Bill Clinton Has a Few things to Say

[hawkeye69]

oh, i thought this was about billy tellin the bitch to wash her clothes regularly and to swallow it all next time.

 

carry on...

[KaskadskyjKozak]

BTW; who's that old Canadian lady on TV that's always showing off the latest and greatest rectal vibrator? Doesn't that violate Gov't Canada's decency laws? Yuk!

 

Canadian school children watch her program during class time. It's their version of abstinence education (images of that lady combined with those devices would make anyone lose all sexual desires...). It helps keep Canadians from being obese as well ... the show regularly induces purging/vomiting.

 

[TREETOAD]

what are you talking about jay? in reference to billy C's interview?

 

I believe he is referring to a certain DNC Kool-Aid guzzler named Crux - who just recently proposed putting network executives in prison for an ABC docu-drama written and produced under the protections of the first amendment.

 

 

Post #601332 - written by Crux:

Now, regarding your news that Senate democrats are talking about pulling Disney's FCC license, that is definitely predictable: I have argued it is a violation of federal law for public sector resources to be allocated for the purpose of dissemination of propaganda for political purposes. The public airwaves thusly abused by Disney/ABC present not only grounds for revocation of the broadcasting license but for criminal prosecution under the provisions of the respective statutes.

 

Any modicum of respect I had for the guy evaporated with this paragraph. True colors revealed - and I don't think Crux is alone in his interpretation of what 'free speech' really means. Scary shit if the Dem's take charge. Really.

 

Amen brother. The fascists are on the left - listen up TREETOAD, i'm talking to you.

 

 

What left brother, you have no left. That is the whole problem. Your political parties just keep swapping the shovel back and forth while the pit they are going to bury your county in is getting deeper every time.

Our system is becoming more like that as well. There are no NEW THINKERS out there. Only a bunch of oil execs fucking you and me and our children out of a future. The only difference it seems is that one party just wants to do it slower than the other. Take a look at the link to the documentary on global warming and George bush and tell me it doesn't scare the shit out of you.

[foraker]

09-27) 18:02 PDT New York (AP) --

 

 

Fox News chief Roger Ailes says former President Clinton's response to Chris Wallace's question about going after Osama bin Laden represents "an assault on all journalists."

 

 

Ailes said Clinton had a "wild overreaction" in the interview, broadcast on "Fox News Sunday." Hundreds of thousands of people subsequently watched clips over the Internet, with Fox foes rallying behind Clinton.

 

 

"If you can't sit there and answer a question from a professional, mild-mannered, respectful reporter like Chris Wallace, then the hatred for journalists is showing," Ailes said in an interview with The Associated Press on Wednesday. "All journalists need to raise their eyebrows and say, `hold on a second.'"

 

 

Oh, wait. He was being serious....

[KaskadskyjKozak]

What left brother, you have no left. That is the whole problem. Your political parties just keep swapping the shovel back and forth while the pit they are going to bury your county in is getting deeper every time.

Our system is becoming more like that as well. There are no NEW THINKERS out there. Only a bunch of oil execs fucking you and me and our children out of a future. The only difference it seems is that one party just wants to do it slower than the other. Take a look at the link to the documentary on global warming and George bush and tell me it doesn't scare the shit out of you.

 

smoke another bowl dude.

[TREETOAD]

Pull your head out and take a look

[Crux]

Pretty soon the government's power will grow so unchecked, and the populace so complacent, that the government will be able to come up with a scary-sounding term like "Hate Speech" and grant itself the right to fine or imprison anyone who expresses convictions that the government deems unacceptable in public.

 

Pretty frightening prospect...eh.

 

As a complacent American public now stands idly by, the United States Congress is now passing law that will move toward turning the United States into a police state -- never mind Canada! The law now being passed will revoke habeas corpus, sanction domestic spying, and legalize the torture of prisoners.

 

Ironically, and in contrast to the apparent situation created by the Canadian hate-propaganda laws, not even a throught-crime charge such as "hate-speech" will be required to effect an arrest and imprisonment under the new American law: The accuser need only point a finger and whisper the word "enemy."

 

"Rushing Off a Cliff"

[underworld]

 

winner of the exaggeration of the day award. you can't truly believe that you or anyone you know is in danger. try a simple experiment - point the finger at chaps and whisper... see what happens.

 

for a group of people that want to trust the government with so many other major aspects of their lives (healthcare, land use, car choice etc) - why aren't you afraid of someone pointing at you and saying "no car" or "no doctor" and you having to walk and be sick for the rest of your life. if you trust them to stay legit with that stuff, why do you not trust them here? i say - never trust em.

 

granted, the thought of wrongful imprisonment is scary and the thing movies are made of... let's not get carried away.

[Jim]

granted, the thought of wrongful imprisonment is scary and the thing movies are made of... let's not get carried away.

 

While the referred to statement is a bit dramatic, read the legislation. It is scary and certainly betrays our conutries democratic foundations. But --- no reason to trouble yourself with details. As long as the Hummer is full of gas and the drive in Starbucks is open.

[underworld]

ah, the imagination of the left. if they disagree with me they must drive a hummer and drink 'bucks coffee. but we don't judge people.

[chucK]

Underworld,

Did you read the recent story of the innocent Canadian detained by the US govt. then shipped to Syria for torture?

 

What about Jose Padilla? They pointed a finger at him, kept him in prison for 3 years, then when his case was possibly coming up in court, they changed their mind (and their legal reasons for wanting him locked up).

 

You want this codified? Put into the lawbooks that this is perfectly legal? For what reason? Because if we let people our govt. has imprisoned come to court, then our courts would be clogged up? Doesn't that reasoning sound a bit weird?

 

Your argument that the lefties want to give up their rights to what car they can drive is totally stupid and not to the point. We are not talking about govt. medical care or pollution standards. We are talking about locking someone up indefinitely without ANY recourse. Surely you don't equate the right to drive any car you want with the right to not be indiscriminately imprisoned?

[Jim]

ah, the imagination of the left. if they disagree with me they must drive a hummer and drink 'bucks coffee. but we don't judge people.

 

Change it to volvo and McDonalds if you want then. The point (I'll spoon feed you here) is the abundance of apathy of the American public. I'm quite surprised the Republican Senate is drinking this koolaid. Some of them can be pretty good at standing up for individual rights afforded by the Constitution. Not this close to November in a tough election year I guess. Gotta hand it to Rove, he knows timing and how to keep the party in their ranks.

[underworld]

yeah.. real nice guy. and the someone just had to point to him for his arrest? padilla

 

my point in linking health care to this case is that it has been 'imagined' that someone that doesn't like you can point and you go to jail for the rest of your life. why is it not fair to 'imagine' someone pointing and dictating my health care, or lack of it. it's just as abstract. it's just as paranoid to think that cloning and stem cell stuff would lead to an ideal race and that i'd be denied healthcare by those in charge because i'm not the ideal race. we can get real creative here.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

can you say... thread drift?

[Crux]

The accuser need only point a finger and whisper the word "enemy."

 

winner of the exaggeration of the day award. you can't truly believe that you or anyone you know is in danger. try a simple experiment - point the finger at chaps and whisper... see what happens.

 

for a group of people that want to trust the government with so many other major aspects of their lives (healthcare, land use, car choice etc) - why aren't you afraid of someone pointing at you and saying "no car" or "no doctor" and you having to walk and be sick for the rest of your life. if you trust them to stay legit with that stuff, why do you not trust them here? i say - never trust em.

 

granted, the thought of wrongful imprisonment is scary and the thing movies are made of... let's not get carried away.

 

The powers and protections provided by the new law do not extend to everybody. Accordingly, to be sure, if I stood as the accuser then no amount of finger-pointing would get anybody sent to a prison.

 

Under the new law, an "accuser" is not just anybody who points a finger. An accuser is, to be clear, any person or corporate entity designated by the president to have the authority to officially identify people with "enemy" status. Once thusly identified, by unilateral executive decree, the accused are then lawfully subject to summary arrest, idefinite imprisonment, and torture.

 

Wrongful imprisonment is indeed scary; it also has been an ongoing practice under the rule of the Neocons for five years now. Call a secret accusation a whisper or not, let's not keep our heads stuffed up our underworlds while the Neocons continue to steal our democracy, OK?

 

Cheers.

 

[Jim]

can you say... thread drift?

 

I'm glad you said it first. I'd be labled the leftist wanker. Any wonder the populace isn't worried. Oh- Dancing with the Stars is already on!!

[Dechristo]

Fuck.

 

This is thread is a prime example of why I usually abstain from discussions such as this.

 

Chuck you totally missed what I believe was Underworld's point. In fact, it appears because of the agenda blinders you wear, you turned his point completely on its head. He was not trying to justify restriction, as with the legislation considered here, but was making a point aside: to the prevalence of attitude condoning restrictions on others that engage in activies you may frown upon. You may not think it pertinent to the issue at hand due to implied relative gravity of the issues... or simply because you missed his point.

 

Then, Jim jumps in with a continuation of this misunderstanding and his patronizing comment of

(I'll spoon feed you here)

which only serves to promote ill will.

 

You guys might rethink your approach to attempts to persuade folks to your point of view. As it is now, you exemplify as clearly as the current administration the ethos of "if you're not for us, you're against us".

 

The tragedy is in how your method of discussion alone turns people away.

[Stefan]

Please remember the Republicans need terrorists.

 

Republicans have been searching for somebody to be labeled as "bad guys" since the communists are no longer in power to feed the military war machine.

 

The "war on terror" is about money to maintain happy contractors. So is the Iraq war.

 

Its sad. But in the end it is true.

 

Still don't know why Bush Administration did absolutely nothing as a retalitary strike to the USS Cole and say, "Hey bud (Al Quaida), I am in power now, so don't be messing with this administration around."

[Jim]

ah, the imagination of the left. if they disagree with me they must drive a hummer and drink 'bucks coffee. but we don't judge people.

 

This is what I respoded tersely to.

 

This piece of a larger article kinda says it all:

 

At last tally, about 63% of Americans said they don't support the war in Iraq, but are nonetheless (a)pathetically condoning it by refusing to engage democracy, failing to vote, to protest, and to mobilize. I spoke with one of them this summer, when I spent six weeks in Washington, DC, meeting with congressmen and senators, and conducting Operation House Call, a project of Military Families Speak Out. One day, when the heat index soared to 110 degrees, hot enough to melt the tar between the steps in front of the Russell Senate Building, a family passed by our vigil of empty combat boots. The distraught mother of two talked about how upset she was about the war, and asked why more people weren't doing something.

 

When I asked her what she was doing, she replied, "Me? Nothing. I've got responsibilities. I'm on vacation."

[Chaps]

HI-HO LOSERS! Like you guys could make a difference with your petty arguements. The heartland is running the country. Your west coast opinions don't matter.

[Dechristo]

Still don't know why Bush Administration did absolutely nothing as a retalitary strike to the USS Cole...

 

Maybe because it took place on 12OCT00 during the previous administration.

[underworld]

well, stop believing all polls you read. people's actions speak louder. they do nothing because they don't feel strong enough about it. easy to sound tuff and strong to a pollster but don't have it in them to take action.

 

so, in other words, the real poll of actions tells the real story of people's attitudes.

[Crux]

Voting is an action.

[Chaps]

Posting on a Internet Bulletin Board is ACTION. Why else would my fingers get tired?

[chucK]

Still don't know why Bush Administration did absolutely nothing as a retalitary strike to the USS Cole...

 

Maybe because it took place on 12OCT00 during the previous administration.

 

So was the inaction a statute-of-limitations type thing or a it's-not-my-job type of thing?