ya that's what i thought. stfu.

1/31/2006 4:45:02 PM

Do you claim victory every time your opponent leaves for a job interview?

Fucking idiot.

Quote :

"no duh, but if the separation of powers was as broken as you guys are claiming it to be, ("Total absence of check or balance."), then his mere assertion would never be challenged."

As was his intention, evidenced by the steps he took to insure that it wouldn't be challenged...

Why don't you put that statement of mine in context, lest you look even more illiterate. I applied the total absence of a check or balance to one situation. Just because you wish I'd generalized doesn't mean I did.

Quote :

"Excoriator: It is being challenged. Separation of powers is alive and well."

Now.

It is being challenged now.

It doesn't seem to bother you that if it were left to the President--or even left to continue as it had been, it never would've seen the light of day, never would have been checked by the judiciary as prescribed, and therefore never would have conformed to the system of checks and balances at all. In short, the checks and balances enshrined in the Constitution would have been dead and buried.

I'm finished arguing with such an obvious attempt to troll.

1/31/2006 9:09:23 PM

but it wasn't left to the president. it was left to the congress also. they ALSO decided not to pursue this issue. It wasn't until the matter was leaked to the press and public pressure forced congress' hand that they decided to pursue the issue.

Just because they agreed with the president and decided that they didn't want to purse him, doesn't mean that separation of powers was broken. It just meant that they agreed with him.

1/31/2006 11:13:20 PM

ensure != insure

1/31/2006 11:15:01 PM

Quote :

" indeed...i will buy your plane ticket "

PAYPAL THE MONEY TO GEORGE@DIRTYGREEK.ORG

1/31/2006 11:15:31 PM

^ HAHA do it trikk311.. and then when he takes the money and does not leave, get a warrant on him for Internet fraud and theft.

[Edited on January 31, 2006 at 11:21 PM. Reason : add]

1/31/2006 11:19:29 PM

Quote :

"then again, i'm not a woman, see, so I DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO TELL THEM WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH THEIR BODIES"

yeah, but you are perfectly content to let women tell men what to do with their wallets

2/1/2006 4:23:36 PM

I'm not a woman so I can't tell them what to do with that gun.

2/1/2006 4:25:43 PM