your heels together and say this until it gets through, a majority is not always right, a majority is not always right

3) liberals are not evil, the left is not out to destroy the nation by the magic of just being liberal. stop treating them like subclasses of human beings

4) a superiority complex never got anyone anywhere, ever

5) you advocate not getting involved in telling businesses what to do, but you want to go into individual lives and make sure they arnt doing anything you disagree with. get your damned priorities straight

6) socialism is not evil, socialism is not evil, socialism is not evil. makgin everything privatised does not fix everything, making everything privatise does not fix everything, making everything privatised does not fix everything

7) activist judges go BOTH ways

8) zell miller is not a democrat, michael moore is not a democrat, and that one lady in florida is not a republican. pointing out crazy old school democrats who are now more loyal to the republican super conservatives does not make you right, refer to point 3

9) free market doesnt work for the same reason communism doesnt work. people are too greedy to hold a free free market in our society, but of course you advocate getting more involved in limiting individual rights than corproate practices so i suppose it doesnt matter

10) prohibition doesnt work, prohibition didnt work during prohibition. weed isnt going to go away, neither will cocaine or heroine. making weed illegal wont develop alot more pot heads, and if it does who cares? when was the last time some one died from smoking pot? not to mention all the crap hemp can be used for
Actually, I think the Republican party is doing just fine thanks.

Actually, I think the Republican party is doing just fine thanks.

Thanks to the third party sandwich.

1) if you lived in alabama and were an intelligent person, you would believe in lunch over voting
This is insulting to all the voters of Alabama, as it implies they are not intelligent.
2) yes, you are being insulting your entire point is an insult and everything you have said to me is an insult. grow up
This from the person who insults every voter in Alabama and calls others f-ing jackasses just because they disagree with him. I think you may need anger management counseling.

This is insulting to all the voters of Alabama, as it implies they are not intelligent.
alot arnt, i could refer you to the letters to the editor if you like

This from the person who insults every voter in Alabama and calls others f-ing jackasses just because they disagree with him. I think you may need anger management counseling.
they need to fucking grow up

A place called Falkirk (Its in Scotland)
thus your opinion on my opinion not mattering doesnt matter as its an entire nother country and voting process

making the asinine assumption the whole non voting population of alabama was going to vote for kerry, he wouldve won

but then again there was nader badnarik and peroutka (or whoever i didnt read names jsut numbers)

thus your opinion on my opinion not mattering doesnt matter as its an entire nother country and voting process

Well I live in NYC, so answer my question about the popular vote.

Well I live in NYC, so answer my question about the popular vote.
what was YOUR question

thus your opinion on my opinion not mattering doesnt matter as its an entire nother country and voting process
*psst* Its only another voting process for the people who actually bother to vote- I assure you we have lunch over here the same as in Alabama- although sometimes we go hungry for an hour if we are waiting to , for example, vote ;)

*psst* Its only another voting process for the people who actually bother to vote- I assure you we have lunch over here the same as in Alabama- although sometimes we go hungry for an hour if we are waiting to , for example, vote ;)
woo woo here comes the clue train

unless scotland has the exact same voting procedure as the united states (hell it might i dunno) you have no room to criticise me

what was YOUR question

That if all the people who felt like you in the red states had actually gone out and voted, the Kerry might have won the popular vote. Thus Bush couldn't claim a mandate, and you would be in a lot stronger position to argue that the Bush white house did not represent the country.

That's why people are pissed at you dude. Not because bush won the EC, but because he got the popular vote as well where every vote counts .

woo woo here comes the clue train

unless scotland has the exact same voting procedure as the united states (hell it might i dunno) you have no room to criticise me
I have plenty of room dude;) Tell me when you were dealing with the clue train did they have any info for you on how , er, wisdom deficient , one would have to be to publically admit to not voting- then make endless threads about politics?

That if all the people who felt like you in the red states had actually gone out and voted, the Kerry might have won the popular vote. Thus Bush couldn't claim a mandate, and you would be in a lot stronger position to argue that the Bush white house did not represent the country.

That's why people are pissed at you dude. Not because bush won the EC, but because he got the popular vote as well where every vote counts .
actually i outlined that for alabama just before you asked me again

YET the popular vote DOESNT count, it doesnt elect the president

in addition, why does him declaring he has a mandate NOT scare anyone? he probably thinks its from god

woo woo here comes the clue train

unless scotland has the exact same voting procedure as the united states (hell it might i dunno) you have no room to criticise me


Lol then no one outside your district has the EXACT same voting methods … hundreds of ways to vote places times people feelings

NOTHING is the same

In fact any experience is different for each person

alot arnt, i could refer you to the letters to the editor if you like


they need to fucking grow up

You see, this is what I'm talking about. To assume that someone is immature and/or unintelligent, simply because they disagree with you, is itself immature and unintelligent.

actually i outlined that for alabama just before you asked me again

YET the popular vote DOESNT count, it doesnt elect the president

in addition, why does him declaring he has a mandate NOT scare anyone? he probably thinks its from god

It doesn't elect the president but it makes a huge difference to how the presidency is viewed. Not just domestically, but also overseas, as you should well know.

Bush now feels that he has political capital to spend, moreso than if he would have won without a majority of the vote. You of course realize that he now describes himself as the first president in sixteen years to actually win with a majority.

Your whole point about a mandate scaring people is a non sequitur. And in fact I'm sure there are a lot of people it doesn't scare, mostly those who voted for him.

Plus the popular vote was won by a narrow margin. Just think of all the lunch eaters across the nation who could have turned it the other way, even those who live in solid red states.

If you can't be bothered to go out and actually do something to record your disdain for Bush because you are hungry, then don't expect people on either side to take you seriously.

And if you want them to, I suggest you admit that not voting was a mistake, instead of rationalizing it away by saying your vote didn't count.

Many people's vote don't count by your reckoning, but they vote because they realize that it is the best way to officially register their dissapproval of the other candidate. If we all thought like you everyone would win with near 90% of a miniscule turn out.

One final thought. Rudolph Guliani. His first victory happened because a lot of people who traditionally thought their vote didn't count actually got of their asses and voted. His victory was an upset.

1 - except there is a separation of church and state, and you may say there isnt, but there is an obligation to not force your religion down people not of that religion's throat, and to do that religion MUST be kept seperate so as not to encourage people to do it


Actually, no there isn't.
Read the constituion lately? The first ammendment only insisted that the government not institute an official religion (such as the COE), not that the government must be completely secular. For that, move to Turkey, they do have seperation of church and state officially in their constitution. (It's really the model of a constitution which would be ideal in the middle east, to prevent (legal) takeover of the political stuctures by one sect or another..)

As to the majority of the other points made in the original post, while I may agree with a number of statements made, the implication that democrats are any better is absurd. The government should get out of individuals lives, and out of business' way. The only justification for the existence of a goernment is to protect the citizenry from crime and foreign invasion, that's it. Not to make sure everyone gets a handout, not to ensure everyone doesn't get high, not to redistribute incomes, not to enforce morals. (and as to the whole gay marriage issue, without tax codes and other government intrusions into personal lives, government has no reason to be involved in any marriages, so if some religion wants to conduct marriages for two men, or any number of individuals for that matter, then let it happen.)
Oh well, I don't see things ever happening the way they should, since there's no way Libertarians will ever control the senate, congress and white house...
:headbang:

Actually, no there isn't.
Read the constituion lately? The first ammendment only insisted that the government not institute an official religion (such as the COE), not that the government must be completely secular. For that, move to Turkey, they do have seperation of church and state officially in their constitution. (It's really the model of a constitution which would be ideal in the middle east, to prevent (legal) takeover of the political stuctures by one sect or another..)

As to the majority of the other points made in the original post, while I may agree with a number of statements made, the implication that democrats are any better is absurd. The government should get out of individuals lives, and out of business' way. The only justification for the existence of a goernment is to protect the citizenry from crime and foreign invasion, that's it. Not to make sure everyone gets a handout, not to ensure everyone doesn't get high, not to redistribute incomes, not to enforce morals. (and as to the whole gay marriage issue, without tax codes and other government intrusions into personal lives, government has no reason to be involved in any marriages, so if some religion wants to conduct marriages for two men, or any number of individuals for that matter, then let it happen.)
Oh well, I don't see things ever happening the way they should, since there's no way Libertarians will ever control the senate, congress and white house...
:headbang:

Hi, I'm new. I just read this whole argument, and your post comes closest to matching my own philosophy. I happen to be one of the Bible-thumping blah blah blah described in the first post way back when, and was happy to see so many states vote down same-sex marriage, but the question on why the state has to be involved in any marriage at all has often come up in other discussions I have had. The way I see it, marriage is an agreement between one man and one woman. The womnan's father represents her walking down the aisle. A minister pronounces that they are marries and not actually committing adultery or anything so no one else can say different, then they all go about their business. What difference does it make to the King/Sheik/President/Prime Minister? I've often thought that the issue is not marriage, but divorce - who gets what when and if the couple splits up.

My two cents. :sniper: (these emoticons are cool).

Hi, I'm new. I just read this whole argument, and your post comes closest to matching my own philosophy. I happen to be one of the Bible-thumping blah blah blah described in the first post way back when.

Hmmm.. the first time I remember someone posting an agreement with something I wrote... at first, I thought it was pretty cool, but then you had to go and ruin it for me by admitting to being a nutjob. :rolleyes: :confused:
No offense intended, of course. ;)

And yeah, there are some cool emoticons. :cool: :mp5:

Reading through the thread, I've got to ask, why choose between voting and lunch? Why not just do an abentee ballot? The price of postage is well worth the saved time. :confused:

IMO though, I do agree that the government should stay out of moral and religious issues. Having the word "God" in somthing is exclusive to many faiths who have goddesses, or multiple deities. It also makes athiest kids feel uncomfortable. I know, I always held my tounge during that part of the pledge in school. And now there's this whole controversy coming up about teaching intelligent design in school too. I do have a problem with that.

Just for the Hell of it 10 tips for Lunch:

1. Stop being so tasty and delicious damn you.

2. When you look at the country, try and realize the mess you are making of our democracy.

3. Listen to all those people who vote instead of eating you, try and pay attention to their concerns. Remember you only won by a very small margin.

4. Don't go around forcing your mealtime habits on everyone else. Some people don't even eat lunch. It's not up to you to legislate your gastronomic morality.

5. No where in the constitution does it say that lunch can't be a sandwich that you can carry to the polling station with you.

6. Damn you traditional lunch, with your comfortable tables and chairs. Try and remember that not all of the country is made up of traditional lunch eaters. Some can skip a meal to do something else important.

7. Learn to respect the opinions of those who eat cold lunches, as well as those who follow your ultra authoritarian hot lunch agenda.

8. And to your friend dinner, tell him he can be eaten after the polls close.

9. You must learn that not everyone has to watch TV while eating you.

10. Breakfast, what I said to dinner goes for you too. We can eat you before the polls open.

1) not every person in the united states is a bible-thumping, god-worshipping christians, stop trying to force your opinions on the rest of us

2) click your heels together and say this until it gets through, a majority is not always right, a majority is not always right

3) liberals are not evil, the left is not out to destroy the nation by the magic of just being liberal. stop treating them like subclasses of human beings

4) a superiority complex never got anyone anywhere, ever

5) you advocate not getting involved in telling businesses what to do, but you want to go into individual lives and make sure they arnt doing anything you disagree with. get your damned priorities straight

6) socialism is not evil, socialism is not evil, socialism is not evil. makgin everything privatised does not fix everything, making everything privatise does not fix everything, making everything privatised does not fix everything

7) activist judges go BOTH ways

8) zell miller is not a democrat, michael moore is not a democrat, and that one lady in florida is not a republican. pointing out crazy old school democrats who are now more loyal to the republican super conservatives does not make you right, refer to point 3

9) free market doesnt work for the same reason communism doesnt work. people are too greedy to hold a free free market in our society, but of course you advocate getting more involved in limiting individual rights than corproate practices so i suppose it doesnt matter

10) prohibition doesnt work, prohibition didnt work during prohibition. weed isnt going to go away, neither will cocaine or heroine. making weed illegal wont develop alot more pot heads, and if it does who cares? when was the last time some one died from smoking pot? not to mention all the crap hemp can be used for
ok, are u this passionate about democrats and their welfare-happy bills?

perhaps i scared him off?

perhaps i scared him off?

No dude, It's lunchtime. :)

I corrected all your spelling and grammar mistakes; your argument would sound more believable if you took the time to spell check and use capitalization and proper punctuation. Just some advice for next time.

1) [Not] every person in the [United States] is a [Bible-thumping, God-worshipping Christian], stop trying to force your opinions on the rest of [us.]

2) [Click] your heels together and say this until it gets through, [“A] majority is not always right, a majority is not always [right.”]

3) [Liberals] are not [evil;] the left is not out to destroy the nation by the magic of just being liberal. [Stop] treating them like subclasses of human [beings.]

4) [A] superiority complex never got anyone anywhere, [ever.]

5) [You] advocate not getting involved in telling businesses what to do, but you want to go into individual lives and make sure they [are not] doing anything you disagree with. [Get] your damned priorities straight

6) [Socialism] is not evil, socialism is not evil, socialism is not evil. [Making] everything [privatized] does not fix everything, making everything [privatized] does not fix everything, making everything [privatized] does not fix [everything.]

7) [Activist] judges go BOTH ways

8) [Zell Miller] is not a democrat, [Michael Moore] is not a democrat, and that one lady in [Florida] is not a republican. [Pointing] out crazy old school democrats who are now more loyal to the republican super conservatives does not make you [right;] refer to point [three.]

9) [Free markets do not] work for the same reason [that] communism [did not] work. [People] are too greedy to hold a free market in our society, but of course you advocate getting more involved in limiting individual rights than [corporate] practices so [I] suppose it [does not] matter

10) [Prohibition doesn’t] work, prohibition [didn’t] work during prohibition. [Weed isn’t] going to go [away;] neither will cocaine or heroine. [Making] weed [legal won’t] develop [many] more [potheads], and if it does who cares? [When] was the last time some one died from smoking pot? [Not] to mention all the crap hemp can be used [for.]

Now, my rebuttal:

1) True. Not everyone is a Christian. What values are you saying that we are forcing on you? I could respond better if you gave specifics.

2) Again, true. But this does go both ways...

3) Liberals are not trying to destroy America by being themselves. They are trying to destroy America by corrupting our moral foundation, demanding that we supplicate ourselves to whatever tyrant happens to be around (Chamberlain's appeasements to Hitler is a good example), and demanding that the government rule over our ability to work and play.

4) Again, true. But this also goes both ways. Liberals tend to view themselves as better than conservatives. Look at this if you don't believe me:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2109218/

5) I think we do have our priorities straight. Conservatives believe that if we can change the hearts of the individual to be fair in their dealings and care for others, the government would not have to regulate their business. If people chose to not cheat, government regulation would be unnecessary; if he chose to cheat and steal in this kind of environment, people would cry out and boycott that person to bankruptcy. Liberals want to treat the effects of bad people; conservatives want to treat the cause of bad people.

6) Socialism is not evil per se. It is less effective than a free market system. It takes away the rights of people to run their business. Privatization gives people back those rights stolen from them by the government and tends to be more effective than socialized programs. Even in our economic slump, the US is better off than most of Western Europe; this is because we allow people to work for themselves instead of working for each other.

7) Please cite an instance where a conservative judge misconstrued the Constitution to make up a new "right", like the "right" to kill babies until the umbilical cord is cut without prosecution. Then we can talk.

8) I don't really see your point here.

9) See my rebuttals for points five and six.

10) True. Prohibition did not work. The reason it did not work is that people had no respect for the law. It's the traffic code of their era. If it was properly enforced, prohibition could have worked. In this respect, the war on drugs has been effective. People who use illicit drugs tend to get caught and jailed. Maybe the reason marijuana related deaths are so low is that stoned people are too afraid of getting busted to get in their car and accidentally hitting someone. Just a thought.

Now I think of it, what does he mean "activist judges go both ways."

Now I think of it, what does he mean "activist judges go both ways."
Actively bisexual judges go both ways.

Actively bisexual judges go both ways.

True, true.


So am I to assume that he believes activist judges are all bisexual. Or was this a hunger induced haulicination.

True, true.


So am I to assume that he believes activist judges are all bisexual. Or was this a hunger induced haulicination.
Or maybe he's hungry for bisexual judges? ;)

Or maybe he's hungry for bisexual judges? ;)

So that's why he couldn't miss "lunch."

Number 4 is good advice for anyone. Including everyone in this thread. Which includes the author.


4) a superiority complex never got anyone anywhere, ever