Translation, please.
(I'm not in the mood to parse out what you just said there)
Dear Cyn. Pardon the interference, but I think he said,
"I am so much better than anyone else, and I just wanted to make a post to that effect. I know everything and I would have done this matter differently, although I will never tell you how. I will not bother with other posters or posts, as you underlings are not worthy of my time or attention."
(I can send you the new ASKEL5 decoder ring, but it's a real bitch to get on your finger, and it hurts all the time.)
Hey Askel5, any particular reason for this antisocial behavior?
I was merely alluding to the fact that the "liberal" press is a hackneyed excuse. Who cares what the liberal press has to say if one presumes they're going to have nothing good to say about Bush and defend to the hilt all things Clintonista? Why should that consideration impede in the least the "fair" and "impartial" progress of our so-called Justice Department?(It's not like the indictment's going to stick when the GOP's interested in loosening it's own standards a bit to accomodate certain excesses of Delay and possibly others.)
As example of how retarded is this clever thinking, I alluded to the 2000 GOP Senate passage of the Schumer Amendment to deny the defenses of bankruptcy to pro-life individuals strung up on RICO charges.
Because Senate leaders anticipated a close vote, Democrats pulled Vice President Gore off the campaign trail in order to have him available to break a tie vote. With the threat of Gore casting a vote to break the tie, many Republicans folded, switching their vote in an attempt to prevent Gore from obtaining publicity. The Republican plan failed because while Gore did not break a tie he received press attention and pro-life Republicans were asked to abandon their principles and vote for an unfair and discriminatory law. In the end, the vote was 80 yeas and 17 nays, causing a major loss to pro-lifers.
Utterly insane. We pretend to be a people who put substance before symbol yet we cave to the Symbol that is "press coverage" over the substance that is support for those already unfairly indicted under RICO for opposing the lawful slaughter of over a million unborn annually in this "Christian" nation.
What's interesting about this story is the way the GOP managed to use the abortion amendment to forestall 2002 passage of the bankruptcy bill.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a move Democrats derided as political theater, the House of Representatives early on Friday passed a bankruptcy reform bill stripped of a controversial abortion provision, effectively dooming the measure in the Senate.
A measure the House had agreed on with the Senate after months of work failed hours earlier when a group of Republicans, upset with how the law would apply to abortion protesters, led a bipartisan revolt against the legislation. Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle later told reporters the change had doomed the bill for the year.
"The House Republicans killed bankruptcy (reform). It's as simple as that," the South Dakota Democrat said. "Even if I wanted to take it up, it would never pass." The abortion language was the linchpin of a compromise between Senate Democrats and House Republicans reconciling competing versions of the bankruptcy overhaul. House Democrats said the notion the Democratic-led Senate would consider a bill without that language was ludicrous.
"This is a legislative stunt for no purpose except saying to the lobbyists, we passed it -- even though we passed it in a form we know the Senate won't even glance at," said Rep. Jerrold Nadler, a New York Democrat.
The bill would have made it harder for debtors to use bankruptcy to wipe out their debts, and was eagerly sought by U.S. banks, retailers, credit-card companies and auto lenders.
Republicans reintroduced the bankruptcy overhaul -- minus a provision that would have prevented anti-abortion protesters from avoiding court-ordered fines by declaring bankruptcy -- just after 1 a.m. They said they were doing so to give members a chance to vote on the legislation's substance without the amendment.
"This is necessary to get the main body of the bankruptcy reform to a vote for the members," said Rep. George Gekas, a Pennsylvania Republican who led the overhaul effort.
The House approved the stripped-down bill 244-116.
Democrats ridiculed the unusual second vote.
"The bill died because some of the members there were torn between the people opposed to abortion and the people with money. And you would have thought they could have waited until maybe February or March to get back in the graces of the people with money," said Rep. Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat.
"the cockamamiest scheme I have ever seen on the floor of a legitimate legislature.".
"This is a legislative stunt for no purpose except saying to the lobbyists, we passed it -- even though we passed it in a form we know the Senate won't even glance at,"
And how could they know for CERTAIN that the Dem Senate wouldn't even look at a bill sans the extra-Constitutional provision to single out pro-lifers for limited defenses under RICO?
Because Democrats are Litmus Test faithful to their personal values whereas the Republicans are only "personally opposed, BUT" can go either way depending on whether something really critical -- LIKE LIBERAL PRESS COVERAGE IN FAVOR OF GORE, duh -- is at stake!These stunts are predictably feasible only because there will always be a few men of principle in either party (there were 17 in the 2000 Senate) who can be counted on for their Pollyanna "litmus test" opposition to abortion such that abortion becomes a Lever Extraordinnaire to gut, stall or pass both legislation and confirm judicial nominees.
It's just one reason that -- even if abortion were not actually a vital prong of the GOP's population control and environmentalist policies -- it indeed shall remain legal, anchored by the in-your-face rape/incest exemption, for just such Circus-Circus purposes.
It's ALMOST as reliable as the "liberal press" where excuses for the "Personally Opposed, but" party's concerned ... be it the fight against abortion or the rightful and speedy conviction of "evil" Clintonistas.
But not nearly as predictable, I suppose, as the rationalizations one grows to expect from the Stoopid Party faithful who have an answer for just about every possible decision of their "Stoopid Party" leadership regardless what's at stake.