Just what does one do with a corpse anyway - target practice?

You must have missed that Sam Kinison skit about the corpse and suffering more indignities after death, or you would not ask this question…

well Genital readers

I hope that’s a typo and not a Fruedian slip Harley..

Now my friends, if this sequence of events had happened to you, how do you think your mental evaluation would go, at that time?

They would label me postal, and be right about it. Of course, they would miss the point that they and what they did to me are why I am feeling that way.

IF this man was considered a danger, why where his purchases approved?

Be careful asking this question, Harley. That’s exactly what they are hoping for. Then they can tell you that that pesky Constitution and second amendment thing is why they really couldn’t do much. That will be followed up with some commentary that what they need is a law that allows them to deny anyone they want a gun on whatever grounds. Forget the fact there are already laws tod deal with this stuff in the first place.

I forgot to state it explicitly, but I’m quite sure the Medford cops had every intention of killing the guy when they decided to go roust him out of his home had he resisted in the slightest.

You really have to wonder why the police dept in such a minor wide-spot of a town has a SWAT team in the first place.  Of course, once you have one, you have to use it....

I lived in Medford for about a decade - the cops there are about as corrupt as they get without garnering the attention of the FBI (like Boise does on a constant basis).  When they aren’t murdering their girlfriend’s husband or fucking the 17-year old girl that works the graveyard shift at the 24-hour donut shop, they tend to spend their time soliciting bribes when issuing bogus traffic tickets, selling drugs (and arresting the competition), and engaging in some routine brutality out of boredom.

The higher-ups are all angling for a job in a Portland, Seattle or LA, because despite all the opportunities for committing felonies while wearing a badge, it’s still a rinky-dink shithole and the pay isn’t all that great.  Besides, ever since all the loggers and mill workers left all there is to push around and harass are the transplanted asswipes from California that all came there to retire.

I would suspect the other daughter on whose property the burial crypt is located.

Just what does one do with a corpse anyway - target practice?

Speaking of dead celebrities, it looks like you can add Jim Phelps to the list.

SO, she has already been DNA tested with a 99.9(% certainty.
I would suspect the other daughter on whose property the burial crypt is located.

$27,500 per student

My sister is a biology teacher at one of the top college prep schools in Philadelphia… A high school that basically exists to feed students into the Ivy League. Annual tuition: $20,000-$22,000 per year.

Its time to really revisit the school voucher concept.

JAMES BROWN!

/Stays on the scene, like a sex machine.

He has Risen! “Do you see the Light?”

No body might mean no damning DNA tests exclude her from a legitimate claim of being an heir.

According to the linked story, activists are claiming that the local school district spends $27,500 per student.

If that number isn’t an indication of the failure of our education system, I don’t know what is. Countries that spend fractions of that number get better results. Maybe it is because they actually educate their kids instead of brainwash and coddle them. Nothing angers me more than people that think what we need is more money instead of a complete makeover of the education system to go back to the basics. This thing that we constantly need to dumb down education to make the dregs at the bottom not feel hurt is why we have so many stupid people that think they are so smart in charge of the country right now.

3) Jose Padilla, an American citizen, would still be indefinitely detained.  Charges were only brought against him because the court insisted on it thanks to these lawyers.  Same goes for John Lindh.

If the legal system had any value and the Constitution was still the law of the land, this guy would have been executed for treason. He took up arms against his country. That he was not executed strenghtens my believe we are doomed to lose this fight.

No clue WTF you mean by this statement, but if it is to say that terrorists need to be treated like criminals, I disagree.

Again, do you have anything to back this claim up, other than bold lettering?

9-11.

I rest my case.

1) Clinton treated terrorism like a criminal issue.  I mean, apart from bombing Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya.  And after he left office, a terror attack happened.

Clinton bombed? You mean the like that incident where we fired off few cruise missiles at empty buildings that house the Iraqi intel org machine in the middle of the night to avoid casualties? Effective as hell. Or are you discussing that attack on the Somali aspirin factory? Maybe the missiles fired at empty al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan? I distinctly remember Clinton getting all butch and though right around the time he was in trouble for lying under oath, but it was meaningless crap.

I would also love to know what bombs Clinton ordered dropped on Libya. I don’t think we have had to bomb Libya ever since Reagan ordered our troops to kill Khadafy back when, and they missed him by a few minutes, but killed his beloved kid. He got so scared then that he played nice after that. Maybe you are confusing Libya with the bombs that were dropped on the Chinese embassy in Serbia when Clinton was president?

The fact remains that Clinton did his best to produce a great show for the distraction factor, but in general terrorist were treated like criminals and with kid gloves. Do I have to rehash the entire bin Laden could have been long dead if Clinton had done his job bit, again?

2) Bush treated terrorism like a war issue.  Except for using the criminal justice system to get the shoe bomber, the bridge bomber and a bunch of other guys.

So you agree with me Bush was wrong there then? Good.

And apart from thousands of our soldiers getting blown up in a foreign country, nothing bad happened!

Maybe you also think most soldier join up just for the free money, food, lodging, and education, but I can tell you that most of them do it because they believe in their country, and want to defend it and give back for it. They understand why they serve. The death of even one soldier is a tragedy, but they make the ultimate sacrifice to keep us free, and this was just more of the same. Please don’t insult them and their sacrifice by claiming they were victims of terrorism when they were soldiers at war, just so you can score cheap points. You sound about as convincing as the libs that claim to want to support our troops by doing everything they can to help get them killed and fail at their mission. This attempt to equate soldiers in harms way during a war with acts of terrorism so you can make like treating terrorists like criminals was a better thing, reeks of desperation.

3) Obama is treating this like a criminal issue—I mean apart from intensified attacks of Afghanistan and more drone attacks in Pakistan. 

Speaking of that, and relating it right back to the death of our troops. Ain’t it funny how when Bush was doing this same thing the very people now pointing out Obama is doing more were front & center doing everything they could to undermine his efforts, force a stop to this, and accusing him of murdering civilians? Now Obama is doing it and you want to give him credit for it. Don’t get me wrong. I am glad Obama has ordered our troops to kill these bastards, and I will give him his props for that, but I draw the line there. We could have been doing the same 4 or 5 years ago if the left had not then actively worked to stop us from doing so.

So if anthing happens, it must be because we put KSM on trial!

No, if anything happens Hal, it is because Obama and the idiots that think like you have dismantled the post 9-11 system that was put in place that put to successfully defend American lives and prevent terrorist attacks in favor of the same broken system that was in place pre-9-11 and failed us. But you can keep up the desperate tactic that the game being rigged in favor of the terrorists didn’t make an attack on their part easer. It works well to make my case.

That’s no logic, Alex.  That’s tribalism.  My guy good, your guy bad.

Yeah, that’s what it is. Unlike you I have no problem admitting when my guy is wrong. It’s nothing about my guy good, your guy bad but I, again, understand the need for that to be your defense/argument/premse. If Obama had chosen to keep the policy that was instituted after 9-11 I would be defending him here. Just like I defend him when morons say he is wrong for ramping up the predator attacks or not pulling out of Afghanistan yet.

The point is simple: terrorists are not criminals, and when we treat them as such during a time of war, we are going to pay for it. It has nothing to do my guy or your guy.

Really Dog, do you have anything to back up what you are saying?  I could write that Alex is full of shit because the Obama Hope/Change unicorm will change its farts from rainbows to prescriptions (stinky but free) and would have almost as much credibility as your rants. 

And, ummm, are you a doctor?  Or was that a typo or some sort of rhetorical device?

Just curious.

They are vaguely aware of some concern about this “deficit thing” out there.  But they don’t really grok it.

Maybe they need a few libertarian water brothers.

I recently was talking to my mother, who asked if Obama knows that there’s a limit to the amount of money he can spend.  I don’t think he does.  I don’t think any of them do, Republican or Democrat (but especially Democrat).

Why do you think Obama re-nominated Helicopter Ben Bernanke to head the Federal Reserve?  He knows damn well Benny B. will pull out all the inflation-supporting measures he can to promote the illusion of a “recovery.”

I can’t wait until the bulk of the OptionARM and Alt-A loans start resetting next year and make a joke of everything they’ve done since TARP.

Sterilization may not be the most libertarian though in this case but then again I’m a father with custody of his child.

These salaries and per student cost, at some point, need to be seriously dialed back. That won’t happen as long as the NEA and the left continually feed each other. One requires power the other money to bestow power… wash, rinse, repeat.
Break that cycle and indoctrination goes back to being education. Bust all unions and cost goes down.For everything.

Tenure may have once had a purpose in American society,the NEA not so much.Democrats even less, but I digress.

If we are able to get a handle on this, or heaven forbid, get it corrected, it will all just happen again… as it always has.

Some days I feel like I’m living on Caprica fergodssakes.

The unions in California make about 1/3 of the political donations i the state.  That’s a power that only a massive popular will can resist.

There are already laws to prevent stuff like this from happening.  They failed, and adding one more wouldn’t help at all.  They’ll be punished for this, and likely serve time.  That’s how it should be.

Nothing is ever our fault.

I see you’ve met my nephew....

Keep in mind.  Had these lawyers not gotten involved, the situation would be:

1) The Gitmo prisoners who were freed and “returned to the fight” would still have been freed.  The 500 men were freed, most after many many years, by the Bush Administration without court intervention.

2) Al-Rabiah and several other innocent men will still be confined in Gitmo.  Their cases only came up because of these lawyers.

3) Jose Padilla, an American citizen, would still be indefinitely detained.  Charges were only brought against him because the court insisted on it thanks to these lawyers.  Same goes for John Lindh.

To you guys, this is going way way beyond representation.

Ah Thrill, always can rely on you to come around for this sort of thing.

At issue is the fact that Holder and his buddies didn’t just want to defend them in court but to bless them with a whole set of rights that go far beyond any protections ever given to any belligerents that fought against the US.  They went far, far beyond mere “representation.”

Yes, I remember how we imprisoned communist traitors and spies indefinitely without trial and tortured them.  And how we imprisoned suspected Viet Cong without trial and tortured them.  And how we imprisoned British loyalists without trial and tortured them.  Good times, good times.

Really, they should have just told these guys to confess and walked away.  Asking for even a modicum of proof that they were terrorists was going way too far.  No one should ever zealously represent a client within the bounds of the law.

As for useful idiots, I thought that’s what he meant.  So once again, we circle around to “you’re a terrorist sympathizer”.  And the circle is complete.  I’ll just call up the Gitmo 7 lawyers so we can burn an American flag together.

And I’m still curious what the Stalin smear is all about.

He’s calling a “useful idiot.” Honestly, I think it’s unfair to call you a useful idiot.

The detainees should have lawyers--military lawyers who represent them in Combat Status Review Tribunals and military trials.

At issue is the fact that Holder and his buddies didn’t just want to defend them in court but to bless them with a whole set of rights that go far beyond any protections ever given to any belligerents that fought against the US.  They went far, far beyond mere “representation.”

That is a problem that even a regular ol’ idiot should be able to identifty, Hal.

Medicare has by the lowest refusal rate for reimbursement

That’s just a flat out lie according to the AMA

I am sure there are people out there passing judgment on you Hal for being so callous to get angry at them, and not understanding that computers are an addiction and these poor people just could not resist it. It’s nobody’s fault!

Exactly.  Nothing is ever our fault.

Let me say it again: he policy of treating terrorists like common criminals and having to deal with them after the fact is what made the 9-11 attacks possible.

Again, do you have anything to back this claim up, other than bold lettering?  This claim that you keep making—that criminal trials will somehow make us vulnerable.  The only logic I can see supporting this is:

1) Clinton treated terrorism like a criminal issue.  I mean, apart from bombing Iraq and Afghanistan and Libya.  And after he left office, a terror attack happened.

2) Bush treated terrorism like a war issue.  Except for using the criminal justice system to get the shoe bomber, the bridge bomber and a bunch of other guys.  And apart from thousands of our soldiers getting blown up in a foreign country, nothing bad happened!

3) Obama is treating this like a criminal issue—I mean apart from intensified attacks of Afghanistan and more drone attacks in Pakistan.  So if anthing happens, it must be because we put KSM on trial!

That’s no logic, Alex.  That’s tribalism.  My guy good, your guy bad.

And I’m still curious what the Stalin smear is all about.

Well, that’s the catch-22, isn’t it?

No, it is not.

You guys denounce everything Obama does so that you can claim “I told you so” when an attack happens.

Weak even from you Hal. Who the F is the supposed “You guys” you are talking about and lumping me in? I denounce everything Obama does that’s wrong, and so far his wrong outnumbers the good by 3 digit orders of magnitudes. I have even defended him when I though he was right or unfairly attacked, granted that’s not often, but on this topic he is dead wrong, and the consequences will be disastrous. See, you would have a point if what Obama was doing was not done before. The indisputable fact is that what he is doing is taking us back to the treating terrorists at war with us the same way that was done before 9-11. And we all know how well that worked and what happened then. You do know what the definition of insanity is right? Treating terrorists at war with us like common criminals while making people like you feel good led to the worst attack on our soil ever, and it will not work now either. No matter how much smarter or better the current collectivist morons think they are. You can however keep pretending that our beef with this disastrous policy change is just because we are automatically opposed to anything Obama, like the libs did when Bush was president, but the delusion is on your part.

Whether it was a result of his policies or not, you will claim this, given your disconnect from fact

Already feeling the need to hedge to provide yourself some cover, Hal? Let me say it again: he policy of treating terrorists like common criminals and having to deal with them after the fact is what made the 9-11 attacks possible. There is no correlation or false claim there. That was proven to be the problem. Yet here we are going right back to it and pretending that this time it will work. Them’s the facts. The disconnect is on your part.

We didn’t have jurisdiction over occupied Iraq?

Are you seriously this stupid? Iraq was a war zone dude! You do know the difference between the US and a place that US troops are engaged in a hot war right? What’s next? Stretch it to say we had jurisdiction in Indonesia too because we have a president that lived there?

OK.  Then Clinton kept this country safe because we didn’t have a domestic terror attack after the first WTC.

Yeah sure, except epic fail. I am not even going to focus on the fact that we had the WTC attacks under his watch, I am only going to point out that his policies and the same practice Obama is re-instituting of treating terrorists like common criminals and not enemy combatants lead to 9-11. I am even willing to give Clinton a huge pass compared to Obama because he didn’t know better – there had been no 9-11 attack yet – yet, and even more importantly, he did not see the reality that we were at war with these people. Obama and his people on the other hand do know and are in the middle of the war, despite their every attempt to pretend otherwise, and yet they are hell bent on taking us backward. There is no excuse for that.

As for the PS, God damn that Holder for filing a brief to keep the Bush Administration from indefinitely imprisoning an American citizen.

Yeah, that’s what you need to make the argument about, even when that’s got nothing to do with what those of us that oppose this lunacy are pointing out, so you can demonize us and ignore the facts in the case. You have earned your lib bonnafides on this one.

I put this in the queue for 12 hours to try to calm down and it still fills me with rage.

I am sure there are people out there passing judgment on you Hal for being so callous to get angry at them, and not understanding that computers are an addiction and these poor people just could not resist it. It’s nobody’s fault!

I’m sure some dipshit is going to try pass a law to prevent this sort of thing.

Want to bet which party they are likely to belong to? And want to bet the bad guy in all of this will be the evil capitalist computer makers and not the idiots that should not have had a kid in the first place?