It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by HarlemHottie
Too bad that the American public, or as I like to call the sheeple, 'Pavlov's dogs,' have been trained to respond negatively to anything Cindy Sheehan ever says.
Originally posted by seattlelaw
The last thing we need in this country is for a person with such little empathy as yourself attending an institution such as Stanford. Leave off man.
We can only hope you're denied entry so you can apply to the University of Chicago
every principle everything this nation has stood for these past 200 years.
So off to UC with you to foster your prejudices against mothers
I do not ask for your sympathy for the woman's plight
for it is readily apparent that you do not entertain sympathy or empathy when considering the merit of a stated political position.
For people such as yourself, humanity constitutes widgets to be cast about, added or subtracted, in a mathematical formula designed to assess utilitatrian concepts of value rather than any inherent notion of value
Which reminds me that you are also a great man in your own mind from which self adulation I can only presume that your "application"
those who live by the sword are surely doomed to die by it.
Res ipsa loquitor, my good man.
Originally posted by The Vagabond
Her only claim to expertise is knowing a corpse.
Originally posted by The Vagabond
Anyone who needed training to respond negatively to Cindy Sheehan has obviously never seen/heard her speak. The woman is clearly and understandably mentally distressed. Her only claim to expertise is knowing a corpse.
"Dear highly educated, duly elected policy makers,
Our country's sovereign right to make war, of which my ADULT son CHOSE to be an instrument, got my baby killed. Please send a clear message that any president who ever exercises this right for any reason whatsoever may end up on trial for it. PS, the post office was busy so I'm just making it an open letter- I'm sure the media will publish it since I am one of the foremost political theorists of our time.
Signed,
Me the People"
You have voted The Vagabond for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
But it seems now that the Democrats are coming into power, he's backing off his widely known and held opinion that this administration should be impeached ...
Originally posted by brimstone735
Cheney, as president, would be able to nominate anyone to fill the vice presidency. In order to prevent McCain from winning in 08, Gingrich would be chosen, because he's the one guy who has a chance of beating McCain in the primaries.
Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
jso, If you think his mistakes were not malevolent, then why should he be impeached? People make mistakes. But I don't think that's a reason to impeach. I'm curious about your thoughts on this.
Your dilemma is that your life's argument (I presume uniformly) is grounded in the largely meaningless diktat of what matters in the physical world.
This rather brutish conceptualization of reality bears striking resemblance to that of Neanderthal.
Are you German?
For this reason I suggest that your narrow, if not shallow, focus as to what constitutes reality represents that type of individual who, like our incurious president, would ridicule anyone who might suggest the earth is other than flat. What say you?
And by the way, I don't believe anyone (certainly not Ms. Sheehan) needs to provide a legal foundation for the prosecution of the president's impeachment and imprisonment. He has done so quite adequately all by himself.
The question is, Mr. Utility, will he be held accountable for the many lies he has told and the deaths he has caused?
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Cheney would nominate Dr. Condi Rice.
[edit on 11/14/2006 by FlyersFan]
You have voted brimstone735 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.
Originally posted by seattlelaw
Thank you. That was fun. And seriously, best of luck with the application. I'm not certain how you kids can afford the tuition at such institutions
but perhaps the dems will successfully move repayment of student loans to a tax deduction status in the near future.
Which brings us full circle to the Conyers, et al, move away from impeachment as a goal. I understand both points of view.
for the sake of utility, we should impeach and imprison. But we will not do so in all likelihood.
Originally posted by seattlelaw
But do tell us the source from which you conclude that 41 is now back in control of the White House?