rehnquist to resign in 4 weeks?

[TJ_Eckleburg 0]

GENERAL POKER thats what I clicked on and thats my only point. Does anyone want to tell me how to enlarge my penis, make my girl censored, or how to make money from home??? if so please post in GENERAL POKER

It sounds like we've stumbled upon much deeper seeded issues here. Acceptance is the first step towards recovery.Dude, chill. If you don't want to comment on this, don't read it or don't post in it. It's not that big a deal.And we can talk about reverse implied odds whenever you like.

[TheIceman05 0]

As long as I'm dreaming, I'd like a pony too.

Politically, I'm in a very very weird place right now. I used to consider myself a pretty staunch and fierce centrist, but...1) I'm well educated, and have a pretty solid grasp of basic economic theory... which makes it very hard to NOT support certain conservative ideologies as the years go by.2) I hate the Bush administration, the Religious Right, FOX News.... (this list could go on forever) and Bill Frist. 3) I'm very socially liberal. The way Karl Rove used the Gay Marriage issue to steal the most recent election (all but dehumanizing homosexuals in the process) made me sick... almost as sick as I was made by the overwhelming fashion in which Americans supported the proposed amendmentsSo, as you can see, I still want to be a hodge-podgey type SanFrancisco hippie centrist. But I hate the conservative party so much that I refuse to agree with them. Ever. On any topic. On principle. On that note, I hope whomever Bush appoints to the Chief Justiceship has the sense to use the constitution to EXPAND personal freedoms, not LIMIT them. Legalize, man...Ice

[TJ_Eckleburg 0]

I'm well educated, and have a pretty solid grasp of basic economic theory... which makes it very hard to NOT support certain conservative ideologies as the years go by.

Agree.

So, as you can see, I still want to be a hodge-podgey type SanFrancisco hippie centrist. But I hate the conservative party so much that I refuse to agree with them. Ever. On any topic. On principle.

Janice Rogers Brown is on the California appellate, and is getting filibustered. Black self made woman from Alabama, on an appeals court in San Francisco, champion of personal rights, more or less conservative, AND GOT 76% of the California vote. Senate Democrats are filibustering her. If you ask me that's unconstitutional and a dangerous precedent.

[TheIceman05 0]

Janice Rogers Brown is on the California appellate, and is getting filibustered. Black self made woman from Alabama, on an appeals court in San Francisco, champion of personal rights, more or less conservative, AND GOT 76% of the California vote. Senate Democrats are filibustering her. If you ask me that's unconstitutional and a dangerous precedent.

If you don't want to be filibustered, don't nominate the J. Bolton's of the world. It's a political tool that's been used forever. It's nothing personal. What sets the more dangerous precedent? Filibustering irresponsible presidential nominations? Or nominating somebody for UN Ambassador who EXPRESSLY HATES THE UNITED NATIONS?Ice

[TJ_Eckleburg 0]

Filibustering has been around forever, but has never not ever been invoked by a Senate or House minority to keep judges from receiving an up and down vote. That's what I think is unconstitutional.And I know Strom Thurmond read the phone book while he was filibustering the Civil Rights Movement. Can't say I'm a fan of that.As for Bolton, I don't know very much about him. I do know Republicans (generally) like him and Democrats (generally) don't like him. All I'm saying is the UN is getting more and more anti-American every day... and it wouldn't hurt my feelings too much if we phased out our role in their organization (or if they phased out their role with us).The USA was taken off the Human Rights Committee, to be replaced by Cuba and Libya. WTF.There have been all kinds of half-baked internet taxes, press taxes and generally giving our sovereignty over to the UN. I'm definitely not a fan of that. Oil for food was unbelievably corrupt. I think of the UN and all I can see is a bunch of self-interested bureaucratic politicians united only in their fears and suspicions of American dominance in world affairs.I don't want to be the world police. But at least the world knows where America stands in world affairs. If someone's going to dominate the world economically, militarily, financially, and every other way, I don't mind it being us. And I'd much rather it not be an anti-American institution like the UN.America is still the most charitable nation in the world (by an awful lot). I'd much rather give money to the Red Cross than UN "peacekeepers," whatever that means. Acting out of motivated self interest isn't the same thing as greed.That's all.

[TheIceman05 0]

Man, you're sounding a little like a neo-conservative.But as much as I hate to admit it, I have absolutely no problem with American hedgemony, but I'd much rather we were a RESPONSIBLE hedgemon. The war in Iraq is a great example. We justified the war on the grounds that, among other things, Iraq wasn't abiding by UN sanctions. Then when they dilly-dallied, we decided they were absolutely unneccessary. That strikes me as hypocritical. Personally, I'm a fan of working within a framework of international cooperation, but if President Bush wants to spit in the face of every other nation on the planet and cut all ties with the UN, why won't he just say so? By appointing Bolton to the UN, he's being infinitely more subversive than the minority in Congress that's filibustering his nomination. And more honest, too. Ice

[TJ_Eckleburg 0]

Man, you're sounding a little like a neo-conservative.

The UN, war on terror, and tax cuts are where I come closest to that.But I'm really not. I'm a big limited government guy, and the Republicans are moving away from that. And they desperately need to distance themselves from the Christian Coalition crowd.You could say I'm libertarian about a lot of things too. But not crazily so or to an anarchist extent.

[FarrellX 0]

i believe the world would is a better place if women can kill their babies, gays can buttram each other while married, and if we cant kill cute little seals drilling in the ANWR...oh and it's good to be back...how i've missed this forum

[Guest]

i believe the world would is a better place if women can kill their babies, gays can buttram each other while married, and if we cant kill cute little seals drilling in the ANWR...oh and it's good to be back...how i've missed this forum

FUCK YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!See, and until this post, this thread was good. Seriously. SO much better than the 18 "I Krablar" threads you see here everyday. I was enjoying reading the good, intelligent debate........Than the forum's prodigal smacktard returns.......

[FarrellX 0]

zerospace Post Posted: Mon, Jun 6th, 2005 11:32 Post subject: Re: kill sealsFarrellX wrote:i believe the world would is a better place if women can kill their babies, gays can buttram each other while married, and if we cant kill cute little seals drilling in the ANWR...oh and it's good to be back...how i've missed this forum**** YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!See, and until this post, this thread was good. Seriously. SO much better than the 18 "I Suit: Heart Krablar" threads you see here everyday. I was enjoying reading the good, intelligent debate........Than the forum's prodigal smacktard returns.......

smacktard?? my intelligent responses prove that you sir, are the smacktard

[JEFFAZ 0]

Man, you're sounding a little like a neo-conservative.

The UN, war on terror, and tax cuts are where I come closest to that.But I'm really not. I'm a big limited government guy, and the Republicans are moving away from that. And they desperately need to distance themselves from the Christian Coalition crowd.You could say I'm libertarian about a lot of things too. But not crazily so or to an anarchist extent.

You present yourself in a very intelligent manner, but you did not address the point. You were told about Janice Brown and then you went off on a rant about Bolton. The fact is liberals do not want a minority to succeed if they are a conservative. ie Clarence Thomas Janice Brown, condeleeza Rice etc. If they allow the American people to see that these people made it in this evil society, while still believing in conservative ideals then they have lost. That is why they are filibustering. If you are black and a conservative then you are an Uncle Tom. How is that for freedom and diversity. I guess white people can have different views on everything but African Americans have to be one dimensional clnes of the left or are stripped of their blackness. Very sad. Freedom of speech as long as you agree with the left.

[Socko669 0]

ok, so if you guys wanna talk politics at a poker site, i will combine the two:here you gotop five reasons liberals suck at poker5. in tournaments they insist that all minority players get a 2:1 chip advantage4. they argue during no limit games because it too closely resembles trickle down economics...how dare someone have a big stack when everyone else has fewer chips...the playing field should always be level (except in the above case)3. they are too pc and claim that the use of the word "spade" to describe a cards suit is derogatory and racist.2. likewise the use of the word "straight" is inconsiderate of homosexuals as it implies that the when a "straight" wins it is a celebration of heterosexuality, which is unfair to all the pole smokers and box munchers.1. they secretly want to take a 68% rake out of every pot to give to welfare mothers and worthless government programs

[SDLAW 0]

For reasons why the UN is getting more and more anti-american, refer to the works of Noam Chomskey.Enough said!

[custom36 4]

Republicans are taking old Democrat ideals and Democrats are taking old Republican ideals. I keep seeing Bush push for a larger, more intrusive government and Democrats are trying their damndest to stop it (partly because Bush is republican, but I think some of them actually believe in small government). I am absolutely appalled by what the republican party has done in the last 5.5 years. I used to be an independent. I believe in small government, help for education, less war, less taxes, personal liberties, and equal rights for all. Since the republican turn towards religion, I have started to identify myself as a Democrat. What the republicans are doing to the country is very sad and it needs to be stopped.

[mulhs82 2]

ok, so if you guys wanna talk politics at a poker site, i will combine the two:here you gotop five reasons liberals suck at poker5. in tournaments they insist that all minority players get a 2:1 chip advantage4. they argue during no limit games because it too closely resembles trickle down economics...how dare someone have a big stack when everyone else has fewer chips...the playing field should always be level (except in the above case)3. they are too pc and claim that the use of the word "spade" to describe a cards suit is derogatory and censored.2. likewise the use of the word "straight" is inconsiderate of homosexuals as it implies that the when a "straight" wins it is a celebration of heterosexuality, which is unfair to all the pole smokers and box munchers.1. they secretly want to take a 68% rake out of every pot to give to welfare mothers and worthless government programs

That's great. :-) I personally think that as a country we need to loosen up a bit and not care what people want to do. As long as they don't plan on blowing up the country, leave the people alone. I wish I had some harder hitting commentary but I don't.

[iveyfan30 0]

i believe the world would is a better place if women can kill their babies, gays can buttram each other while married, and if we cant kill cute little seals drilling in the ANWR...he's backkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkoh and it's good to be back...how i've missed this forum

[wilheldp 0]

Also for the record I think the democrats are being entirely unconstitutional with their filibusters, and the Republicans have no spine.

I think it would have been really funny had the Republicans changed the rules to stop the filibusters from blocking their nominations. Sure, it would help their cause in the short term, but what about 10 or 20 years down the road when the Democrats regain control of Congress? The Republicans will be bitching twice as hard about how they are powerless to block Democratic nominees. The whole situation is ludicrous.For the record, I am neither a Democrat or a Republican. I am a fiscal conservative which is currently a non-entity in Washington (with the exception of Ron Paul, the only Libertarian in Federal Government). The two party system is inherently flawed, and it has gotten to the point where it is self-perpetuating, so unless the American people wake up and realize that the Republicrats are the same party and they are hood-winking you into voting for them every year, no actual progress is possible.