January 31, 2006
The Way I Figure It,
Teddy Kennedy and Samuel Alito are having a
passionate affair. It's really the only explanation that makes sense.
(h/t: Goldstein, who as I understand it does not endorse my theory)
Posted by: Attila Girl at
01:44 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 40 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Here's to the hope that Alito will not end up like Teddy's other mistress...
Posted by: the Pirate at January 31, 2006 11:03 AM (0ZKi5)
2
He's probably taking swimming lessons now, just in case.
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 31, 2006 01:58 PM (XbEp3)
3
More testosterone-induced harassment..."Goldstein" doesn't go to Goldstein.
Posted by: Desert Cat at January 31, 2006 07:29 PM (xdX36)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 14, 2006
"The Most Important Issue of Our Day
. . . is being decided right now," he tells me. "And people are oblivious."
"What's the issue?" I ask.
"The limits of Executive Power. The relationship between Congress and the President. I care about that much more than I care about abortion."
This clarified things for me enormously, because I had thought the big issues of the day were things like:
1) whether/how Israel will survive;
2) whether parts of Asia or the Middle East were going to be annihilated in a nuclear war;
3) whether terrorists would succeed in taking out both the White House and the Capitol building at the same time, thereby effectively decapitating the government of the United States as the 9/11 terrorists attempted to do;
4) whether Europe would remain Western and liberal in its outlook, or whether it would instead be overtaken by the unenlightened segment of it growing Muslim populations, and
5) just how much bloodshed there would be in the growing conflict between Islamism and Western-style liberalism.
But, no. Apparently the issue is that Bush is packing the Supreme Court with justices who will give him a little bit of latitude in fighting this war, though he hasn't approached the liberties FDR took with the system—much less those Abraham Lincoln felt forced to take in keeping the Union together.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
11:50 AM
| Comments (8)
| Add Comment
Post contains 232 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Yep. That's my No. 1 concern. Well, that and all those prostitutes and drug dealers threatened with Gitmo via the Patriot Act. No wait. That's network television fiction--Law and Order and it's spinoffs, the Practice and every other left-wing drama. Al Gore can have everyone who faced the Patriot Act up on stage with him when he delivers that Police State speech next week. I mean real folks, not the TV actors. But he might have to get the TV actors if he wants anyone to join him up there. It would make for better TV, if they were in costume.
Terrorism? It's all a myth...Yep. Bush's Imperialism is the real problem. Remember where you heard it.
Posted by: Darrell at January 14, 2006 09:08 PM (W9PvN)
2
That naughty, naughty, power-hungry cokehead.
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 15, 2006 11:17 AM (/y+/O)
3
What a shock! The conservative President putting conservative (we hope) Justices on the Supreme Court..
To the victor, goes the spoils.
Posted by: Marvin at January 16, 2006 02:03 PM (LKYQX)
4
Yeah, where the hell does that Smirkychimp W. McHitlerburton get off, acting like his party won the 2004 election, or like they control the House and Senate?
Oooh, it makes me so angry that I think I'll go put another smarmy bumper sticker on my car - or maybe key the one next door with the W sticker.
Posted by: Steve Skubinna at January 18, 2006 12:21 AM (j4Cpd)
5
[...] he hasn't approached the liberties FDR took with the system—much less those Abraham Lincoln felt forced to take in keeping the Union together.
Interesting that you should bring this up. Do you think that the Japanese-American internment camps (in FDR's case) and the suspension of
habeas corpus (in Lincoln's case) were reasonable, necessary responses to the exegencies of the day?
Posted by: Christophe at January 18, 2006 10:13 PM (td8Qe)
6
"No," and "probably not."
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 18, 2006 11:33 PM (/y+/O)
7
"No," and "probably not."
I'm with you there, but claiming that Gitmo isn't as bad as Manzanar doesn't mean Gitmo's fine.
I'm surprised that the right is giving Bush a pass on Gitmo and the related extra-judicial apparatus. This seems directly contradictory to the underlying philosophy of, "The government cannot be trusted to maintain liberty on its own," which is precisely what is being asked of us at Gitmo. If, post-Oklahoma City, the Clinton administration had been hauling armed members of right-wing groups into prisons without clear charges, no judicial review, and no real timetable for what is going to happen to them, I would think that the right would have, uh, sent a crisp letter or something about it.
Sure, I don't fancy nuclear war or any of those bad things, but really, I don't think my choice is quite as stark as: Accept everything the administration wants, or the bad stuff in #1-5 will happen as night follows day.
Posted by: Christophe at January 19, 2006 03:22 AM (td8Qe)
8
Are you blurring the line between American citizens and non-American citizens accidentally, or on purpose?
I'm also trying to think of another country whose prisoners of war actualy
gain weight during their captivity. I'm not coming up with anything off the top of my head, though.
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 19, 2006 01:01 PM (/y+/O)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Wow. Are They Doing It On Purpose?
From the
New York Times:
Few Democrats or analysts said they thought that Judge Alito's nomination could ever be blocked. "It may be a mistake to think that their failure demonstrates that they necessarily did something wrong," said Richard H. Fallon, a professor of constitutional law at Harvard Law School. "As long as most of the pubic will settle for evasive or uninformative answers, maybe there was nothing that they could have done to get Alito to make a major error."
Amazing. Apparently, Ruth Bader Ginsberg just appeared on the Supreme Court one day, like Venus on the half-shell. Or Fallon had a dream in which she answered the sorts of questions Alito didn't.
Or, most likely: nominees appointed by Democrats should be rubber-stamped no matter how ideologically extreme they are, whereas Republicans' nominees must be grilled.
The "Ginsberg rule," in other words, only applies to nominees who are "within the judicial mainstream." And the mainstream is, of course, leftist.
Paging Alice in Wonderland . . .
Posted by: Attila Girl at
11:35 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 181 words, total size 1 kb.
1
This is as close to linear thinking as the Left can muster. Maybe you should append this post to the next?--The Best Way To Deprogram Yourself...
Posted by: Darrell at January 14, 2006 12:07 PM (cUMtc)
2
Or, most likely: nominees appointed by Democrats should be rubber-stamped no matter how ideologically extreme they are, whereas Republicans' nominees must be grilled.
Um, I must be missing something. Generally, Democrats will find appointees by Democrats more acceptable than appointees by Republicans. Similarly, Republicans will find appointees by Republicans more acceptable than those appointed by Democrats. This seems to be exactly the behavior one would expect in a two-party system. I realize that Democrats Bad, Republicans Good, but expecting Democrats to routinely veto appointees by Democratic presidents because, y'know, it's all fair that way may be taking it just a bit far.
Bush, in fact, may have acquired the singular distinction of having nominated a candidate to the Supreme Court that he couldn't get by his
own party. One should not lose sight of the fact that such situations are anomalies.
Posted by: Christophe at January 18, 2006 10:18 PM (td8Qe)
3
But things are changing, and not for the better: Ginsberg, as far left as she is, sailed in easily. Hell: Scalia was confirmed almost unanimously.
Posted by: Attila Girl at January 18, 2006 11:40 PM (/y+/O)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 13, 2006
What a Fascinating Notion.
Goldstein's
covering the confirmation hearings, and he's on more drugs than usual.
It's not like my uterus has ever done me any good, other than garner strange praise from OB-GYNs, who get oddly enthusiastic about my reproductive organs, despite the fact that I've never truly exploited their potential.
So the uterus-as-accessory idea might be the way to go.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
05:16 AM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 66 words, total size 1 kb.
January 12, 2006
Robbo
. . . has some ideas for how to bring some
depth and intelligence to the Alito confirmation hearings.
Posted by: Attila Girl at
01:54 AM
| Comments (1)
| Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Dear Miss Atila,
this is from the Americans for Dr. Rice group. I am posting it to share information with you and your readers. I hope this is ok, and that you celebrate free speech as much as I do.
Americans for Dr. Rice leaves for a trip to Iowa this weekend. Your readers in Iowa a might enjoy coming to this event.
Here is the message I am sending out on behalf of our new spokeswoman in DC, Jessie Jane Duff.
This trip to Iowa will give us a chance to speak directly with the people of Des Moines about our nationwide effort instead of drowning by the power of the mass media in Iowa. That was one of the motives to advertise our TV ad promoting Condoleezza Rice as our next president on the ABC show, "Commander in Chief", to get our message out to the audience. The group purchased ads on ABC in Des Moines for 2 weeks on television. That is also why we paid for radio ads in Des Moines for over 6 weeks on WHO, to plant the seeds of this great vision for our nation's future.
Here is the list of our events this weekend.
On Sunday, January 15, there will be a public meeting at the Quality Inn on the 2nd floor, Room 208 in downtown Des Moines starting at 2pm. This is part of informing Iowa voters about the Americans for Dr. Rice grassroots effort for 2008.
Since we have a booth at the Iowa Caucus on January 16, this meeting will be a venue for those who are not coming to the Caucus at the HyVee Events Center downtown on Monday. Our speaker, Jessie Jane Duff will provide the pubic with a chance to collect information about the Draft Condi 2008 movement, ask questions, and get a bumper stickers or a campaign buttons.
On January 16, a press conference will be held at 9AM with the Americans for Dr. Rice spokeswoman Jessie Jane Duff at the podium. Martin Luther King's birthday is a day to honor the success of minority representation in local governments, state governments, and for those holding national positions of power, like Secretary Condoleezza Rice, who help create policy for leaders on both sides of the aisle.
In Iowa, we celebrate the recent election of Ross Wilburn as the first black mayor of Iowa City. There are now 3 black mayors serving in Iowa, including LaMetta Wynn and Reagan Banks.
On this wonderful day, we will speak about Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and why we believe she is the most qualified and strongest leader for our nation in 2008. This is a horserace, and we are betting on the filly with the best legs.
this note was written
on behalf of Jessie Jane Duff
the new leader for Americansforrice.com
Posted by: Crystal Dueker at January 12, 2006 09:32 AM (PzHr9)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
January 11, 2006
Okay. I'm Officially Worried.
Volokh has
weighed in on the "troll law."
Posted by: Attila Girl at
09:50 PM
| No Comments
| Add Comment
Post contains 16 words, total size 1 kb.
37kb generated in CPU 0.0222, elapsed 0.1313 seconds.
210 queries taking 0.1209 seconds, 438 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.