Sort of on the topic of your post, I’ll never forget a letter to the editor of Car and Driver magazine, though it had to have been 20 years ago.

IIRC, the writer, an S. Kim in Los Angeles took great umbrage at the following phrase used in a previous article: “The only chink in the Mercedes’ otherwise unassailable armor was…”

The editor replied something to the effect of “You are absolutely correct. We apologize, and while we’re at it, we also apologize for the use of the words “yellow” (p.86) and “slope” (p 94)”

I lauged for 5 solid minutes and still do every time I think about it. Shades of “niggardly.”

Here is what I said originally;
“ACLU and other moonbat organizations are the one convincing everyone that they have rights more important than others rights, even speech”

(That would be my opinion)

Then you asked me if I was making things up and I proved that I wasnt and the rest is history.

Long name said;
that you fail to grasp the distinction, or that you have unspoken ulterior motives as jmj said. I strongly suspect the latter is the case.

Look gentlemen, dont talk to me about grasping , I grasp facts documented in history, you grasp what the lemmings with their hair on fire tell you to grasp.
The distinction is this. I do not see the distinction in having a right that limits the abilty for children to be free of predatory creeps, against the creeps that hunt them The ACLU should of never gone anywhwere near this case, but they did.
It is not a right to plot , conspire , organize and plan the lynching of people based on their color. Should we give rights to murder organizations ? As long as all they do is talk about it ? A lot of folks are in jail for plotting murders and molestations, so give me a large break ! Its not a right !!!
But the ACLU defended that also.
You disguise your ignorance all you want with “WE ALL DESERVE OUR RIGHTS ” all you want.
I have the right to my self and property and to be free of intervention and aggressive removal of those rights by institutions such as the Klan or NAMBLA or the ACLU !
But this scumbag organization the ACLU comes to the rescue of these disgusting organizations anyway.
And why? Why do the moonbats who are always so worried and crying” Ohhh ! they’re undermining the constitution ! ” give the ACLU a free pass, an organization that has communist roots and still is held down by that basic ideology ?

With all due respect , this is a lie
I proved all my claims, you did not prove ONE of yours.

Sorry, I forgot to nail you on this one.
Of course as I’ve stated it should really be your job to present the facts instead of just mouthing off. But I’ll grant you this since you dont seem to want to really look for answers.

These words come straight from the mouths of our president and Alan Greenspan.
I’ll bet you would like to go off on the ANTI FOX diatribe, but the words dont come from FOX, they come from the utmost authority on this subject.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297250,00.html

GEORGE W. BUSH : I would say that the record, our fiscal record is admirable and good. After all, the deficit percentage to GDP is low, relative to the 30-year average. It’s about 1.5 percent of GDP, which is — which is good. And we submitted a budget that shows that we can get it balanced.

I would also argue that cutting taxes made a significant difference, not only in dealing with the recession and the attack in our country, but it made a significant difference in dealing with the deficit, because a growing economy yielded more tax revenues, which allowed us to shrink the deficit.

ALAN GREENSPAN, FORMER FEDERAL RESERVE CHAIRMAN: The issue is really not the short term. The president’s numbers are correct. Indeed, the deficit this year is coming in well under expectations.

Heres some more education for you, as opposed to the chicken littles you get your info from.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,259241,00.html

Another doomsayer is U.S. Comptroller General David Walker, who’s slightly hysterical about another kind of debt—the debt of the U.S. government. He was on “60 Minutes” last week warning that the nation is about to go broke and is—in that tired, old phrase we last heard from Ross Perot—“mortgaging the future of our grandchildren.”

Subprime loans—the kind the market’s now fretting about—amount to about 20 percent of all mortgages. Of those, about 12 percent are now or are about to be in default. In other words, about 2.6 percent of all loans are crashing.

That’s not a lot.

Now, as for Mr. Walker, he’s singing a blast from the past that’s reprieved about every decade or so. The important thing to keep in mind when thinking about the national debt is its size in relation to out entire economy. There have been times when our nation has borrowed much more than we are borrowing now.

For example, during World War II, our national debt totaled more than 100 percent of our annual economy (known as Gross Domestic Product, or GDP). Towards the end of the Cold War, our debt averaged about 50 percent of GDP. As the Wall Street Journal pointed out in a 1994 editorial about the debt, “We would certainly argue that winning the World War was worth borrowing 100 percent of GDP, and winning the Cold War was worth borrowing 50 percent of GDP.” (WSJ, November 18, 1994)

Once the Cold War was officially ended with the 1989 downing of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent demise of the Soviet Union, our federal deficit and national debt began to decline. The “peace dividend” also coincided with a (temporarily) more responsible government, divided between Republicans in Congress and a pragmatic Democrat in the White House. The welfare reform bill, regulatory and trade liberalization (like NAFTA) and other stimulants of economic growth generated more private-sector income, while limiting the role of the government in the economy. This helped reduce the deficit and led to a budget surplus, until we were hit with the double whammy of the dotcom bubble burst and 9/11.

Nowadays, we’re in the midst of a new war. I speak not of the battle in Iraq, but of the larger World War against radical Islam. This is a war that’s worth winning before terrorists create the kind of damage that would cost many times the amount of money we’re now paying to service the debt. But still it will cost a lot more money. Freedom is not free, and the debt will be necessary to help us defend our freedoms.

Having said that, since the tax rate cuts of 2003 kicked in, we’ve seen a steady decline in the rise of our budget deficit. This is due to the most fundamental law of economics: Incentives matter.

As taxpayers are allowed to keep more of their earnings and investments, they become more productive. They work harder and take money out of tax dodges and put them back in the taxable economy. So you have the seemingly contradictory effect of government tax receipts growing as tax rates decrease.

It worked now; it worked in the ‘80s with Reagan tax cuts, in the ‘60s with JFK tax cuts, and in the ‘20s with the (Treasury Secretary) Mellon tax cuts. Had we merely focused our intentions on balancing the books to lower deficits, the country would not have grown and our deficits would likely have increased as a percentage of GDP.

Do I like budget deficits? Of course not. But the problem with the folks that shout loudest about deficits is that they are usually willing to sacrifice private-sector growth (in the form of tax increases) for the sake of lowering the deficit. In other words, they assume that a lower debt is better than anything, even if it takes more cash out of the taxpayer’s pocket.

This is nonsense. There’s nothing wrong with cutting spending (i.e., the size of our monster government) to lower the deficit. But there’s plenty wrong with trying to lower the deficit (or the overall debt) by squeezing an overtaxed population even more than they already are. Besides, as it’s been proved again and again: if you raise tax rates, you very often end up with less revenue and higher deficits.

Oh, did I mention that the market has gone up as all these doomsayers have been predicting the worst for years and years? Will it continue to? Not always, and not as quickly as it did in 2006.

But while doomsayers may be right occasionally (like the broken clock), they shouldn’t be allowed to panic the markets with their dire predictions. Look at the facts, don’t listen to hysterics.

The link is there if you would care to read what the pros have to say
You will see how misguided you are. Maybe not.

You welcome.

Found and I care believe in the import of the vigilance of the citizenry. You believe in blind patriotism.

JMJ

God you guys are THICK !
Once again, you make claims and then answer me with your own words as proof !

First of all, It looks like I already toasted you on the war being corrupt.
You answer with an interpretation of Krauthammer, was that your best shot ?phff.

No judgement has been handed down on blackwater, only litigation.
No judgement has been handed down on Bush for constitutional violations.
No judgement has been handed down on the TSA.
I have yet to see one person loose any rights due to the patriot act, can you name one who has won a case in court ?
VOTER FRAUD? prove it !

Spare you the name calling? Moonbat is a compliment.

You said;
And yet they’re irrelevant because they don’t speak to the rationale that was used to sell this war.

You say they are irrelevant ? Congressional votes ? Hmmm.
Rationale ? I guess you would be the one to show our whole congress what is rational ?
I guess in your eyes the rational must be related to the DMDs ?
Well even without them we had quite a few other legal reasons to go in.
Saddam shot at us in no fly zones 7 times, as was presented to you above, but I guess the facts just dont cut it with you right ?

long name said;
how can speech be considered “free” if that freedom only applies to content you agree with?

Speech should also be free from B.S. and lies.
And actually if you paid attention I was talking about over sensative cultural zealots.
I am all for free speech, but I am also free not to listen to it.
SO YES! I DO HAVE CONTROL OVER CONTENT THAT REACHES MY EARS !
I CAN CHANGE THE CHANNEL OR LEAVE !
Insted of crying like some emotional retard and then go file a law suit or petition for an apology.

And Jersey, stop playing the idiot card. I know damn well what your point was, you just keep changing it everytime you get hammerd.

So as you can see you have really posted nothing substanial except for a bunch of empty claims and opinions.
Neither of you really care to put up a decent fight (typical lib fashion) and present facts.

The opininated heresay and emotinal debate will go to personal logic
The factual debate will go to the truth.

Do you understand that ? Man I feel like I should be getting paid for educating kiddys

JMJ

“Got any data to back up our constitution being undermined ?”
The TSA, blackwater, torture, the way Bush has used signing statements, the PATRIOT act, habeas corpus, voter fraud/diebold, and so on. If you’re honestly interested you can google them for yourself. Clinton was no saint in this department but Bush has been far worse.

“Show me some facts on our blown treasury, last I checked it was still there.”
How’s the dollar doing these days? What does our deficit look like?

“How is the war corrupt ? In your eyes only ? or a few others with BDS ?”
BDS, huh? I had to look that up. Krauthammer was wrong all along. He still is.

“I have concrete data proving at least 9 acts of war against America by Saddam since the first gulf war, on top of numerous human rights violations.”
And yet they’re irrelevant because they don’t speak to the rationale that was used to sell this war.

“So please, spare me the moonbat diatribe.”
No, spare ME the immature name calling.

my question remains unanswered:
how can speech be considered “free” if that freedom only applies to content you agree with?