You know as well as I do that Bush is a deserter and a well-bred idiot. The only reason he could get in the White House was that his dad was President. Kerry is the better man. Hell, Jerry Lewis is a better man. Jerry Springer is a better man. A springer spaniel is a better man. Let's just drop it before I lose my serenity.

---
What others say about boorite!

Id Bush a poo-poo head boowite? :C

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

Tonight, on Crossfire!

---
I was gonna send a robot back in time, but I got high.

I protested the Republican National Convention based on one very simple principal:

Bush was never elected.

The RNC is just as much of a sham as the DNC, with lots of glad-handing and back-patting and "Free Speexh Zones". Bullshit.

But Kerry hasn't been in the White House yet. He hasn't had a chance to fuck up our country yet. Bush stole Al Gore's chance and fucked it up even worse than his daddy did.

That precedent being set, I went down to the city to protest the fact that Bush is President in the first place. To shout the fact that I disagree with just about every single policy and choice he has set/made for my country. I went to protest the fact that this convention shut down a square-block radius in the city (which is not unusual, protesters do it all the time), but PREVENTED people from walking by the convention.

I went down there to protest anyone who supports Bush and his fucking evil, lunatic administration and the goddamn shadowy, sour-faced, devious members of his administration. What I ran into was police blocking off the entire radius, only allowing police and Republicans (who had to brandish Republican party IDs and PAPERS. Nazi Poland, anyone?) to pass through.

Also, when walking BY the cordoned-off area, protesters had signs taken from them (from what I saw they gave them up peacefully, which is the only option unless you're willing to incite violence), or told to leave them behind, hide them, etc. People speaking and reading excerpts were told to stop. No one was allowed to "loiter" around that area. Fucking ridiculous.

On a related note:
I'm also tired of the righteous indignation of people who like to limit the rights of others. NOTHING gives you that right. The right to limit the rights of others. NOTHING. It's not an unalienable right to take or limit the rights of others. It's a power that one assumes when given office, and it should not be.

Fucking open your mind or be doomed to obsolescence.

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

Your post is a good metaphor for protestors in general. Mainly because I didn't pay attention to it and it's probably just angst-ridden.

Any good guesses from people about who will be the front-runners in the 2008 election? If Kerry loses I'm supposing Edwards will keep at it. If Hillary doesn't run in 2008 (supposing Kerry loses) does she have another four years minimum shelf-life left?

What will be most interesting in 2008 is if Bush wins and Cheney remains on the ticket throughout the term. I just can't believe Cheney would try to take the nomination. If he did would someone give a sitting Vice President a run for his money in the primaries? Would it seem odd for Cheney to just not seek the nomination if he knew he could not win? Is there anyone on the Republican ticket you Kerry supporters would vote for?

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

I would like to believe you, MaKK, but even your dismissal is calculated.

We all know you pay very close attention to the protests and the protesters. You'd have to just so you'd know what you're talking about when you criticize them. You DO know what you're talking about, right?

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

There's a difference between protestors and arguments that hold water in the media. Everybody expects protests and nobody is swayed by them. That's why you're so disaffected. If people actually cared as much as you wished they did they'd be crashing barricades and breaking the laws you are lamenting so much. But they just want to go out and get on TV and scream, they don't actually care enough or have enough of a justifiable right to commit civil disobedience. Your peaceful protests represent complicity with four more years of Bush. I, and countless others, thank you for your de facto support! ;)

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

quote:

---

On a related note:
I'm also tired of the righteous indignation of people who like to limit the rights of others. NOTHING gives you that right. The right to limit the rights of others. NOTHING. It's not an unalienable right to take or limit the rights of others. It's a power that one assumes when given office, and it should not be.

Fucking open your mind or be doomed to obsolescence.

---

Yes! Exactly! Unruly conduct is the perfect way to get your message accross and affect change! You can sway thousands of holdbacks by just breaking laws and causing a riot!

Thank you MaKK. Every time I feel myself slipping, becoming a republican, I just read your posts, and they make me forget all about that nonsense. You are a real american hero.

---
Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.

Mikey is the one complaining about the police not letting them just run amok. I'm just offering a solution to his angst.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

You shouldn't. However, as you so astutely pointed out, the social consequences of such language are what you choose to face.

That's not a RIGHT. Taking someone else's life is not a right. Don't be fatuous.

Maybe you should actually read a li'l thing called "The Patriot Act". And I mean READ it. Don't skim over it, seeing a few things that you can use to argue and feel righteous. READ the whole thing, take it all in, and then make your comments.

I see no reason to equate what I was saying with Kerry or Hillary. This seems to be a widespread problem. Disagreeing with Republicans does NOT mean Democrat, and vice versa.

Free Speech has its consequences. If we can allow people to spread messages of hate, which Rush Limbaugh and Bill O'Reilly unequivocally spew forth from their gaping maws.

I don't really understand what you are saying. You need to differentiate between rights and priveleges. Privacy should not be a privelege. What rights are being taken away that I don't like? The RIGHT to bear arms? I don't see how carrying a weapon made specifically for death should be a God-given right. If it was a right, then why, if we go according to Christian doctrine, did Adam and Eve not shoot the shit out of the snake? Because they didn't have guns. They DID, however, have the freedom to choose.

I think we're all pretty aware of that fact. Especially considering the pains revolutionaries tend to have to go through to earn it.

See, you just summed up MY point right there. I don't believe in violently solving problems, but if you roll into Compton and call a black person a nigger, it is your right to do that. Be prepared to reap the consequences, which are quite possibly getting your fucking ass handed to you. Those consequences need not be state or federally regulated. You can stand on the corner of 42nd and Broadway down in the city and call people kikes, spics, wops, micks, etc. etc., and you should have the RIGHT to do so. There cannot be any legal consequences for such actions, because then other free speech can be deemed inflammatory and the lines blur. Which they already have.

Also, MaKK, I can't see how standing in front of the RNC with signs of protest is "running amok". Or even walking by it, for that matter, which is what was denied.

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

Did someone mention gaping maws?

Self-defense is a right, that's why you don't go to jail if you kill someone in the scenario presented.

Maybe you should actually read a li'l thing called "The Patriot Act". And I mean READ it. Don't skim over it, seeing a few things that you can use to argue and feel righteous. READ the whole thing, take it all in, and then make your comments.

The Republicans instituted the Patriot Act? I thought Congress did. I've read it and it only targets terrorism. Are you a terrorist, Mikey?? Why else would you hate this document (clearly labelled to help patriots)?? Hm..

Good idea, let's censor political speech one party doesn't agree with! Ah, democracy. You truly are not a "patriot", Mikey. Tsk tsk. (Finger slowly wagging at you)

What you are requesting is taking the right of free speech away from someone else. You can't stop the RNC from peacefully gathering and you can't try to stop the media from covering it. Have your own damn convention of protestors pissing and moaning about how they think death is bad and see how many cameras show up. You can march down the street any day of the week holding a sign. Why are you so upset you can't do it this week in one specific spot? Get a life!

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

Self-defense is a right, sure. But what does that have to do with the right to bear arms? Can't someone defend themselves against guns by WEARING something defensive? You don't need to be offensive to be defensive, stupid.

Aaaah, that word "terrorism". I'm glad you brought that up. First off, maybe you should define terrorism according to the written definition of terrorism according to the U.S. AND the U.N.

Once you've done that, you may find it startling that there is little difference, if any, between terrorism and "counterterrorism", which the United States is quite guilty of.

Moving onto what the Patriot Act addresses, the statutes allow for the removal of Constitutionally-granted rights from individuals SUSPECTED of aiding, abetting, and performing terrorism. The breakdown of what allows someone to be suspected of terrorism and what the definitions of "terrorist activities" are seem to be missing and/or vague.

So, MaKK the Troll, if it makes you feel any better or helps you sleep at night, all us dissenters ARE terrorists.

I think I forgot to finish my sentence. There cannot be censorship of any kind unless we will be censoring EVERYTHING inflammatory. We cannot limit the Rushes and the Hannitys and the O'Reillys without limiting people on the opposite side of the spectrum. The problem seems to be that such people as Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, etc. seem to all have a very large and well-broadcasted forum for their views while most dissenters are doomed to NPR.

Wrong. They have the ability to say whatever they want.

What is peaceful, exactly? Is our country peaceful? Peace also seems to have a skewed definition. If our country is peaceful, then why are shooting deaths so much higher here than say, Britain? That doesn't sound like the actions of peaceful people.

I said everyone should have the Freedom of Speech. If they are allowed to gather and have a political convention, then we are allowed to openly oppose their views. I never mentioned anything about gathering peacefully, either.

Why are you so upset you can't do it this week in one specific spot? Get a life!

People do that all the time. They have and will probably continue to do so. New York is a great place for protesters, and the Repubs knew that far in advance. Why should we STOP protesting just because they are here?

Why does anyone protest? To be seen. To have your views seen because you feel your voice is not being heard. The Republicans need to hear our voices, and what better way to hear them then when they're in town, right smack in the middle of it?

Because the streets are not private property, my friend. Why are you so upset that something could disturb your little pow-wow? Come on, bring up the Dem Convention, I dare you. They're almost as guilty, and DEFINITELY guilty of being oppressive with their similar "Free Speech Zones" Why are the Repubs bringing their bullshit message of togetherness to a city rife with protests and then won't even listen to the people they're talking about being together with?

They say they are compassionate. About what? Not the people who want them to hear what they have to say. You make me laugh, Makk. I'm not sure if it's because you're a biased, bitter fuck or if you're just trolling. But keep up the good work, nonetheless. I like sharpening my political intellect on your battered carcass sometimes.

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

Okay, first off, defending one's self is a right, if the use of lethal force is necessary. Secondly, wear something to protect you from a gun? Okay, I'll just wear a bulletproof vest, helmet, mask, and some lead underwear, just because some asshole might try to sneak into my house.

Though, I'm kinda unsure of what I'm going to do if he brought a crowbar.

In any case, onto the racial epitaphs question. Contrary to the general belief that I sense around here (correct me if I'm wrong), you *can* be arrested, or fined for using racial slurs, ever hear of the FCC? It wasn't just that, it's the whole "you can't use curse words on TV" shit that bugs me too, as well as a whole slew of other idiotic rules laid forth by the FCC.

I in no way indicated that I drew my conclusions of your being a Kerry supporter from your statements, I drew them from previous posts in which you have said something to the effect of "Better Kerry than Bush" or some such nonsense. And truthfully, that comment wasn't directed solely at you, but toward all the other liberal/democrats who have been posting in this thread.

Back to gun control, I don't think people should be carrying around AK-47s to defend their homes, but if you want a colt .45, I don't see a problem there. My property, my life, my family, my decision. Carrying it around on the streets is another issue, and one that I'm somewhat undecided on. I like the idea of having a weapon to defend yourself in a dangerous area, but at the same time, I don't like the idea of a dangerous firearm at easy reach when someone comes up and starts insulting you, you've had a bad day, and decide to end the guy right then and there. There's no simple solution for this problem, and I've yet to hear a decent answer. I suppose that the best we have is good background checks, and psychological testing before allowing someone to carry a firearm in public.

My point on the racial slurs can be easily summed up by saying that I can't call someone a gook without 20 people around me getting mad that I would have the nerve to break the PC laws.

The only reason it really even bothers me that much is the fact that I was disconnected from the internet, and threatened by my ISP for telling a racist joke. I meant no harm, and I was under the impression that the guy I was trading jokes with was fine with it. He started making Christian jokes, and I made a Jewish joke. Guess that made me an anti-semite instantly.

I just think congress should be passing laws to ensure our freedoms, not lock them down into tiny little defined variables. It doesn't help that the entire world has forgotten how to take a joke. Everyone seems to get offended by the slightest bit of off-color humor, and we suddenly have to call everyone multiple-syllable names, else we might just offend them!

No more "black", no more "oriental", no more "indian" or "american indian", no more "gay", and no more "jew".
Now we have "african american", "asian-american", "native american ('scuse me? last I checked, native meant "born there", I was born here. I'm native american.)", "homosexual (god, that sounds like someone saying 'penis' in porn!)" and "hebrew-american".

First off, the american part is redundant, and secondly, last I checked there were a lot of black people from Jamaica, Cuba, and many other countries. I don't like confusion to arise around my Indian friends, so I simply call the people who were here before the whites, blacks, browns, and yellows "american indians". I don't stand around all day saying "I hates me some niggers!" I often don't even acknowledge a person's race when talking about them, or talking to them, unless their skin color is a defining factor ("Yeah, John called me today." "Which John?" "The guy from work" "There are two Johns at work!" "Oh, the black guy"). Sure, I could say "the guy with the stupid tie" or "the dude who is always talking about the Beatles", but physical characteristics are easier to describe, and are usually more recognizable. Anyway, I digress too much. Give women the right to put some eggbeaters in the oven and drop the cookies that weren't ready to get cooked. Let gays marry wherever they are allowed in. Let me have my Colt .45 next to my bed. Give me the freedom to be whatever religion I want without persecution (yes, I hate the stupid patriot act too). But if someone refuses another the right to live without provocation, fry 'em. If I kill someone in my home because they are threatening me with the same, then maybe they'll come back a little wiser next time. If I shoot him in the street because I think his tie is ugly, then I'm gonna take a ride in the magic chair.

Oh yeah, and

You're not on the offense when they're in your room with a weapon. If you go to their house to kill them because they stole your cheez-its, then you're on the offensive. But if they think they have the right to invade my home, I am pretty sure I have the right to show them that they don't. Hell, a good .45 right in the shoulder probably won't kill them, but it'll stop 'em really quick. Guns don't have to kill, and people don't have to steal my shit.

---
Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.

Self-defense is a right, sure. But what does that have to do with the right to bear arms? Can't someone defend themselves against guns by WEARING something defensive? You don't need to be offensive to be defensive, stupid.

Ok, you walk into a bad neighborhood with a full body bear suit and I'll walk in packing heat, Mikey.

Aaaah, that word "terrorism". I'm glad you brought that up. First off, maybe you should define terrorism according to the written definition of terrorism according to the U.S. AND the U.N.

Once you've done that, you may find it startling that there is little difference, if any, between terrorism and "counterterrorism", which the United States is quite guilty of.

Huh? What? The act of fighting terrorism is...itself terrorism? Is this the same logic that brought us "invading a country because they invaded another country is the same act"? This is just complete foolishness, not to mention really having nothing to do with the Patriot Act.

Well hey, that's a good idea.

That lets the FBI do its job.

I know.

Protesting is just trolling.

I think I forgot to finish my sentence. There cannot be censorship of any kind unless we will be censoring EVERYTHING inflammatory.

No, there's a such concept as "fighting words". There is also obscene speech considered to have no merit other than to shock.

Join the mainstream, hippie. The free market doesn't owe your angsty ass anything.

Wrong. They have the ability to say whatever they want.

That's what you ask for, you ask to limit their ability to speak, when you lament the protest rules that keep you from interfering with people going to and from the convention and actions going on inside. It's the same concept as not being allowed to jump up in a movie theater and start telling the audience your thoughts on the movie thus far. You can't do that and not expect to be drug off.

What is peaceful, exactly? Is our country peaceful? Peace also seems to have a skewed definition. If our country is peaceful, then why are shooting deaths so much higher here than say, Britain? That doesn't sound like the actions of peaceful people.

Having a peaceful meeting means you meet with the intention of not causing violence. It's a pretty easy idea to grasp.

Same. Conept. As. Standing up. In a theater. Idiot.

quote:

---

quote:

---

Have your own damn convention of protestors pissing and moaning about how they think death is bad and see how many cameras show up. You can march down the street any day of the week holding a sign.

Why are you so upset you can't do it this week in one specific spot? Get a life!

---

People do that all the time. They have and will probably continue to do so. New York is a great place for protesters, and the Repubs knew that far in advance. Why should we STOP protesting just because they are here?

---

Self defense is a right? Maybe. But attacking someone with as equal force as they attack you with is not a right. Then we start getting into pre-emptive self-defense, which was the basis for going into Iraq.

Can you shoot someone because you believe they are trying to kill you? I am sure there have been cases where such an action was justified. But you'll also find that in countries with less guns, *gasp* there are LESS SHOOTING DEATHS!

Less violent crimes, as well. Britain succumbed to the fear of guns, but up until they did that their Bobbies were not required to carry a firearm. There were firearms in the country, and there WERE shooting deaths, but guns were not as a part of their CULTURE as they are here. We glorify guns and have for a very long time. Britain's shooting or gun-related death rate compared to ours was a pretty ridiculous ratio. Meaning that the larger number, by far, was ours.

As for racial epithets, you may be arrested for shouting Nigger in Harlem, but the case will not hold up in court. The FCC don't have a habit of arresting people, either. Fining them ridiculously for what they refer to as "vulgarity", yes. But not arrests. You can be arrested for disturbing the peace as well, which may include shouting "Nigger" in Harlem. I am not particularly happy with the P.C. movement, but there are no laws fortifying this belief. You can get fired from your job for cultural insensitivity or ostracized because of your prejudiced ways, but not arrested unless you're guilty of a hate crime. And I believe that one should be able to say whatever they want without fear of LEGAL repercussions by the State or Federal government.

P.S. - MaKK, your arguments never make any sense. Standing up in a theater is quite different, because the entire public has access to the theater provided they pay the fee for the movie. There's no discrimination as to who can enter as long as you pay the requisite fee. The Republican Convention, as WELL as the Democratic Convention, is exclusionary.

You're one of those people that is secretly very, very stupid. You aspire desperately to be intelligent, but your quest has consistently reached a dead end. You've coped by being inflammatory and repeating words and statements you hear, and have tried to copy the techniques of others to make yourself APPEAR intelligent. You DO appear intelligent to people who already believe what you are telling them. You are just distractionary enough, when backed into a corner, to change the topic quickly enough to draw attention away from your inaccuracies, errors, and lack of actual insight. This allows the people who follow your sort of logic to never hold onto anything you say long enough to grasp the lunacy of it, and they are left with the impression that you have said something important. The truth is, you never say anything important. You resort to name-calling, mudslinging, and just plain childish jibes. You never address any points made about you and your methods, either. You like to keep this as impersonal as possible. But I and quite a few others see through it. You're a vacuous, silly little vortex of angry, thoughtless propaganda. Cheers, mate.

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

Yeah they just picked New York out of a hat. Taking advantage of 9/11 wouldn't cross Rove's mind!

Maybe?

"Oh no a man just pulled a gun on me, I wonder if I have a right to defend my life.."

BLAM

Luckily this debate only kills liberals.

Public property is used for the best COMMON good. That means one group can't block off a road and claim it's their public right. I'm sorry this idea doesn't make sense, but you probably think you are the center of the universe.

You're right, based on what I've written, it would be a well-kept secret if I were in fact stupid.

Aren't you the one marching around chanting "hey hey, ho ho, "your political phrase here" has got to go"?

You don't believe public property is available for the best common good? I don't think I've said anything only a minority of ideologues would agree with, here. You're only bitching because you can't stand where they've told you not to stand; it's not an ideological issue.

You're the one changing the topic from "free speech zones" to my charming personality.

I'm hoping all this means you've given up your protesting in despair.

Your points about my methods are the distractions. You're just mad because I made valid points about the free speech zones.

Shall I point out the irony of this coming from a protestor?

Hey hey, ho ho.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

Especially since Bush spokesmen made statements publicly that the Republicans would be highlighting 9/11 and reminding people of it throughout the convention.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040829/pl_afp/us_vote_republicans_040829214637&e=5

---
The giant three-phallused phallus of Uzbekistan will one day squirt the cosmic jizz of revenge all over Canada.

Why would you want to forget 9-11? The only reason (politically) would be because Bush handled it well.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

Except for the part where we had the entire world's sympathy after 9/11, and the administration pissed it away with arrogance and chest-thumping phrases like, "You're either with us, or with the terrorists".

---
Think classy, you'll be classy.

What good is sympathy? Does that defend our borders? If they were really sympathetic they'd understand why we viewed Saddam - and their dealings with Saddam - as a threat.

I'd rather have material support from real allies than your "sympathy" from faux allies any day. Bush didn't make France and Germany hate us, he just revealed to the light of day how they have always felt about us.

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008

But of course, let's alienate the whole world and then when we can't find a way to stop terrorism by ourselves, we can just blame it on those pussy-footed countries out there for not supporting us in our quest for world domination. Nice and convenient.

---
Think classy, you'll be classy.

What exactly is "the whole world"?

---
Vote Jeb Bush 2008