| Author | Message | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2677 Registered: 6-2001 |
Ryan: I don't know about illegally chosing the president, but I do know that the court had to make up more than one new issue to rule the way it did. That's one reason why they wrote the opinion so that it was difficult to use it as as basis for another decision. Interesting how the court broke along the lines that it did however. Bush probably wins Florida anyway, but it sure left a big stink in a lot of people's noses. Art | ||
| Ryan Alexander (Ryalex)
Junior Member Username: Ryalex Post Number: 123 Registered: 8-2003 |
At Harvard Law the liberals NEVER fail to mention the 'atrocities' of the Supreme court in 'illegally' choosing Bush as President. No a freaking day goes by I don't hear it... Why is it a 'noble' pastime to hate our presidents? Dissent is one thing, but it appears the media's sole purpose is to attack our elected leaders (either party, although particularly against Repub's). Then intellectuals feel like they have to as well to sound intellectual. It's also sad that being "educated" nowadays means that you can't judge between right and wrong, because you can't judge. | ||
| Dan Gordon (Ferruccio)
Junior Member Username: Ferruccio Post Number: 250 Registered: 2-2003 |
ya, perish the thought. LOL | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 6903 Registered: 8-2002 |
Dan, it's true, i'm a horrible 'american'... LOL... Hell, i don't even remember which state i'm registered in...! Voting means that i'd actually have to get up and go away from FerrariChat for a certain amount of time... Perish the thought...! | ||
| Dan Gordon (Ferruccio)
Junior Member Username: Ferruccio Post Number: 249 Registered: 2-2003 |
DES so its true you don't even vote? WTF? | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 6894 Registered: 8-2002 |
LOL... i love this ••••... Even if i voted a hundred times, it still wouldn't make a difference... After years and years of examining, evaluating and reevaluating the facts (which are mostly fiction) about stuff like this, i've come to the beliefs i now currently stand by; my observations have molded these beliefs... ...in other words, you guys continue to quabble over stuff that will NEVER change unless "they" want it to change while i sit here and laugh about threads like this one... Dave, if i ever make it down to Texas, i'll promise to shut the •••• up regarding politics - but it's gotta be a mutual promise...  | ||
| Dave (Maranelloman)
Advanced Member Username: Maranelloman Post Number: 2941 Registered: 1-2002 |
Dan, DES can't make a difference. He refuses to vote, yet insists on b!tching & moaning about the current administration, complete with frighteningly laughable conspiracy theories. DES, we all love you, man, but regarding politics, please either vote or  | ||
| Dan Gordon (Ferruccio)
Junior Member Username: Ferruccio Post Number: 246 Registered: 2-2003 |
DES: "Lastly, my initial comments were posted just to get a rise out of YOU; that's right... i have no interest in this thread but decided to post something JUST to antagonize you... How 'bout them apples...?" YOUR WHATS WRONG WITH FERRARICHAT. AND WHATS GREAT ABOUT THIS COUNTRY IS ANY MAN CAN MAKE A DIFERENCE.EVEN YOU (even if its a bad one) | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 575 Registered: 11-2002 |
Art - Honestly I couldn't care less. I'm making a point. Anyone could read those cases or any of the reports of it on the web and say "Wow, what a stupid man! He must be a piss-poor lawyer!" Of course, those people don't know the whole story, right? They've only seen one side of the coin, right? The same is true of you. It gets my goat a little when you continue to judge my qualifications as a lawyer based on what you read here. Really, it does. But I figured most people here were adult enough to realize that this is for enjoyment purposes only. I guessed wrong on you, though. Ah well. Such is life. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 6883 Registered: 8-2002 |
Dan, i wasn't using slander to discredit our thief in chief... There's nothing i can do about the fact that our murderous, cold-blooded killer of a president is in office nor is there anything i can do to get him out of it... There are far better people than i, who've done much more than i ever could, and still, he remains... It's all set up that way... If i don't love it [this country] enough to defend it, i don't need to go ANYWHERE... i can stay right here... That's what's so great about this country... i can ••••• and moan about how much i hate it and i have every right to... Isn't that splendid...? Nothing i've said here, did i hear in a bar, by the way... i don't frequent bars... i, too, am sane, as well... Notice how YOU'RE slandering ME and yet complaining that i'm doing it to your dearly beloved president... Lastly, my initial comments were posted just to get a rise out of YOU; that's right... i have no interest in this thread but decided to post something JUST to antagonize you... How 'bout them apples...? | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2676 Registered: 6-2001 |
Nebula: Read Chambers v. Kay, did you? If you read the law, you'll see that the court made new law in that case, requiring a signature from the client in order to share fees. In my case, the client had no objections, didn't appear, it was a dispute between counsel. That case has caused quite a bit of trouble for a lot of attorneys in this state. It used to be that you could take another lawyer at his word, but not any more. It didn't effect my life style however. I'll still get paid, but on a different basis, in my humble opinion. Art | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 172 Registered: 2-2003 |
Bruce, I am dying laughing over here...!!!!! Gary Coleman, bwahahhahaha! | ||
| Dan Gordon (Ferruccio)
Junior Member Username: Ferruccio Post Number: 243 Registered: 2-2003 |
DES: "Of course he handled it great, he was partly responsible...! Everyone who intentionally does some horrible ���� like that has a back up, this-will-make-me-look-good contingency plan..." DES if you really think that Bush had a hand in that you as an American should do EVERYTHING (not work, not sleep, not post 6500+ posts on F-chat, etc.) to get him out of office. IT IS YOUR DUITY AS AN AMERICAN. If I or any other red blooded American thought that are President was capeable of such an act he would be out. PERIOD. Too many people have died for this great country for you not to stand up for it in every way possible. If you don't love it enough to defend it you need to GET THE •••• OUT.........I on the other hand am sane and don't believe everything I hear in a bar...In other words BUSH had nothing to do with killing 3,000 incent Americans....or did Gore or Clinton, etc. etc. If you don't agree with the man fine. But don't use slander to discredit him. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 571 Registered: 11-2002 |
Get a signature next time, Art, before you decide whether or not I'd make a good lawyer. $500,000. Ouch. Ooops. Kinda of a stupid mistake, eh? | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 569 Registered: 11-2002 |
Excuse me Art? Delusional factual issues? WTF are you talking about? Again, you claim to know a hell of a lot about my qualifications as a lawyer based on my posts at a Ferrari website. That's totally shortsighted, and just plain rude. Like I said before, should I judge your abilities as a lawyer based on what you post here? A$$hole. | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Advanced Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 3256 Registered: 2-2001 |
The 2 things Bush has done well was destroy the Taliban & cut dividend taxes & capital gains down to 15%. You can bad mouth Bush cus he comes from an oil family but Gore's family also had strong connections to oil. I think 9/11 was inevitable no matter who was in the White House. I doubt Gore would have gone into Afghanistan like Bush did | ||
| Bruce Wellington (Bws88tr)
Advanced Member Username: Bws88tr Post Number: 3128 Registered: 4-2002 |
BEATS GARY COLEMAN........... | ||
| William H (Countachxx)
Advanced Member Username: Countachxx Post Number: 3255 Registered: 2-2001 |
Arnold is a hell of a guy, A friend of mine is friends with him. Arnold is Extremely tenacious, intelligent & is a brilliant strategist. You dont win a major competition like Mr Olympia 7 TIMES!!!!!! without extreme tenacity & superhuman will power. Very few actors can match his draw at the movies , his movie budgets, & his power in Hollywood. Sure he's no Sir John Gielgud but he's a great action star. He also had the brains to marrry into the Kennedy clan. I think California can do a whole lot worse than having Ah-nold as Governor. I wish him the best of luck. I know he could have been US Pres if he was born in the US, but Gov is next best thing | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2673 Registered: 6-2001 |
Lawyers, objectivity? Come on. What will get him is the delusional factual issues. You have to be able to get your facts right, despite any bias you might have. That will screw him up, if and when he gets he license. Art | ||
| Mfennell70 (Mfennell70)
Junior Member Username: Mfennell70 Post Number: 177 Registered: 7-2001 |
Again, assumption among those who didn't really know (ie: congress, media) was that any WMD data was accurate so it was not questioned. Further, since you're so hung up on Republican vs. Democrat, the Republicans had plenty of their own material to work with, as shown by Jon. You don't think the reaction from deposing a ruler (no matter how detestable) with 150000 troops might be a little more dramatic than a bombing campaign? Really? You act as if the only difference in the two situations is the parties involved when that isn't the case at all. I hope you're able to apply more objectivity some day as a lawyer than you seem to with politics. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2670 Registered: 6-2001 |
I didn't like the no fly zones, I didn't like bombing what ultimately turned out to be civilian factories. Art | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 566 Registered: 11-2002 |
Mfennel - of course I see the difference. But my point is this: Clinton bombs an aspirin factory because he thought there were WMDs being produced there. When it turned out that it was an aspirin factory, we didn't see the republicans screaming for proof that Saddam had WMD. None were found in the action. Bush's military campaign was done for the same reason that Clinton's bombing campaign was. Of course now, because Bush is a repbulican, the dems are screaming about how there was never proof of WMDs. Why didn't they scream for proof when Clinton bombed? That's all I'm asking for....why??? | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 6844 Registered: 8-2002 |
Nebula, it's nice to know that you can take my extremist, conspiracy theory view in stride... | ||
| Mfennell70 (Mfennell70)
Junior Member Username: Mfennell70 Post Number: 176 Registered: 7-2001 |
Do you honestly not see a *slight* difference between a few bombing campaigns (the '98 one *did* create quite an uproar) and 150,000 troops in a multi-year commitment? Clinton wasn't branded a "war mongerer" (well, not by so many) because he didn't go to war. Further, there was no screaming about WMDs because everyone still assumed they were there. Your mistake is in believing there's a substantive difference between Democrats and Republicans behavior beyond pandering to different audiences. Quotes from both parties can be handily exchanged between the Clinton/Iraq and Bush/Iraq situations. PS: Clinton ordered attacks in '93, '96, and '98. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 565 Registered: 11-2002 |
I thought you'd like that DES. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 6839 Registered: 8-2002 |
ROTFL...! | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 564 Registered: 11-2002 |
nod and smile. nod and smile. nod and smile. | ||
| DES (Sickspeed)
Senior Member Username: Sickspeed Post Number: 6836 Registered: 8-2002 |
Of course he handled it great, he was partly responsible...! Everyone who intentionally does some horrible •••• like that has a back up, this-will-make-me-look-good contingency plan... To answer the original question, well... it's not even worth getting into. | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 557 Registered: 11-2002 |
Art - what was your opinion of Clinton after he bombed Iraq in 1998? I'm curious. | ||
| arthur chambers (Art355)
Advanced Member Username: Art355 Post Number: 2668 Registered: 6-2001 |
JOn's right the idology gets in the way. In my humble opinion, the right will let Bush, et al get away with anything. Look at their reaction to Rush's getting booted from ESPN (Yeah, I know he "quit", but if I had to bet,it was with a foot in his bottom). Art | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 555 Registered: 11-2002 |
Jon - The railing the repbulican's did was, in my mind, completely warranted. Clinton spent 6 years doing nothing but caving to pacifist policy. When did he finally do something? When he needed to divert attention. The republicans were RIGHT. But I'm not arguing over that. I'm arguing the fact that after the bombing took place, there was no massive effort to brand Clinton a "war-mongering" "gang member" by the left. In fact, the left LOVED him for doing exactly what they hate Bush for. Do I think Clinton did the bombing in order to divert attention away from his impeachment? Of course I do! This is politics! Do I think the bombing was a bad idea? Hell no.....and regardless of his reasons, I'm glad he did it. | ||
| Jon P. Kofod (95f355c)
Intermediate Member Username: 95f355c Post Number: 1095 Registered: 8-2001 |
Dan, Actually I can blame Bush more for the economic problems than I can credit Clinton for the economic prosperity. The booming economy under Clinton had less to do with his economic policies and more to do with the fact that Congress was Republican controlled and the White House was controlled by a Democrat. We had gridlock which was a good thing. Clinton did do a much better job than Bush on free trade but other than that the economy did well in spite of Clinton and his attempts to unsuccessfully institute many of the failed Democratic policies that have never worked. Bush on the other hand, supposedly, being a fiscal conservative, has done nothing to institute sound fiscal economic stimulus. He did enact the tax breaks but at the same time is running up huge deficits. This version of "Trickle Down Economics" doesn't work very well. Of course the Democrats like to ignore the fact that when tax cuts are instituted across the board during times of SURPLUS it does work. Trickle Down Economics or Supply Side Economics or whatever you want to call it was invented by none other than JFK and it worked very well during the 60's while the surpluses were in place. It wasn't until Johnson came to office and we had this huge explosion in wealth theft....oh excuse me....Social Programs that all of JFK's work went down the drain. The war on terror is not his (Bush's) fault and I don't blame him for the tab that is mounting up because of 9/11 but at the same time we are going to spend north of $100 billion on the WRONG DAMN THREAT (and in my opinion not much of any threat compared to the others we shoud have attacked). I could easily stomach $100 billion maybe more (I would even pay higher taxes) if we were using that money to threaten S.Arabia or mounting a war against them or telling the Pakistanis were coming in with 50,000 troops and hunting every damn cave on the border until we find Bin Laden but instead we go after Saddam who is of little threat. As for Jesse V...I am simply pointing out a person who had no political experience (and some would say limited inteligence) who made things work in MN. Granted he didn't inherit CA's problems but he cut a lot of spending and worked with both sides to make progress. Arnie on the other hand thinks that many current social programs in CA are fundamentally sound and just need tweaking. That's not going to work with $40 billion in debt. You're going to have to axe a lot of programs. Now if he lies like a true politician and says these programs will stay and then does cut them CA has a chance but if he truly believes his centrist/moderate Republican stance it's not going to get any better. regards, Jon | ||
| Jon P. Kofod (95f355c)
Intermediate Member Username: 95f355c Post Number: 1094 Registered: 8-2001 |
Nebula, What are you talking about! There was an uproar about the whole thing. He bombed them two days before the impeachment vote. The Republicans were livid about this saying he was trying to divert attention from the scandal. Apparently you don't remember Trent Lott saying Clinton only bombed Iraq for one reason....to get the focus off the attention of the Lewinsky scandal. As you will recall he quickly recanted his claim but the damage had been done to his reputation. "While I have been assured by administration officials that there is no connection with the impeachment process ... [b]oth the timing and the policy are subject to question" (Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott). "The suspicion some people have about the president's motives in this attack is itself a powerful argument for impeachment" (House Republican Richard Armey). "Perceptions that the American president is less interested in the global consequences than in taking any action that will enable him to hold onto power [are] a further demonstration that he has dangerously compromised himself in conducting the nation's affairs, and should be impeached" You apparently don't remember the huge Republican outrage at Clinton's actions nor the claims of his shakey intelligence used for the attacks. The same stuff the Dems are now using as ammunition. Proves my point exactly. Those on the Right can't seem to remember any of this back in Clinton's term and those on the left are doing the exact same thing. Here are some more quotes: "It is obvious that he is doing this for political reasons" (Rep. Gerald Solomon, R-N.Y.). Clinton must have bombed Iraq to avoid impeachment, because "how else to explain the sudden appearance of a backbone that has been invisible up to now?" (Rep. Gerald Solomon, R-N.Y.). And it appears the Republicans cry of Democrats aiding the enemy was used by the Dems as well...read below: Democrats say Republicans who accuse Clinton of wagging the dog are inadvertently aiding and comforting the enemy. Example: "Shame on you [Republicans] for playing into the hands of Saddam" (Rep. Martin Meehan, D-Mass.). The GOP's remarks were "as close to a betrayal of the interests of the United States as I've ever witnessed in the United States Congress" (Sen. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J.). The House should "not take up impeachment until the hostilities have ended. It shouldn't come up as long as our troops are in harm's way" (House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt). I am off to bed but please post any rebuttles on my economic beliefs, will be happy to debate you on that. Regards, Jon | ||
| Dan Gordon (Ferruccio)
Junior Member Username: Ferruccio Post Number: 241 Registered: 2-2003 |
wow John that was incrediable. I agree Ronald would have done a better job. But can't think of many nowadays that would do as good as Bush has. I think he handled 9/11 great. As for economics your right can't really blame Bush or credit Clinton. Therefore Bush has done pretty good considering the compition. | ||
| Tyler (Bahiaau)
Intermediate Member Username: Bahiaau Post Number: 1066 Registered: 12-2001 |
Go Jon Go! I love it when you get fired up! | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 166 Registered: 2-2003 |
Jon, agree to some degree with your rant, but why do you think Jesse Ventura would have been a good candidate? | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 553 Registered: 11-2002 |
Jon - Your arguments can be countered by me or anyone else with a brain, but you dodged the origianl question. Why the double standard? Why didn't dems grill Clinton over the coals when he bombed Iraq in 1998? Why didn't they ask for proof and call him a gang member? | ||
| Amir (Amir)
Junior Member Username: Amir Post Number: 165 Registered: 2-2003 |
Hey, he also handled the election right (as far as he's concerned)...! | ||
| Jon P. Kofod (95f355c)
Intermediate Member Username: 95f355c Post Number: 1093 Registered: 8-2001 |
Its sad really so far he has done a great job. You've got to be joking. We have 3 million people unemployed, growth has slowed to a crawl, we went from a surplus to a $480 billion deficit, we attacked the wrong damn country and the perpetrators of 9/11 (Saudi Arabia) are getting a free ride from this adminstration. We've lost nearly 3 TRILLION in stock market wealth....thats TRILLION !!! We are embarrassingly groveling to Third World dictators running the UN and asking the French and the Germans for help! And you think he's done a good job. The only thing that nitwit did right was how he handled the aftermath of 9/11 and attacking Afgahnistan and removing the Taliban. Since those days he hasn't done ••••! His economic team couldn't pass a freshman econ 101 exam. His first Treasury Secretary was shuch a lame brained idiot our currency traders had an easier time understanding the Japanese treasury secretary and he's speaking in JAPANESE!!!! Then he replaces that lame brained idiot with an even bigger idiot, John Snow, who also had no economic experience and is an even bigger idiot than O'Neil. First he says the value of the dollar is determined in the currency market, then he says he doesn't mind a weak dollar, than he says nothings changed and the US and the Bush administration supports a strong dollar, then he talks the dollar down.......... No one can understand what the hell he is trying to say. Rule number one in business or politics if your an idiot surround yourself with smart people. Apparently Bush is unaware of this. While I pretty much hated Clinton at least he deferred on matters he knew nothing about to smarter people, like Robert Rubin and a bunch of other people who at least had an economics degree. Bush has gone through 4 economic advisors in three years. They all end up quiting because he doesn't have a clue about domestic policy and how to get the economy going. Hell even Alan Greenspan, a life long Republican and conservative, won't support Bush's economic plan. The only solace Republicans can take in Bush's performance is that if AL GORE had won, we have a 1 TRILLION DEFICIT, the Taliban would still be in power and negotiating with us as we offered them everything but our kitchen sink, and the attackers of 9/11 would be turning the US into downtown Jerusalem with daily fireworks. Why can't any of you on the right and the left be any more objective. We got Al Franken's fans on one side (along with a zillion other Democrats/Socialists/Communists whatever you want to call them) and then there's Ann Coulter's folks, the Republicans who seem to have forgotten the term FISCAL CONSERVATIVE and seem hell bent on passing all these stupid laws on gay marriages and such. It seems that neither side can see any fault with their position at all. The Dems say the war is a total failure the Republicans say it's a rousing success and we are all safe now. NO MIDDLE GROUND FROM EITHER SIDE! and no objectivity. You guys are all blinded by your ideology. Bush has done a worse job than his idiot ass father did on domestic issues and on foreign policy he gets a C at best. He handled 9/11 very well up until he started ranting about Iraq. God I miss the days of Ronald Reagan, he's the last great President we had. Good thing he has Altheimers as he would outraged at both the Bush idiots and slick Willy. Can we blame Bush for all the economic problems?? Certainly not. Then again we can't really credit Clinton for the boom years of the mid 90's either. But Bush hasn't done anything of use to jump start the economy. And now we have Arnold running in California. Just what we need. A steriod freak, grade B movie actor with no grasp of politics or economics and he's going to make $40 billion of debt just disappear by cutting taxes and expanding social programs. Boy that's a winner of a plan!!!! And yet all you Republicans are thrilled that he is going to win because in the end it's all about defeating one bone headed idiot (Davis) with your own bone headed idiot (Arnie). Do you all honestly think he can turn things around? I got news for you, I am willing to bet that if Arnie wins, by next summer the state will be in even bigger trouble. I think Jesse Ventura would have made a good candidate (I know he doesn't live there) but Arnie........ Regards, Jon P. Kofod 1995 F355 Challenge #23 | ||
| Rikky Alessi (Ralessi)
Member Username: Ralessi Post Number: 380 Registered: 5-2002 |
He didn't lose! The election was stolen from him! | ||
| Horsefly (Arlie)
Intermediate Member Username: Arlie Post Number: 1517 Registered: 5-2002 |
As I said before, they STILL can't get over the fact that their boy Al Gore lost by a whisker in Florida. Sore losers plain and simple. What do you expect from a party whose poster boy is Uncle Teddy the late night Aqua Man. | ||
| Evan Jones (Jonesn)
Junior Member Username: Jonesn Post Number: 133 Registered: 8-2002 |
Because they're little children. | ||
| Dan Gordon (Ferruccio)
Junior Member Username: Ferruccio Post Number: 237 Registered: 2-2003 |
Thats a good question. Dems seem to hate Bush for no good reason. They love to be negitive and spread unfounded lies (that hurt there credibility) about him.Its sad really so far he has done a great job.IMHO | ||
| Nebula Class (Nebulaclass)
Member Username: Nebulaclass Post Number: 546 Registered: 11-2002 |
In 1998, Clinton made a case for bombing Iraq. The case involved Saddam's WMD program. Democrat and Republican politicians supported the bombing, and it went forth. When it turned out that we bombed an Aspirn factory, no republicans came screaming forth for proof that Clinton did not lie about WMD's. Democrats did not, either. Also, Clinton sent troops to the Balkans without a UN resolution. Again, no screaming from the Dems or Rpublicans. Why all the screaming from Dems now, when Bush has done what was supported in 1998? Why? |