I think if I ever write a book, it should be titled "How to read a Jack Thompson email (if you have to)".
Liberalism? What the hell is he talking about? Protecting our fist amendment is a conservative action. Attempting to destroy free speech for the good of the commonwealth is extremely far left. Scientific Basis? Those people call it science like the word could give them cred, if those bitches be scientists then cap me in the head!
Exactly. Has he not been paying attention for the last twenty years? His main allies in all his little Crusades against free speech have been 'Clinton Liberals.' With the exception of Oliver North, the whole PMRC bandwagon against 2 Live Crew was composed of Gore, Clinton, and Lieberman types. 90+% of the anti-game legislation of the last year and some change has been from nanny-state advocating, think-of-the-children-cultist Democrats acting on the advice of the Progressive Policy Institute
( ... )
Interesting....goodrobotusSeptember 6 2006, 17:12:11 UTC
I think the problem is the definition of Liberal in the US seems to be something different to the definition of Liberal in the UK.
The UK Branch of 'Liberalism' was originally founded as a 'Middle of the Road' political organisation, with Labour promoting Industry, the Unions and 'Working Class' and Tories (Coservatives) representing the land-owners etc, and more dedicated to maintaining the status quo. Liberals were not in favour of the Unions having massive power, but still believed in Rights for workers that stopped abuse, such as the minimum wage law, which was why they supported the introduction in 1998 iirc.
If a new technology threatened that status quo, then the UK Conservatives would have no qualms with ignoring Freedom of Speech in order to restore that balance. But they more than likely would have met joint resistance from both Labour AND Liberal representatives.
Re: Interesting....jabrwockSeptember 6 2006, 17:25:02 UTC
It was the butt of a comedy sketch on "This Hour Has 22 Minutes" on CBC. They were constantly explaining whether they were "Big L" Liberals, "Big C" Conservatives, "small l" liberals, "small c" conservatives, "small l" Conservatives, or "small c" Liberals. ;)
There are no bridges, because they all sank into the Gulf of Mexico last year. And I doubt there will be any bridges in the near future after spending so much tax money on this little circus of his.
I should've seen this coming a mile away.gabrielcelestaSeptember 6 2006, 11:10:28 UTC
Crybaby Jack strikes again.
Something doesn't go his way, he screams at EVERYONE.
Let's see what he says...
His law's "constitutional and scientific basis"? News flast, Jack: THERE AIN'T NONE. Probably even less than that.
"Judge brady should be off the case"? "He could not be fair and that he would not be fair"? I'm pretty sure any other judge would've done what he did. Besides, infuriating the judge is a REALLY BAD idea.
Jack, if you're reading, the world does NOT revolve around you. Got it?!
(Ah hell, of course he doesn't get it. He never will... (*sigh*))
Brady said he has examined the laws of other states where courts have declared the statutes unconstitutional and he can find no difference in the Louisiana law, despite claims by Guidry that it is more narrowly drawn.
"It looks like they (legislative drafters) just copied them" from the other states, Brady said.
Thompson further proves that he can't even practice what he preaches(growing up and getting a life).
Comments 97
Reply
Reply
Heres the link to a site where you can make them. You can make him say anything you want. The Phoenix Wright says thing is mine though.
Reply
Reply
Liberalism? What the hell is he talking about? Protecting our fist amendment is a conservative action. Attempting to destroy free speech for the good of the commonwealth is extremely far left. Scientific Basis? Those people call it science like the word could give them cred, if those bitches be scientists then cap me in the head!
Reply
Reply
The UK Branch of 'Liberalism' was originally founded as a 'Middle of the Road' political organisation, with Labour promoting Industry, the Unions and 'Working Class' and Tories (Coservatives) representing the land-owners etc, and more dedicated to maintaining the status quo. Liberals were not in favour of the Unions having massive power, but still believed in Rights for workers that stopped abuse, such as the minimum wage law, which was why they supported the introduction in 1998 iirc.
If a new technology threatened that status quo, then the UK Conservatives would have no qualms with ignoring Freedom of Speech in order to restore that balance. But they more than likely would have met joint resistance from both Labour AND Liberal representatives.
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
Something doesn't go his way, he screams at EVERYONE.
Let's see what he says...
His law's "constitutional and scientific basis"? News flast, Jack: THERE AIN'T NONE. Probably even less than that.
"Judge brady should be off the case"? "He could not be fair and that he would not be fair"? I'm pretty sure any other judge would've done what he did. Besides, infuriating the judge is a REALLY BAD idea.
Jack, if you're reading, the world does NOT revolve around you. Got it?!
(Ah hell, of course he doesn't get it. He never will... (*sigh*))
Reply
Further, Judge Brady's trashing of the law before he even heard the constitutional and scientific basis for it
Uh, no. Judge Brady looked at past court decisions regarding previous overturned laws. From a Times-Picayune article:
http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/capital/index.ssf?/base/news-4/1151734289140970.xml&coll=1
Brady said he has examined the laws of other states where courts have declared the statutes unconstitutional and he can find no difference in the Louisiana law, despite claims by Guidry that it is more narrowly drawn.
"It looks like they (legislative drafters) just copied them" from the other states, Brady said.
Thompson further proves that he can't even practice what he preaches(growing up and getting a life).
Reply
Leave a comment