[Labyrinthos]

I don't have a problem with common sense. I'm just telling you that Kuby's statement is protected under the First Amendment. Now if Kuby had made such a statement in Cuba about Castro or in Saudia Arabia about one of the royal towelheads, then you would be absolutely correct in that he would have been arrested, tried, convicted, and executed in very short order. BTW, you can blast me to your heart's content about being a lawyer and I don't give a RATS @ss. I'll take my superior knowledge off the First Amendment any day over your arrogant ignornance. Remember pal, as a result of the First Amendment, I'm free to go to my local pub after work today and publically state to anyone who wants to listen that I wish T. Daschel would choke to death on his own words, without fear of the FBI hauling me off to jail.

[Sabertooth]

BTW, you can blast me to your heart's content about being a lawyer and I don't give a RATS @ss. I'll take my superior knowledge off the First Amendment any day over your arrogant ignornance.

OK, I'm convinced of your humble superiority of intellect.

BTW, what's "ignornance?"

[Sabertooth]

Remember pal, as a result of the First Amendment, I'm free to go to my local pub after work today and publically state to anyone who wants to listen that I wish T. Daschel would choke to death on his own words, without fear of the FBI hauling me off to jail.

Hey pal, it's only because of some lawyers' deviation from common sense that your prerogative to exchange virtual child porn is said to be protected by the First Amendment, when you and I both know that George Mason and the rest of the Framers would have ridiculed the notion.

Further, your Daschle analogy falls on two counts:

First "choke to death on his own words" is clearly figurative, as no one has ever expired thus. More importantly, Daschle is not the President of the United States, and is not under the protection of the Secret Service and special legislation regarding the Exectutive Branch.