Damaeus > wrote in
:

> As I see it, they shouldn't say anything in public that they aren't
> prepared to step up on stage and say in person.

The amazing thing is that she is hiring Levant to represent her in a human
rights complaint after HER organizers shut down the debate. Can you say
"self-absorbed"? I knew you could :-)

I guess Levant will have to go before one of those human rights tribunals
he "so dearly loves" (tm applied for). Don't expect any sympathy towards
these nutjobs, from the tribunals or from me.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...streatment-in-
canada/article1509793/

http://tinyurl.com/yj63g59

And she's off...blah-de-blah-de-blah.

It might have been politic to let her put her foot in it and then arrest
her for hate-mongering. Of course, her whole argument falls apart as she
is trying to deny a much larger group of people THEIR right to free speech
in a democratic society.

--

"The officer corps will forgive anything they can
understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."

Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16

On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:09:01 -0500, Michel Boucher wrote:

> Damaeus > wrote in
> :
>
>> As I see it, they shouldn't say anything in public that they aren't
>> prepared to step up on stage and say in person.
>
> The amazing thing is that she is hiring Levant to represent her in a human
> rights complaint after HER organizers shut down the debate. Can you say
> "self-absorbed"? I knew you could :-)
>
> I guess Levant will have to go before one of those human rights tribunals
> he "so dearly loves" (tm applied for). Don't expect any sympathy towards
> these nutjobs, from the tribunals or from me.
>
> http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...streatment-in-
> canada/article1509793/
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yj63g59
>
> And she's off...blah-de-blah-de-blah.
>
> It might have been politic to let her put her foot in it and then arrest
> her for hate-mongering. Of course, her whole argument falls apart as she
> is trying to deny a much larger group of people THEIR right to free speech
> in a democratic society.

to me, the word '****' was invented just for coulter.

but i find the canadian approach to free speech to be misguided. i had
read of this part of the post pointed to elsewhe

Even before she spoke in London ¡X the first of three speeches this week on
Canadian soil ¡X Coulter received a pre-emptive and private caution about
the limits of free speech in Canada from the provost of the University of
Ottawa, where she appears Tuesday.

....and apparently informing her that she could be arrested and jailed if
she spouted her usual crap.

to my way of thinking, one of the best things about america is that you're
free to say any damnfool thing that pops into your head, short of
threatening to kill the president. i think that's as it should be in a
free society.

i didn't like students shouting down speakers when i was in college, and i
don't like it now. leave that shit to the pinhead teabaggers.

(but any post about coulter requires a pointer to this pictu

<http://www.allgraphicdesign.com/images/Coulter.Alien.jpg>

....too bad her adam's apple isn't seen to best advantage here.)

your pal,
blake

In news:rec.food.cooking, Michel Boucher > posted on
Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:09:01 -0500 the following:

> Damaeus > wrote in
> :
>
> > As I see it, they shouldn't say anything in public that they aren't
> > prepared to step up on stage and say in person.
>
> The amazing thing is that she is hiring Levant to represent her in a human
> rights complaint after HER organizers shut down the debate. Can you say
> "self-absorbed"? I knew you could :-)

I read more about it and found out that the police shut down the thing
going on in Canada, not Ann. Ann actually wants to press forward. Maybe
that makes her more of a bitch than I thought she was originally. I
dunno. Some people just hit me that way. "Bitch..." You know the type.
Doesn't mean I stick to the view, but sometimes it hits.

> It might have been politic to let her put her foot in it and then arrest
> her for hate-mongering. Of course, her whole argument falls apart as she
> is trying to deny a much larger group of people THEIR right to free speech
> in a democratic society.

Yes, having your voice heard on a planet of many is hard to do.
Unfortunately people who are "important enough" to get on TV get a lot
more attention than someone who lives in a trailer in Mississippi. The
guy living in Mississippi would be able to say more about what's needed
than some career politician with a lousy tie.

I don't think anybody can deny that "more money" makes the living of life
better. I know people like to parrot that "money can't buy happiness". I
think that's propaganda. I know there are wealthy people who have lost
their happiness. Also, as someone who has never had a lot of money, I
can't see how having more of it could make me unhappy, or prevent me from
being happier.

The lack of enough money in my own life has lead to all kinds of
depressing things, like not being able to buy all the latest video games.
Video games certainly make me happy. There are some I want now, and not
being able to get them makes me unhappy. Or not being able to pay the
bills I ran up going into debt for the necessities (like car repairs) I
needed just to keep going to work every day. Not having enough money
starts you out in a position of discontent to begin with. At least having
plenty of money to spend on the things you need and want keeps that aspect
of life (the lack of money) from making you unhappy.

Money didn't buy happiness for one person who perhaps had a remarkable
story. But it has turned into a religion. You can't buy happiness with
cash, but who wants to order happiness and pay the bill for it? In that
case, it's the trip toward happiness that is more fun: spending the money,
and using what you've bought.

Damaeus
--
"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."
-Harry Anslinger (1929), Federal Bureau of Narcotics

In news:rec.food.cooking, blake murphy > posted
on Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:23:24 -0400 the following:

> Even before she spoke in London ?X the first of three speeches this week
> on Canadian soil ?X Coulter received a pre-emptive and private caution
> about the limits of free speech in Canada from the provost of the
> University of Ottawa, where she appears Tuesday.
>
> ...and apparently informing her that she could be arrested and jailed if
> she spouted her usual crap.
>
> to my way of thinking, one of the best things about america is that
> you're free to say any damnfool thing that pops into your head, short of
> threatening to kill the president. I think that's as it should be in a
> free society.

Well, there are things I'd /like/ to say, but don't say publicly because
doing so makes one look suspicious. I could say that I wish a big swarm
of tornadoes would come blow all of Washington DC out into the ocean,
including all the politicians who work there. While the net result would
be positive for the country and the world, the method of removing
Washington DC is the one point that's hard to post online without a twinge
of fear, unless I use some wild natural event, like a swarm of tornadoes.
I certainly don't think it would be a bad thing if all the so-called
"politicians" ended up out of office. And even if I suggested some
"militaristic way" of accomplishing it, I don't want any readers to
actually feel like I have the means or the will to pull it off. The whole
thing these days isn't even interesting enough to make me sick, to
paraphrase Cher in "The Witches of Eastwick". All I want is a peaceful
life to contemplate, think about things, and just spend my time alone.
Joining some bandwagon full of scraggly, bearded Americans who are turning
themselves into terrorists is just so flaming stupid, not only because it
proves that one is a parrot, but because there's no point. Hell, if
everybody would stop trying to kill other people, we'd all live in peace!

I really don't give a shit one way or the other. I just go by what it
looks like people want: freedom (for themselves, not others), and what
politicians are not providing: freedom (because they can't when people
can't ask for freedom without also adding exceptions to freedom).

I do feel muted in that I don't always feel like I can write exactly what
I think for fear of being investigated as a possible terrorist. Of
course, I don't agree with the Muslims or Islamics, either, so I have
nothing to gain by joining their, even more ridiculous and stupid side of
life. The only thing positive I can say about Afghanistan is that they're
growing poppies for the world. YAY Afghanistan! I also feel sorry for
drug cartels who must hire and maintain armies just to fill a hole in the
market that the USA doesn't like.

You'll notice I kind of danced in this message. It's not one I'm totally
comfortable posting, but I'm gonna hit send anyway. Surely any
chucklehead who thinks I'm interesting enough to investigate will see my
thousands of other usenet posts that have nothing to do with their little
3-ring circus.

Damaeus
--
"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."
-Harry Anslinger (1929), Federal Bureau of Narcotics

blake murphy > wrote in news:9tbaexr12eui
:

> but i find the canadian approach to free speech to be misguided.

We have limits to free speech here and those limits are centered on hate-
mongering. Had she said anything which would have been deemed to have
promoted hatred towards a particular group (lib'ruls, ayrabs, furriners),
she could be arrested and charged with commission of a crime under the
Criminal Code. sections 296 (blasphemopus libel), 297 (defamatory libel)
and Hate Propaganda, sections 318 (Advocating genocide) and 319 (Public
incitement of hatred). You cannot expect us to listen and read what she
has produced so far and not already find her guilty of these charges in her
output. These are not protected under the rights of free speech in Canada,
and it's a damned good thing too.

The heinous duplicity of these dexter master baiter organizations is that
they promote her bile spewing as free speech and deny entrance to Canada to
George Galloway on the gounds that he brought humanitarian assistance to
people in dire need.

--

"The officer corps will forgive anything they can
understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."

Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16

Damaeus > wrote in
:

> I read more about it and found out that the police shut down the thing
> going on in Canada, not Ann.

Not what the news is reporting:

CTV (aka Conservative Televisual Vortex):

Free speech advocates say university administrators should be embarrassed
that protesters forced right-wing firebrand Ann Coulter to cancel her
appearance at the University of Ottawa...

....

Conservative political activist Ezra Levant, who spoke on behalf of the
organizers on Tuesday evening, said "it would be physically dangerous for
Ann Coulter to proceed with this event."

....

Police eventually showed up to the scene and blocked the door to the
building, but Hamamdjian said she doubted whether the combination of
protesters and disorganization actually constituted "a physical risk to Ann
Coulter."

----

The police would have shown up upon a communication to them that there was
a threat to Ann Coulter, which would have come from her people.

--

"The officer corps will forgive anything they can
understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."

Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16

In news:rec.food.cooking, Michel Boucher > posted on
Wed, 24 Mar 2010 13:13:59 -0500 the following:

> blake murphy > wrote in news:9tbaexr12eui
> :
>
> > but i find the canadian approach to free speech to be misguided.
>
> We have limits to free speech here and those limits are centered on hate-
> mongering.

But how do you draw the line between bringing something to people's
attention, and hate mongering? I mean, if something is going on that
people would hate if they knew about it, then letting them know about it
will make them hate it. Isn't that a good thing? Why should it be
illegal? I'm not talking about hating people as individuals, but about
hating situations.

I mean, the national news has been hate mongering with the healthcare
bill.

> The heinous duplicity of these dexter master baiter organizations is
> that they promote her bile spewing as free speech and deny entrance to
> Canada to George Galloway on the gounds that he brought humanitarian
> assistance to people in dire need.

Yes, watching what the officials do in response to the movements of people
who do nice things for others is very revealing of how nasty government
can be.

And then look at all these "closed-door meetings" in which cameras are not
allowed in American government. I can just see someone saying, "Let's get
this done. Keep the media out or the whole process will stall because the
people would hate what we're doing if they knew about it."

Damaeus
--
"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."
-Harry Anslinger (1929), Federal Bureau of Narcotics

Damaeus > wrote in
:

>> We have limits to free speech here and those limits are centered on
>> hate- mongering.
>
> But how do you draw the line between bringing something to people's
> attention, and hate mongering? I mean, if something is going on that
> people would hate if they knew about it, then letting them know about
> it will make them hate it. Isn't that a good thing? Why should it be
> illegal? I'm not talking about hating people as individuals, but
> about hating situations.

That is why the courts in Canada rely on test cases to determine the
validity of the charges. Our present Charter of Rights dates back to
1982 and was largely cradted to avoid the pitfalls the US has endured due
to lack of clarity.

> I mean, the national news has been hate mongering with the healthcare
> bill.

Not in Canada. Not out issue, and by the way, congratulations on finally
starting back on the path to sanity.

>> The heinous duplicity of these dexter master baiter organizations is
>> that they promote her bile spewing as free speech and deny entrance
>> to Canada to George Galloway on the gounds that he brought
>> humanitarian assistance to people in dire need.
>
> Yes, watching what the officials do in response to the movements of
> people who do nice things for others is very revealing of how nasty
> government can be.

Our Conservative government is a fine example of just such nasty
behaviour. Luckily they are not in the majority and their situation is
far from secure as 65% of Canadians do not want them in power.

--

"The officer corps will forgive anything they can
understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."

Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16

blake murphy wrote:
<snip>
>> It might have been politic to let her put her foot in it and then arrest
>> her for hate-mongering. Of course, her whole argument falls apart as she
>> is trying to deny a much larger group of people THEIR right to free speech
>> in a democratic society.

My impression of Coulter is that she probably doesn't believe a word of
what she says publicly. It's just her way of making a buck, basically.
There are plenty more around like her who do the same thing, in
completely other non-political spheres as well.

> to me, the word '****' was invented just for coulter.

It's a great word with a lot of impact (much like 'faggot', IMO).

But I'm really quite partial to ****s, myself. I reckon they're just
great... well, maybe not *all* of 'em
So I prefer to use more appropriate words, rather than denigrate real ****s.

<snip>

--
The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism
by those who haven't got it - George Bernard Shaw

On Mar 24, 1:13*pm, Michel Boucher > wrote:
> blake murphy > wrote in news:9tbaexr12eui
> :
>
> > but i find the canadian approach to free speech to be misguided.
>
> We have limits to free speech here and those limits are centered on hate-
> mongering. *Had she said anything which would have been deemed to have
> promoted hatred towards a particular group (lib'ruls, ayrabs, furriners),
> she could be arrested and charged with commission of a crime under the
> Criminal Code. sections 296 (blasphemopus libel), 297 (defamatory libel)
> and Hate Propaganda, sections 318 (Advocating genocide) and 319 (Public
> incitement of hatred). *


Those things are pretty much Ann Coulter's style. If it wasn't for
hate speech, she wouldn't have anything at all to say.

Christopher Helms > wrote in news:617ed80c-88c3-
:

> Those things are pretty much Ann Coulter's style. If it wasn't for
> hate speech, she wouldn't have anything at all to say.

So we have a right to tell her to **** off. She can go to Alberta where
they are tolerant of pompous fascists.

--

"The officer corps will forgive anything they can
understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."

Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16

In article
>,
Christopher Helms > wrote:

> On Mar 24, 1:13*pm, Michel Boucher > wrote:
> > blake murphy > wrote in news:9tbaexr12eui
> > :
> >
> > > but i find the canadian approach to free speech to be misguided.
> >
> > We have limits to free speech here and those limits are centered on hate-
> > mongering. *Had she said anything which would have been deemed to have
> > promoted hatred towards a particular group (lib'ruls, ayrabs, furriners),
> > she could be arrested and charged with commission of a crime under the
> > Criminal Code. sections 296 (blasphemopus libel), 297 (defamatory libel)
> > and Hate Propaganda, sections 318 (Advocating genocide) and 319 (Public
> > incitement of hatred). *
>
>
> Those things are pretty much Ann Coulter's style. If it wasn't for
> hate speech, she wouldn't have anything at all to say.

But she cries all the way to the bank... ;-)
IMHO she is a female Rush Limbaugh.

I'm not fond of extremists in either direction. Coulter is a far, far
right extremist conservative and she scares me sometimes.
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
"We're all adults here, except for those of us who aren't." --Blake Murphy

On 3/25/2010 3:17 PM, Omelet wrote:
> In article
> >,
> Christopher > wrote:
>
>> On Mar 24, 1:13 pm, Michel > wrote:
>>> blake > wrote in news:9tbaexr12eui
>>> :
>>>
>>>> but i find the canadian approach to free speech to be misguided.
>>>
>>> We have limits to free speech here and those limits are centered on hate-
>>> mongering. Had she said anything which would have been deemed to have
>>> promoted hatred towards a particular group (lib'ruls, ayrabs, furriners),
>>> she could be arrested and charged with commission of a crime under the
>>> Criminal Code. sections 296 (blasphemopus libel), 297 (defamatory libel)
>>> and Hate Propaganda, sections 318 (Advocating genocide) and 319 (Public
>>> incitement of hatred).
>>
>>
>> Those things are pretty much Ann Coulter's style. If it wasn't for
>> hate speech, she wouldn't have anything at all to say.
>
> But she cries all the way to the bank... ;-)
> IMHO she is a female Rush Limbaugh.
>
> I'm not fond of extremists in either direction. Coulter is a far, far
> right extremist conservative and she scares me sometimes.

Hell Om! I'm a right wing conservative and she scares me.

In article >,
George Shirley > wrote:

> On 3/25/2010 3:17 PM, Omelet wrote:
> > In article
> > >,
> > Christopher > wrote:
> >
> >> On Mar 24, 1:13 pm, Michel > wrote:
> >>> blake > wrote in news:9tbaexr12eui
> >>> :
> >>>
> >>>> but i find the canadian approach to free speech to be misguided.
> >>>
> >>> We have limits to free speech here and those limits are centered on hate-
> >>> mongering. Had she said anything which would have been deemed to have
> >>> promoted hatred towards a particular group (lib'ruls, ayrabs, furriners),
> >>> she could be arrested and charged with commission of a crime under the
> >>> Criminal Code. sections 296 (blasphemopus libel), 297 (defamatory libel)
> >>> and Hate Propaganda, sections 318 (Advocating genocide) and 319 (Public
> >>> incitement of hatred).
> >>
> >>
> >> Those things are pretty much Ann Coulter's style. If it wasn't for
> >> hate speech, she wouldn't have anything at all to say.
> >
> > But she cries all the way to the bank... ;-)
> > IMHO she is a female Rush Limbaugh.
> >
> > I'm not fond of extremists in either direction. Coulter is a far, far
> > right extremist conservative and she scares me sometimes.
>
> Hell Om! I'm a right wing conservative and she scares me.

:-)

You are not an extremist and neither am I. I've always considered
myself to be a conservative liberal. I have leanings in both directions
with no truly extreme views.

For example, I do believe that a certain amount of socialism/social
responsibility is fundamental to a functioning society, but I do not
believe in supporting deliberate freeloaders. ;-)

I also feel very strongly that self-defense is a basic human right, and
nobody should be deprived of it out of sheer paranoia...

But, to each their own! That's also a basic right.
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
"We're all adults here, except for those of us who aren't." --Blake Murphy

Omelet > wrote in newsmpomelet-91DF6A.19060925032010
@news-wc.giganews.com:

> but I do not
> believe in supporting deliberate freeloaders

Then you should object to capitalists who want all sorts of freebies, like
tax free status and roads and electrivity built right up to their door at
no cost...I'm just sayin' :-)

--

"The officer corps will forgive anything they can
understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."

Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16

In article >,
Michel Boucher > wrote:

> Omelet > wrote in newsmpomelet-91DF6A.19060925032010
> @news-wc.giganews.com:
>
> > but I do not
> > believe in supporting deliberate freeloaders
>
> Then you should object to capitalists who want all sorts of freebies, like
> tax free status and roads and electrivity built right up to their door at
> no cost...I'm just sayin' :-)

I have no problems with your statement. ;-) It's accurate on the
extreme end.

I've had to work too hard for everything I've ever had.

And far left liberals want a lot more for free. paid for by taxes...
--
Peace! Om

Web Albums: <http://picasaweb.google.com/OMPOmelet>
"We're all adults here, except for those of us who aren't." --Blake Murphy

Omelet > wrote in newsmpomelet-5F10FC.21552525032010
@news-wc.giganews.com:

> And far left liberals want a lot more for free. paid for by taxes...

Sorry but only capitalists want things for free. We far left people
realize far better than you think that money is wasted by the right on
things like military expenditure and bailouts for big companies and
economic sectors.

If you think people on the far left are wasteful you a. have not met any
people on the far left, and b. you have been believing what the right says
about the left which as instructive as believing what the Senate said about
the Caesars...which is why we have such a bad opinion of the ones the
Senate did not like because it only said bad things, and not necessarily
true either.

--

"The officer corps will forgive anything they can
understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."

Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16

In news:rec.food.cooking, Omelet > posted on Thu, 25
Mar 2010 14:17:43 -0600 the following:

> But she cries all the way to the bank... ;-)
> IMHO she is a female Rush Limbaugh.
>
> I'm not fond of extremists in either direction. Coulter is a far, far
> right extremist conservative and she scares me sometimes.

Well, it gets to be so that it looks like a competition to see who can be
the most to the right, or the most conservative. "Look at me! See how
radically conservative I can be! Beat that!"

Damaeus
--
"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."
-Harry Anslinger (1929), Federal Bureau of Narcotics

In news:rec.food.cooking, Omelet > posted on Thu, 25
Mar 2010 19:06:09 -0600 the following:

> You are not an extremist and neither am I. I've always considered myself
> to be a conservative liberal. I have leanings in both directions with
> no truly extreme views.
>
> For example, I do believe that a certain amount of socialism/social
> responsibility is fundamental to a functioning society, but I do not
> believe in supporting deliberate freeloaders. ;-)

Sometimes people are freeloaders because the rewards for working are so
low. There's often work that these people are willing to do, but the time
required for the amount of money earned is so crappy that actually getting
involved becomes depressing. If the rewards were greater and more equally
distributed, there would be more jobs for people to do, and more
interesting things for people to do to make a living. People in general
would have so much that the few "freeloaders" there are wouldn't even be
given a second thought.

Damaeus
--
"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."
-Harry Anslinger (1929), Federal Bureau of Narcotics

On Thu, 25 Mar 2010 03:20:41 -0700 (PDT), Christopher Helms wrote:

> On Mar 24, 1:13*pm, Michel Boucher > wrote:
>> blake murphy > wrote in news:9tbaexr12eui
>> :
>>
>>> but i find the canadian approach to free speech to be misguided.
>>
>> We have limits to free speech here and those limits are centered on hate-
>> mongering. *Had she said anything which would have been deemed to have
>> promoted hatred towards a particular group (lib'ruls, ayrabs, furriners),
>> she could be arrested and charged with commission of a crime under the
>> Criminal Code. sections 296 (blasphemopus libel), 297 (defamatory libel)
>> and Hate Propaganda, sections 318 (Advocating genocide) and 319 (Public
>> incitement of hatred). *
>
> Those things are pretty much Ann Coulter's style. If it wasn't for
> hate speech, she wouldn't have anything at all to say.

she doesn't have to say anything. she was the conservative's pinup girl
before sister sarah came along.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy > wrote in
:

>> If it wasn't for
>> hate speech, she wouldn't have anything at all to say.
>
> she doesn't have to say anything. she was the conservative's pinup girl
> before sister sarah came along.

How depressing.

--

"The officer corps will forgive anything they can
understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."

Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16

"Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
. ..
> blake murphy > wrote in
> :
>
>>> If it wasn't for
>>> hate speech, she wouldn't have anything at all to say.
>>
>> she doesn't have to say anything. she was the conservative's pinup girl
>> before sister sarah came along.
>
> How depressing.
>
> --
>
> "The officer corps will forgive anything they can
> understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."
>
> Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16

Too much Poutine can ruin your health; but too much sister sarah can ruin
your life.

Alan

blake murphy > wrote:

>to me, the word '****' was invented just for coulter.

>but i find the canadian approach to free speech to be misguided. i had
>read of this part of the post pointed to elsewhe

>Even before she spoke in London ¡X the first of three speeches this week on
>Canadian soil ¡X Coulter received a pre-emptive and private caution about
>the limits of free speech in Canada from the provost of the University of
>Ottawa, where she appears Tuesday.

>...and apparently informing her that she could be arrested and jailed if
>she spouted her usual crap.

>to my way of thinking, one of the best things about america is that you're
>free to say any damnfool thing that pops into your head, short of
>threatening to kill the president. i think that's as it should be in a
>free society.

I wholeheartedly agree.

Tangentially, I recall one Usenet discussion where it was asserted
that I had no standing to criticize the overly-restrictive nature
of Canada's anti-free-speech laws because I am American.

The fact is, national boundaries mean very little to me,
they don't affect my concepts of what personal freedoms
people deserve, and they certainly do not define where I will advocate
for personal freedom. National borders, and ultimately any concept of
citizenship or nationalism, are largely fictions created by
right-wingers. I have to play along with the system of national
jurisdictions so that I can function within that system, but I do
not have to worship it.

If national sovereignity gives some right-wing faction within a
given country the ability clamp down on free speech locally, it's
still my business, because the people whose rights are being
infringed are still human beings, of which I am still one.

Steve

(Steve Pope) wrote in news:hojgvh$cc6$1
@blue.rahul.net:

> If national sovereignity gives some right-wing faction within a
> given country the ability clamp down on free speech locally, it's
> still my business, because the people whose rights are being
> infringed are still human beings, of which I am still one.

Of course, you could inform yourself first too.

--

"The officer corps will forgive anything they can
understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."

Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16

On Fri, 26 Mar 2010 17:59:14 -0500, Michel Boucher wrote:

> blake murphy > wrote in
> :
>
>>> If it wasn't for
>>> hate speech, she wouldn't have anything at all to say.
>>
>> she doesn't have to say anything. she was the conservative's pinup girl
>> before sister sarah came along.
>
> How depressing.

if you're a conservative, yes.

your pal,
blake

blake murphy > wrote in news:18w43t1ebaivd
:

>> How depressing.
>
> if you're a conservative, yes.

or just a human being. If what we are reduced to is having morons put
forward to speak giberrish (Palin, Coulter, Beck, et al) and they are
considered "leading lights", I fear that humanity is doomed.

--

"The officer corps will forgive anything they can
understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."

Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16

On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 13:29:21 -0500, Michel Boucher wrote:

> blake murphy > wrote in news:18w43t1ebaivd
> :
>
>>> How depressing.
>>
>> if you're a conservative, yes.
>
> or just a human being. If what we are reduced to is having morons put
> forward to speak giberrish (Palin, Coulter, Beck, et al) and they are
> considered "leading lights", I fear that humanity is doomed.

as a connoisseur of such things, i must object. *palin* speaks in fluent
gibberish; her sentences don't parse. coulter and beck speak coherently,
but coulter is a hateful **** and beck is idiotic.

but yes, a sad lot of heroes for someone to have.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:42:14 -0400, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 13:29:21 -0500, Michel Boucher wrote:
>
>> blake murphy > wrote in news:18w43t1ebaivd
>> :
>>
>>>> How depressing.
>>>
>>> if you're a conservative, yes.
>>
>> or just a human being. If what we are reduced to is having morons put
>> forward to speak giberrish (Palin, Coulter, Beck, et al) and they are
>> considered "leading lights", I fear that humanity is doomed.
>
>as a connoisseur of such things, i must object. *palin* speaks in fluent
>gibberish; her sentences don't parse. coulter and beck speak coherently,
>but coulter is a hateful **** and beck is idiotic.
>
>but yes, a sad lot of heroes for someone to have.
>
>your pal,
>blake


But Palin has a rack,
http://www.nerve.com/CS/blogs/scanne...s/default.aspx
Coulter (skanky bitch that she is) does not.

In news:rec.food.cooking, blake murphy > posted
on Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:42:14 -0400 the following:

> On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 13:29:21 -0500, Michel Boucher wrote:
>
> > blake murphy > wrote in news:18w43t1ebaivd
> > :
> >
> >>> How depressing.
> >>
> >> if you're a conservative, yes.
> >
> > or just a human being. If what we are reduced to is having morons put
> > forward to speak giberrish (Palin, Coulter, Beck, et al) and they are
> > considered "leading lights", I fear that humanity is doomed.
>
> as a connoisseur of such things, i must object. *palin* speaks in fluent
> gibberish; her sentences don't parse. coulter and beck speak coherently,
> but coulter is a hateful **** and beck is idiotic.

Glenn Beck is a comedian. That can make him look like an idiot. At one
point I thought he was actually becoming schizophrenic.

Damaeus
--
"Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men."
-Harry Anslinger (1929), Federal Bureau of Narcotics

On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:07:56 -0500, WTF wrote:

> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:42:14 -0400, blake murphy
> > wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 13:29:21 -0500, Michel Boucher wrote:
>>
>>> blake murphy > wrote in news:18w43t1ebaivd
>>> :
>>>
>>>>> How depressing.
>>>>
>>>> if you're a conservative, yes.
>>>
>>> or just a human being. If what we are reduced to is having morons put
>>> forward to speak giberrish (Palin, Coulter, Beck, et al) and they are
>>> considered "leading lights", I fear that humanity is doomed.
>>
>>as a connoisseur of such things, i must object. *palin* speaks in fluent
>>gibberish; her sentences don't parse. coulter and beck speak coherently,
>>but coulter is a hateful **** and beck is idiotic.
>>
>>but yes, a sad lot of heroes for someone to have.
>>
>>your pal,
>>blake
>
> But Palin has a rack,
> http://www.nerve.com/CS/blogs/scanne...s/default.aspx
> Coulter (skanky bitch that she is) does not.

but coulter has an adam's apple:

<http://fromtheleft.wordpress.com/2007/03/03/ann-coulter-is-a-man/>

your pal,
sarah

blake murphy > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 13:07:56 -0500, WTF wrote:
>
>> But Palin has a rack,
>> http://www.nerve.com/CS/blogs/scanne...+palin+nude+ph
>> otos/default.aspx Coulter (skanky bitch that she is) does not.

I hope you all realize those are fakes...her head on another woman's body.

--
"The officer corps will forgive anything they can
understand, which makes intelligence the only sin."

Carnell, Blakes 7 episode 16