righturnonred

He's refering to the unconstitutional practice of judical legislation in which liberal activist judges essentally make law from the bench while circumventing the legislature all together. He's saying that if the people want gay marriage, then congress will pass a law. It's not up to individual judges to determine the will of the people. At least 2/3 of Americans are opposed to gay marriage. There is an entire thread on this subject regarding the abuses of power by US 9th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals. 9th Circuit At It Again Marriage is the foundation of a healthy society and is essential to raising children effectively for starters. Legally yes, there are too many penalties on marriage, and thats why Bush wants to remove those obsticles to promote marriage because he understands how socially important it is. That's ridiculous, of course you can. In fact, you benifit more through marriage. 2004 Medicare Co-Payments & Eligibility Guidelines It's incredible how misinformed you are on a whole range topics.

So, where are you getting this crap from, huh? Moveon.org, or maybe you've been listening to Tim Robbins run off at the mouth again? Or maybe you even heard such garbage from Algore. It's really impressive to hear you throw around legal terms of which you clearly know nothing about. Have you even heard talk of Impeachment, I haven't. So, instead of trying to blow us all away with your extensive knowledge of constitutional law, lets see some evidence of those High Crimes you speak of. As Krusty posted earlier, this is not a rant forum, this is a political discussion forum where adults present evidence to support their arguments. So, make your case for your lame accusations or move along. Regarding the Patriot Act, of which like too many people you're probably seriously disinformed, the Senate Judiciary Committee oversees the implimentation of the Patriot Act in order to ensure that the Constitutional rights of American citizens are preserved. Since the law was passed in the months following Sept. 11, the Senate committee has received not a single complaint regarding misuse of the Patriot Act. To date, the committee testifies that there has been NO abuse of the Patriot Act on behalf of the Justice Department. Simply put, this law grants tools to combat terrorism that are already attributed to organized crime and counter-narco operations. This is just Democrats and left-wing nuts crying "bloody murder" for purely political purposes. Regarding Guantánamo, there are no American citizens being held there. All of the imates at Gitmo are enemy combatants that were picked up off a foreign battlefield. They have no rights to access the US legal system. This brings me to John Walker, who like those at Gitmo, was picked up on a foriegn battle field yet as an American citizen was tried and convicted in the American Justice system, which is more than he deserves. The same goes for Richard Reed, and Padilla. Have your rights been violated? Do you know anyone whose rights have been violated? Have you heard of anyone's rights being violated? That's what I thought. Just calm down, and take a deep breath.

As usual, you make plenty of bombastic statements, such as those above, that are completely unsubstantiated by facts. I'd be genuinely curious to see your evidence that points to the conclusion that the US raped countries of their resources under the guise of engaging and protecting the free world from the evil threat of Soviet communism. I'd also like to see articles or facts indicating that the US is receiving profit monies from Iraqi oil, which by the way is under the control of the IGC and isn't even plentiful enough to finance the reconstruction of their own country. If you continue to make reckless accusations such as these, without evidence on any kind, then it is you who are guily of the very wrong doing that you accuse Bush of, misleading people.

Incredibly, you haven't hit on either one of them. Bush's drop in the polls is a result of his controversial immigration proposal and the revelation of cost overruns on the recently passed Medicare bill, both of which have his conservative base incensed at the moment. You have very narrow understanding of American politics. Just an observation.

Bushmustgo, You can continue on with your nonsensical tripe if you wish, but the rest of us live within the confines of reality. The lost jobs have not resulted from Bush's single handed mismanagement of the economy, and it would be absurd for you to claim so. Nor was Clinton singlehandedly responsible for the economic expansion of the 1990's. If fact, the economy flourished despite Clinton economic policies, IMO. You must have slept through economics in college, that is if you're even college educated. But there is still hope for. You can research this on your own using a marvelous invention called the internet and teach yourself all about the business cycle and how it effects job and wealth creation on a national and global scale. Economic growth, and thus employment, does not proceed along an inclined plain but rather along a course of peaks and valleys over time. So... Get real! All economists agree that the US is currently in the midst of an economic recovery. You're being ridiculous and unless you want to offer proof, which would be much more persuasive that your typical one liner jabs, I suggest you just save it. But you're obviously such a blind ideologue that I'm sure you'd never actually consider trying to prove me wrong. Talk about desperate, all you can offer are pathetic democratic talking points: 3 million lost! Herbert Hoover! Biggest deficit in history! [incredibly shrill, high pitched noise!]

Here's another story for WorldNetDaily.com (sorry Hardner ). Teacher told: Ditch the Star of David Oh really? Well, it offends me that the Palestinian immigrants are offended by the Star of David, so I think Palestinian immigrants should be removed from school. Come on.

Unemployment Rate Falls; 112,000 New Jobs The Economy IS improving despite 9/11, the war on terror, corporate scandals, the Clinton bubble, and the natural business cycle. Furthermore, employment is always a lagging indicator. In fact, I'd say the economy is tremendously healthy considering all that's happened over the past three years.

Don't you see what's going on here? By including the disclaimer, Dr. Tuttle has gone out of his way in an attempt to avoid conflict with his students. The same cannot be said of this self-rightous pegan brat who most likely originated the conflict by having a combative, vitriolic reaction to the disclaimer in the first place. I don't see any other students having a problem with this. This is a controversy created by one agitator and a moronic administrator. I'd like to get the input of the other students in the class to find out what really went on. Tuttle's point of view is represented by FIRE. As for the Dean, he was "bothered by the disclaimer" and I doubt we'll get anything else out of him on this subject as is so typical of someone likely so arrogant that he refuses to justify his actions.

Catholic professor punished for views Unbelievable! One complaint from a single arrogant, sanctimonious, red-diaper-doper-baby, fool college student and this decent man is targeted and removed from his class. Counseling for tolerance?! Outragous. Who's the intolerant one here? It seems that stories such as this one are starting to appear almost daily as the secularists continue their mindless assault on one of the most important stablizing forces in society: religion, Christianity specifically. Why is it that fanatical left-wing groups such as the ACLU are attempting to drive religion from public life entirely? How does the Star of David that a person wheres around their neck even concern you? How are you adversly affected by the message of love envoked by a public nativity sceen? This is absolute insanity. The US Constitution guarantees freedom OF religion, NOT freedom FROM religion. If this single college student twit is so terribly offended, then he should take it upon HIMSELF to withdraw from the class. Take you're secularist crap elsewhere.

I can understand your enthusiasm for this Democratic primary campaign phase but don't get ahead of yourself. The Democrats are duking it out in the playoffs right now but the big game has yet even start. When Bush takes the field, that's when the show begins. In addition, If you look historically, this period in a President's term is typically marked by a slump in the polls, so don't start hyperventilating just yet.

I wouldn't disagree with you as we're all just voicing opinions here. None of us are clarivoyant and therefor we cannot determine with certainty what runs through the heads of top adminstration officals, however there is a clear difference with what the liberals are doing. They are charging the President with crimes and convicting him even, without so much as a shread of evidence to support such destructive accusations. In addition, you are still unable to make a distinction between a lie and a mistake.

Of course WMD was not the only justification for the war, althought no one can deny it was a major one. I don't think Rasputin can seriously deny that WMD was not a central selling point for the war. Never the less, the disappearance of WMD doesn't evaporate the justification for the war. Saddam's had this coming for 12 years and everyone knows it. Anyone one who didn't want him gone is either protecting their own financial interests, shares Saddam's sadistic nature and is afraid they may be next, or is simply confused which is the case with most liberals, IMO. The fact is that Bush repeatedly made the humanitarian argument along with WMD, UN resolutions, 1991 ceasefire violation, etc. As is painfully obvious to those of us who understand the larger purpose for this war, it wasn't so much about WMD as it was about the reconstruction and moderization of a region that so desperately needs it. Iraq and Saddam were the perfect candidate for this much needed revival.

More information coming out about Iraq's "Oil for Blood" contracts handed out to supporters of his regime under the guise of the UN's "Oil for Food" program. This article gives more details from the Iraqi Oil Ministry Documents implicating government officals worldwide of accepting bribes in exchange for looking the other way. Developing... Document: Saddam Supporters Received Lucrative Oil Contracts

They were involved. They we're protecting thier own interests, i.e. lucrative business contracts with Saddam at the expense of global security and the wellfare of the Iraqi people.

First of all, it's hard to vote in Congress if you're not a member. Howard dead is the Governor from the town of Vermont, not a US congressman. Second of all, this is an incredibly small number and won't be as big a factor as you think. During Vietnam, the US was losing close to that number every week at the height of the war. This will make no difference on peoples' current views of the war. Those who will turn against the war have already done so. Clear thinking Americans know why the war was waged and whether the Intelligence was wrong or not doesn't make any difference to them. This is a surprisingly shallow observation. Of course the Republicans dislike Dean, he's an unabashed leftist wacko. But the Republicans also love Dean because he is the most easily defeated of all the candidates, except maybe for Kucinich who's not a serious contender for the nomination.Dean's entire strategy is based on bashing the President on the war but polls consistantly show that for most people, Iraq as an issue is trumped by domestic concerns and the economy. In short. A Dean nomination is Rove's and the adminstration's dream come true. In fact, Dean's floundering has caught them by surprise and caused a level of concern ironically. Dean has absolutely no chance of defeating Bush in a general contest. Interestingly, Lieberman is probably the only candidate that could stand up to Bush in a general election but the Democratic party has moved far to the left and he doesn't have a chance of gaining the nomination. Joementum and commonsense foreign policy just don't seem to appeal to the radical left wing of the Democratic party.

If anyone was wrong it was George Tenet and he should be fired. Actually Tenet, a hold over Clinton appointee, should have been fired long ago.

As has been suspected all along, France and freinds' oppostion to the war was based not on high moral ground but rather on a high profit margin. Suprise, surprise. As of now this breaking story has not appeared on any major network news site. Iraqi govt. papers: Saddam bribed Chirac Whether or not WMDs are found is irrelivent. We thought he had them, Saddam played along, he needed to go regardless, and now he's gone. Good riddance. The region, and hence the US and the rest of the world are more secure with him out of the way. Libya has capitulated as a direct result of the US led war. Iran and Syria will follow as the pressure builds on them to reform. The Arabs deserve and desperatly need democracy and freedom and it is insulting and ethnocentric to suggest that they are incapable of embracing such a universal concept.

I disagree. While it may seem counter intuitive, it is in fact minority groups who display the greatest amount of racism in America today. Most anglo (white) people in this country would prefer to live in a more or less color blind society and simply do not see the logic of making determinations about ones character based on the color of their skin. In contrast, many minority groups, blacks in particular who are literally obsessed with skin color, wish to use race to their advantage at every opportunity because they believe that the crimes of slavery and institutional discrimination perpetrated against their predecessors generations ago is responsible for their downtrodden status today and hence entitles them to preferential treatment. This represents the core of the "victim mentality" and unfortunately this negative racist perspective prevents many minorities from dealing with and solving the real problems that plauge their communities. Just as is the case with the Palestinians, it is much easier to vent ones frustration upon a convienient scape goat rather than to undertake the difficult and humbling task of confronting the actual debilitating social and cultural problems that keep these groups from achieving. However, I think that race relations in Europe posses completely different dynamics than one finds in America.

The BBC picked this story up from a WorldNetDaily article published on Jan. 23. Walid Shoebat, a former Palestinian terrorist recalls how from a very young age he and other children were taught to hate Jews. He gives his perspective on what he views as a culture of terror in which young men are indoctrinated to want nothing more than to Kill Jews and die as martyrs. His story is remarkable and should be a model for other psychopathic Arab killers to follow. Walid says it will take a generation for attitudes to change. Read the entire article here: Palestinian militant turned peacemaker

I agree. Hardner, you've made your point numerous times about the plagiarism issue and you're point has been ceded. Craig made a bad choice and the consequences be what they may, but you're incesent hand ringing is turning these threads into a circus. You're obsession is reminiscent of news converage of Chandra Leavey, or Scott Peterson, or Elisabeth Smart, or Jean Bonet Ramsey: old news, and not relavant to any important discussion. Rasputin, I suggest you stop butting heads with Hardner over this. You're only feeding fuel to the fire.

The obvious difference is that the US, contrary to what you may believe, is not a rouge nation and can infact be relied upon not to use WMD or hand it over to terrorist organizations. The same cannot be said for rogue nations. In a post 9/11 world, rouge nations will not be allowed to possess WMD, period. You are wrong about MAD. Although Russia is technically no longer an adversary, that country is slowly but surely slipping back into the reigns of totalitarianism. In addition, China possesses a small by significant intercontenental capability and IMO they are most certainly an emerging adversary to the US. MAD has deminished since the Cod War, but it is not gone and probably won't be for a long time. Bottom line, the US will not use Nuclear weapons unless we are struck with such weapons. In contrast, it's not possible to assume this with rouge nations, i.e. Iran, Iraq, N. Korea, Syria, Lybia. I agree that the elimination of nukes from the planet is a noble and worthy endevour, however it's completely illogical to expect the US to "set the example".

Great post Rasputin. If Saddam didn't have WMDs, he sure as hell wanted his neighbors and rest of world to believe that he did. His previous history of using the weapons, threatening others in the region, outspoken moral, financial, and logistical support for terrorism, and his elaborate aparatus of deception employed to hide his so called weapons from inspectors all point to a reasonable conclusion, that Saddam Hussein possessed WMDs. As this point, opponents of the war are forced to conclude as of now, based on all available information, excluding purely paranoid delusions or vitriolic Bush hatred, that the Adminstration has not lied about but was simply wrong on WMDs based on inaccurate or inconclusive intellegence. No one, not Hans Blix or Jock Iraq or anyone, had any doubt pre-war that Saddam had weapons. With that said, WMDs were only one part of what this war was about. It is first and foremost a monumentous attempt to modernize and reshape that region,not to remake it in the image of American, but to bring their culture from the 6th century into the 21st. In addition, this war was about helping the Iraqi people from out under the boot of Saddam where he held them hostage for a generation. And yes, oil was part of it as well. The United States has a compelling interest in protecting the stablility of world oil supplies. Currrently the US imports about 55% of it's oil from foreign countries. Roughly 30% of that comes from the Gulf region. While the US continues to import a greater percentage of it's oil from abroad, imports from the middle east are actually shrinking in accordance with out strategy to be less dependent on oil from that unstable region. Instead, other countries are picking up the slack, countries such as Mexico, Venezuala, Russia, Canada, and others. Our dependence on foreign sources of oil could be further reduced by opening portions of ANWR to domestic oil exploration, a mere 6% of that reserve. This initiative has repeatedly been block by Democrats in Congress who are willing to the put the lives of caribou, which incidently wouldn't be harmed in the slightest by such an operation, above the security of the American people. A grand example of liberal perversion at work. Bushmustgo or others, don't bother replying with your take on Bush's "real" war agenda, that being domestic political advantage, stealing oil, benefaction of corporate cronies, campaign of global imperialism, or simply for him [bush] to satisfy his overwhelming urge to slaugher "hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians" because he's an evil evil man, or whatever else ridiculas tripe the left has forced down your throat.

SirRiff, Do you think it's relavent at all to take into consideration the intent and reasons behind actions. The US opposed communism singlehandedly for fifty years. Afghanistan is one example. Do you think the Soviet Union should have been permitted to conquer Afghanistan unopposed? And what about France and Germany? Without American protection, they would have undoubtably become shinning members of the Warsaw Pact. It's was called the COLD WAR Riff, and the entire world was at stake. The threat of communism was not manufactured by American politicians merely as an excuse to pursue world domination. It was not our responsiblity to rebuild Afghanistan after the Soviets layed waste to it. Tell me, why do you think the US was committed to opposing Soviet expansion into that country? Was it for their rich resources of oil? The Afghans, to this day, should be greatful for the support we gave them. But ofcourse, as it's always been with Arabs, they sign allegiance to no one.You are trying to attribute logic to Islamic fundamentalism, and the violence it creates, where none exists. America did not "deserve", nor did it ask for 9-11. It is unfortunate that you have bought into this blame America crap without stopping to think about what American has done for you. What do you think the world would be like today if there had never been an American counter balance to the evil forces of fascism and communism that posed an evepresent threat to freedom over the past fifty years? Proxy wars were common place during the Cold War. The Soviets fought them to spread the disease of communism around the world. The US fought them to protect the world from the disease of communism. The US supported dictators in order to protect Europe and the West. Today, France, Germany, and others support dictators for profit, or perhaps to oppose the United States. It is ridiculas for you to place the US and the Soviet Union on parallel moral ground in their opposition to one another during the Cold War.

I don't know how effective that strategy would be. Evidence seems to suggest that hispanics are just as divided on the immigration issue as the rest of the country is, although you wouldn't think so. Like I've said before, I think this immigration proposal is just an empty ploy to attract the interest of hispanics toward the Republican party. I suspect that there is close to no chance in hell that such a proposal would ever pass Congress. The President has no support on this from either party, and that's the point. It's just a politcal manuvuer. Morgan has observed conservatives on other forums threatening to abstain from voting for Bush based solely on this issue. Some would, the vast majority would not. What about you Morgan? Would you be willing to endure 4-8 more years of trickle down immorality just to brow beat Bush on this one issue? Condi Rice would make an excellent first female President, but Colin Powell has made it abundantly clear that he is not interested in the Presidency, now or ever. Too bad. In fact, I think he may retire from his current post before the end of Bush's second term.

Alright Hardner, I don't what this turned into a prolonged pissing contest so lets just put an end to it here. You're entitled to you're opinions, Craig's not going anywhere though what he did was a lapse of judgement, but now we've both said our peice and I don't think there is anything else to be gained. Anyway, this thread was a about jobs was it? well, you're not listening hard enough. They're out there, somewhere. Basically, you have a choice between two alternatives as a gauge of employment and job growth: the Household Survey or the Employer Suvery, both of which are conducted by the Dept of Labor. As I've indicated for several reasons in a previous post, I beileve that the Household servey is a more comprehensive and accurate representation of employment and job growth. Just because you don't hear it in the leftist media dosen't necessarily mean it's untrue. Omission is the single most devious, and prevalent form of media bias. As I understand it, either measure is considered "legitimate" so it's basically your call to decided which method you think presents a more accurate picture of employment.