Posted on 03/29/2005 8:58:34 AM PST by Long Cut
Halo 2 is the bomb. Best. Game. Ever.
You mean Petronski?
Just wondering. Does anyone know how to put up a background for your about page? I've tried, but can't figure it out, the white is so ugly.
The CounteSS has been overridden in the horsepower department in recent years by other rides (she's a 2001), but she'll give just about everything except a Cobra or a 'vette a run for their money. She handles like a dream, and there's nothing quite like the sound and feel of a purebred musclecar when it's angry.
It was better when I lived in Florida...nice straight, open roads, and the weather allowed a lot of T-top operations along the coast. Mrs. Cut and I loved cruising in her down to Daytona from Jax along A1A.
And then there was that night we went to dinner at our favorite Italian restaurant in daytona from Jax beach. 85 miles. We left home at 5:00 PM and sat down to dinner at 6.
Nope. I won't mention the name, but he's been here a LOT, attempting to start trouble.
Wrong. I read the rulings by Whittemore and the three judge panel. The matter at question pertained to the request for preliminary injunctive relief. It is clear that Congress did not intend to change the law pertaining to preliminary injunctions, so existing law was applied. Whittemore ruled that the Schindlers did not demonstrate the substantial likelihood of success on the merits required to obtain a temporary restraining order. The three judge panel does not revisit this point, but only reviews the original judge's ruling only for abuse of discretion.
Like it or not, this was a conservative judicial ruling.
RUSH: Last night Scarborough Country, MSNBC. This gets hot and heavy. The guests included Catherine Crier of Court TV, Pat Buchanan and Peter Beinart, the editor of The New Republic. Buchanan says to Peter Beinart, "You know how she's dying? The way they died at Dachau, the way they died at Andersonville." BEINART: That is an outrageous, outrageous statement. BUCHANAN: It is not. They were starved to death and denied water. BEINART: You know, it is outrageous for you to say -- BUCHANAN: Why do you want her dead so bad, Peter? BEINART: She cannot feel the pain that we would feel in starvation, and compared to the Nazis, when this woman, when the court said this woman wanted to die, it's just outrageous. Outrageous. CRIER: And Pat? How dare you, Pat? How dare you ask us how much we want this woman to die, because there is no one on the other side of this that wants her to die. If I could will her to get up, to -- BUCHANAN Well, why don't you give her some food and water?
Everyone I know who has video/computer games for their kids regrets ever getting them started on it. They say, "Never let the first one in the door."
One family is in the business of designing the games and systems, and they have a house rule: our work doesn't come home."
I see the point of this thread. It's about a group of folks who believed that starving a person to death was "merciful" and "compassionate", based on hearsay, who claimed to be fed up with the name-calling, etc. yet that group, self-dubbed as the "coalition of the sane" have, by default, labeled anyone who doesn't agree with their "compassionate" ways as "insane".
Now, tell me again why I would want to enjoin myself with hypocrisy?
This wasn't the matter under question, though. The question was whether or not the Schindlers could obtain a temporary restraining order while further action proceeded.
I know who you mean. But the heck with him...
BEST run I ever had in the CounteSS was when I beat my CO's Mustang. NOTHING beats blowing the doors off an 0-6's ride.
No. It wasnt, and the dissent nailed them on it. He articicially raised the barrie on the first Prong of the FOur Prong test for Injuctive relief.
The simple fact is one needed to only show some ability ot succeed. Whittemore then argued that the medical briefs were not properly argued vis-a-vis a Constitutional Claim.
He hid behind an artificial construct, generally speaking the nature of the Harm the relief seeks to prevent wieghs in the decision.
Congress MANDATED the hearing. Congress MAndated the hearing be De Novo. IT was fairly implied by the law that the object of said law be kpet alive.
7 congressmen filed a brief stating exactly the intent of the law. It is linked in one of my posts to atlaw.
Chad, Is that what got you suspended for an hour? Saying, "Like I care what you think, newbie."
Would you care to provide some evidence that this "group of folks" collectively holds this opinion?
All we want is a civil discussion so facts can be brought and reasonably evaluated, without the overheated rhetoric.
Is that so bad?
A Conservaitve ruling??????????? you're dreaming.
Yes, it was. The opinion of the dissenter is not deciding. And both the full 11th Circuit and the Supreme Court let the ruling stand.
Congress MANDATED the hearing. Congress MAndated the hearing be De Novo.
Congress did NOT mandate that temporary injunctive relief be granted.
No argument with you - my argument was specifically with Frist's comment, and that coming from a thoracocardiovascular surgeon.
Hastert et. al. are simply wrong in their assertion that Congress required a temporary restraining order. That language was in the original language of the bill, and was changed, then subsequently removed.
What you have are a group of legislators trying to blame the judiciary for their passing bad law.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.