The Big Tent contributors are followers of Alfred Thayer Mahan.
And the High Court owes Al Gore an apology. dcat
Bush won by 537 votes...get over it.
And Al Gore owes the world an apology for perpetuating the global warming myth.
Paul -- Wow -- you needed two comments for that blather? Compress yo dumbness.If you think global warming is a myth you are a moron. We can debate what to do about it. We can debate how much of it is caused by which aspects of human behavior. But global warming is not a myth. End of story.As for the Supreme Court discussion: The court established an arbitrary deadline for the counting of votes. They also said that Bush v. Gore would not provide a precedent, allowing them a partisan one-off. Bush may well have won Florida by 537 votes. Or he may not. We will never know because the Supreme Court established an arbitrary deadline for counting votes even as those who normally prattle on about states rights suddenly wanted the court to overrule the state court.
"Wow -- you needed two comments for that blather?"So? Your point?"Compress yo dumbness."Lame attempt to sound cool/hip."If you think global warming is a myth you are a moron."Ad hominem abusive."But global warming is not a myth."Are you currently following the debate or did you stick your fingers in your ears and yell "lalalalala" a few months ago when all the bad news came out?"Bush may well have won Florida by 537 votes. Or he may not."But he did, you stubborn idiot. (See, I can name-call too!) Three independent news agencies recounted all of the ballots using different methods (the same methods and standards Gore wanted to use) and Bush came out the winner each time. Next dumbass argument? "We will never know because the Supreme Court established an arbitrary deadline for counting votes even as those who normally prattle on about states rights suddenly wanted the court to overrule the state court."Straw man. State courts get things wrong all the time. Federal courts are there to correct them when they do. That's what happened. Only a foolish absolutist would argue that state courts can never be overturned. The recounts violated the EPC of the 14th Amendment and the SC put a stop to them. I would think that you would be happy about that.
Dumb is as dumb argues.
I was going to weigh in on each of Paul's inane assertions. And then I remembered: Publishers are asking me to write books for them; journals are asking me to write articles for them; I am constantly asked to write op-eds; I am asked to write reviews of more books than I can possibly read, even as a member of the National Book Critics Circle. I am asked to give public talks (am giving one in nine hours!) Paul? Not so much. Paul criticizing me is a gnat biting a horse's hindleg -- annoying, but inconsequential. None of these things happens to Paul. Because no one gives a fuck what he thinks. My opinions matter. Paul's don't. If anyone here wants opinions about the Supreme Court you can read one of the chapters of my book. Or you can read the chapter in Paul's -- oh, sorry. You can't. Ahhh, liberation. It's a glorious thing. Please, Paul. Keep telling us what you think about things. Because people care so much. dcat
Elitist prick. You're honestly going to make the assertion that opinions that are written down are more valuable than those that aren't? You are a jackass, and everyone who reads this thread will most likely come to the same conclusion.
Post a Comment