Free Republic

Although the President is seen as a strong leader, if he really wanted to get his point across he would simply stop paying dues to the UN. But unlike Reagan, who did cut off US funds for many years, I honestly don't think Bush has the nerve. Even if he wanted to do it, the neocons with whom he has surrounded himself, would talk him out of it.

On top of pro-abort Alberto Gonzales becoming AG, this is a sad development.

As usual AP tries to put a negative spin on this by reminding us that the "big names" escaped.

Well, everyone reading this thread should know that Israeli Intelligence (Debka web site) is reporting that the US has "sprung the trap" on insurgents fleeing from Fallujah.

In other words, what is happening in Iraq now is part of a strategic plan (described by Debka as a "scissors offensive") whereby US forces "deliberately pushed" the insurgents out to Mosul, Baquouba and Latafiya and then, to use Debka's words, "clobbered them there."

Finally, Debka reports that this offensive has cut Sunni-Shiite rebel links.

Yes our troops are number one.

Pass this on, because none of it is going to be reported in the MSM not even by so-called right wing types at Fox News.

"Because the Bush adminstration has failed to provide free medical and dental care to everyone, this poor pumpkin has only seven teeth in its mouth!!!!!!

Just checked the masthead of my latest issue of PC Magazine.

"Forgery expert" Mendelson is listed as a contributing editor, but what interested me is the mission statement of this periodical, which is as follows:

"PC Magazine is the Independent Guide to Technology. Our mission is to test and review computer-and internet related products and services and report fairly and objectively on the results."

I am wondering if this guy went off on his own, publishing under the PC Magazine banner his comments comparing IBM typewriters and modern day word processing programs. This is something that seems outside the test and review mission of the magazine.

As a subscriber, I will give the magazine the benefit of the doubt for the time being because I don't believe the editors or publisher cleared Mr. Mendelson to do this.

Let's see if he even keeps his job after what appears to be a major mistake on his part, i.e., injecting his employer, a technical journal, into a Presidential campaign.

In any case, it appears his article is getting clobbered, so if I am wrong in my belief about how this came about, then PC Magazine will lose me as a subscriber.

Proabort politicians who say they are Catholic have already been warned by at least a half dozen bishops. For some good concise info on this subject, click here: http://www.catholiccitizens.org/press/contentview.asp?c=14709

Gosh, NJ Freeper don't you get it? Who cares about individual liberty? All you have to do is take that guy's reasoning and substitute anything you dislike for the words smoke or smoking when he used them in his article (for example, try body odor or SUV or prayer or white male) and voila, you have a ready made argument to enact more laws so that any one who has body odor or owns a SUV or who prays or who is a white male can be caught and punished just like smokers. Utopia is just around the corner.

These guys are hypocrites suddenly to talk about too much violence in a movie. Where have they been? Have they never heard of the French director Luc Besson or seen his films, which are filled with mindless violence? Ah well, selective indignation is a wonderful thing, especially when you can aim it at a Christian director like Mel Gibson.

You ask a good question because that is exactly what happened to the LAPD officers who arrested RAK. They were acquited in the state trial and subsequently convicted in a Federal Court of "depriving" poor Rodney of his civil rights. My guess is that the Inglewood Officer will not be tried by the Feds because unlike the RAK officers he at least was not acquited.

Nevertheless, Ashcroft and Bush will agree in a minute to have him tried in Federal Court if they think Bush can get more votes in California than he would by not trying him. It's all about votes. It is because of votes that Medicare now has a prescription drug plan courtesy of the "fiscally conservative strict constructionist" Republicans. By the same token "Law and Order" Republicans would have no trouble feeding a young police officer to the wolves if they thought it would would garner them some extra votes.

I understand that his original condemnation by the committees made page 7 of the NY Times. Can any Freeper out there tell us on what page of the Times the recent announcement of his exoneration by the Ministry of Science appeared? Can't help but wonder if that will get the same exposure.

That dumb broad may not be so dumb. I predict that by Monday night one of two mantras will begin to be drummed into our heads nightly by the agenda driven left leaning media.

Mantra One: that Hussein should immediately be turned over by us to some international body such as the UN, the Int'l Red Cross, or the Int'l Court of Justice. (The State Department, which I don't trust, may actually encourage this.)

Mantra Two: that Hussein should immediately be taken to the United States where, of course, the ACLU and our marvelous legal system will quickly insure he lives at least at the same level of comfort as Sirhan Sirhan for the rest of his days and maybe even get a book deal.

Thanks for your reply. I suppose I should have been more specific in my first post. All I meant to say was that the Japanese swastikas on the map you posted are not the same as the swastikas that are on the Nazi flag. The ends point in different directions.

I said what I did because in my Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary (admittedly an old one) under the word "Swastika", the only image is that of the Nazi swastika. There is none of the Japanese or far eastern swastika.

I guess the answer to all this is that both symbols can be called swastikas, just like Yugos and Mercedes can both be called automobiles.

The problem is those map markings are not swastikas. Don't believe me? Go to your dictionary and look up "Swastika" and the accompanying picture.

Anyone who writes an article about Rush Limbaugh should be required to take an oath under penalty of perjury that he has listened to every minute of Rush's show for at least three straight weeks.

Why do I want this?

Because the one constant in all the anti-Limbaugh articles I have read is that the writers of those articles have not listened to Limbaugh's program. This one is no exception.

Can someone answer these question for me?

Every picture I have ever seen shows that the Ten Commandments are engraved on the top of Judge Moore's monument. Engraved on its four sides are quotations from American history.

My question is: Why was not the "offensive" top part simply sandblasted or removed with a special saw? In other words, why was the whole monument removed? Did the quotations from our own history also violate Federal law?

Also, will the Shepardizing lawyers out there tell me what the status is today of the US Supreme Court's decision in Holy Trinity Church vs. U.S. (143 U.S. 457), which stated, among other things, that "this is a Christian Nation"?

Ditto on that, thinktwice. Also if you have ever operated a chipper you know that they run at such a high speed and are so efficient that there is not enough time between insertion and expulsion for a small animal such as a chicken to feel any measurable pain before death.
I suspect these guys thought for health reasons it was the least messy and contamination free way to do it. They may have been wrong in there thinking, but in California you can't simply burn unwanted things anymore, so cremation was probably out of the question. What else were they going to do? Gas the birds and then put them in a landfill?

To the folks at the NY Times fierce is anything worse than having your pet chihuahua bite you in the ankles.

LOL. People here in the West take a dim view of Floridians. Recently, I was in Laughlin Nevada playing a little "high stakes" Bingo in a rather crowded room. We were just a few minutes into a game when someone yelled "Bingo". The officials checked the card. The Bingo was no good. It turned out that the guy had marked numbers that had not been called. A man sitting across from me opined in a loud voice, "The guy must be from Florida!" The room erupted in laughter.

Fed up with liberals, Bill Buckley once said that he'd rather be governed by the first 100 names in the New York City phone directory.

Living in California, I would rather be governed by Larry, Moe, and Curly Joe than Gray Davis.

This politically correct, diversity-loving fiscal wizard recently signed into law a bill that will allow aliens to matriculate at state universities for less tuition than will be paid by U.S. CITIZENS matriculating at the same universities.

Looking back at some of the decisions the Senate has made over the past 30 or 40 years, I always suspected SOMETHING was in its ventilation system.

While this is indeed great news, I have a question for the lawyers out there.

One of the legacies of liberal SCOTUS decisions is the so called "incorporation doctrine." This is the doctrine that selected parts of the Constitution, originally written as restraints on the federal govenment, are also applicable to the individual states because of the enactment of the post-Civil War Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.

Most conservatives decry this doctrine. To make matters worse, it has been applied selectively. In other words it has been used only when it has helped the liberal Justices to "feel good" about their decisions, "feeling good" being the criterion for almost all liberal decision making.

Now it is my understanding that the Second Amendment has never been "incorporated", i.e., it has never been held to apply to the states. So my question is this. Will conservatives now raise the ante and take the anomalous (for them) position that the Second Amendment applies to the states via the incorporation doctrine?