If you really feel that way...

Post #18,079 by Silverlock 11/13/01 2:02:18 PM 11/13/01 3:40:01 PM Reply	If you really feel that way... That the new laws rescinding constitutional rights are justified, then we don't really have much to discuss. I will admit to a feeling of awe that you consider this on a par with the previous administration. You honestly see this as business as usual? I don't. One other thing "I'm really tired of this "style" of "debate", ie. It was the Clinton modus operandi - attack character of anyone you disagree with." If you don't like this style, then why do you use it? How to mangle the truth; Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet. Edited by Silverlock Nov. 13, 2001, 03:40:01 PM EST Expand All History
Post #18,099 by Brandioch 11/13/01 3:37:27 PM Reply	As I believe has been noted before. We did not need these provisions during WW1 WW2 Korea Vietnam or any of the smaller wars since then. But we need them NOW?
Post #18,107 by wharris2 11/13/01 3:58:59 PM Reply	Actually things were different in WW1 and WW2 but during both of them, we had declared war, and normal civil liberties were not in effect. During WW2, in particular, there was massive government censorship and I'd bet wiretaps on every suspected enemy sympathizer with or without a warrent. But that was wartime. Korea, Vietnam, Gulf War, this so-called war on terrorism - there isn't a state of war in effect. If you want extraordinary government powers, declare war, don't pass laws that will stick to the books almost forever. (Yeah, yeah, I know about the sunset clauses on some provisions. I do wonder if the sun will really set on them.) "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth
Post #18,123 by bepatient 11/13/01 4:40:48 PM Reply	Minor difference... In all previous conflicts (except WWII...where we actually DID use some similar tactics), we were not fighting an enemy firmly entrenched on our own soil and on the soil of some 60+ other friendly nations. We were not trying to find and deter activities being carried out on our own soil. Don't you think the measures need to be somewhat different? After all...I don't think that the Republican Guard had access to a mail drop in Trenton New Jersey. While I don't agree with all the measures being proposed...your comparison to conflicts of the past is ludicrous (excepting, of course, that you seem to have forgotten just how badly we trounced the civil rights of Japanese-Americans in WWII) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #18,144 by Brandioch 11/13/01 6:27:26 PM Reply	Why not? "Don't you think the measures need to be somewhat different?" No. "After all...I don't think that the Republican Guard had access to a mail drop in Trenton New Jersey." On the other hand, there was nothing preventing them from doing so. Yet no such measures were instated. And while we did round up anyone suspected of Japanese heritage (was this wrong in your opinion), we did not legalize the procedures that we are legalizing now. And if it was wrong to round up the Japanese here, why do we seem to be doing similar things now? To put it another way, Germany had SPIES. Germany had an EMBASSEY. Germany had the finances of a COUNTRY. We fought the Cold War for YEARS. We know that US citizens were turned by the Soviets. Yet we still did not legalize the wiretaps we have now.
Post #18,220 by bepatient 11/14/01 9:35:06 AM Reply	Your decided.. ...lack of grounding in the reality of this situation notwithstanding... On the other hand, there was nothing preventing them from doing so. Yet no such measures were instated. Maybe because they were country sponsored, located in that country...and something along the lines of 6000 miles away. Don't let that bit of real-world information bother you. To put it another way, Germany had SPIES. Germany had an EMBASSEY. Germany had the finances of a COUNTRY. We fought the Cold War for YEARS. We know that US citizens were turned by the Soviets. Yes...we knew all these things...and we also knew that all of those US citizens turned by the Soviets were charged with keeping a low profile, gathering information and supplying that information back to the Soviets. Guess what..some of them were even successful. And NONE OF THEM ever got onto a plane and crashed it into a building. NONE OF THEM were charged with filling a semi full of nitrate based explosives and blowing up the Golden Gate Bridge. NONE of their brethren had been known to strap TNT onto themselves and walk into a pizza shop.... <sarcasm>But other than that...I guess the situation is the same.</sarcasm> You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #18,322 by Brandioch 11/14/01 6:20:09 PM Reply	Reality isn't your forte. "Maybe because they were country sponsored, located in that country...and something along the lines of 6000 miles away. Don't let that bit of real-world information bother you." And I assume the terrorist here were born here, raised by parents who were born here and so on? I didn't think so. If ObL can get an operative here, I'm sure the Germans could have also. In fact, I >KNOW< the Russians had operatives here. ALL THROUGHOUT THE COLD WAR. Yet we still didn't have these laws passed. "Yes...we knew all these things...and we also knew that all of those US citizens turned by the Soviets were charged with keeping a low profile, gathering information and supplying that information back to the Soviets." ??? Bullshit! They sold whatever they could to the Russians. It is amazing that our people never suspected them. And we STILL won. "And NONE OF THEM ever got onto a plane and crashed it into a building." And this is relevent because? "NONE OF THEM were charged with filling a semi full of nitrate based explosives and blowing up the Golden Gate Bridge." And this is relevent because? "NONE of their brethren had been known to strap TNT onto themselves and walk into a pizza shop...." Okay, so you're fixated on individual acts of terrorism. You don't understand that compromising our spy systems or weapons was more important than killing 5000 people (a fraction of the number that die on the roads every year). Gee, because they didn't want to go from a Cold War to a Hot War? Care to give me a fucking estimate of how many US Citizens were killed during WW2? Then why don't you do the math and tell me how many WTC's would have to occure to match that number.
Post #18,395 by bepatient 11/15/01 9:02:42 AM Reply	Never dealt in real estate, eh? You keep ignoring the most important fact.... Location, Location, Location. The only other "hot" war to hit US soil in the past 100 years was WW2. The Japanese hit Pearl Harbor. Now do we need to review just how badly we treated Japanese Americans after that happened? Do you not think the measures were a tad draconian? But wait...we don't put Japanese_Americans in "encampments" anymore...hmmm...wonder if a parallel can be drawn... And...how much impact would wiretapping law changes have really affected anything in ww1, ww2, korea or vietnam? And this current situation is NOT a cold war...it is a hot war...and it was not only declared here, but over the course of at least 2 decades in places like London, Munich, Brussels, Paris...and finally New York. But...you keep on believing that there's no difference between the current situation and any other we've faced before. If the death of 5000 civilians can't convince you of that, then you are a permanently lost cause. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #18,420 by inthane-chan 11/15/01 12:32:28 PM Reply	Historical side note... The Japanese did also take some islands up in Alaska, but very few people really noticed. "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post #18,431 by bepatient 11/15/01 1:47:40 PM Reply	And I'd bet... ...they didn't use landlines, cellphones or email to plan it either ;) You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #18,433 by inthane-chan 11/15/01 1:53:01 PM Reply	You got it. I heard some of the Alaskans felt sorry for them, though, because they were just sitting their freezin' their asses off with nothing to do. So occasionally, they'd just sneak over to the island, fire a few rifle rounds over their heads, and run off laughing. "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post #18,442 by Steve Lowe 11/15/01 2:54:15 PM Reply	Re: Historical side note... Alaska and Hawaii weren't states then, are territories also considered US Soil? ----- Steve
Post #18,459 by Brandioch 11/15/01 5:43:48 PM Reply	Why the switch? So now you're saying that we didn't have those new laws in place because the US wasn't invaded? Not because there weren't spies here. We know there were. Not because US citizens weren't killed. We know they were. But because no foreign agent destroyed a building in the US? So, after surviving things like WWI and WWII and the Cold War and the resources of entire countries being brought against us, we have to start dismantelling our freedoms because some suicide terrorists take out the WTC? That is the kind of logic that I expected. We could handle the KGB. But ObL is too much of a threat.
Post #18,463 by bepatient 11/15/01 6:00:35 PM Reply	Are you really.... ...this dense or do you just play that way for effect. Please tell me what effectiveness wiretapping would have had against the Germans. Against the Vietnamese? Against the Koreans? And...if you think these laws were followed in cases of espionage...do you >really< think that? Anyway, my part in this discussion with you is over... There is no war to compare this against. Just comparing it to other large scale conflicts is ludicrous. The fact that you don't see this...or refuse to acknowledge it...is well...your prerogative, I guess. I can see, however, that there will be nothing gained from this but right-shift You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #18,483 by Brandioch 11/15/01 8:23:51 PM Reply	You left out a few. "Please tell me what effectiveness wiretapping would have had against the Germans. Against the Vietnamese? Against the Koreans?" None. >IF< you only consider them, in their country. By that same token, what use is wiretapping against Osama? Against any of the countries that protect him? Against any country that supports terrorism? "There is no war to compare this against." Why not? We've lost more US citizens in other wars. This is described as a "war". "Just comparing it to other large scale conflicts is ludicrous." Why? "The fact that you don't see this...or refuse to acknowledge it...is well...your prerogative, I guess." Just as it is your perogative to fail to see that measures we didn't use before are being advocated now when the threat is less than before. And that is the truth of the matter. More US citizens will have been killed in WWI or WWII or Korea or Vietnam than will be killed by terrorists. Even when we ran the Japanese-Americans off to camps, we didn't pass laws to tap our own people. We never infringed upon the rights of the majority. Bill says this is only because no one ever hit the continental US (except Japan). Not that they wouldn't (look at Germany bombing England or any other European country). But just because they didn't get around to doing it.
Post #18,484 by wharris2 11/15/01 8:27:01 PM Reply	Wiretap Osama? We have Echelon for that. Oops, I forgot, Echelon doesn't exist. My bad. "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it." -- Donald Knuth
Post #18,485 by bepatient 11/15/01 8:28:54 PM Reply	Yawn You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #19,057 by CRConrad 11/20/01 9:57:22 PM Reply	What a fscking stupid non-response If you don't have anything to say, and can't just shut the fuck up, why don't you admit that you have no reasonable response, for once in a fucking while, BeeP? A stupid "Yawn" certainly doesn't make you look any more right, when it's obvious that you're just plain fucking wrong, you know. This may come as a shock to you, but this isn't the first time you've been wrong and Khasimioch right. Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #19,094 by bepatient 11/21/01 9:39:06 AM Reply	To a continued idiotic line of reasoning. And the fact that you consider this situation in any way similar to WWI, II, Korea, or Vietnam... Well, I guess some folks just don't get it. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #19,167 by Ashton 11/21/01 4:06:22 PM Reply	C'mon BeeP - missing all the common denominators? And the fact that you consider this situation in any way similar to WWI, II, Korea, or Vietnam... Offhand I would say the common milieu for any State action transcends the always peculiar details of any next one: At root: the bases for there being this particular State! Not merely the documents, Constitution and related - but our putative ethos? and the priorities which we preach at home and abroad (whether the preached-to think our sermons hypocritical? (sometimes) or merely sanctimonious! (often)). We certainly cannot claim that ~we are inured to what others think of us (though many believe we Are inured to whatever it is - which others think, period). We live! to preach our magnificence and.. deem that our prosperity is related to Our Goodness. Est-ce que ce n'est pas vrai, mon cher? Thus, all the above is mere rhetoric we amuse ourselves with, in strifeless intervals. It is in stressful periods ONLY - when we demonstrate what we Really believe. Like now. Like Ashcroft and the hubris AND fearfulness in the now litany of new Official Laws for the Millennium: in form of dictats er Executive Orders - freed from those messy constraints, tiresome details like debate, public discussion, apprising of legislators, legislation by Legislators - opinion of judiciary. Etc. Oh.. because we are in a hurry! Just as we were in a hurry, hours after after 12/7/41. Yet then, while we exaggerated the guesstimate of the loyalties of US Citizens of Japanese descent (also Italians, less so -oddly- Germans amongst us) -- at no time did we conceive of the Draconian hysterical mass of abortive intrusions into personal Rights, as are occurring in the present contretemps. Common denominators? saboteurs (real and imagined) - looking Just Like Us\ufffd or.. different (too). Unknown 'plans', schemes, capacity! to commit nefarious deeds .. like maybe blowing up [all the same stuff as now]. Need more common denominators of all the past events and our responses? {sheesh} Yeah.. this one is Different all right: as are the wildest of imaginations, Each time. Only This time: we are willing to forget at lightning pace (da capo) At root: the bases for there being* this particular State!* Kill Those to save That, but please to call it, "military necessity". Again. A. Imagine.. if Economics Principles finally ever won completely? over umm National Principles (if we still have any left next month). Imagine that world. {shudder}
Post #19,169 by bepatient 11/21/01 4:16:29 PM Reply	I can't help blindness. Nor do I intend to carry this argument alot further. If you cannot judge the differences in a) the perceived enemy and b) the extreme pervasiveness of wired/wireless communications as a support infrstructure for networked organizations....well theres not alot of point in discussing why monitoring capability is more important now than it was before. You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! _{Laurie Anderson} [link\|mailto:bepatient@aol.com\|BePatient]
Post #18,505 by Simon_Jester 11/15/01 11:33:54 PM Reply	actually...not that I care... but wiretapping (and code breaking) was an integral part of WWII. Enigma, Flower Code, Navajo talkers and all that. Of course, flip side is that this is not a declared war and WWII was. (I know, details, details)
Post #18,396 by admin 11/15/01 9:26:59 AM Reply	FWIW And I assume the terrorist here were born here, raised by parents who were born here and so on? I don't have the cite, but at least one of the terrorists that has been mentioned in the news lately (I don't recall if he was on one of the planes, or just associated in another way) was born in Illinois. :-) Regards, -scott anderson
Post #18,101 by screamer 11/13/01 3:42:25 PM Reply	Clarification... The problem with a document such as our sacred constitution, is that usually it is used interchangeably with Bill of Rights, but I will remind you that the last president (a lawyer, no less) couldn't even determine what the word "is" means... and they call Bush Jr. stupid? And "rights" are relative as well. What happened to the rights of smokers under Clinton? Oh, you don't smoke, right? What, smokers have no rights? And what about due process of law (a large part of the Constitution... Clinton ran totally roughshod over all those "meaningless" paragraphs... As far as the Bill of Rights (so there's no confusion), Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Amendment II A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. Amendment III No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. Amendment V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in theland or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. Amendment VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence. Amendment VII In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. Amendment VIII Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. Amendment IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. Amendment X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. ******************************************************************** Now, I take it that you are concerned with Amendment IV? Define to me the words "unreasonable" and "probable cause"... Then, while your at it, glance at the 1'st amendment... tell me why prayer in school is not guaranteed by that one. Or the right to a tank by the 2nd... OHHH! You interpret? So your precious Bill of Rights are OPEN TO INTERPRETATION? Get my point, lefty? Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,104 by Silverlock 11/13/01 3:51:30 PM Reply	Classic use of fallacy Which fallacy is left as an exercise for the student. For help in understanding what a fallacy is, go [link\|http://www.primenet.com/~byoder/fallazoo.htm\|here]. How to mangle the truth; Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
Post #18,117 by screamer 11/13/01 4:21:04 PM Reply	Classic use of phallus... For a brain. heh, heh, Beavis, he said phallus... WTF are you talking about? Writing notes to yourself? Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,122 by Silverlock 11/13/01 4:29:50 PM Reply	Consistency not one of your strong points? You joined this thread with a rant that included the line "I'm really tired of this "style" of "debate", ie. It was the Clinton modus operandi - attack character of anyone you disagree with." Well maybe. I notice you don't metion insults as something you're tired of. And your use of them indicates you do like them. So, in the spirit of the game... your signature pic suits you well. How to mangle the truth; Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
Post #18,132 by Ashton 11/13/01 5:14:09 PM Reply	Nahh. the pic is an insult to Zippy Who has a deeper comprehension of the Murican Zoo than most folk around, whereas The Scream King.. prefers EZ black/white doggerel and, apparently - the waving of flags to exorcise embarrassing Conundrums* in the Zoo cages. * like that National Bird Conundrum: the One-Two Party with Two Right Wings -- him so funny that Bird -- flies only in a downward spiral. Notice it nearing the ground? Please apologize to Zippy; his feelings are easily hurt by wrongful associations! All for (1, 2, ..3) Unity Now ... Card-carrying member, Zippy Is Tops Society
Post #18,191 by screamer 11/13/01 11:36:10 PM Reply	Intelligence not one of yours? I also joined this "rant" with a lot of other "stuff" too... To which you reply to some mythical "students" (implying that scholarly folks will see some mythical fallacy in my post?) No, I insulted you because your last post is an insult to rhetoric. You declare there is a fallacy, you don't point it out, you instead choose to imply (to some mythical students - like this is some type of 101 Rhetoric class!) that... You have exemplarily displayed the attitude that I have come to detest from the current crop of so called liberals... The condescending attitude - "you're wrong... Trust me, I know, 'cause I'm really really smart. I won't bother to tell you why, that's below me" Which pretty much summarizes the entire state of the Democratic party these days. We know what's best for everyone. Trust us. Send us your money and we'll do all the social engineering for you all... 'Cause we're smart and you're not... Any other questions? Class dismissed. Right? Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,216 by Silverlock 11/14/01 8:39:16 AM Reply	Evidently not I keep replying to your trolliing. How to mangle the truth; Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
Post #18,231 by screamer 11/14/01 10:14:59 AM Reply	I'm not done with you yet. And yes, I am trolling. And I perceive it as a reply to your troll about As(s)croft and "students" and other vacuous comments paid for and contributed by the left... LOOKY HERE... You are in the War On Terrorism forum. You come out railing about your Chicken Licken fear about the Fourth Amendment. I point out that the Constitution (or more specifically, the Bill of Rights) is not a static document. That it has been, is and will be open to interpretation. I don't ask you where the hell you've been hiding your head through the last twenty years during the erosion of same Ammendment by our "War on Drugs" or the erosion of perceived civil rights with our wars on Poverty, Smoking, etc... It just seemed to me that you were parroting some talk show host (Bill Maher, maybe?) with his condescending left wing crap... What I have seen is a consistent pattern from your posts to put out some kind of agenda that I've seen before. I am willing to listen if you will throw something substantive on the table. NOW... The sight you posted is interesting and yes, rhetoric must appeal to ethos, pathos, logos, something... And logic should be, well, logical. What I fail to see is what specific fallacy are you pointing out in my post that would do anything to deter from my main point which is that the Constitution is not nor has ever been a static document... This was important for me to establish to try to ascertain why you are now so upset with this current (perceived) assault. Instead, you chose to hide behind some childish (condescending, too) duck with your "fallacy" post and link... So, maybe your not a paid shill for the Democratic Party, and maybe we just got off on the wrong foot... I ask you again, what is your major concern with this particular erosion of the Fourth Amendment? Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,236 by screamer 11/14/01 10:37:29 AM Reply	One more thing... What is the TRUTH? You keep accusing me of "mangling" it. What is the truth? And just what exactly makes you believe that you have some magical path to it that I don't? Could it be that maybe you THINK you know the "truth" about whatever it is your think you know the "truth" about, but I THINK you may be wrong... Or do you consider things like that in "truthworld"? If the "truth" means that the current administration is further eroding the Fourth Ammendment because of the current fear of terrorism, then I think there is no argument. If you think the "truth" is that this only happens when Repos are in charge (which you imply), then, I THINK you are incorrect... Which is what I've been trying to point out. If you think the "truth" is that you can do anything constructive ABOUT it, by a juvenile mispelling of Ashcroft's name and calling the President by an initial,etc.. on an INET forum and parroting some Democratic mindspeak... well, then maybe, just maybe you'd be barking up the wrong tree as well. Which again, I suggested to you in the "if your so smart..." remark. And if the truth is that in "truthworld" noone ever calls anyone out to question, then welcome to America and the Internet... This is where I am coming from... Have I clearly identified why I am screaming at you? Maybe I'm too sensitive? Yeah... Right... Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,247 by Silverlock 11/14/01 11:27:24 AM Reply	Ok, I'll explain As far as your comment re. "mangling the truth". Not directed at you at all. It's part of my sig. On to my comments regarding the constitution. The term "gutting" is, I admit, an exageration. But not much of one. The fallacy I refer to is false analogy, goes like this- Person A does a very bad thing. I point out that person A has done a very bad thing Person B does a somewhat bad thing you deny the thing done by person A is very bad by pointing out that person B has done the somewhat bad thing. Let alone the relative severity of the bad things done, how does the actions of another excuse the actions of the first? Following that logic could lead to things like, "You can't put me in jail for murder your Honor because you failed to put that person in jail for theft." Now, you may not think that that the recent actions of McCongress and Asscroft (Yeah it's juvenile, so what? I'm insulting them, not you) are any more significant than other actions taken in the past. I do think these are significant. There you go. My last attempt at civility with you. The ball is in your court. How to mangle the truth; Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
Post #18,260 by screamer 11/14/01 12:41:33 PM Reply	We're getting there... Sorry about the noise about the sig... I've had major problems with sigs myself... I'm all for civility as well. I am glad that you have admitted that your initial post had some exagerration. As well, I felt that the "tone" (implying that our current government hates freedom worse than the Taliban - is a slight exagerration as well :-) )... All water under the proverbial bridge now. Now, I'll admit that I "loaded" statements in my following posts. I was intending to first take apart the rhetoric, then lead to the meat, which is entirely important. I failed miserably... such is life. Getting back to the Fourth Amendment, I absolutely agree with your premise that it is being "challenged" again with the current crop o' politicos... I just felt it necessary to point out that we truly have been through this kind of "law by reaction" in the past and when cooler heads prevail, then the changes are rescinded. That is my hope in any event. I have been railing long and hard about the protection of the Bill of Rights and how it has been "stretched", beginning with the sixties (probably before that, but I wasn't around then!). The creation of agencies with legislative and oversight power (never a part of the Constitution). The legal system with too many laws, lawyers and not enough sense to dispense common justice... I could go on :-) What is important to keep in mind is that people in this country truly are scared, liberals and conservatives alike. Noone (most probably) could have conceived of commercial jets being flown into the World Trade Center or the ramifications that it would have on Arabs, suspected terrorists, etc... It stands to reason, IMHO, that doing nothing is NOT better than attempting to find these types of folks. It does require a tradeoff. How far we are willing to trade our privacy for security is a matter to be played out. I honestly didn't think that our government would "stretch" the Fourth (and Fifth for that matter) as much as it did fighting the "war on drugs"... It did. So there is plenty of reason for our concern. We added a new agency for Homeland Security... That got the hairs on the back of my liberal neck standing straight up... Hell, these guys and we the people are all "winging it" right now. There is no precedent for the current scenario saving the old Peter Sellers "Mouse that Roared" movie. But then, they didn't really attack anything... For what it's worth, I am very concerned about our Fourth Amendment rights (as I understand them) and took offense (rightly or wrongly) by how I feel they are being "politicized" currently. Whenever issues become politicized, there is also a tendency for them to become marginalized as well. I feel they are too important to become just another blip on the American commercial network... Perhaps what we, the concerned citizenry, should be asking for is that any modifications to the Bill during wartime are up for immediate review as soon as the crisis is passed? Then we can clearly scrutinize how badly we've jeopardized individual liberties. In other words, I like what you're saying, but I don't like how you're saying it... Critics voice, take your choice... You have no problem with me. Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,267 by Silverlock 11/14/01 1:11:15 PM Reply	Refreshing I just love it when a thread is saved from the flames. I think we aren't too far apart on this. My original point (however badly expressed) was in the nature of a logic exercise. I regret the implication that I think our gov is worse than the Taliban. However, I strongly disagree with your contention that the current inroads on civil liberties are simply more of the same that others have done in the past. I think this is much more serious. With that in mind, the point I was trying to make was, given the rhetoric of our administration regarding the aims of the terrorists, we have already lost the "war on terrorism" due to our actions in response. How to mangle the truth; Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
Post #18,278 by screamer 11/14/01 2:27:46 PM Reply	Point taken... And I'm no prophet. I am guardedly optimistic that this is more of the same... We can agree to disagree on the "degree" of severity of this current power grab, and we can agree to agree that we must try to diligently guard our rights to unlawful search and seizure and due process... I'm ready to put this to rest if you are. Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,280 by Silverlock 11/14/01 2:37:39 PM Reply	Putting it to rest. Complete agreement. (about putting it to rest. Other things? We'll see.) :-) How to mangle the truth; Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
Post #18,299 by Ashton 11/14/01 4:05:20 PM Reply	PS to both. Mouse That Roared !! Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. I'd forgotten that masterpiece.. Would that 'we-all' had not: there is no finer pomposity-buster than Sellers in a good vehicle - and that one was a Ferrari Testa Rossa on nitro. The Q Bomb says it all. Nice to see Sweet Reason is alive and well at, at least zIWE. I too shall attempt next to avoid merely replying in kind to shibboleths and, if I can - point out as well: the sight of a process doomed to doggerel by M$-like initial Awful McDesign. (repeat after self the mantra.. scale and relativity, scale and relativity, scale and relativity..) Peace. We have to become accustomed (but not inured) to the Interesting Times - and remain vigilant of the BS of all the bounders, each looking for opportunities, whatever sewn-on label they sport. No? Ashton
Post #18,301 by Silverlock 11/14/01 4:33:19 PM Reply	Pomposity buster Being There. Sellers most understated role. And an absolute delight to watch. The cluelessness of the politicians/media/business leaders reacting to this "Gardner" is hilarious. The Shirly MacClaine masturbation scene is especially rich in wry humor. Highly recommended to any with an appreciation of subtlety in film. I've got to get the book to see how much is left out of the movie. How to mangle the truth; Have it reported by any major U.S. media outlet.
Post #18,310 by Ashton 11/14/01 5:02:36 PM Reply	Yes.. of Course! Timeless and entirely current Maybe more than Mouse. Everyone got to watch close-ups of most congresscritters recently - in that orchestrated Let's Get Horny Billy rewrite of The Ten Commandments Live! on color Tee Vee! Permanently ingrained: those faces, that High Dudgeon, that McSincerity! er hypocrisy dripping onto the expensive carpeting. Mr. YouthfulIndiscretionHyde presiding with requisite silver-hair and avuncular epithets. Cackle.. glorp.. One of the few videos I bought. Thanks - have to view it again soon, with a cohort. Chauncy Gardner Lives! He lives in the hearts and minds of every little girl at Christmas time.. Yes! Virginia - there IS a Chauncey Gardner !!! Ashton ain't us homo-saps a Riot!? RIP Mr. Sellers
Post #18,312 by screamer 11/14/01 5:13:28 PM Reply	Okay, Okay.... I'll bite... The Party is the ultimate in my view... Birdy num nums, birdy num nums... Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,372 by boxley 11/14/01 10:40:35 PM Reply	nope there is a girl in my soup and dont forget leu licunce pour la mahenky thanx, bill tshirt front "born to die before I get old" thshirt back "fscked another one didnja?"
Post #18,326 by jb4 11/14/01 6:38:22 PM Reply	If you can't keep up, take notes. From your latest noodle-logic rant: What happened to the rights of smokers under Clinton? Actually, the same thing that happened to the "rights" of smokers under George I and Ronald McDonald. BTW, the fallacy is that smoking is a privilege, not a right, Butthead. Therefore, there is no "right" to smoke. Just as there is no right to drive. Hope you were paying attention this time...there will be a quiz... jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #18,398 by screamer 11/15/01 9:58:54 AM Reply	Exqueeze me... Noodle man... I have the right to do anything I damn well please until someone tells me it's illegal... It was perfectly fine and dandy to smoke anywhere until the late '80's and '90's. While you may not perceive that as a right, you'd be wrong. I could smoke cigs in public until the Bush/Clinton admin if I so desired. Reason it was brought up ... as it has been before, where the hell were you when this right was taken away? It probably didn't bother you 'cause you didn't smoke... You claim you have the "right" not to breath second hand smoke where it never existed before... OH? By what magic "right" did this happen? Which is exactly what is happening now with the perceived "rights" of people to privacy - albeit that privacy is more universal and sexy than smoking... See my point. Or do you want me to go through this again but more slowly... Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,436 by jb4 11/15/01 2:16:30 PM Reply	Re: Exqueeze me... Noodle man... So you claim to have the right to drive a car (or an 18-wheeler, for that matter)? jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #18,440 by inthane-chan 11/15/01 2:43:32 PM Reply	I guess that also extends the right... ...to own, concentrate, and release into the environment substances that are toxic to others? "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post #18,449 by screamer 11/15/01 4:09:14 PM Reply	You got it pal... now give me your car keys... Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,452 by inthane-chan 11/15/01 4:28:54 PM Reply	Which is why... ...we have emissions tests here in Washington state as a prerequisite to relicensing, and California is forcing automakers to move towards zero-emission vehicles. My father chain-smoked while I was growing up. I was frickin' miserable the whole time, and couldn't stand it. He finally quit when I was around 20. If you have a right to blow smoke in my face, (smoking not being an essential service - transportation is a HELL of a lot more essential than smoking) I have a right to urinate in your beer. So, where do you keep your supply? "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post #18,456 by screamer 11/15/01 5:18:20 PM Reply	Which is absolute and total bullshit... you have no "right" to do anything if we view the world from your myopic perspective. Everything is a priviledge unless YOU deem it okay? Is this how it works? Or are YOU now gonna hide behind the "oppressive majority" to claim your rights? If so, then screw you when you need my help... Isn't this how it works? My dad chainsmoked too. I hated it. I also hate loud music in cars. I also hate people who wear too much perfume. I also hate people who don't open doors for other people. You know what, so fucking what? When you use legislation to cram stupid laws down people's throats because of the way the political wind is blowing, then you end up giving up rights... Again, which is my point. If you are not willing to defend the unpopular ones, where is the consistency in that. Why do I care if YOUR privacy is infringed? I mean, I have nothing to hide, let 'em bug me all they want... In any event, if you can't see the correlation, I'm not going to belittle this any further. And as far as you beer pissing, I'd just throw it in your face anyway... Then blow smoke on you. Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,457 by inthane-chan 11/15/01 5:29:54 PM Reply	No, I see the correlation. Oliver Wendell Holmes said, "Your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins." Now, if smoking did no harm to others, then by all means, I'd be all for you comitting suicide in whatever way you choose necessary. And I don't advocate creating "smoking laws" - the idea of creating a targeted law is exactly the kind of thing that gets us all in a lot of deep shit. We create laws that apply to "all cases, except where noted in subsections b., c., d. f.42, and this other law over here." Get back to basics, I say. Cut out all the crap, and instead pass a single environmental law that defines a maximum acceptible carcinogen output. I'll admit I'm pulling this idea out of my nether regions right now, so I'm not really sure how we'd benchmark that, but I'm sure something fairly reasonable could be dreamed up. Then apply that standard across the board. You drive? It applies to you. You smoke? It applies to you as well. You piss in somebody's beer? Well, you've got other problems, in addition to the carcinogen law. :) I'd love to have a solution without laws. The problem is, we're human beings. Anarchy is a great state, if all you've got is totally enlightened beings, which our species seems to be lacking in. It might very well be that the carcinogen output from cars would completely blow away second-hand cigarrete smoke. I'm fine by that, and quite frankly, I wouldn't be surprised at all. Cigarretes do make me personally ill, and maybe specifically attacking them is wrong - but saying that we have a "right to smoke" without regards to those around us IMO is wrong. "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post #18,464 by screamer 11/15/01 6:14:17 PM Reply	It's becoming a lovefest... :-) And yes, it would be great if we could get an "enlightened public" to be mindful of others all the time at all places. Having said all of this, I'm glad that the smoking bans are in place as well 'cause there's nothing to more annoying than walking into a smoke filled room to eat (or drink - something I personally don't do). As well, having played the "bar scene" for many years with rock bands, etc... smoking is even the more personally offensive. I've have been smoke free for about 4 months now (Zyban - which may explain my mood swings!) and this is a very touchy subject for me. The point I'm getting at though is that every little liberty that we the people are willing to cede for comfort or security, add up. Kind of like the jokes about congress "a billion here and a billion there, pretty soon your talking about real money..." I'm getting so verbose lately thought that I'm boring myself... As stated earlier, I hope that the Silverlocks of the world are able to keep civil liberties on the "front burner" and believe it or not, I'm trying to help out by tempering the message (a political filter if you will) so it can't be easily dismissed as being just more partisan bickering... Oh, and as a personal favor, can we agree to poopcan the beer thing. It makes me ill every time you say it... It just confirms one of my greatest fears concerning the color and smell of American beer... Please? Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,476 by inthane-chan 11/15/01 7:11:27 PM Reply	No more beer comments, I assure you. :P "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post #18,493 by inthane-chan 11/15/01 9:36:31 PM Reply	But ya know... ...it does make me wonder: Are you more afraid I'll piss in your beer, or that you'll realize that me pissing in your beer would dramatically increase the quality of it? (Evil grin) "He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you." - Friedrich Nietzsche
Post #18,470 by jb4 11/15/01 6:48:10 PM Reply	WARNING - red-herring alert! Instead of: [...]you have no "right" to do anything if we view the world from your myopic perspective. Everything is a priviledge [sic] unless YOU deem it okay? Is this how it works? Or are YOU now gonna hide behind the "oppressive majority" to claim your rights? If so, then screw you when you need my help... Isn't this how it works? How' bout you answer the question: Where's your beer supply? jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #18,451 by screamer 11/15/01 4:17:34 PM Reply	You don't need a license to smoke... But since we brought this up, the topic of what is a "right" or a "priviledge" is a good one to have. Probably not in the War On Terrorism forum, but good nonetheless... If you are asking about the right to drive, no, I'd say that you have a right to receive a license if you meet the requirements and follow the rules of your state. But since we have juxtaposed cars into this smoking equation, you still have the right to pollute my air with yours... Much more toxically (a word?) than any second hand smoke can... so by all rights, and using the same logic as was used to ban smoking in public, we should be able to ban motor vehicles for the "second hand smoke" they produce, right? Oh, that would be umpopular, wouldn't it... Politics... Go figure. Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,472 by jb4 11/15/01 6:50:21 PM Reply	Actually, I agree... I would support a law prohibiting driving a polluting vehicle indoors.... jb4 (Resistance is not futile...)
Post #18,481 by Ashton 11/15/01 8:11:31 PM Reply	Or: Everything not prohibited is compulsory.
Post #18,131 by Ashton 11/13/01 4:57:30 PM 11/13/01 5:03:59 PM Reply	Jeez Scream-ful One - I be so ashamed So ALL ISSUES devolve to the Democrat Repub Mutual epithet - izzat it? And natch - when a 'Demo' refers to the er {Constitution}, why it ain't perzackly the SameThing.. as when a Repub refers to the [Constitution]. ..pondering.. mulling And since One of these (members of the One Murican Party with Two Right Wings) must be Right. T'other (imaginary party) must be Wrong. ..cogitating.. cognitive dissonance occurring.. .. .. ..Eureka! How could I have missed!.. of course, these New Laws are being passed for my own comfort and security! I see I must Get with the Program. Again: [link\|http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2001/11/12/tomo/index.html\|My Country Daft or Lugubrious] Thanks for pointing that out. Makes all discussion next - so much EZier. Actually - makes discussion superfluous. A. PS Oh Master(de)bator with Word-thingies: How unusually clever of you, to portray Clinton's self-defense intentional confounding of a legal atrocity; done by lawyers as commit legal atrocities: in the Language of legal atrocity iself! Gosh.. I guess you missed the irony of a palpably Political Effort to reverse an election: and Clinton's possibly understanding the Constitution with more depth .. at least than: what you can muster here. Situational ethics is so comforting to the afflicted. Ah yes -- you sure made That Point clear. To the reader. Edited by Missing User 70 Nov. 13, 2001, 05:03:59 PM EST Expand All History
Post #18,184 by screamer 11/13/01 11:26:12 PM Reply	My, my, my... To you, good sir, I will take time to respond. As you may know, I am keenly aware of the the Murican zoo. I am also aware of the "so called left" putting words in my and other "liberals" mouths running lockstep with the mindspeak of the Katie Couric's of the world... Sorry boys, but the show is over. Some things are much more important than pseudo-intellectual tripe such as the Chicken Lickin, Goosy Loosy nonsense that the fucking demogogues... er demigods... er Democrats have been espousing for the last 20 years... Yes, I've been keeping track. It annoys me much more than the Republican mindspeak because it is so much winier and childish... I didn't get my way, so I'm gonna keep crying and screaming... Something for you to ponder, Ashton, as you've seen me be just as merciless towards the Republicans... Could it be that maybe, just maybe, your ox is now conceivably starting to be gored and you and your until recently happy ideological cohorts are just now starting to see the power gone mad corruption in Washington? But that doesn't mean that others weren't being gored before the "unholy election"... Think for a minute. Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "Nietzsche has an S in it" Celina Jones
Post #18,205 by Ashton 11/14/01 4:07:30 AM Reply	Not my ox. That died some time ago. I find the entire pabulum of Murican political cacophony as ludicrous as, apparently - you do. In the spirit of our polar national non-debates.. I just take each asserted POV as a monad. Don't try to keep a running tally but - yes, usually your little notes of cheer are mixed with less straw than above. Whad'ya do - install XP by mistake, and can't get rid of it? Still, carping about Bill C's use of BS lawyer-speak, amidst a patently political attempt at a coup d'etat (Portuguese for, tryin to run the sucker outta town).. this overseen by one of the outstanding sexual hypocrites around, Mr. Youthful Indiscretion Himself.. well, that's kinda a red flag. Still, the larger humor is on the larger scale: if there were ever a more juvenile, Puritan-besotted sexually hypocritical society to-the-core than this: nominations? So at least there was daily comic relief as these folk tried to stir up the sheep to evict this.. this.. typical Murican male! - for acting out what so many wished they could manage. As in hee hee. Well, I'd like to argue that the concern for the general social welfare, rights of the working person (especially since the assassination + self-immolation of the trade unions): is squarely in the Democrat court. Can't though - to obtain power Bill C. had to adopt first the speech patterns of the terminally misanthropic, then - after ill-advised forays into military sex and pompous misreading of the power of the insurance and medical Corps: he lost that overdue reform for us all, too. When his sl. rt. of center is called 'Liberal' and Bushie's far-right current influence group is called 'Conservative' - WTF does anything mean anymore? (what does 'mean' mean?) So I have no idea what a W2K 'Democrat' might do, to find a leader for 2004 - or even much idea how many actual Democrats remain here. All I know for sure is that 'Democrats' aren't Democrats and Republicans aren't .. 'Conservative' but are tossing red meat to their most reactionary wing; mixing-in theology wherever they can get away with it - and are more than happy to even increase Corporate power to fund the next election. (Theirs natch). Guess it'll still be: a pseudo-Democrat over a Reactionary masquerading as a Conservative. Every time. OR: another Wrestler! Couldn't possibly do worse. I have no solutions for redesign, because any I come up with - require an adult informed citizenry. What we have is a juvenile, disinformed mass of mouth-breathing consumers. Since they aren't 'safe' for ideas - ya sure as hell can't make ideas safe for them. Corporate knows what's best for Corporate. Any questions? or do we gotta return to all Monica all the time? (forgot name of the missing surrogate du jour, but we haven't heard much about her Svengali, Condit - since we got a real Issue to nationally weasel to death with platitudes) (Who's Katie Couric - izzat comm'l TeeVee or somethin? ;-) Ashton now if we could get the whole population away from their TeeVees to practice thrashing stuff out too, why by '04 - Naaah. By then- we might have to ask the guy with the armband for permission. Blockenf\ufffdhrer?
Post #18,229 by screamer 11/14/01 9:57:19 AM Reply	L&COL... That's laughing and crying... As you have correctly surmised, yes, I have recently installed XP and do want it to go away :-) (actually not "so" awful). It is a good Quake III server though, so I may let it lay around for a while. Katie Couric is the (still) perky one that used to sit next to Brant/Bryant (sp?) (now Matt anyway) to tell the morning hypnotized what to think. And going with the new tagline, "you know that the hypnotized never lie - do you?" Having cleared those things up, I am growing tired of the drone of DemoRepo buzz marketing on any medium. This place was sort of my last respite. Now... even on the War On Terrorism forum, I'm getting (paid?) political adds from the left... It wouldn't be so awful if it weren't for the fact that I have been screaming for 20 odd years about the drug laws and the way THEY have been destroying the Fourth... Terrorists/Drug Dealers... next? Car dealers? This type of Rip Van Winkle gestalt just sort of smells of political sell sell sell to me. I, of course, could be wrong, but I am willing to take my First Amen right (praise...) to ferret out what I perceive as bullshit. Now, "I" feel better... Just a few thoughts, Screamer "I'll tip my hat to the new constitution, take a bow for the new revolution, smile and grin at the change all around, pick up my guitar and play, just like yesterday..." P. Townshend "You know that the hypnotized never lie" P. Townshend "Do you?" P. Townshend
Post #18,307 by Ashton 11/14/01 4:48:00 PM Reply	Will be on same side of barricades.. Yes.. the War 0n ___ is such a Popular Murican EZ-alternative to profound thought, debate on any issue. Hey! we declared war! - now we can let the &%#@ Marines handle it, and go back to sleep: the cheeldrun will be safe! (except from us, of course). I'd give the War on Poverty somewhat higher marks. Johnson was perhaps the Master politico of our time; knew where the bodies were buried, and the intimate strains of personal madness within ALL the heavy lifters (and even me-toos). While his motive was surely somewhat ~personal legacy (how could it not be?), I think he was sorely stung by the disdain and mawkishness of the Kennedy clan - who unwisely dismissed him as a rustic buffoon. LBJ was nothing if he wasn't smart - and he knew fully how any efforts to actually address er 'peoples needs'!, was an alien concept to the c-critters. Etc. You are of course entirely correct about the prior erosion of lots of principles < 9/11. But I'd see that Mouse That Roared* and raise you with a pair of Duesys: Babbitt, and It Can't Happen Here. Believe Sinclair Lewis was our homegrown de Tocqueville (maybe augment that with Graham Greene, In the American Grain for advanced divination?). 'We' are in fact intellectually lazy (even anti-) as a matter of preference - for simplistic fixes to highly interrelated giant Problems. We flush our problems down the toilet whenever we can - surely our most popular 'solution'. The Drug War proves: the current crop of 'consumers' hasn't an iota of comprehension.. of the mechanics of Prohibition and why it failed, would fail thus Why: This Too shall pass - after Enough cousins are doing 40 years, for wanting to alter Their Own\ufffd &%$& minds (to escape the unutterable banality of the Murica we have let the Corporations 'build' with our ovine complicity). I spit on the graves (present and future) of the illiterate MBA/CPA-circumscribed entrepreneurs and their Marketing mouth-breathers, so typified by the recently deceased MeMeMe.com in(s)anity. Babies playin Greed The Game\ufffd. Talk 'bout yer virtual Reality.. May they be slowly asphyxiated by masses of ground-up $1000 bills dropping slowly into open throats - as, staked in prone position: they must listen to Corp-CDs of cacophonous sounds (at 90 dBm) as are sold to the grazing sheep, to keep them disoriented. Also smells: of frying burgers with double-bacon. And disco/exercise videos. Well, so much for the mild solutions.. Bumper sticker seen: Die Yuppie Scum! (Another wimpy moderate.) Ashton at least we'll soon know Why things will next occur (?) .. things fall apart .. the center cannot hold (We got such a good price - we sold it All)
Post #18,339 by CRConrad 11/14/01 7:54:14 PM Reply	Hey - <lightbulb on> - does this mean the expression... Ashton uses a spelling I haven't seen before: But I'd see that Mouse That Roared and raise you with a pair of Duesys: ..."That's a doozy!" refers / originally referred to a car?!? (Brand name used as a symbolic expression of "excellence", like?) That it actually means -- or used to mean -- "That's a Duesenberg!"...? Cool! Ya learn something new every day. Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Comes Ever Closer To Knowing Fucking Everything
Post #18,343 by Ashton 11/14/01 8:14:49 PM Reply	Ya gotta watch that incipient Alzheimers.. Twas in fact thee thyself who er emended my scrofulous error of using Deusy, reminding me 'twas Duesenberg! (least I didn't say, Deusenburg). And while assuredly pronounced Doozy, I feel that proper accuracy for a {sniff} now fading Marque is de rigeur.. a Marque unknown to latest crop of Yahoos lusting after copycat homogenized Logos with interchangeable bodies attached, that is. (I can only vaguely recall seeing it in print, but would bet 10:1 it was indeed spelled 'Duesy' - I'd remember the post-modern abortion flag.. which Doozy would have evoked in my nascent brain as large as a planet.. I would!) Natch too, we of the Cisitalia Owners Club possess much finer sensibilities and wisdom, except wehn/sic we transpose ue and stuff. The Man Who Fills in the Blanks for The Man Knowing Fucking-near Everything
Post #18,345 by Ashton 11/14/01 8:18:01 PM Reply	Er Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle.. Cackle..
Post #18,533 by CRConrad 11/16/01 9:13:21 AM Reply	I think that was only the whole word I saw then? Or perhaps the discussion was already so car-oriented that if you used the short form, it was "too obviously" a nickname for the car-building brothers? Either way, I don't think the connection to the idiomatic expression for "Great!" had occurred to me before. Couldn't swear to it, though... Indeed, Alzheimer is the final Nemesis of us all -- if Murphy doesn't get us, he will! Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #18,585 by Ashton 11/16/01 3:41:36 PM Reply	Heh.. forgot what -- er, what you said is prolly correct :-)
Post #18,597 by CRConrad 11/16/01 7:27:43 PM Reply	Not that we should... Either way, I don't think the connection to the idiomatic expression* for "Great!" had occurred to me before.* ...regard that connection as fully established -- or should we? I was mostly just speculating, you know; much of what "occurs" to one as "obvious, in hindsight" turns out not to be so obvious at all, but just plain wrong. Anybody know which on-line dictionary to turn to for etymologies of outdated slang expressions? Christian R. Conrad The Man Who Knows Fucking Everything
Post #19,032 by Ashton 11/20/01 8:47:50 PM Reply	Not sure what you're unsure about. Also: need New Word! What I can report from childhood memory is that, "That's a Duesy" (perhaps often misspelled as Doozy or other? too young to know that at time) - indeed meant Great! or to translate for our newcomers: Kewl as replaced Rad ... bitchin .. and all the serial attempts to create a new Word-def to own for just one's peer group. Pretty sure I used it well before realizing it was about That Car - though pretty early on, I did find out about the real Duesys: them was bitchin! (with 19\ufffd gas) {sigh} Now I'm looking for a New word-def to encapsulate our Renegade Attorney General Ashcroft, as he abrogates new powers to his Exec Group, almost daily. Something perhaps hinting at the ease with which he is also so-far not much opposed in this dismantling of various rights, etc. Something of the droll casuistry of say, Satisfiction (IIRC - someone's typo which rang huge gongs here: possibly it describes the ersatz feeling of having watched infotainment? or had to hear an entire Ad run through? Or bought most any '80s hunk of Detroit Iron? .. or ever believed any single phrase from Redmond - for an entire minute) So any ideas? - something suggesting duplicity, sanctimony, spin, nefarious sub-plot and overall: disingenuousness via a Patriotic rubric. Guess I'll post this in Politics forum - everybody loves a Contest. Winner gets: attribution and a free \ufffd Cheers, Ashton Linguistics Ltd. Don't like the sound of 'bad' ? We'll make it sound like 'good'
Post #19,038 by a6l6e6x 11/20/01 9:18:33 PM Reply	Ashcroft has at least a temporary setback. [link\|http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Assisted-Suicide.html\|NY Times: Oregon.] A federal judge on Tuesday extended a court order that has temporarily blocked a move by the U.S. government to dismantle the nation's only law allowing physician-assisted suicide. Checks and balances in action. Alex Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. -- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
Post #19,046 by Ashton 11/20/01 9:46:09 PM Reply	The mob is very loud, though. A small step for a man a giant backwards leap for Muricankind, swaddled in the required Patriot mouthings. Will it work again as it has so often worked? Will it take a few months, years - a decade? - to unDo it? We are such babies at self-government -- care to guess how many around you could even ID the Bill of Rights' contents? (the sad test has been done many times) Stay tuned. PS - he'll soon end-run around all physicians and kill Med Marijuana next - bet? Hey Gerard: is he still Da Man? (all misunderstood and unfairly accused of: losing his last election to a dead man?) He did, you know - in MO. Where they know who he be. And they be 'conservative of Their Stuff there' too. A.
Post #19,060 by CRConrad 11/20/01 10:00:11 PM Reply	About whether the idiom actu-really does refer to the car.
Post #19,068 by Ashton 11/20/01 10:22:55 PM Reply	It do: less'n they lied to a little kid :(
Post #18,655 by Ric Locke 11/17/01 9:08:08 PM Reply	The real D\ufffdsey -- >Twas in fact thee thyself who er emended my scrofulous error of using Deusy, reminding me 'twas Duesenberg! (least I didn't say, Deusenburg). ::chuckle:: Christian, you should have been able to work that one out; after all it's a German word. D\ufffdsenberg -- and the usual convention of umlaut = letter + e when there aren't any umlauts on the keyboard (there's a reason it was called ASCII)
Post #19,025 by CRConrad 11/20/01 7:01:34 PM Reply	Huh? Of course I did; that may be why I could correct him.
Post #18,373 by boxley 11/14/01 10:46:20 PM Reply	aaactuually aahm ver found of mamma has a squeezebox, goin mobile, Im (screw it all of them) thanx, bill tshirt front "born to die before I get old" thshirt back "fscked another one didnja?"

Welcome to IWETHEY!