Is this a repost or a rant?
-
Just read the headline that congress accepted Dubya's "let me be god" proposal, and wondered what I could find in the respective rant(s) here. But nothing?! Or did I miss it? I'm on the road, so I don't see that much CP those days. Q: Is the law passed as broad as it was proposed? I mean all thissoft lawyeresque "a threat to the US" thing etc. P.S. been to CA for a few days, and for me, as a european it was good to hear that there are really not only drumbeaters on this side of the ocean. OK, otoh CA not Texas :cool: Just sayin' hello, my way. Peter
"Just read the headline that congress accepted Dubya's "let me be god" proposal, and wondered what I could find in the respective rant(s) here. But nothing?! Or did I miss it?" Nope, no rants here! While you've been gone we've converted EVERYBODY to be good little Americans and everybody is "proud as a peacock" about the new congressional resolution. ;P ;P
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
-
"Just read the headline that congress accepted Dubya's "let me be god" proposal, and wondered what I could find in the respective rant(s) here. But nothing?! Or did I miss it?" Nope, no rants here! While you've been gone we've converted EVERYBODY to be good little Americans and everybody is "proud as a peacock" about the new congressional resolution. ;P ;P
Mike Mullikin :beer: You can't really dust for vomit. Nigel Tufnel - Spinal Tap
OK, here's a rant. I don't think invading Iraq will do a damn bit of good, but I do get angry when my government gives any sort of credence to the authority of the U.N. I think we should invade Iraq just to show the U.N. that we do not recognize it as any sort of legitimate authority which we are in any way obligated to respect. The U.N. is a non-democratic orginization comprised of Marxist, socialist and communists elitists from various failed societies around the world. Why in God's name should any American give a rat's rear what the U.N. wants? Rant over. Blood pressure coming back down...
-
OK, here's a rant. I don't think invading Iraq will do a damn bit of good, but I do get angry when my government gives any sort of credence to the authority of the U.N. I think we should invade Iraq just to show the U.N. that we do not recognize it as any sort of legitimate authority which we are in any way obligated to respect. The U.N. is a non-democratic orginization comprised of Marxist, socialist and communists elitists from various failed societies around the world. Why in God's name should any American give a rat's rear what the U.N. wants? Rant over. Blood pressure coming back down...
Hmmm... the US should defy the UN and invade Iraq for defying the UN. Interesting logic :-D Paul Life is just a sexually transmitted desease - Matthew Wright (ex-journalist, TV presenter) 10-Oct-02 I finally have a sig! - Paul Riley (part-time deity) 10-Oct-02
-
Just read the headline that congress accepted Dubya's "let me be god" proposal, and wondered what I could find in the respective rant(s) here. But nothing?! Or did I miss it? I'm on the road, so I don't see that much CP those days. Q: Is the law passed as broad as it was proposed? I mean all thissoft lawyeresque "a threat to the US" thing etc. P.S. been to CA for a few days, and for me, as a european it was good to hear that there are really not only drumbeaters on this side of the ocean. OK, otoh CA not Texas :cool: Just sayin' hello, my way. Peter
peterchen on tour wrote: Is the law passed as broad as it was proposed? it's not quite as bad as it could be. i believe it's limited to Iraq and GWB has to "prove" to congress that diplomacy failed before he can take any action. that last part is nearly worthless, since GWB has already abandoned diplomacy. here is the important part of the senate bill:
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. (a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to-- (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq ; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq . (b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that-- (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq ; and (2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. (c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS- (1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution , the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution . (2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:11:./temp/~c1075RBESi::[
-
Hmmm... the US should defy the UN and invade Iraq for defying the UN. Interesting logic :-D Paul Life is just a sexually transmitted desease - Matthew Wright (ex-journalist, TV presenter) 10-Oct-02 I finally have a sig! - Paul Riley (part-time deity) 10-Oct-02
You caught that too huh?!?!?:-D That's hilarious... Norm Almond: I seen some GUI's in my life but WTF is this mess ;-) Leppie: I made an app for my sister and she wouldnt use it till it was colorful enough:) Norm:good point leppie, from that statement I can only deduce that this GUI must be aimed at children:laugh: Leppie:My sister is 25:eek: -Norm on the MailMagic GUI
-
OK, here's a rant. I don't think invading Iraq will do a damn bit of good, but I do get angry when my government gives any sort of credence to the authority of the U.N. I think we should invade Iraq just to show the U.N. that we do not recognize it as any sort of legitimate authority which we are in any way obligated to respect. The U.N. is a non-democratic orginization comprised of Marxist, socialist and communists elitists from various failed societies around the world. Why in God's name should any American give a rat's rear what the U.N. wants? Rant over. Blood pressure coming back down...
Anonymous wrote: The U.N. is a non-democratic orginization comprised of Marxist, socialist and communists elitists from various failed societies around the world. Duuuuude, what is that shit you are smoking? Pass it on brother! Sounds like bad ass d0pe! -- Please state the nature of your medical emergency.
-
peterchen on tour wrote: Is the law passed as broad as it was proposed? it's not quite as bad as it could be. i believe it's limited to Iraq and GWB has to "prove" to congress that diplomacy failed before he can take any action. that last part is nearly worthless, since GWB has already abandoned diplomacy. here is the important part of the senate bill:
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES. (a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to-- (1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq ; and (2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq . (b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that-- (1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq ; and (2) acting pursuant to this resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorists attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001. (c) WAR POWERS RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS- (1) SPECIFIC STATUTORY AUTHORIZATION- Consistent with section 8(a)(1) of the War Powers Resolution , the Congress declares that this section is intended to constitute specific statutory authorization within the meaning of section 5(b) of the War Powers Resolution . (2) APPLICABILITY OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS- Nothing in this resolution supersedes any requirement of the War Powers Resolution
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c107:11:./temp/~c1075RBESi::[
Do you or anyone else know of a "US Political System 101" document somewhere on the web? I know the basic structure, congress, senate, president, that sort of thing. But it would be great with some overview of how decisions are made, bills are passed, who says what to whom, who elects whom, why are some decisions made by the senate while other aren't. A graph with annotations would be very nice indeed. I tend to get lost in these discussions. :( And I really do want to know and understand what is going on, because eventhough I am not a US citizen, the outcome of a new big war will affect me in some way (indirectly). I should know this stuff. I studied it in school 10-12 years ago, but my memory can only hold a certain amount of information. -- Please state the nature of your medical emergency.
-
Do you or anyone else know of a "US Political System 101" document somewhere on the web? I know the basic structure, congress, senate, president, that sort of thing. But it would be great with some overview of how decisions are made, bills are passed, who says what to whom, who elects whom, why are some decisions made by the senate while other aren't. A graph with annotations would be very nice indeed. I tend to get lost in these discussions. :( And I really do want to know and understand what is going on, because eventhough I am not a US citizen, the outcome of a new big war will affect me in some way (indirectly). I should know this stuff. I studied it in school 10-12 years ago, but my memory can only hold a certain amount of information. -- Please state the nature of your medical emergency.
here's one http://bensguide.gpo.gov/9-12/index.html[^] :) -c
Green's Law of Debate: Anything is possible if you don't know what you're talking about.
-
OK, here's a rant. I don't think invading Iraq will do a damn bit of good, but I do get angry when my government gives any sort of credence to the authority of the U.N. I think we should invade Iraq just to show the U.N. that we do not recognize it as any sort of legitimate authority which we are in any way obligated to respect. The U.N. is a non-democratic orginization comprised of Marxist, socialist and communists elitists from various failed societies around the world. Why in God's name should any American give a rat's rear what the U.N. wants? Rant over. Blood pressure coming back down...
Let's invade the UN instead. It will be cheaper and a lot closer, and I hear the hors dourves are excellent. Besides, there's no bar in Iraq. Word of the day: Rotundacrat
Extra Credit will be awarded for: Quasimobo... -
OK, here's a rant. I don't think invading Iraq will do a damn bit of good, but I do get angry when my government gives any sort of credence to the authority of the U.N. I think we should invade Iraq just to show the U.N. that we do not recognize it as any sort of legitimate authority which we are in any way obligated to respect. The U.N. is a non-democratic orginization comprised of Marxist, socialist and communists elitists from various failed societies around the world. Why in God's name should any American give a rat's rear what the U.N. wants? Rant over. Blood pressure coming back down...
lay off the acid, A. it fries your synapses. out of all the forums on CP - why allow anonymous posts in here???
Green's Law of Debate: Anything is possible if you don't know what you're talking about.
-
Just read the headline that congress accepted Dubya's "let me be god" proposal, and wondered what I could find in the respective rant(s) here. But nothing?! Or did I miss it? I'm on the road, so I don't see that much CP those days. Q: Is the law passed as broad as it was proposed? I mean all thissoft lawyeresque "a threat to the US" thing etc. P.S. been to CA for a few days, and for me, as a european it was good to hear that there are really not only drumbeaters on this side of the ocean. OK, otoh CA not Texas :cool: Just sayin' hello, my way. Peter
Anyone seen the film "Dr. Strangelove" :~ Elaine (cowering fluffy tigress) Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
lay off the acid, A. it fries your synapses. out of all the forums on CP - why allow anonymous posts in here???
Green's Law of Debate: Anything is possible if you don't know what you're talking about.
Oh, sorry, I hadn't realized I was posting anonymously. Still, I would have thought you would have recognized me! ;P I'm not a real reverend, I just play one on CP.
-
Hmmm... the US should defy the UN and invade Iraq for defying the UN. Interesting logic :-D Paul Life is just a sexually transmitted desease - Matthew Wright (ex-journalist, TV presenter) 10-Oct-02 I finally have a sig! - Paul Riley (part-time deity) 10-Oct-02
Paul Riley wrote: Hmmm... the US should defy the UN and invade Iraq for defying the UN. Interesting logic I never said anything about invading Iraq for defying the UN. That is not a part of my logic at all. Hell, I admire Iraq for defying the UN. So should we - overtly and purposefully. If the Europeans don't like it, let them invade us. What I'm saying is that we Americans should consider the UN a non-entity altogther. The UN is a lifeless, gutless, powerless committee controlled by your standard set of European political buffoons. If *we* have a reason to invade Iraq, what ever that reason might be, we should do so without any regard whatsoever to the wishes, proposals or dictates of that organization. I'm not a real reverend, I just play one on CP.
-
Anonymous wrote: The U.N. is a non-democratic orginization comprised of Marxist, socialist and communists elitists from various failed societies around the world. Duuuuude, what is that shit you are smoking? Pass it on brother! Sounds like bad ass d0pe! -- Please state the nature of your medical emergency.
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Duuuuude, what is that sh*t you are smoking? Pass it on brother! Sounds like bad ass d0pe! In pricisely what way is my description of the U.N. invalid? Do the people in your country get to vote for their representative in the U.N.? Do the people in China? Again, my question, why should I, as an American, a citizen of the only successful culture on the planet, the one culture holding the entire global community together, economically and socially, care to give any sort of respect to the U.N.? I'm not a real reverend, I just play one on CP.
-
Jörgen Sigvardsson wrote: Duuuuude, what is that sh*t you are smoking? Pass it on brother! Sounds like bad ass d0pe! In pricisely what way is my description of the U.N. invalid? Do the people in your country get to vote for their representative in the U.N.? Do the people in China? Again, my question, why should I, as an American, a citizen of the only successful culture on the planet, the one culture holding the entire global community together, economically and socially, care to give any sort of respect to the U.N.? I'm not a real reverend, I just play one on CP.
Reverend Stan wrote: why should I, as an American, a citizen of the only successful culture on the planet Only successful culture ? ;P Lets see, in Texas at the moment there are in excess of 1.5 million children without healthcare (this was on a news programme about two months ago). I have a friend in Florida who was ill and was seen by a doctor under this 'workmans comp' scheme. He was sent home as 'fit' with a fever of 105 degrees and collapsed outside the clinic. :mad: Elaine Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
Oh, sorry, I hadn't realized I was posting anonymously. Still, I would have thought you would have recognized me! ;P I'm not a real reverend, I just play one on CP.
It wasn't difficult ;P Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
It wasn't difficult ;P Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
Hey, thanks! I derive such pleasure from challenging established orthodoxy - however it might be defined. It's a dirty job, but someone has to do it. I'm not a real reverend, I just play one on CP.
-
Reverend Stan wrote: why should I, as an American, a citizen of the only successful culture on the planet Only successful culture ? ;P Lets see, in Texas at the moment there are in excess of 1.5 million children without healthcare (this was on a news programme about two months ago). I have a friend in Florida who was ill and was seen by a doctor under this 'workmans comp' scheme. He was sent home as 'fit' with a fever of 105 degrees and collapsed outside the clinic. :mad: Elaine Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
I can assure you that there are no children in Texas going without any health care they really need. And if they are it is only because of the creeping influence of Socialistic "Euro-think" witihn our political culture. I belong to one of the poorest families in western Oklahoma, and everyone in my family gets all the health care they need. The intervention of government into the process makes it more difficult than it used to be when the medical profession was governed purely by market forces, but even so, every poor person I know who needs health care gets it. An abandonment of bureaucratic government health care systems, and a return to capitalism, and more of it, is the answer to whatever health care "crisis" we are facing. I'm not a real reverend, I just play one on CP.
-
I can assure you that there are no children in Texas going without any health care they really need. And if they are it is only because of the creeping influence of Socialistic "Euro-think" witihn our political culture. I belong to one of the poorest families in western Oklahoma, and everyone in my family gets all the health care they need. The intervention of government into the process makes it more difficult than it used to be when the medical profession was governed purely by market forces, but even so, every poor person I know who needs health care gets it. An abandonment of bureaucratic government health care systems, and a return to capitalism, and more of it, is the answer to whatever health care "crisis" we are facing. I'm not a real reverend, I just play one on CP.
Stan, there were children going blind because glaucoma wasn't treated in that programme. You do not assure me at all. Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
-
Stan, there were children going blind because glaucoma wasn't treated in that programme. You do not assure me at all. Would you like to meet my teddy bear ?
1.5 million children went blind with glaucoma in Texas alone???!!!!! Oh my god, its a crisis!!!! We need more government to protect the children from glaucoma! I think I know more about what it is like to be poor in the U.S. than do you. Here's a story for you. In the late 1950's my mother went blind. She needed surgery on her eye's to replace her corneas. At that time such surgery was very experimental and very expensive. There was no government health care to use, we did not have a stich of insurance of any kind, my father was out of work due to his own health problems. Yet my mother got her surgery thanks to the Lion's club. My father was soon back on his feet with help from the local churches. We children never did without. We did not need insurance. We did not need complex government programs. The reason those children are going blind from glaucoma is *because* of government intervention in what would otherwise be a perfectly workable health care system if it were simply allowed to function in a natural, unfettered, capitalisitic fashion. It is *your* principles that have blinded those children, not mine. My ideas work, yours do not. Supporting socialistic principles may make you feel good about yourself, but they do not help anyone. They hurt people, espescially the poor. I'm not a real reverend, I just play one on CP.