More bad news to end the week...damn, this will definitely be a week I remember for the rest of my life.

Oh SHIT.

Ok for those of you that don't know the Supreme Court basically says what will and will not go and actually are the most powerful body in the United States Government. They withhold the right to say what is and isn't constitutonal and are a check and balance for the President and Congress. Unfortunately though the Justices are appointed by the President. So that means that Bush now gets to pick a new Supreme Justice.

On the scale of bad, this is about an 8.5 out of 10 people.

Article here http://www.cnn.com/2005/LAW/09/03/rehnquis...obit/index.html

Yeah, it's bad that Bush gets to pick a justice, but Rehnquist was conservative and Bush will pick somebody conservative so it balances out.

Oh god he gets to appoint another WASP.

it was bound to happen, sooner than later, rehnquist has had cancer for more than a year, and he wasnt the healthiest of 80 year olds.

Thats sad that someone died, but FUCK CONSERVATIVES.

No, Conservatives are good on some issues. Technically i'm Conservative.

Fuck Fundamentalist Christians, is what you mean.

Time to get Judge Judy on the bench !!

NAH .
Judge Wapner wipes the floor with them .

No.. It's time for judge Dredd

Forget all of you, bring on THE JUDGE!

now i see y he died
but seriously this does suck, these next months are gonna be tough as hell

Dweezil with the win.

Fuck them too.


But, I dont like a majority of conservatives.

If you break me down issue by issue I'm probably more conservative than liberal. But it just so happens that the issues I feel much more STRONGLY about tend to be supported by liberals and absolutely destroyed by the conservatives, so I tend to vote democrat most of the time.

But I'm a libertarian, is that chill with you?

I thought I was a libertarian once, then I got a clue.

I'm a card carrying (i do have a card!)

I'm a card carrying liberal too...I'm an ACLU member!

Although I'm gonna have to renew my membership here in a few months and I'm not gonna. As much as I support the ACLU's cause, they have a stigma which prevents them from getting much done, and they're REALLY stupid about 1 out of 10 times (hence the stigma).

Every libertarian on Earth is 16 years old. What the party stands for is a little off, but pretty good. Libertarians themselves are fat, stupid cocksuckers who have never had to survive on their own and believe everyone should tough it out.

That's basically the conclusion I reached.

I still like smaller government, and man do I like Badnarik's upstanding interpretation of the constitution. But they really go too far when it comes to cutting government...stuff like SCHOOLS. I consider schools like, ya know, important.

But mostly libertarians are gun freaks. Not like I'm for banning guns, I believe they should be legal...it's just that gun freaks are scary.

my dad is a libetarian, he started out a poor immigrant living in a 400sq. foot house with his mom, dad, brother and 2 sets of grand parents, and now is worth millions...so they arent all fat and lazy. he threw a copy of any Rand's "atlas shrugged" at me when he found out i was a member of the liberals...such a thick book!

civillians should not have guns...if people wernt allowed to buy guns, freewer criminals would have guns, and gun violence would go down...in canada there are very few gun related crimes, because we regulate guns so closely...the same statistic is true fopr every other country which regulates gun ownership and use!

Yes, thank you Michael Moore.

However, I know for a fact that people can own guns properly and never kill anybody. Banning guns to prevent murders it like banning DVD-R sales to prevent bootlegging or like banning cars to prevent traffic accidents. There are safe, legal uses for guns that should be protected. If somebody shoots somebody else, then that's against the law and there's a trial and yadda yadda. It's how the system works.

This point is all fucked up because people ARE allowed to own guns, and lots of 'em, in Canada. Regulation and registration are not the same as banning. You are advocating banning while using an example of regulation and registration.

Ha, good call Mitlov.

Seconded. Everything but the name will stay the same.

I'm more pissed that Bush will be picking O'Connor's replacment. She was a very important swing vote...with a conservative in her place, the Surpreme Court will vote with the republicans 90% of the time. The balance of the surpreme court will be lost.

<-- Not 16 years old, living with a roommate in an apartment, 6'4'' and 180lbs, and I have NEVER sucked a cock in my lifetime. I suppose that I should generalize that all liberals are tofu-eating hippies that have never had to work for a damn thing in their life and just want handouts for the government? And they suck cocks?

But you and I know that's a load of horseshit.

So I take it you want to export all the mexicans and close america's borders?

Yup. I eat babies for fun too. Fetuses are like veal, so raw and tender. Which reminds me, anyone have any good recipies?

http://www.lp.org/issues/immigration.shtml

They favor open immigration.

huh I wonder when they changed that.

criminals would have illegal AK47s, and law abiding citizens would be stuck with dinner forks

our mexican border is so perforated that you could probably get a nuclear warhead through there

a lot of you euros and canadians seem to forget that we have mexico and south america right below us, and a lot of people bitch and moan about border restrictions so we basically let them come in whenever they want illegally. our border patrol is useless

This is the biggest crock of drivel I have ever read. Law abiding citizens who own guns are not the cause of the problem.. the criminals are. Are you that naive to think the criminals will buy guns through legitimate means? They'll never pass the background check., so they either steal them (as in the looting of New Orleans) or buy them on the black market, most of which were stolen by the scumbags to begin with. Government should enforce the gun laws they have on the books and severely punish the criminals who use guns in the commission of their crimes.. of course, the liberals will say it's "cruel and unusual" to single out one segment of the criminal society...

Say what you will about Rehnquist... he stuck up for the little guy in the New Haven eminent domain case ( unfortunatly, the liberals on the SC carried the vote) In case you didn't know about this. The City of New Haven, Connecticut wants to kick people out of their homes by taking them by eminent domain to sell the land to a developer. Most cases of eminent domain are done to construct roads, schools and public buildings. This case was to fatten the wallets of the developers. Ironically, that's what conservatives are expected to do...

The liberals on the supreme court sided with the City and the developers.. I thought they stood up "for the people"...

nobody is going to listen to you. democrats and liberals have a habit of conveniently ignoring information that goes against their notion of every democrat politician being the son of god.

DZ.. Any hardliner is like that conservative OR liberal.

I have seen stupid republicans and stupid democrats.

i agree, both sides are idiotic, but i just find it frustrating that something as huge as the emminent domain case is used by liberals against the bush administration when it was in fact the democrats who pushed it

um, where do the stolen guns come from? can you say "from people who bought them Legit, and had them stolen?"

the bullshit about mexico and South America is retarted...durring the time that the "assault rifle ban" was on in the US, crime commited with these weapons went down, now that the law is off the book, and you can again buy these kinds of weapons, crime with them is on the rise...notice how this has nothing to do with the mexicans??

canada dosent ban guns, but we do have tough laws which govern who gets them, how they are stored, and how they can be carried...did you know it is illegal in canada to leave a gun in a car un attended...you have to move it form your house to your car in a locked container then you must procede directly to the place you intend to use i the weapon, be it a range or a designated hunting area...the transport it right back home...and you know what...we dont have anywhere near the amount of gun crime you do down south...is this a coincidence? we have poor, we have oppressed, but we dont have as much gun crime...weird.

but any way this is OT.

I dont know alot about how americna politics work, your Supreme court sounds alot like our Sennate...appointees sit on the bench for life, after being apointed by the current political leader...it's a ridiculus system...and I dont understand why we have it in place...it seems conter intuitive to democracy.

The US isn't a democracy, its a republic. Guns are only dangerous if people aren't taught to respect them.

up here we call it a representitive democracy...but it dosent apply to the senate, which has "final" approval of all of our laws & bills (they are thought to be the only road block in our "de-criminilize pot" bill working its way through the system now). the sennate is appointed..and sit till they retire or die.

its hard to teach a kid about proper gun control and respect...especially a kid who grows up poor...it is much easier to make it hard to get the gun in the first place...if you eliminate the major supply of guns...i.e. guns stolen from legitiamate owners, you would in effect reduce the amount of gun crime in your country...but with the disolvemnt of the assualt weapon ban, things have atcually taken a step backwards...

I live in Texas to go to school, and a great deal of the folks I know here (including my roommate) were around guns since day one, fired one before they turned 10, and were disciplined very well in their use and their dangerous capability. They turned out alright, and not one of my friends has committed a violent crime with one. If you take away guns from law abiding citizens, criminals will still get them, and you've taken away a man's right to defend himself - you can't bring a knife to a gun fight. Just taking them away from legitimate owners isn't a solution - the folks who you don't want to have them will still have them regardless.

Fact is, the armed are citizens, the unarmed are subjects.

in canada we have strict gun laws, and the criminals, for the most part DO NOT have guns...they cancle eachother out...but it is a proliferation of fear which supports the american gun culture...

I like guns...I have used them...and i think they are fun, but i dont want them in my house, or in my neighbors house, or in the hands of some punk kid...i think they are an accident waiting to happen...

and king henry gave up on taking your country long ago, you dont need to defend it any more

Should spoons be outlawed because obesity is on the rise? Folks attitude is what must change - pointless legislation leads to a Big Brother effect. Instead of taking guns away, encourage education about them. I grow tired of the solution being - "Problems involving X are on the rise, lets ban X." Like somebody already pointed out, that's like putting a tax on iPods because they might hold stolen Mp3s or CD-Rs because they might be burned with copyrighted material.

WHAT THE!? really? shit, i thought he was still after us, damn, ive wasted all this money and arms and ammunitions. hah silly me.

That's not the king I'm worried about.



That motherfucker is EVERYWHERE.

you can argue that cars are far more dangerous than guns, seeing as how they are more prevalent and cause much more deaths per year than guns even in america. should we outlaw cars too?

Spoons first.

but not before matches. after all, they light things on fire, and fire kills people

Oh, you're right. But what about metals? They can be used to make guns, knives and cars. Sounds like that's the source of the problem right there.