Your Attention Please [Breaking News and WoD Flamewars]

[Hemingway's Ghost]

No thanks, I'm quite finished with the likes of you.

[new cruelty]

Are there any guidelines for posting with regards to multiple threads?

Yesterday three threads on Sean Penn were posted, all citing the same article from the NY Post. I posted a fourth thread(if you can't beat em...) that was pulled after around 9 posts.

[CWOJackson]

Don't be too sure about that.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

. . . are almost always initiated by a small number of drug-obsessed libertarians who spend every waking minute scouring the Internet for some isolated news story or "High Times" editorial, posting it front page and then pinging a melee into existence. The best thing to do is to wholly ignore these one-trick ponies (one-bong blowhards?), which I decided to do a few days ago.

EXACTLY what we're talking about!!! Ladies and gentlemen, you simply can't make this stuff up any better than it happens in real life.

[toothless]

Your changes are an improvement. The best solution, IMO, would be to relegate the whole dope-wars babble and squawk to a backroom from the get-go.

And suppress the whole arguement, since you guys know you will loose sometime in the next 30 years.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

Don't be too sure about that.

That a threat?

[bvw]

The Sand Pepples was great and flawed ... great up to the end where it became preachy anti-war. The charater dynamics apprciate how men working together in a military mission become greater than they would alone. It reminds me of both of the two movie versions of "Law and Order" -- the second with Ronald Reagan, btw -- meant to be anti-gun screeds, they end up making a better case for the right to bear arms -- the charaters appreciate a good personal arm (especially in the 30's version, were one of the main leads carries a short-barreled shot gun).

[Houmatt]

Now, on to the WoD [War on Drugs] flamewars. There are a few problems with them. The flaming on them is tremendous. It is wrong for several reasons, and it should stop and the first thing we are going to do to try to get them to stop is to make a request for them to stop.

The only way this will be achieved is if you simply ban those who support the ridiculous and highly immoral idea of drug legalization. That is absolutely NOT a conservative concept, and would therefore be better suited for a place other than FR.

Just my humble opinion.

[Chad Fairbanks]

What's this 'we' stuff? Got someone in your pocketses?

[eureka!]

I really do like your sense of humor. Thanks for all you do...

[freedumb2003]

A noble effort, undertaken and supported by those of us who desire a safe, sane, and drug-free America.

Say WHAT?? Look you *&*%%^ I have had it with you and your ilk! I fart in your general direction! How DARE you come on this thread and say such nonsense! You must not have a single brain cell! What is your problem? Did your parents know each other???? Are all your posts this stupid???

I beg to differ. But of course, you have your perspective and I have mine.

[Hemingway's Ghost]

That is absolutely NOT a conservative concept, and would therefore be better suited for a place other than FR.

Funny . . . I don't recall seeing you on many WoD threads. If it's not a conservative concept, I wonder if you'd care to come on a thread and explain why, because none of the other Drug Warriors have been able to explain why supporting the W.o.D. is a conservative concept. Consider this an invitation from an anti-W.o.D. freeper to join in and argue your point.

[toothless]

The only way this will be achieved is if you simply ban those who support the ridiculous and highly immoral idea of drug legalization. That is absolutely NOT a conservative concept, and would therefore be better suited for a place other than FR.

[toothless]

Funny . . . I don't recall seeing you on many WoD threads. If it's not a conservative concept, I wonder if you'd care to come on a thread and explain why, because none of the other Drug Warriors have been able to explain why supporting the W.o.D. is a conservative concept. Consider this an invitation from an anti-W.o.D. freeper to join in and argue your point.

There is a section of conservatives that do not differ very much from the Taliban in their desire to control other people's morals.

[robertpaulsen]

Ask and ye shall receive:

[bvw]

Even the Temperance Movement had more respect for the Constitution than that. They did it the legot way, they respected the LAW, they passed a Constitutional Amendment.

There seems to be a mixed gang of thugs willing to kick the Constitution while it's down -- the nanny-state socialists with government as the Uber-Mammy, and the drug warriors, with governement as the Uber-Papa. Well many of us hold to a higher standard -- the government is a contract between adults.

[Chad Fairbanks]

The only way this will be achieved is if you simply ban those who support the ridiculous and highly immoral idea of drug legalization. That is absolutely NOT a conservative concept, and would therefore be better suited for a place other than FR.

One doesn't have to support drug legalization to have concerns about the trampling of the Constitution that appears to be occurring because of the WoD... but then, that's MY opinion...

[SquirrelKing]

"A great flame follows a little spark."

-Dante Alighieri (1265 - 1321), The Divine Comedy

[Chad Fairbanks]

"A great flame follows a little spark."

Ah yes... Dante... this line was inspired by some incidents in our Jr. high Locker Room...

[dighton]

See Civil War threads for another example.

Let bygones be bygones, I say. Never mind that the tyrant Lincoln stomped my great-great grandpa's puppy.