Comments Posted By SShiell
Displaying 151 To 160 Of 223 Comments
I DARE YOU TO MAKE ME A DEMOCRAT
Another example of the difference is the British and US laws: In Britain, the authorities can detain and hold a suspect for 28 days without charges being filed. He is not under arrest, he is merely being "detained". At the end of 28 days, charges must be filed or the suspect must be released. here in the US, a suspect generally can only be held for 48 hours before charges must be filed.
Again, I do not think you would advocate changing our laws to mimic the British system just because it "works".
Comment Posted By SShiell On 14.11.2006 @ 02:15
"Law enforcement is working well for the British."
Not so fast there, Bill. The British Anti-Terrorism Laws make the Patriot Act seem like child's play. Law enforcement works for the British because there is not the same respect for privacy in the British system as there is in ours. They do not play with the same set of rules that we have. Our Constitution, even with the Patriot Act in place, handcuffs our law enforcement agencies. (And as much as the Left complains otherwise, the Constitution is still the law of this land)
Example: Surveillance. The controls for internal surveillance in Britain are not the same as in the US. The contoversial NSA "domestic" surveillance programs have to have a foreign communication source - not so in Britain. Any and all communication sources are fair game and there does not need to be any court allowance in order to do the surveillance, use the information for arrest, or even use the information for trial. Why or How can this be? Becasue the British system trusts the law enforcement agencies of their country in ways we do not.
And in the final analysis, I do not think you would advocate changing our laws to mimic the British system just because it works.
Didn't think so.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 14.11.2006 @ 02:03
The Republicans put out and signed the Contract for America over a dozen years ago and it was the Republican Party, not the voters, who broke that contract. I believed in that piece of paper promising a small, fiscally responsible government and, for a while, it seemed to work. Then 9/11 happened followed closely by the war and soon the Republican Party ran out of "airspeed and ideas" in the process. Hubris and arrogance brought them down and they deserved it much the same way the Democrats deserved their comeuppance 12 years ago.
The biggest question of all now is - did they learn anything from it? Time will tell.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 8.11.2006 @ 23:46
The legacy of Viet Nam is to not fight a war in any way except to win. Viet Nam was a near perfect example of what happens when you try not to lose. And even there, once Nixon took off the shackles and let loose the Air Force for Linebacker II the North was begging to get to the peace table and couldn't sign a peace treaty fast enough.
In Iraq, we haven't and aren't losing the war - the war has already been won. You don't invade a country and take its capital in 21 days and call that a loss. We are losing the peace!
Yeah, I know, you my think it is just semantics but take "another counterfactual" example here and say the war in 1945 Europe is over, the surrender of the Germans has just been signed and we immediately beat feet, leave the country, even leave the continent. Why? Because we have another enemy to finish off - the Japanese. And no sense wasting any more time here than we need to.
In actual fact, the troop levels in Germany stayed above 500,000 for almost two years. And there were casualties there that would surprise you. And that does not include the British or French troops. (Yes, even the French. The one thing they take pleasure in war is any chance they can to rub the Germans nose in IT.) Why so many troops? How about 2,000,000+ Soviet troops. The War is over but where do you think Europe would be today if we had left.
I agree with you Rick. Disheartened at the way the "Peace" had been conducted - Yes. But until that "Peace" is won, we still got work to do. A new and better plan? Great - Put something on the table Democrats . . . put something on the table anybody.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 6.11.2006 @ 19:20
To me the case is simple and it has nothing to do with the desease MJF is suffering from, whether he is or is not on his meds - it has everything to do with the use of “infallible victims†in politics.
Cindy Sheehan, Michael J Fox, the 9/11 Widows - anyone who stands up in support of a political agenda is fair game. To question whether MJF was acting or off his meds in order to make a political point is a reasonable question. Let him answer it. And let him support his rationale for doing so. His affliction does not make him bullet proof.
It reminds me of a warning my grandfather once gave me: "Be careful when you take the moral high ground. All that heavenly backlighting makes you an outstanding target."
Comment Posted By SShiell On 25.10.2006 @ 16:15
A LIBERAL MANIFESTO AND OTHER HALLOWEEN FRIGHTS
"As the Democrats seem poised to take power on election day, liberals might remind themselves that only the extraordinary hubris and stupidity of Republicans and not any grand clash of ideas is giving them this victory."
I agree that this midterm election result is just punishment for Republican sins. I can only hope the Republican Party can learn from this experience and return to the conservative roots that brought it to power in the first place. The arrogance of a liberal President who decided he knew better than the average American how life should be lived and what a normal person's goals should be.
If the Democratic Party were to live by this "manifesto" then it will be a short lived ascendency. And the result will be they could very well find themselves condemned to where they belong, the graveyard with the Whigs, the No-Nothings, and all the other defunct political parties of the past.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 24.10.2006 @ 15:01
Condemn her to live in the very world she praises - exile this "God forsaken, broken down old side show barker" to Iran. Let's see how she takes to living among those she defends.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 17.10.2006 @ 10:52
COOLING THE PLANET BY BURNING SKEPTICS
Far left environmental moonbats trying to stifle debate from those whose ideas are diametrically opposed to their own. Rick, so what else is new? Is this any different from the standard run-of-the-mill moonbat tactic?
But here there is a major difference. The difference is the "Hitler" reference is a built-in mechanism. "Nuremberg-Style War Crimes" makes referring to Hitler or Nazis redundant. And even the old "I was just doing my duty" defense falls apart even better than before!
Brilliant!
(Snark)
Comment Posted By SShiell On 13.10.2006 @ 09:00
APPALLING DISHONESTY FROM OLBERMAN
"More strained and putrid prose from Olberman with Keith getting out the kneepads to service his hero."
Was that a blue suit Olberman was wearing? DNA tests anyone?
Comment Posted By SShiell On 26.09.2006 @ 11:35
"Where does this idiocy end?" It won't end so long as it works. They get the attention they want and will force the world to grovel at the feet of their tantrums.
How do you deal with a bully? You stand up to him. You put your face into his and tell him point blank "NO!" He may be able to wipe the floor with you. But the classic bully will back down. Because he is so used to people backing down to his demands, he does not know how to deal with someone standing up to him.
"Where does this idiocy end?" It ends when the world gives the Islamoturds the bitch slapping they deserve whenever they throw their tantrums. And when does that happen? When we put our fear of them aside and stand up to the bullying tactics they employ.
Comment Posted By SShiell On 20.09.2006 @ 15:38
