Crybaby sues because he lost election
In a nation chocked full of crybabies, in a political party of largely crybabies, how do you manage to stand out as a the biggest crybaby in history? Well, you sue because you lost an election because of your voting record which adhered slavishly to the party line, like crybaby Ohio’s Steve Driehaus.
It seems, according to US News, that the Susan B. Anthony List pro-life group campaigned against Driehaus because of his pro-abortion voting record, so Driehaus, using th president’s executive order, written to give cover to Democrats who voted for his healthcare regorm plan, to call Susan B. Anthony List’s attacks “lies”.
And you’d think that a judge with half a brain would toss out the case, right? Well, not Obama appointee U.S. District Court judge Timothy S. Black who allowed Driehaus to go forward in an attempt to enforce the Lawyers’ Employment Act.
What is equally curious, however, is why Judge Black has allowed the case to move forward and why he did not recuse himself from it since, as Barbara Hollingsworth reported Friday in The Washington Examiner, he apparently is the former president and director of the Planned Parenthood Association of Cincinnati. As seeming conflicts of interest go this one is a real humdinger.
And as TSO says, they say the Stolen valor Act has a chilling effect on political speech, but they allow this crybaby shit go forward.
Thanks to ROS and Old Trooper for the link.
Category: Legal, Liberals suck, Shitbags
you wanna know whats funny? If Al Gore hadn’t tried to pull a fast one he would have won in 2000. Of course thats also how Al Franken, one of the biggest Douches in history got into the Senate, by the courts.
Al Franken did not get in by the courts, George W. Bush did. I assume you all are equally outraged about the theft of 2000? And are also mad as hell about Thomas not recusing himself for Bush V. Gore since his wife was working at the Heritage foundation to get appointments for when her husband rigged the system and got Bush in?
And I assume you’re also quite outraged over the fact that Scalia’s son worked for Ted Olson?
And you must be mad as hell for O’Connor’s refusal to recuse herself despite publicly declaring she wanted to retire under a Republican?
The only “fast one” pulled was by the Supreme Court when they stole the election of 2000. There is absolutely nothing Gore could of done once they decided, unconstitutionally, to involve themeselves. They were bound and determined to steal the election come what may.
The fact that you Republicans defend it, proves once and for all that you don’t give a flying fuck about the rule of law. Winning, no matter what rules you break, is ALL that’s important to you.
You forgot to reference the Bush Family Crime Syndicate, the Bilderburgers and the chemtrail cabal. Fail.
Look if you want to argue the decision, come at me with all you’ve got. I’ll kick you asss.
Who said we’re all republicans?
Look, we can’t take you seriously…you didn’t link a single fact back to Alex Jones or Salon.
Anyone who wants to defend Bush v Gore, then. Though i can’t imagine a libertarian defending it. And Teapartiers are just Conservative Republicans too ashamed to call theirselves that since Bush so royally screwed the country up.
Hey sissy boy or he girl. You really don’t know what you’re saying. Now be a good lad or lassie and get back to occupying something somewhere. And that moniker is perfect. Maybe you should look that big word up before you use it again. Toodles.
Why are you still blaming Bush? He’s been gone for awhile now.
Ok, just to make you happy, I’ll defend Bush vs. Gore; all things being equal, I’d rather deal with bush than gore…even though there’s a good chance that at least one week a month the bush can be covered in gore.
well if you look at the initial attempts of Bush V Gore, Gore tried to get a selective recount, in certain counties. Which is exactly what he got. And he lost because of it.
Now, personally I shudder to think of Al Bore’s response to 9/11. HOWEVER you could not say without 100% accuracy that it would have been ENTIRELY a Democrat’s fault. Which it mostly was. But since the Left is struck with Bush derangement syndrome, Such things are unmentionable.
Instupid… even libs on Scotus voted for Bush, because the Florida’s SCOTUS was violating equal protection by using different standards for different counties.
The recount has been beaten to death. Al Gore only wanted the counties that would have been beneficial to him recounted and he threw out A LOT of military votes. He lost.. He lost… he lost,… He lost when it was counted once..twice.. three times a lady. And then when the lib publications came in again to count again– he lost again.. MMMKAY!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A12623-2001Nov11
Doc Algore would have had to cease his search for manbearpig to save us all singlehandedly after creating the internet and moving the earth far enough away from the sun to stop global warming…..or some shit like that.
Being a native Tennessean, anytime some lame-brain decides to bring up the “stolen” 2000 election I have to point out that if Gore had had the common courtesy of winning his home state the point would moot. Anytime a former Senator and Presidential candidate can’t pull his own state in the election, you know he’s a POS. End of story.
@redacted I’ll stop blaming Bush, when you START blaming Bush. The S.O.B. (son of Barbra)caused the death of thousands of people, got us involved in a needless war and decimated the world economy. Those are the facts.
World War II has been over for quite a while as well, but i still have some nasty things to say about Hitler. Before you guys say it, i’m NOT saying Bush is even close to as bad as Hitler, i’m only saying that this whole time-limit on blame idea is absurd. Bush is worthy of blame now, he’ll be worthy a 100 years from now. Besides, i recall some Conservative being very ready to blame the economy, 911 and even the most recent collapse of the market on Bill Clinton.
In regards to Bush v. Gore, i figured you guys couldn’t defend the indefensible so you’d just retreat with the usual ZOINKS! He’s a conspiracist bush hater! Talk about fail.
Who said I wasn’t blaming Bush?
>In regards to Bush v. Gore, i figured you guys couldn’t defend the indefensible
You mean like violating equal protection? That was Gore, baby cakes! And you are defending it…Love it and Live it..
As for blaming Bush- There are a lot of things I blame Bush for. Primarily that he wasn’t conservative enough. I just didn’t get his compassionate conservative platform and the money he had to spend on it.
Insipid a. Destitute of taste; vapid; flat; dull; heavy; spiritless……
Yep, matches all the variables…. We gotcha, bless your heart……..
Ya know, Insipid, after eleven years of talking to you rock heads about Bush, we’re a little tired of making valid points that get dismissed with a wave of a limp-wristed hand. You won’t listen to reason, so why should we be reasonable?
Talk about fail.
You’ve been doing nothing but talking about fail since you got here, sparky. Would you like to buy a vowel?
Insipid- Bush decimated the world economy? I guess it had nothing to do with Clinton Administration and Frank-Dodd dreaming up the idea that people have the right to buy a home the could never ever afford? You know, getting the banks to open the subprime morgtage market to any one even remotely breathing? It was that fiasco tied to greedy bankers( who overwhelmingly contribute to Democrat candidates) that led to the state of out economy. You know what else sucks? News coverage that prematurely declared voting closed in Florida, even though the Pensacola/Tallahassee area is in different damn timezone!!!
There you guys go again, pointing out facts to Insipid. You all, or y’all, should be ashamed of yourselves. Pointing out facts to one defined variously as “Destitute of taste; vapid; flat; dull; heavy; spiritless” is just mean.
Now, insipid, or Occuturd, whichever the case may be, I’d suggest you study the link that melle put up, it may educate you. You know what they say, in your case, a waste is a terrible thing to mind.
Yeah well, I like banging my head against a brick wall……
The fact that you Republicans defend it, proves once and for all that you don’t give a flying fuck about the rule of law. Winning, no matter what rules you break, is ALL that’s important to you.
The fact that you Dimocrats keep wanting to change the fucking rules AFTER the election (“But,but,but, Gore won the POPULAR vote”)says everything. Hell, you want to argue elections? Nixon should have beat JFK but the corpse vote in Chicago screwed him over.
It’s over, Bush won, Gore lost, get over it or slit your wrists. (Remember… go “down the road”, don’t “cross the street”.)
insipid is just try to distract.
What is going on here is a concerted effort to establish legal precedent in shutting down active, free speech. SBAL has been active in many campaigns against abortion-enabling politicians. The expected court fight will be protracted, and very costly to SBAL. Dreihaus and his moneywomen are drawing on Stimulus and Obamacare funds provided by taxpayers.
Judge Black was reviewed and approved by the Senate (probably in exchange for free Skittles for the RINOs) for the very purpose of this case. Progressives lost the legal ability to suppress free speech with the Citizens United case, but when Black rules against SBAL, the SCOTUS won’t have enough time to consider the case in time for the 2012 election.
Considering the next Senate will review and vote on at least 2 SCOTUS Justices, along with 100 or more judges, the key races this year will all be for the US Senate, and not the POTUS.
melle rocks!
Insipid…re-read #14 Country Singer. It says “game, set, match”. He couldn’t even carry his home state. If he had, you’d be blaming him now. Oh, well, no you wouldn’t, you’d be blaming Bush’s father.
Honor and Courage
>You mean like violating equal protection? That was Gore, baby cakes! And you are defending it…Love it and Live it.. First off, counting, using different standards does NOT violate equal protection. There’s different standards for what constitutes “reasonable doubt” from State to State, county to county and even jury to jury. And yet there’s some people doing life in prison for being convicted of crimes that other people, with similar fact patterns, are completely free on. In fact Cameron Todd Willingham was executed despite others going free on almost exactly the same fact pattern. Secondly, if it was sooo damn important that all votes are counted equally, why not simply extend the time, allow votes to be counted by one standard and then let the chips fall where they may? They wouldn’t because that MAY mean that Bush would win. Thirdly, it’s fundamentally dishonest to say that the case was all about equal protection. The case was whether or not there would or would not be a recount Had the court allowed the recount to proceed using the same standards would you of counted that as a victory for Bush? No, because what Bush wanted was to stop the recount entirely. You’re just pretending that it was all about equal protection because you need that to justify your sycophantry to party rather than the rule of law. Fourth, even if some of the votes were counted differently or even wrongly, where is the damage to Bush? Do you have any evidence (Democrats are always up to something is NOT evidence, Dittoheads)that Bush would be counted incorrectly more than Gore. No you don’t. But this sudden concern for the 14th amendment is a lot more palpable than just admitting you don’t give a shit about the rule of law so long as my guy wins. Fifth, where does Bush have standing to sue anyway? Bus was NOT a voter in Florida. NO voter in florida came forward to say that their rights were violated by the incorrect counting? His “damage” was that he had the “right” to the Presidency regardless of… Read more »
Insipid. I want to point out to you that as a soldier in Iraq in ’04 I lost my chance to vote because California dicked around with absentee ballots. Believe it or not a majority of the troops IN IRAQ no less voted for Bush in ’04. Why? Because we wanted a POTUS that actually gave a damn about us.
The real shame is that he didn’t repeal every bit of Clinton era legislation he could, which would have saved us from our current economic woes. Keep in mind that guys like George Soros pilfered the NASDAQ and NYSE when the Markets opened back up again. There was a lot of encouragement by a lot of Americans, as a patriotic duty to buy stock, to prevent a free fall, that was expected. Soros, along with others (most Liberals btw) MADE THAT FREE FALL HAPPEN.
Now, I would REALLY like to know why, almost three years into Obama’s term we are STILL getting the “blame Bush” routine. Also I would like to point out that a lot of people DID equate Bush=Hitler (even though the two couldn’t be more different) BUT when the “Why so Socialist” thing came up, which was actually pretty vinilla in comparison, you’d thought that every car carrying Pachyderm had just shouted “NIIIGGGEEEERRR!!!” at the top of their lungs. Please explain that to me.
and WHILE we’re on that subject. How the flying F**k did the party of the KKK, and segregation suddenly become the party that cares about minorities? I suppose Johnson saying “I’ll deliver the N***r vote to the Democratic party for the next 50 years” doesn’t bother anyone.
<The recount has been beaten to death. Al Gore only wanted the counties that would have been beneficial to him recounted and he threw out A LOT of military votes. He lost.. He lost… he lost,… He lost when it was counted once..twice.. three times a lady. And then when the lib publications came in again to count again– he lost again.. MMMKAY!
See, the fact that I'm arguing rule of law, and you're arguing "He wold of won anyway" proves that you KNOW he has no leg to stand on. If i go ahead and attempt to hijack a plane i'm STILL guilty of hijacking a plane, even if it evenutally lands where it was meant to land. The fact is that the Supreme Court stole this election, there are arguments to be made on both sides as to what would of wouldn't of happened. We don't know either way. What we do know is that the SC didn't give a shit. They stole if for their guy. They didn't give a shit about the rule of law, and neither do you.
You’re hysterical Doc Baily. We must ONLY blame Democrats. Our economic woes were caused by George W. Bush. He’s the one that gave us 2.5 trillion in unpaid for tax breaks, 2 trillion in unpaid for wars, and over a trillion in an unpaid for giveaway to big pharma. His deregulation of wall stree caused the collapse we faced.
The fact is that conservative economics is a gimick that has been tried and has ALWAYS failed. In 1922 Coolidge got in deregulated the banks, gave tax cuts for the wealth and 8 years later there was a massive bank fail which was the first Republican great depression. That was such a disaster that it was never tried again until Reagan came in, gave massive tax cuts to the wealthy, cut regulations and 10 years later we had the S & l melt-down. Then Bush came in, cut taxes, deregulated… you know the rest of the story.
The fact is that when the rich pay more and when there’s more regulation, the country does better. Look at Roosevelt, Eisenhower, Kennedy and Clinton eras for proof.
At this point you guys are doing the equivelent of the folks who still defend Communism as a misunderstood phiolosophy. It doesn’t work, it will never work. It will always be voodoo economics.
I don’t know about you guys but the vapid one has convinced me! And so now we do what? Hey, how’s about we argue how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? No? Well how about whether if all of Babe Ruth’s records are shattered, he will still be the most highly regarded baseball player of all time.
insipid: you argument is invalid because it is unConstitutional. One can not argue ‘rule of law’ without being, you know, somewhat aware of the law.
We know that the process laid out in the Constitution, and governed by US Code (which was bipartisan), was followed. If you don’t believe that, then fine, continue your disbelief. Just don’t project crimes on conservatives that are being carried out by Progressives every election cycle.
If you want to discuss stealing elections, the textbook cases feature any race lost by Dino Rossi of Washington state.
Well Insipid, you’re partially correct in one thing. Those tax breaks would have been paid for by decreasing the amount of people working in the Gov’t. As for FDR onward. Fiat money is a joke. It has caused nothing but trouble, and lead to debt spending that has killed our economy. Also because our currency is based on faith that our government can pay its debt and Obama has pretty much pissed on that faith. . . you can see where this is going.
as for the crash in the 20’s I think I’ve made it quite clear that post-industrial revolution economies are cyclic in nature. Keep in mind that we’d only had these economies for less than 60 years by this point. Economic theory had not caught up to reality. There is a strong case for CERTAIN regulation, that is very rigid. BUT that does not extend to oh say making sure people can buy a house “that would not normally be able to afford it”
>First off, counting, using different standards does NOT violate equal protection
Uh yes it does. If you count one vote that has a dimpled chad for Gore and not one for Bush… Then you are violating equal protection for citizens. You are ensuring that one vote counts differently than another- It is the DEFINITION of equal protection. You are disinfranchising one group for the way they vote..
>Fifth, where does Bush have standing to sue anyway? Bus was NOT a voter in Florida
The same standing that Gore had to sue Katherine Harris.. You do realize Instupid that Gore started the court cases in Gore v. Harris… to restart the recounts.. or didn’t you realize it was YOUR SIDE that used judicial tyranny first?
See, the fact that I’m arguing rule of law
Hmmmm…seems to me that people a whole lot better versed in the law say you’re full of shit.
>Kennedy and Clinton
You might want to look up the fact that they both offered tax cuts… And Clinton was regulated by a Republican Congress.
Clinton gave new life to Cohiba.
Clinton tax cuts? Seem to forget that one. I remember his tax hikes pretty well though.
Get your jurisprudential wisdom here! $1.00–Right here! Errant facts half price for the next 30 minutes! Six wrong facts for the price of three! Get a dozen more, Insipididy Doo Dah. You are running low!
Also keep in mind that many of the problems in the 20’s and 30’s came about because of both big labor, AND the demand of the people. The companies went into overdrive in the 20’s (hence the “roaring” part) to provide what workers could suddenly afford. This in turn caused them to hire more workers etc. Only problem is things like planned obsolescence hadn’t been worked out yet. So after making big purchases like say a Model T, and a Refrigerator. . .you’re not exactly going to buy one again next month are you? Suddenly the Market was absolutely flooded with products that were not exactly NEEDED anymore. Add to that agricultural practices that we *now* know are wasteful, and actually harmful (causing the dust bowl) and the crash was inevitable.
I should also point out that post WWI Americans were investing heavily in the Wiemar Republic, which would use that money to pay War Reparations to France and England, which in turn sent that money to America to pay for War Debt. When the US started to pull their money out of Germany they hyper inflated the Mark by printing more (sound familiar) so they could pay their bills. The result is that the Mark wasn’t worth the paper to wipe your ass with.
Also its important to note that Post WWI it was assumed that limiting arms would prevent wars (Washington Naval Treaty). After WWII it was economics (IMF, World Bank). Sadly neither school of though has done dick to prevent wars.
Sparky- He did a lot of middle class ones, but more so he had a Republican Congress I think to keep him moderated. Clinton also was not an ideologue. He tended to do what was good for him politically and what the polls said. That is why (and I shudder when I say this) I would rather have a Clinton than an Obama. Obama doesn’t care about polls or politics- he is a an idealogue straight up.
Actually Insepid I want to make this very clear. Had Gore not tried to pull a fast one and gone for selective recounts, instead of for the whole state. . .yeah he probably would have won. BUT the recounts were done by HIS demand, and he lost out because the criteria he tried to set was insane. The legal brief was so full of “count this one but not this one” jargon, but it basically equated to “I want you to hand me the election”. When the final recount was done OF THE SELECTED COUNTIES GORE WANTED, he lost.
Again had he recounted the whole state, he MIGHT, and I stress that word. Might have actually won.
Still I want to make this very clear. If he had actually been the POTUS on 9/11 we would have been so screwed!
Them blasted hanging chads. You gotta wonder though, when a guy is so worried about the west coast eventually running along the border of California and Nevada, gets many people to believe we’re all doomed, makes a shitload of money off of it, and buys an oceanfront estate (the Gorlioni Mansion); how badly would he have fucked up ths country? Probably worse than the current occupant of the oval office (Given the hunt for manbearpig didn’t interfere, of course).
>and buys an oceanfront estate
LMAO–Especially after he made a movie that said the ocean levels were going rise 20 feet or something…
That’s my point. Ole’ boy should be in jail.
I think he’s gone. Evicted from OWS.
With the spew he let loose in here, it wouldn’t surprise me if insipid is that crazy, stoned trust fund hippie on the youtube video. Or a close relative.
didn’t his wife divorce him or something? Must’ve caught him making out with a mirror.
Also I love how a guy can put on a powerpoint presentation and get the whole world to pay attention, when just about every PP presentation I practically had to stab myself to stay awake for.
I get that some of guys enjoy going’ round with a moron for yucks. Me, I lose my patience too quickly. As I like to say, When the Good Lord handed out patience, I wasn’t about to wait on that line.
>That’s my point. Ole’ boy should be in jail.
I like his carbon credit scheme.. it akin to buying a pet rock…
>didn’t his wife divorce him or something? Must’ve caught him making out with a mirror.
I think he was getting happy endings from a massage therapist, but apparently everything was “go green” and recycled so he thought his wife would be okay with it….