> RoMunn wrote:
> There seems to be more incompetence than anything else. As for destroying
> the traditional Republican Party, he didn't do it all by himself, he had
> lots of help from Congress.
True Dat
~|
Create Web Applicati
There seems to be more incompetence than anything else. As for destroying
the traditional Republican Party, he didn't do it all by himself, he had
lots of help from Congress.
On 3/16/07, Gruss wrote:
>
>
>
> I wasn't making a comparative analysis, only describing how the Bush
> administration feck
On 3/16/07 Timothy H wrote:
> I'm not knocking it, I'm an Ayn Rand nut, I know I'm out there and this
> country will never adopt of system of governance that matches me
You did that on purpose, right? A ref to Anthem? ;-)
*I* like Rand too. Guess I'm nutty x2, neh?
> RoMunn wrote:
> I think you fell in the punchbowl when you were drinking the liberal
> Kool-Aid.
>
I wasn't making a comparative analysis, only describing how the Bush
administration fecks ups, lies, lies, lies, fecks up, repeat. In the
process he's destroyed the traditional Republican Party.
ED]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 3:08 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> you can't have an American flag? What's the reasoning there?
>
> >So I was just looking at a site that's coordinating the counter
> >protest, apparently
you can't have an American flag? What's the reasoning there?
>So I was just looking at a site that's coordinating the counter protest,
>apparently our permits do not permit us to carry flags or signs.
>
>WTF? Why do these pieces of garbage have freedom of expression, but the
>very men and women t
he 60s and 70s, I'm not going to see
that happen with my generation of warriors.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 1:45 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> here's a l
I'm glad I wasn't listening to this on the way in today :)
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 1:45 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> here's a link:
> http:
here's a link:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=8951653
>Just gets better and better.
>
>These freaking people.
>
>If I'm not on Monday, it's probably because I'm in jail for hurting some
>hippy at the protest at the wall this weekend. If I am, I may have to
>go demonstrate at
well, it's not the anti-war part that pisses me off. But you can be anti-war
without dissing dead soldiers. Oh and defacing a national monument...
>This isn't one of those things I can let go.
>
>I'm not sure if it's a publicity stunt or what, but it sure as hell has
>the local veterans groups in
ya but then I listened to Limbaugh yesterday and learned that when you can
everyone around you despicable it's ok if you claim you're bain attacked :0
>I thought reading Chomsky taught you how to have a discussion without
>personal attacks?
>
>On 3/16/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
y I support the US going
on a true war footing. Transitioning our economy to a war based
economy, with the productive might of this country behind it.
> -Original Message-
> From: Sam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 12:27 PM
> To: CF-Community
&g
I think you fell in the punchbowl when you were drinking the liberal
Kool-Aid.
How about what the Democrats stand for:
1. Unions that promote sloth, incompetence, and waste in business and
government.
2. Spending, spending, spending! Remember the wasteful Medicare prescription
benefit program? Wh
I thought reading Chomsky taught you how to have a discussion without
personal attacks?
On 3/16/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> He can't hear you for the tin foil. Rush says all is well so it must be.
~|
Create Web
You would know but it's a very well kept secret. Something like that
would be all over the MSM.
On 3/16/07, Heald, Timothy J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yo man, you couldn't be further off on this. Numbers are down, morale
> is down, equipment is breaking down.
>
> Its getting bad.
>
~~
ally started
68/69. I can't let it happen, neither can a great many people around
here, so hopefully it won't be a problem.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 12:11 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subjec
He can't hear you for the tin foil. Rush says all is well so it must be. As for
that demonstration -- they aren't *really* contemplating spray-painting the
wall are they?
If so I can definitely see why that would piss you off. Hell, it pisses *me*
off. Just remember though, that you aren't doi
>Yo man, you couldn't be further off on this. Numbers are down, morale
>is down, equipment is breaking down.
>
>Its getting bad.
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Sam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 12:06 PM
>> To:
Yo man, you couldn't be further off on this. Numbers are down, morale
is down, equipment is breaking down.
Its getting bad.
> -Original Message-
> From: Sam [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 12:06 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG fi
On 3/16/07, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Yeah, here you have an AG that blatantly lied under oath to Congress
> and an administration that's still lying and can't keep its lies
> straight. And rather than accept accountability, they take the
> coward's route.
And I thought this thread
Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, March 16, 2007 8:51 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> this just in -- the former Republican head of the Armed
> Services committee (Chris Smith I believe) says he was forced
> out of his ch
Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> On 3/14/07, Timothy H wrote:
> >
> > Dude you read Chomsky, you are out there.
>
>
> Hey now! Don't make me nam-shub yo ass...
>
>
>
~~~
I have read some of his writings, he's a nut job. Seriously.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 7:33 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> in this thread? Let me check ;)
but how can you be "the war president" and not want to pay for veteran's health
care???
This is somebody who really doesn't care that the consequences of his actions
fall on other people
>> Dana wrote:
>> saying that allocations for veteran's medical care were too low.
> Dana wrote:
> saying that allocations for veteran's medical care were too low.
Shinseki, Powell, O'Neil ... the list is endless. This administration
is loyalty above competence, ideology above logic.
In college I had a friend that was a finance wiz. He got recruited to
be Prince's CFO for Pai
this just in -- the former Republican head of the Armed Services committee
(Chris Smith I believe) says he was forced out of his chairmanship for saying
that allocations for veteran's medical care were too low. NPR Morning Edition
this morning.
Dana
>1.) Strong Military. Nope, defense is at
> RoMunn wrote:
> break out the tin foil hats, why don't you...
>
Yeah, here you have an AG that blatantly lied under oath to Congress
and an administration that's still lying and can't keep its lies
straight. And rather than accept accountability, they take the
coward's route.
It's really sad t
On 3/14/07, Timothy H wrote:
>
> Dude you read Chomsky, you are out there.
Hey now! Don't make me nam-shub yo ass...
~|
Create robust enterprise, web RIAs.
Upgrade & integrate Adobe Coldfusion MX7 with Flex 2
http://www.adobe.c
> Yeah you are.
really? why?
> paleeze woman, do not take me for that kind of fool.
> Someone that drinks the Kool-aid from the extremist left-wing troth
> has to know who thier leader is.
really? Who is my leader, Sam? I mean... here I was thinking it was the interim
Vice-President for Academi
On 3/14/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not recommending anti-semetism... silly boy.
Yeah you are.
> As for Chomsky -- he's a professor of linguistics; I've heard parts of a
> couple of talks where he was parsing Bushspeak. Is this anti-semetism? I
> recall no mention of Jews
break out the tin foil hats, why don't you...
On 3/14/07, Gruss wrote:
>
> > Sam wrote:
> > they're USAs who weren't part of the Comey/Fitzgerald/McNulty crowd."
> >
>
> Maybe there is a vast right wing conspiracy ... to avoid
> accountability. "It's not my fault I lied and tried to exploit the
>
I'm not recommending anti-semetism... silly boy.
As for Chomsky -- he's a professor of linguistics; I've heard parts of a couple
of talks where he was parsing Bushspeak. Is this anti-semetism? I recall no
mention of Jews or even Israel. If he has denied the Holocaust or something
elsewhere, I
You're recommending something you know nothing about?
On 3/14/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> in this thread? Let me check ;)
>
> as for Chomsky... no information on anti-semitism. The snippets I've heard
> from him were parsing Bush pronouncements. Is that whey he's a communist?
in this thread? Let me check ;)
as for Chomsky... no information on anti-semitism. The snippets I've heard from
him were parsing Bush pronouncements. Is that whey he's a communist?
Dana
> Did I call someone a name?
> Chomsky? I thought he was all about communism and anti-Semitism. Why
> would a
Did I call someone a name?
Chomsky? I thought he was all about communism and anti-Semitism. Why
would anyone want to read anything he writes?
On 3/14/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> No actually. I was doing the work from Aluquerque thing once and stopped by
> the University to hara
No actually. I was doing the work from Aluquerque thing once and stopped by the
University to harass him, but he apparently had not strolled into work yet.
But I suppose your point is that we are both extremists because we think you're
a mindless throwback to McCarthyism? Or wait.. I think his p
Have you met Dinner yet?
On 3/14/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All I can say is wow. So if I strayed, then what was your point again? It's
> all ok because there's a secret investigation? Does that remind you of
> anything by any chance?
>
~~~
All I can say is wow. So if I strayed, then what was your point again? It's all
ok because there's a secret investigation? Does that remind you of anything by
any chance?
> We don't know what the investigation was it's not public, we're
> speculating.
> That's why I chose those names, so common
We don't know what the investigation was it's not public, we're speculating.
That's why I chose those names, so common they could be anyone off the
street. Get it now.
You really strayed here.
On 3/14/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> and that was the case? If so I never heard of it
and that was the case? If so I never heard of it and I doubt the local
Bush-apologist rag would have missed it.They went on for weeks about the
fourteen-year-old somebody allowed to register. Which should not have happened
mind you, but I think one such incident in several thousand new voter
re
More like someone knocks on your door and says Hector Rodrigez, Julio
Gonzalez and Jose Garcia are registered to vote and they live here and
you say: well I built this house thirty years ago and I'm the only
family to ever live here. :)
On 3/13/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it went
Quoted for truth.
> -Original Message-
> From: Gruss Gott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 1:57 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> > Dana wrote:
> > It would certainly cut down on inconvenient investigations
> Dana wrote:
> It would certainly cut down on inconvenient investigations
Which is why I've always opposed the Patriot Act in the first place.
If you give government power they will use it and take away your power
to do anything about it. Always. No matter what.
~~~
I don't know that it's for *no* other reason. It would certainly cut down on
inconvenient investigations and improve the odds of convenient ones.
Dana
>(3.) The Justice Department was actively pursuing having USAs
>appointed indefinitely via the Patriot Act provisions for no other
>reason than b
> Sam wrote:
> they're USAs who weren't part of the Comey/Fitzgerald/McNulty crowd."
>
Maybe there is a vast right wing conspiracy ... to avoid
accountability. "It's not my fault I lied and tried to exploit the
Patriot Act ... it's THE LIBERALS!"
~
Here's a wierd twist:
http://www.spectator.org/util/print.asp?art_id=11131
"If I had to guess, he views himself as the logical replacement for
Gonzales should he be forced out," says an acquaintance who says he's
familiar with McNulty's thinking. "You have Schumer calling for
Gonzales to resign, an
> tBone wrote:
> he still serves at the pleasure of the
> president. ANY reason can be used to fire him. Anything.
>
I think there's 3 issues with this:
(1.) Your point is 100% true and valid: USAs CAN be fired anytime for
anything. Traditionally however, once appointed, the USAs are
*supposed
me too
>Now maybe the law needs to be changed, that's something I could see.
>
>
>>
~|
Deploy Web Applications Quickly across the enterprise with ColdFusion MX7 &
Flex 2
Free Trial
http://www.adobe.com/products/coldfusion/flex
that would be fine except that they keep saying it's performance. Which is what
*he* is pissed about, of course.
Nice touch on the reference
Dana
> Of course. He was fired for political reasons, which is within
> Presidential bounds, except Gonzo lied about it to the American
~~~
OO, ooo... I know this one!
yes, he does ;)
>I realize that ~30% of the population have legs soaking with urine and
>are claiming it's raining, but do you actually believe what this
>administration says about anything?
~|
Upgrad
Dude you read Chomsky, you are out there.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dinner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2007 3:23 AM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> On 3/13/07, Sam wrote:
> >
> > Myspace is down?
something I could see.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 10:58 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> fyi:
>
> Iglesias produced statistics showing that his office's
> immi
: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 10:54 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> really?
>
> ;)
>
> the basis for this in the case of Iglesias seems to be that
> he was absent to carry out his duties in the Naval Reserve.
> He is such a poor performer that
It can't come soon enough.
I'd like to see Ron Paul get it. I know he won't, but damn that would
be something.
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Munn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 9:45 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: A
Right?
Guess what, don't want to get fired for garbage, don't become an
appointee. Pretty simple.
> -Original Message-
> From: Robert Munn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 7:47 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
&g
alist. No laws broken means move
on.
> -Original Message-
> From: Gruss Gott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 4:58 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> > tBone wrote:
> > Bush and Gonzales didn't do anything w
> Dana wrote:
> Iglesias produced statistics showing that his office's immigration
> prosecutions had risen
Of course. He was fired for political reasons, which is within
Presidential bounds, except Gonzo lied about it to the American people
and Congress (which may be illegal). Further he trie
> RoMunn wrote:
> dream on
>
What are we, 6 or 7 years into this administration and things in the
Justice Dept are run at this level of incompetence? Wow. THAT's
pretty stupid.
It seems obvious that the culture Bush has encouraged is to promote
the idiots and lie about their resulting incompete
On 3/13/07, Sam wrote:
>
> Myspace is down?
What? Misplace dis clown?
*sigh*
Awww, shucks. Sorry Sam. It's just that fixing the system
doesn't seem to be part of the dance- and you are eggstream!
I thought I was out there, man. Way out there, all crazy-like.
You're not one of those "prayer w
I'm not try to do anything. A smarter Republican Party would have run him for
office not fired him, is all I am saying. He'd be a killer candidate because
he's Hispanic. And because he's Hispanic and likeable vs two pols who are
neither, welp, if you don't think that matters when a majority of v
it went like this. They said "hey! how come 300 people are registered to vote
at (let's say) 101 Bradway NW?" And the newspaper and anyone interested drove
past the address and found out that it's a day shelter for the homeless that
provides a mailing address for its clients. What more investiga
Myspace is down?
On 3/13/07, Dinner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sam, after seeing the "PCs never break" posts, I was pretty sure,
> but now, I know.
>
> Well, I'm at least even more sure. =]
>
~|
Deploy Web Applications Quickly
Sam, after seeing the "PCs never break" posts, I was pretty sure,
but now, I know.
Well, I'm at least even more sure. =]
On 3/13/07, Sam wrote:
>
> If your boss says you're doing an excellent job over here BUT I want
> you to make progress over there, and you say, well I'm too busy to
> work on
If your boss says you're doing an excellent job over here BUT I want
you to make progress over there, and you say, well I'm too busy to
work on that this year. You're done.
I also noticed your trying to play the race card, did you forget
Gonzalez is Hispanic?
On 3/13/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PRO
What if they didn't investigate any foul play reports against
Republican voter fraud? You'd want them fired in a heartbeat..methinks
:)
On 3/13/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Um. So it is ok for politicians for ask an attorney general to investigate an
> opponent and have him fired
dream on
On 3/13/07, Gruss wrote:
>
> > RoMunn wrote:
> > January 2009 my friend.
> >
>
> Or much earlier at the rate this administration is going ... and this
> is only 2 months of a Dem majority ... at 6 months who knows what
> skeletons will fall out.
>
--
---
Robert Munn
www.funk
fyi:
Iglesias produced statistics showing that his office's immigration prosecutions
had risen more than 78 percent during his tenure and said the office prosecuted
record numbers of narcotics and firearms cases as well.
Iglesias cited a January 2006 letter from Michael A. Battle -- the Justice
really?
;)
the basis for this in the case of Iglesias seems to be that he was absent to
carry out his duties in the Naval Reserve. He is such a poor performer that Tom
Cruise made a movie about him, call "A Few Good Men." Never saw the movie, but
it doesn't sound like something that would get
> RoMunn wrote:
> January 2009 my friend.
>
Or much earlier at the rate this administration is going ... and this
is only 2 months of a Dem majority ... at 6 months who knows what
skeletons will fall out.
I should add that when Gonzo's chief of staff lied to Congress, well,
that might be illegal.
Wow, that's a much better rant.
January 2009 my friend.
On 3/13/07, Gruss wrote:
>
>
>
> BOTTOM LINE: get rid of this administration and its abuse of power ASAP.
>
>
--
---
Robert Munn
www.funkymojo.com
~|
ColdFu
> RoMunn wrote:
> i still have no idea why this story is such a big deal.
Because, surprise!, Gonzo lied. It would seem Gonzo is more concerned
than you; especially his Chief of Staff who resigned yesterday.
It's kind of Libby-Trial all over again. Top administration officials
blatantly lied an
politicians do this sort of thing to their opponents all the time. that's
just the way the game is played, by both sides.
On 3/13/07, Dana wrote:
>
> Um. So it is ok for politicians for ask an attorney general to investigate
> an opponent and have him fired if he does not comply?
>
> Party affili
Um. So it is ok for politicians for ask an attorney general to investigate an
opponent and have him fired if he does not comply?
Party affiliation aside, any references to Bill's blowjob aside...does it seem
like a good thing? What if you aren't running against a politician, you just
criticize
yeah but they probably would have polled that high before this story came to
light.
i still have no idea why this story is such a big deal. they serve at the
president's pleasure. some of them got fired. so what? oh, it was
politically motivated? oh, heaven forbid, i fear for the safety of the
rep
you seem determined to make say it.
>How about for this reason:
>http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n16_v50/ai_21123146
>
>
>On 3/13/07, Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
~|
ColdFusion MX7 and Flex 2
B
How about for this reason:
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n16_v50/ai_21123146
On 3/13/07, Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> See, I disagree with you.
>
> They may not have done anything illegal, but I think they _did_ do
> something WRONG (if it turns out the attorney
See, I disagree with you.
They may not have done anything illegal, but I think they _did_ do
something WRONG (if it turns out the attorneys were fired for not
acting on political motivations), and as detrimental to our government
and legal systems as anything I have _ever_ heard of in government.
They wanted the indictments from the 2004 fraud to come in before the
2006 election, so they say :)
On 3/13/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the congressional election. Not the presidential election
>
> http://www.abqjournal.com/news/breaking//apcong11-08-06.htm
>
> >2 years after the
> tBone wrote:
> Bush and Gonzales didn't do anything wrong.
Haven't read enough to know but the WSJ headline is:
"Attorney General Gonzales conceded mistakes in the way eight federal
prosecutors were dismissed. He took responsibility but won't resign.
Emails revealed the firings were considered
other hand committed ethical violations. They
actually seem to have done something wrong.
> -Original Message-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 4:05 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> why should tha
> JJ wrote:
> These all _were_ Bush appointees.
> He fired all the leftovers from Clinton's administration.
> These were Republican attorneys, for the most part, but not political
> enough for the Whitehouse.
>
Thanks for the writeup. I hadn't been reading much about this, so
it's good to know.
the congressional election. Not the presidential election
http://www.abqjournal.com/news/breaking//apcong11-08-06.htm
>2 years after the election and still no indictments? Yet they convict
>Libby of getting his dates wrong.
>
>On 3/13/07, Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
~
Is that what you're reading? Do tell. It's being reported as voter fraud
allegations at least in what I have read.
Now, corruption we do have here ::cough:: hard to deny it after the state
treasurer gets indicted and convicted. But ok... that indictment had to do with
kickbacks for permission
why should that be a reason to excuse him from this one? Just asking. It does
seem pretty solidly tied to Gonzales...
>I agree that the reps/senators involved should be looked a. Obviously
>that isn't right.
>
>I just don't see that this is something that should fall back on shrub.
>He's given u
2 years after the election and still no indictments? Yet they convict
Libby of getting his dates wrong.
On 3/13/07, Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You aren't reading very much about this, I see.
>
> These all _were_ Bush appointees.
> He fired all the leftovers from Clinton's administr
Do you mean the guy who decided not to indict Democrats for there
courthouse kickback scheme because of the election?
On 3/13/07, Dana Tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ummm maybe because there is nothing there to investigate? I did voter
> registration in the last election. THe instructions f
ilto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 3:04 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> ummm maybe because there is nothing there to investigate? I
> did voter registration in the last election. THe instructions
> for homeless people were to get
ummm maybe because there is nothing there to investigate? I did voter
registration in the last election. THe instructions for homeless people were to
get the address where they can receive mail.
I see your point, but raise you this -- a woman who was in a very tight race,
hot and cold running
You aren't reading very much about this, I see.
These all _were_ Bush appointees.
He fired all the leftovers from Clinton's administration.
These were Republican attorneys, for the most part, but not political
enough for the Whitehouse.
This _isn't_ normal. Typically, these appointments are repla
;d like to know why they
wouldn't investigate that personally.
> -Original Message-
> From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 1:30 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> Firing a prosecuter because t
It might be stupid, but if there was no crime here, I think we have
better things to worry about.
> -Original Message-
> From: Gruss Gott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 1:41 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: Re: AG firing rant
>
> &g
Clinton fired all of them. What was your point again?
On 3/13/07, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > tBone wrote:
> > They serve at the pleasure of the president. Period. Congress doesn't
> > have any oversight on justice, and they shouldn't.
> >
>
> As I understand it, Presidents have h
> tBone wrote:
> They serve at the pleasure of the president. Period. Congress doesn't
> have any oversight on justice, and they shouldn't.
>
As I understand it, Presidents have historically stayed away from this
because politically motivated culls and loads would be very disruptive
to the Justi
Like throwing Libby in jail?
On 3/13/07, Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Firing a prosecuter because they would not do POLITICALLY motivated
> prosecution (not idealology, but purely democrats vs republicans) is
> about the worse thing I can think could happen in our political and
> Jus
Firing a prosecuter because they would not do POLITICALLY motivated
prosecution (not idealology, but purely democrats vs republicans) is
about the worse thing I can think could happen in our political and
Justice system.
How can this NOT be a big issue?
Would you feel better knowing the prosecuto
-
> From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 12:02 PM
> To: CF-Community
> Subject: AG firing rant
>
> OK, let's leave aside the picture of a White House "excited"
> at the prospect of replacing Attorneys General without
Firing attorney generals makes one a tyrant. Can't you kids come up
wioth any real issues?
On 3/13/07, Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Dana wrote:
> > some homeless people used the address of an agency that receives mail for
> > themUgh.
> >
>
> That's not a rant! Come on you can d
Wasn't there some California Law that said you can use a park bench as a
legal address? I saw this dude living in bicycle cart parallel parked on the
main drag in Santa Cruz.. funny shit.
~|
Macromedia ColdFusion MX7
Upgrade to M
> Dana wrote:
> some homeless people used the address of an agency that receives mail for
> themUgh.
>
That's not a rant! Come on you can do better than that ...
How about, "Yet another example of Bush tyranny" That's a good
opening rant line.
~
OK, let's leave aside the picture of a White House "excited" at the prospect of
replacing Attorneys General without Congressional approval. What really bugs me
is that the assertion that there was voter fraud by Democrats in New Mexico.
What the Republicans (more or less a fringe party here) wer
100 matches
Mail list logo
