Is the Prez “shredding the Constitution” by invoking his war time powers without Congress having first declared an official war? Many of Tom Tomorrow’s frenetic little gadflies seem to think so.
But how has the Supreme Court interpreted the President’s war powers? And need it even do so [cough cough Dellums] in every scenario that involves U.S. military operations…?
Keep shrieking about the war, the war, the war, terrorism, terrorism, terrorism, you bootlicking Bushies out there, how convenient it must be to ignore the fact that it’s not Osama and al-Qaeda who are bringing down the U.S. economy (one of their stated goals), but the Corporate Terrorists, a regular Fifth Column of crisply dressed white American traitors. Keep waving the flag and wagging the dog, all you “real Americans!” And tell your buddy Bush to pull his pants up and get out of bed with the people who are trying to kill us. (The CEOs AND the Saudis, Egyptians, etc.)
Awww. Danny dwopped his wowwy pop. See? That’s what happens when wittle Danny thwows a tantwum…. No more sweets for Danny! Back to sucking Nader’s cock for you, wittle boy.
P.S. 1) I’m not a Bushy. 2) Proper names are normally capitalized (e.g. “Danny”), whereas common nouns are not generally capitalized (e.g. “corporate terrorists” or “fifth column”)—unless you’re one of those pretentious bell hooks-types, I mean. 3) Two independent clauses joined by a comma is a comma splice. Try using a semi-colon, a period, or a coordinating conjunction in place of the comma (”…bootlicking Bushies out there; how convenient…”). 4) Now sod off, child. I’ll write about whatever the hell I want.
Wow—another Ritalin wonder writes in. Time to get your meds adjusted, “danny.”
Danny, you are an insufferable little freak. Didn’t you read the box? Politics are for grownups. Go do something less stressful, like raising bunnies or knitting Kleenex-box cozies.
Wow, Danny, hats off to you. You are one courageous dude. Are you right now listening to the jackboots coming up the stairs, or did they already get you? Did you write that post on toilet paper and smuggle it out of the gulag?
To me, the most poignant part of your moving story is how Bush and Ashcroft deprived you of a capitalized name. Oh, the humanity!
So the gross fiscal irresponsibility of a half-dozen companies out of the Russell 1000 is a danger to the country, eh?
What have you go to say about the government’s mind-boggling incompetence in this area? You can’t even accuse them of “cooking the books” because what they have for accounting records would send Arthur Anderson running away shrieking in horror and dismay.
Just consider that the Ponzi Scheme they call Social Security would get any CEO jail time, and the fact they “lost” 17 billion dollars last year (go <a href=”http://sproteus.blogspot.com/2002_05_12_sproteus_archive.html#85095002″>here</a> for the details). And you think these guys should be guarding the henhouse?
Question: What happens to a government department that loses 17 billion dollars?
Answer: Nothing.
Question: What has happened to the corporate scum who engaged in accounting jiggery-pokery? Answer: Penny stock. Dead companies. Lawsuits. Federal charges. Jail time.
I stand corrected, Bryer.** Now that I reread danny’s rebuttal more closely, well, wow. That’s a bad Dylan.
I mean, JG asks a question and then links to a review article. What a pathetic Bushie lapdog he is. Then Danny comes along, with the waving and the wagging and the bootlicking and mmmmm GLAVIN!!
<blockquote>Clearly, you have all been reduced to nothing but childish name-calling–typical of those who can’t argue facts.</blockquote>
“Bushies wriggle and squirm”
“tight-assed conservatives”
“rabid little attack dogs”
If you read this site, you will see many measured discussions about all the things that you are so upset about. With links. So, engage brain and try again. Me, I’m off to shriek about the war. Warrrrr!!!!
**[<i>Dylan is responding here to a flame post I removed and whose author’s IP address I banned. As I explained to Dylan in an email, I lost a friend today, and I’m in no mood to put up with senseless and uninformed <i>ad hominem</i> attacks against me or any of my readers—especially when those attacks come by way of some smarmy loafpinch who’s just going to post and run anyway.
This was not an easy decision for me (witness the 260+ posts in the Tom Tomorrow thread), but as I say, my site, my rules. I apologize for the inconvenience</i>—Jeff G.]
Thanks for the clarification, Jeff. I missed the Return of Danny. I was hoping he’d bring some arguments and information with him, but I was not betting on it.
A shame, too. Now I’ll never know for sure if he’s an intelligent, thoughtful individual worth arguing with, or an insignificant little shitstain not worth the attention.
Actually, it was someone else, Steve. To my knowledge, “danny” has not been back.
JG:
As one of the fairly far left-wing liberals who reads your site on a mostly daily basis, you go right ahead and ban the flamers and mock the name callers. I’ve always appreciated that your site spawns commentary between people of opposing opinions. But when the opening salvo in that “commentary” includes the phrase “boot-licking Bushies”, it really spoils the fun, and lowers the level of intelligence in the debate.
I may not agree with your politics, and I may not see your point, but I’m at least going to try to respond with conversation, not blathering idiocy.
Oh, and I’ll capialize my name, too.
“<i>I may not agree with your politics, and I may not see your point, but I’m at least going to try to respond with conversation, not blathering idiocy.</i>”
–and that, Amy, is why I have your site—and many others’ whose politics settle to the left of my own, but who are engaging, intelligent thinkers nevertheless—linked on my blogroll.