|
|
| SheRat |
quote:
FPM C10 wrote:
Um...OK, anything to please a fan of Rush's. I aren't illegal perscription drugs with leaving a young women to drown and not notifying police until fat Ted sobered up.
Really, I aren't.
Are all dittoheads illiterate?
I know this post is old, but MAN, flea, I literally spewed my Dandelion tea all over my keyboard. Some of it came out my nose! |
|
|
| pdog |
quote:
SheRat wrote:
I literally spewed my Dandelion tea all over my keyboard.
That's something you don't read here everyday... |
|
|
| SheRat |
quote:
pdog wrote:
That's something you don't read here everyday...
It's good for your liver. So when I'm hungover tomorrow, I will be alternating coffee and dandelion tea. |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
Sup guys?
SheRat did you get married? If so, congrats baby! |
|
|
| telecaster |
quote:
SheRat wrote:
Some of it came out my nose!
What tea? |
|
|
| SheRat |
quote:
sirmoonie wrote:
Sup guys?
SheRat did you get married? If so, congrats baby!
Yes, moonie, I did on Saturday. Look for the SheRat's Big Day thread to see pics.
Tele: perhaps there's some joke there I don't get, so I will play it straight: Traditional Medicinals Organic Roasted Dandelion Root tea. Good for your liver. Mine took a beating this weekend, and what, with another 4-day weekend nearly upon us, it will be taking another beating starting at 8:30pm tonight.
I try to treat my liver good. I don't want to have to quit the hooch!
 |
|
|
| LadyJane |
quote:
SheRat wrote:
Yes, moonie, I did on Saturday. Look for the SheRat's Big Day thread to see pics.
Tele: perhaps there's some joke there I don't get, so I will play it straight: Traditional Medicinals Organic Roasted Dandelion Root tea. Good for your liver. Mine took a beating this weekend, and what, with another 4-day weekend nearly upon us, it will be taking another beating starting at 8:30pm tonight.
I try to treat my liver good. I don't want to have to quit the hooch!
Moonie where have you been? There are pics on RO and the Couch and the bride was a vision of beauty and elegance.
Now...is this true? Dandelion Root Tea?? I must begin drinking this heavily.
Return to the States in the Fall, my friends.
Tele...Moonie...YOU BOTH are gonna show up at a summit. I HAVE to drink with you guys.
LJ. |
|
|
| Riffhard |
This my friends is why conservatives are generally more intelligent on National defense/security issues. Please feel free to read this brilliant piece by the esteemed constitutional lawyer Mark Levin,and then libs,try and tell me where you think he has it wrong. I know there are some lawyers on this board so feel free to comment. This is just another example of a few liberal justices trying to legislate their liberal ideas from the bench. Levin slays them all,and he does it with his usual panache. He uses little things we conservatives like to call FACTS.
____________________________________________________________
By Mark R. Levin
Congress and the Court are systematically stripping the presidency of war-making powers. Congress demands that the president get court approval before intercepting enemy communications (we call that intelligence gathering) and the Court demands that the president get statutory support from Congress before he can use military tribunals to try terrorists.
And yet, neither Congress nor the Supreme Court have any explicit constitutional authority to make these decisions. Congress can cut-off funding for the war or any aspect of it, which it has not; and the judiciary’s only role in these matters is to defer to the president, who has explicit and broad authority under the Constitution as the commander-in-chief.
Today, the Court has taken a giant new step in its usurpation of explicit presidential authority. The battle against terrorism is being fought as much in our courtrooms as on the field in Iraq and other places — where the likes of the ACLU and activist judges will set policy in contravention of the Constitution.
Congress and the courts are conferring rights and privileges on terrorists. They are conferring constitutonal protections on the enemy. They are granting the enemy jurisdiction in our civiliam courts. They are extending the Geneva Conventions to an enemy that is specifically excluded from those protections.
I wrote an entire book on the subject of the Supreme Court, and how it’s destroying America. And that’s exactly what it’s doing. In 2004, the Court said, in two cases — Rasul and Hamdi — for the first time in our history, that unlawful enemy combatants — that is, terrorists who themselves refuse to comply with the rules of law — have a legal right to access to our federal civilian courts and can file habeas corpus petitions there. That means they can ask a federal judge to determine whether their detention is proper. In the past, the Supreme Court refused to grant such access to our courts. And as I wrote at the time, this is a slippery slope. Having broken down the wall of restraint that had traditionally been recognized by the Court, there appears to be no limit anymore on the judiciary’s role in second-guessing the commander-in-chief. And that’s exactly what happened today.
The Supreme Court said today that in exercising his constitutional authority, the president had to comply with congressional statutory mandates. I don’t believe the establishment of these tribunals violate any statute, but more to the point, since when does a statute trump the Constitution? Since never.
Let’s look at the relevant Geneva Convention. First point - since when does a party that has NOT signed a treaty, and does not comply with a treaty, become a part of such a treaty? The Geneva Convention relating to the treament of prisoners of war provides, at Article 4, that —
“A. Prisoners of war … are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:
“1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
“2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own territory, even if this terrirory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps, including such organized resistance movements, fulfill the following conditions:
“(a) That of being commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates;
(b) That of having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance;
(c) That of carrying arms openly;
(d) That of conducting their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.”
The purpose of this language is to make clear that NOT every combatant is covered by this treaty, i.e., that in order to receive the Convention’s protections, combatants must accept and comply with basic rules of war. Any literate person should understand this.
Well, the activist Supreme Court majority in Hamdan decided to ignore this language. Instead, it looked to “Common Article 3,” which has nothing to do with the current war. It requires, as an initial matter, that the conflict be not be of an international character. But the war on terrorism clearly is of an international character. Are the justices blind to the numerous known terrorist cells and conflicts throughout the world?
After rejecting the jurisdictional restriction of this article, the Court then went ahead and applied it to unlawful enemy combatants. That is to say, that terrorists detained by the U.S. “shall in all circumstances be treated humanely” and there shall be no “outrages upon [their] personal dignity, in particular humiliating and degrading treatment.”
The author of this intellectually dishonest opinion is John Paul Stevens. Stevens did something very similar in the earlier Rasul case in which he played word games with “jurisdiction.” In Rasul, the relevant statute provided that a writ of habeaus corpus may be granted by a federal judge within their own jursidiction, meaning within their judicial district. Stevens twisted that language to mean that a federal judge’s jurisdiction extends to any terrirtory over which the U.S. exercises complete control, i.e., Guantanamo Bay — a military base located in a foreign country. In doing so, Stevens also reversed over 50-years of precedent. In Johnson v. Eisentrager, the Court held it that alien combatants did not have access to U.S. civilian courts.
Today the Supreme Court’s majority trashed the Geneva Conventions, trashed Supreme Court precedent, and trashed the Constitution. But it did succeed in expanding its own authority and the ability of the enemy to conduct its war against us.
____________________________________________________________
Damn straight the guy's a genius!
Riffy
|
|
|
| rasputin56 |
Whiny bitches, the whole lot of ya. Whine, whine, whine. Fact or opinion? Tough call. Although I do enjoy watching Levin and his ilk jump up and down yelling "activist judge, activist judge", "legislate from the bench, legislate from the bench". Too frickin' funny. That's usually the sure sign that the decision was correct. But go ahead and continue to dream about your all-powerful dictatorial leader, it shouldn't be much longer. That usually works out for the best. Enjoy.
Isn't the National Review the same place that says the NYTimes should be up for treason and have their WH credentials revoked (even though Bush and his boys disclosed this and similar programs repetitively)yet they lobbied to have a gay, male hooker who pretended to be in the service with zero journalistic creds keep his WH credentials? Just wondering. TIA |
|
|
| SheRat |
Riff? What does that have to do with Rush Limbaugh's flaccid weenie?
Or were you merely posting that to show an example of a conservative and/or republican's lucidity of thought?
personally, I'd like to read his book about how the supreme court is ruining america...is that why there's such a brouhaha on both sides of the aisle about appointing judges?
I wonder if he means the supreme court as a concept or the surpreme court we have now...it matters little as this thread is about howe funny it is that Rush Limbaugh didn't egt enough pussy in the Dominican Republic to use up all his Viagra.
I'm going to be getting Viagra soon and trying it. I'll report back with my experiences in the Getting High Appreciation Thread.
|
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
rasputin56 wrote:
Whiny bitches, the whole lot of ya. Whine, whine, whine. Fact or opinion? Tough call. Although I do enjoy watching Levin and his ilk jump up and down yelling "activist judge, activist judge", "legislate from the bench, legislate from the bench". Too frickin' funny. That's usually the sure sign that the decision was correct. But go ahead and continue to dream about your all-powerful dictatorial leader, it shouldn't be much longer. That usually works out for the best. Enjoy.
Isn't the National Review the same place that says the NYTimes should be up for treason and have their WH credentials revoked (even though Bush and his boys disclosed this and similar programs repetitively)yet they lobbied to have a gay, male hooker who pretended to be in the service with zero journalistic creds keep his WH credentials? Just wondering. TIA
OK Raspy I'm gonna mark you down on the side of granting terrorists constitusional rights and protection under the Geneva Convention. The fact that they are not US citizens or in any way eligiable for rights to a treaty that they never signed and have never abided by means nothing. Thanks for clearing up your position. Hey if it makes Bush look bad who cares if it helps the enemy,right? Gotcha! Thanks.
Riffy |
|
|
| pdog |
quote:
SheRat wrote:
I'm going to be getting Viagra soon and trying it.
I had no idea you were dealing with limp clit...
First snorting tea know this...
I you experience swollen Labia for more than 4 hours, please post and brag! |
|
|
| pdog |
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
OK Raspy I'm gonna mark you down on the side of granting terrorists constitusional rights and protection under the Geneva Convention. The fact that they are not US citizens or in any way eligiable for rights to a treaty that they never signed and have never abided by means nothing. Thanks for clearing up your position. Hey if it makes Bush look bad who cares if it helps the enemy,right? Gotcha! Thanks.
Riffy
I've said this before, if we lose our freedoms, they won't hate us...
We really don't have to lose them, just the appearance we have. This terrorist really aren't that bright, they just never get laid, so they got major sperm blockage... |
|
|
| rasputin56 |
quote:
This terrorist really aren't that bright, they just never get laid, so they got major sperm blockage...
That was a beautiful transition back to Rush Limpaugh and his "problems". Well done.
[Edited by rasputin56] |
|
|
| rasputin56 |
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
OK Raspy I'm gonna mark you down on the side of granting terrorists constitusional rights and protection under the Geneva Convention. The fact that they are not US citizens or in any way eligiable for rights to a treaty that they never signed and have never abided by means nothing. Thanks for clearing up your position. Hey if it makes Bush look bad who cares if it helps the enemy,right? Gotcha! Thanks.
Riffy
Bush doesn't need people like me to make him look "bad". He does that pretty well for himself.
How do you know who's a terrorist and who isn't? (cue witty Murtha/Pelosi/Dean/Ward Churchill remark) Just wondering. I know in 'Nam they could tell the VC if they ran, if they didn't run, they were just disciplined VC, is this just as clear? I might as well get these questions in before the terrorists have nothing left of us to hate. TIA |
|
|
| glencar |
Bush must have done okay at today's press conference since I didn't see any gaffes on tonight's news. I feel safer. |
|
|
| rasputin56 |
Don't be so tough on him, press conferences are like riding a bike...uh, nevermind. Stick with he done good. |
|
|
| pdog |
quote:
glencar wrote:
Bush must have done okay at today's press conference since I didn't see any gaffes on tonight's news. I feel safer.
I'm sure John Stewart will be all over it... |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
rasputin56 wrote:
How do you know who's a terrorist and who isn't? (cue witty Murtha/Pelosi/Dean/Ward Churchill remark) Just wondering. I know in 'Nam they could tell the VC if they ran, if they didn't run, they were just disciplined VC, is this just as clear? I might as well get these questions in before the terrorists have nothing left of us to hate. TIA
Generally the terrorists are the ones who were found on a field of battle with a gun pointed at the US military while screaming,"Alah Akbar!" I know that it is easy to apply the liberal logic that the US military are in fact the bad guys,but this just does not jibe with any facts. We know that liberals can not look at the world in black and white terms. It's all shades of grey I guess. I,however,have no problem distingushing between Islamofucks who just two weeks ago beheaded two US troops after hours of torture,and our team who provides three hots and a cot. I mean shit we even give these guys a Koran,prayer beads,and anoiting oil for their religious practices. I wonder how many US troops that have been captured have been given a Bible? Rosary beads,perhaps? Yarmulka? LOL! I'm thinking that has never once happened. Just a guess mind you,but one based on the sheer barbarity of the fuckers that liberals seem so determined to protect.
Hope that clears it up.
Riffy
|
|
|
| pdog |
I thought they were given anal beads, not prayer beads...
Jihad up your ass and all that!!! |
|
|
| rasputin56 |
Yes, that was great and really cleared up the whole kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out thing. Thanks. I'm glad to see though that you still feel, like us liberals, that we are better than those that want to kill us and that by stooping to their barbarity, we would in fact be becoming that which we fight against. Welcome aboard. |
|
|
| pdog |
We argue about this here, so we don't have to argue about it there...
No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! No Freedom, No Terror !!! |
|
|
| Riffhard |
quote:
rasputin56 wrote:
Yes, that was great and really cleared up the whole kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out thing. Thanks. I'm glad to see though that you still feel, like us liberals, that we are better than those that want to kill us and that by stooping to their barbarity, we would in fact be becoming that which we fight against. Welcome aboard.
Oh no,I don't think we should stoop to their level of barbarism. On the contrary. I don't think that an air conditioned cell with three hot(religious appropriate)meals a day,and total religion freedom comes close to what they do. It's just that liberals seem to think that we are the ones who need to take "a good hard look at our own actions". Well from all accounts we have bent over backwards to be as accomodating as posible. I mean the International Red Cross is on location at Gitmo and they have found no evidence of abuse at all.In fact it was due to pressure from this group of "humanitarians" that we covered the cell windows in the cell doors to provide some privacy to these poor lost souls. Three of them promptly hung themselves and have gained their desired martyr status. Good call IRC!! Of course we all know that it was really Bush's and America's fault though. Right?
Riffy
[Edited by Riffhard] |
|
|
| pdog |
quote:
Riffhard wrote:
Oh no,I don't think we should stoop to their level of barbarism. On the contrary. I don't think that an air conditioned cell with three hot(religious appropriate)meals a day,and total religion freedom comes close to what they do. It's just that liberals seem to think that we are the ones who need to take "a good hard look at our own actions". Well from all accounts we have bent over backwards to be as accomodating as posible. I mean the International Red Cross is on location at Gitmo and they have found no evidence of abuse at all.In fact it was due to pressure from this group of "humanitarians" that we covered the cell windows in the cell doors to provide some privacy to these poor lost souls. Three of them promptly hung themselves and have gained their desired mayrter status. Good call IRC!! Of course we all know that it was really Bush's and America's fault though. Right?
Riffy
We always need to be careful, b/c American diplomacy is just like our pop culture. Everyone loves to see the stars come crashing down, it news and entertainment. And we don't hear about the good stuff, and when we do, we attack the people who are trying to do good. That's how America is viewed by the world.
I saw a former Gitmo prisoner on TV today. The guy was released, and wasn't guilty of anything... He still spent a few years locked up. Even in the best conditions, being locked up there sucks.
All I'm saying, is there comes a point wher even for the right reason, you can be the bad guys... and it's fucked up... B/c there's people who want to harm us.
None of us can really say anything that matters. We're all to far removed and just reproducing here, what pundits are saying in the media.
None of us have been to Afghanistan or Gitmo, and we certainly don't know what events led up to all the people in Gitmo getting there. It's possible some of them shouldn't be there! Being held w/o charges, trial or legal counsel, is not cool, even for the guilty. If we don't act right, we're wrong... |
|
|
| telecaster |
quote:
rasputin56 wrote:
Yes, that was great and really cleared up the whole kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out thing. Thanks. I'm glad to see though that you still feel, like us liberals, that we are better than those that want to kill us and that by stooping to their barbarity, we would in fact be becoming that which we fight against. Welcome aboard.
Hey, Andy Rooney
One time in bandcamp....
Take a stand, be a man. Don't be the usual lib limp wrister. Don't do it. You are better than that!
Tell us, tell the board what you suggest, what you would do
We know you can criticize without ever offering an option
We have seen hundreds of your/those posts
Take a position, make a suggestion, offer an opinion
Belly up to the bar and be a man......
Hike up your skirt if you have to but for God sakes take a position and stop with the whinning
You are making more noise than a Jewish wife with half the results
But then again.....I guess that is why you clowns keep losing
|
|
|
| Maxlugar |
Tele, Riffy, Glencar and Nanky!
Do you want to keep debating these morons?
Well then:
[Edited by Maxlugar] |
|
|
| glencar |
Maxy, I avoided the first 5 pages of this crap but then I went weak. Happy Fag Day backatcha! |
|
|
| pdog |
quote:
glencar wrote:
Maxy, I avoided the first 5 pages of this crap but then I went weak. Happy Fag Day backatcha!
You came for the crap, you stayed for me... |
|
|
| sirmoonie |
quote:
Maxlugar wrote:
Tele, Riffy, Glencar and Nanky!
Do you want to keep debating these morons?
Can we please just turn this thread back to Rush Limbaugh's use of Viagra to try to get his dick hard in the Dominican Republic? Can we just try to stay on topic once on the fucking board????
I mean, for fuck's sake. For the sake of fuck. Fuck o' sake. |
|
|
| pdog |
Poppers, teenagers, viagra and opiates... Rush is quickly becoming more likeable! |
|
