Democrats versus Republicans

[tdw]

Originally Posted by Artwerke

When they repeat Ted Kennedy's 2003 quote"Iraq is George Bushes Vietnam" They leave out, and I'm going to do every thing in my power to make sure it is.

Nah, Dicky Boy and Dubya are quite capable of doing that all by themselves.

[sailaway21]

Actually, your Wombatness, Mr. Nixon couldn't have, and might not have, were it not for the US congress, led by Democrats. Which, I guess was just about Artwerke's point. I just thought that I would interject a modicum of history into the soundbites.

[sailaway21]

There seems to be a discouraging trend in our country today, wherein virtually anything can become prosecutable. This is especially true of "crimes" involving sex or the relations between the sexes. The essential ingredient in these cases is a zealous prosecutor well versed in the law, if not common sense.

From the Scooter Libby case to the Duke lacrosse players debacle we seem to have an over abundance of prosecutors gone wild. "Girls Gone Wild" has reintroduced the PT Barnum dictum, "no one ever lost money underestimating the taste of the American people" to a new generation. In that case, the buyer has only to answer to his credit card company or, perhaps, a parent or wife. In these prosecutorial excesses, the ultimate authority, the citizen is entitled to some answers. Whether one agrees or not with the case against Mr. Libby it should be borne in mind that our tax dollars were spent in a perjury case that grew out of a case where, early on, it was found that there was no crime committed. And we spent millions of our dollars on this. Those are tax dollars that could have put a Flicka in every driveway. Note; I am rather partisan in my views of how tax-payer money should be wasted.

The Duke case is much better known and understood. It's not over either. your tax dollars, particularly if you're a resident of North Carolina, will keep the lights burning in more than one Carolina court room as those players, in the words of former Labor Department Secretary Raymond Donovan, ask, "where do I go to get my reputation back?". One of the places they might look is on the campus of Duke itself. Over eighty members of that Ivy league school decided that the case was of such importance, the hidden racism and sexual domination so pernicious that it could only be expunged by exposure to the bright sunlight of a full page advert in the New York Times. Now New York is quite a hike in anybody's book from Durham, North Carolina. So those professors must have thought that there were issues of national importance that could only be fully delineated in the nation's newspaper of record. The continuing crisis of racism and sexism is alive and well in the US they proclaimed. That no one, outside of Durham, took to the streets had to be disappointing. It certainly never occured to those professors that the rest of America read their screed, looked around, saw no evidence of a greater problem, and resumed trying to figure out if singing ability was a help or hindrance to winning American Idol.

Why are those professors significant? In colleges and universities, particularly prestigious ones such as Duke, we send our young people to become educated in the ways of the world. Notions of proper behavior, inculcated by parents, meets philosophy, particularly the regnant liberal philosophy maintained by the academe. And that philosophy is legalistic in the extreme. Even more so, when the student reaches the law school. Inherent in this philosophy is that the full power of the law can be the only force to remove all racism and sexism from our midst. That stuff, antiquated stuff, you learned at home is no longer sufficient to the day. An inappropriate touching might have resulted in a slapped face and public embarassment in yore. Now it'll land you in the hoosegow, get you thrown out of school, and quite possibly make you a person of interest in sex crimes for the rest of your days. Make no mistake, parents and communities are not dreaming these things up. You have to go to the level of the university educated lawyer-politician to achieve such an inquisition building society.

My local law enforcement friends relate that their number one time burner and problem are personal protection orders, otherwise known as restraining orders, or PPO's. These result when a divorce is sought and the first step of the divorcing spouse's attorney is to get the court to deem the spouse a threat to the physical well-being of the divorcing spouse. These orders are issued more frequently than your cable TV company flyers. The problem for the cops is not violence by those breaking the orders. The problem is that at around midnight the soon to be ex-husband, it's usually the husband, gets a hankering for ice cream or just figures he'll get his shopping done avoiding the crowd. He turns down the ice cream isle and there, fifty feet away, is his soon to be ex-wife. Wifey is not kindly disposed and she owns a cell phone. The cops are no longer empowered to respond to the scene, see no problem, tell everybody to stay cool, and go on their way. Nope. Somebody's goin' to jail. Which some cynical observers of society might say was the whole point of the PPO in the first point. How do the cops deal with this? Well there are many routes one may take to the grocery store and they really should not get below half a tank on gas, and other emergencies may arise before they arrive at the store. And it may take awhile to get from the produce department all the way over to ice cream. Anotherwords, they are trying to respond the way they might have thirty years ago when they had discretion, but by different means because now the law is an ass, but they cannot change or modify it. Sounds funny, huh? Your tax dollars are paying for more cops found necessary to enforce the laws being passed. Not laughing now, are you?

If you think I'm perhaps over-doing the caffeine, or "not in my town", read the following article.
http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/bu...nts-cornelison

Ideas have consequences. Especially when they become laws.

[tdw]

Originally Posted by sailaway21

Actually, your Wombatness, Mr. Nixon couldn't have, and might not have, were it not for the US congress, led by Democrats. Which, I guess was just about Artwerke's point. I just thought that I would interject a modicum of history into the soundbites.

Confused !! No idea what you are talking about here Sway. If it relates to my previous post the Dickey I was referring to may well be every bit as tricky as Nixon but I was referring to Cheney.

[sailaway21]

Fluff,
it wouldn't be the first time either of us was confused or talking at cross purposes, now would it? sorry

[tdw]

Originally Posted by sailaway21

Fluff,
it wouldn't be the first time either of us was confused or talking at cross purposes, now would it? sorry

Probably not the last either !

[Sapperwhite]

Originally Posted by TSteele65

GOP Convention Agenda:

Noon: Cheney and Bush literally burn the Constitution, declare martial law and jail anyone making less than $150K/year and/or any corporate head not contributing at least 20% of gross revenues to their Dubai bank accounts.

12:30: Cheney takes entire Supreme Court on a hunting trip.

Apparently someone hasn't read the latest Executive Order........just nod, smile and make nice....no one will get hurt. You keep dissenting and your property will be siezed.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0070717-3.html

of particular interest:
(c) the term "United States person" means any United States citizen, permanent resident alien, entity organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States (including foreign branches), or any person in the United States.

Thats you

[uspirate]

ever look at a newly built school? when i was in grade school, we had big beautiful windows for a view. Sorry to wake you up but the newer schools built are also designed to serve as detention centers... think i'm joking? take a good look at the windows of the next school you drive past!

[sailaway21]

Those who slept through civics class, now awakening Rip Van Winkle like, may find the concept of executive orders shocking. Rest easy. Executive orders are how the president asserts the power vested within that office. In this instance, it is the puruance of the congressional mandate for the invasion of Iraq. An executive order is necessary if the Justice Department is going to seize assests within the US deemed to be aiding the enemy in Iraq. The same methodology was used, for instance, to freeze all Iranian assests when the hostages were taken in the 1970's. If certain groups, foreign or domestic, are raising money for Al-Qaeda for instance within madrasssas and mosques within the US their assests may be seized. The nature of executive orders is that they are generally temporary and designed to a specific need. A brief review of recent history will show nothing new about this order, either in intent or scope.

The change in design of schools, while lamentable from an esthetic standpoint, has absolutely nothing to do with serving as detention centers, although some students may argue the point. School funding, design, and construction are local and state issues, there being no federal code that is even legally enforceable, let alone existant.

Those not familiar with the laws of thermodynamics will do well to consider the conductivity of glass and the fact that, unlike forty years ago, schools now are air-conditioned. If you are going to ventilate schools with ambient air, large openable windows are necessary. If you are going to utilize central heating and air conditioning to do the same thing, windows are a net energy loss. The most obvious example of this are schools that have been modernized. The window sizes have been reduced by half for energy efficiency. Office buildings continue to sport large windows, for esthetic purposes as most do not open, and they have paying tenants responsible for the energy bill. Most school districts, having trouble enough to raise the money for new schools, are reluctant to make them energy sink-holes.

Of course, someone who's nom de plume is US Pirate would certainly be most sensitive to possible detention facilities existence.(g) btw, those steel doors they use inside are not for incarceration effectiveness either, they're part of the fire code.

[tdw]

I've not read all of this thread and have no intention of doing so but has the subject of whatisname "Mr I don't Remember I don't Recall" Gonzales come up ?

Given that I'm not a USAian and so only have a passing interest in your internal politics I'd be interested to read the take on this fella. From afar he comes across as a complete tosser, that's for sure, but he's good for a laught it seems.


(aww gee I know what is going to happen now. I'm beginning to feel like I'm Sway's straight man.)