Posted by Mr Vinyl [ 72.144.112.66 ] on November 14, 2005 at 10:56:12:
In Reply to: Re: Let's look at some facts... posted by manualblock on November 14, 2005 at 10:15:25:
Sure, glad to help. I would ask you to answer my questions but we both know how that would end.
Your question #1 "I asked for your interpretation of what legislating from the bench means."
My interpretation is this. Legislating from the bench is when a judge makes up "rights" that are not in any law or constitution. He makes up these rights only to forward his biased political agenda. In other words to overturn laws that he or she doesn't like. In some cases like the New Jersey case I sited. The judges will totally ignore law to create their own laws. Basically they write new laws. This is supposed to be the job of congress and not the judges. Hence the term "legislating from the bench". BTW I don't believe you ever asked my for my interpretation of Legislating from the bench. You said you haven't seen a coherent definition which Ann Coulter certainly provided.
Your question #2 "I tell you exactly why I think Coulter is a sham and you change the subject and insist I have insulted her. Can you address those reasons I gave by any chance?"
I gave you specific insults that you said of Ann Coulter. I'll repeat for you in case you didn't read past the first couple of lines from my previous post.
You called Ann Coulter a "used car salesman", a "Blond Twit". You have also said in reference to Ann Coulter "Back in the old neighborhood they had a name for a woman with her personality" You also mentioned that you think she has an annoying voice.
Are these not insults? Regarding giving your "exact reasons why Ann Coulter is a sham" What exact reason would they be? I don't see any other than you didn't think she used the word "prissily" correctly and that you don't understand her remarks. Please give examples and not just call her a blond twit, and I would be more than happy to address them. BTW I didn't change the subject at all. Please provide some examples of how I did this so I can address them.I have not side tracked anything. This is what you do. Please give an example and I would be more than happy to address this.
Regarding Bob Grant. Just because you say something doesn't make it so. Let me get this straight. It's common knowledge that Rush copied Grant. But you can give no examples of how. And the only examples of Grants show that you did give "hangs up on people" and says "Get off my phone" Rush doesn't do. So please give specific examples of how Rush copied Grant?
If you can get any links that dispute what I have said and shown I would be more than happy to read them and discuss them. So show me a link that proves Church leaders force members to vote or campaign for Republicans, Show me a link that shows the internet has helped the Democrats even though the Republicans keep winning. Etc. Don't just say you can find them. Show me them. Just because you say something doesn't make it true.
This aint show and tell? So you want to make any wild accusation that you want. Not answer any questions about them. Not link to any web sites that support your claims etc. Sounds like good honest debate to me. Let me try one ok,
It's common knowledge that Clinton raped several woman. He also killed several people that got in his way. Of course this is not debatable. If you want you can look up the many web sites that prove this. This isn't show and tell so please don't ask me to link to them here. Also please don't ask me any further questions on this subject because it's common knowledge. Anyone that is intelligent, has access to the facts, and hasn't lived in a cave would no this to be true.
Wow, I kinda like your brand of discussion. It's a lot easier.
[ Dungeon Forum ] [ Help ]