It's a thing of beauty.

Isn't that what the Bosses say when one of their Captains conducts a hit?

Well, shooter242 does live in New Jersey.

I really am sorry...that so many of you are so seriously afflicted with Bush derangment syndrome, that you can't even ask the right questions.

And we, in turn, are truly sorry you are so afflicted with a hatred of America that you're willing to destroy it simply on the say-so of a messianic nihlist who is likely suffering neurological damage from Lime Disease.

A pity really. But then you were afforded your own chances for redemption.

Now all you can do is burn in your own hatred.

1. Does this atrocity of legislation full retroactive immunity from prosecution to all telecos?

2. Does this immunity extend to both civil and criminal legal actions, or simply civil ones?

3. Could the telecos still be indicted as "criminal co-conspirators" in a future action against the US Government on this issue based upon the 1886 ruling by the Supreme Court on Santa Clara County V. Southern Pacific Railroad and their 1906 one on Northwestern Nat Life Ins. Co. v. Riggs?

Would anyone like to say something nice about Bush?

No. The man isn't worth the $7 in household chemicals he's made of.

Thanks for laying your ignorance bare.

The Iraqi people want us out of Iraq. The American people want us out of Iraq.

There simply aren't enough troops either deployed or readily available to properly secure the country and its borders.

There is no strategic rationale to continue this occupation.

Doesn't that tell you something?

Let's leave South Korea. We can redistribute the troops, save a boatload of money, and occupy Iraq indefinitely.

The point of this being...what? How would drawing down USFK down to zero, thereby removing a mere 31,000 personnel, save any worthwhile amount of money?

Where would they be deployed to? Japan? Iraq? Pokipsie?

In any case, aren't you the one always going on about how we "can't retreat" from any of our current positions, or does that just apply to Iraq?

Good. Maybe they'll stay out long enough for the Dems to actually get some work done.

Comedic distraction? A cautionary tale of Bush Derangement Syndrome? Useful idiot?

Yes to all the above.

All I want from him though is the following: his neck in the guillotine, his severed head stuck on a pole in the town square, and his heart on a silver platter.

Provided I don't have to pay more than $.02 to get all this done. He's not worth any more than that.

Bush is worth less, but he isn't at issue here.

Of the House, that is. How soon before we get another vote on the PAA extension?

Even with a dem congress your views are inconsequential.

Don't you have a meeting of MBLA to go to or something?

Let's just waterboard the lot of them, and be done with it.

Actually, thinking on it...

What the hell are you people thinking about?

Barring that, can we at least ship him off to somewhere more conducive to his mind-set. Like Pyongyang?

It sounds like you think the "illegal wiretapping" consisted of listening to actual conversations, personal content let's call it. It isn't.

You remind me of a journalism student I roomed with a decade ago. He too seemed incapable of grasping the simple reality that one cannot simply ignore the law, irregardless of the motives or intent involved.

President Bush has ordered wiretapping without a warrant where one is legally mandated. Is that really so difficult to accept or understand.

Rhetorical question, btw. You've already shown you're incapable of grasping the essentials.

Left-wing smear campaigns...

Do you have an actual point you're trying to make, or is this just some neurological disorder you have no control over?

But on balance, I like President Bush's insistence on tax cuts that have produced good results for the economy, I like the aggressive war on terrorism, I like the restraint (I'd like a lot more) on discretionary spending, and more than anything I like his judicial appointments.

I honestly can't understand what 'Elephantman', whoever or whatever he is, is trying to communicate here.

Bush's tax cuts have not produced any documented benefit to the American economy, his 'aggressive war on terrorism' is a rhetorical chimera that has done nothing to curb international terrorism in the slightest, he's put no restraints on discretionary spending, and his judicial appointments have been shown to be individuals of questionable integrity or legal learning (to put it as diplomatically mildly).

If this sentence of his is meant to be either a joke or a satire on what he considers a 'conservative', its a bad attempt.

If he's serious, he needs serious medical help.

Is there a third interpretation to be had?

willing to call terrorists "terrorists." The ACLU wants to call terrorists "defendants."

A trite and unconvincing re-imaging of the controversy in question.

Finally, I have little doubt about the outcome of the next general election. One side, yours or mine, is bound to be extremely disappointed.

Good dodge. I'll have to remember that one.

I just hope and expect that it will be your side that is so disappointed. If moderates and bipartisan-minded independents know their issues, they will vote for McCain, and not Clinton or Obama.

Only if they all get lobotomies first. The last seven years have amply demonstrated the current GOP has no real interest in 'bipartisanship' or even basic governance. Anyone with two brain cells has already jumped ship from the GOP.

I just don't want a Democrat nominating federal judges.

I'm sure you'd feel much better with someone like Janice Rogers Brown and a return to Lochner-era deregulation of industry.

I'm also sure we'll all feel much better if you'd just jump into the East River wearing a cement overcoat.

Oh, wait. Its just the General Tso's chicken I had.

Was this commercial supposed to be scary or something?