Here is where the views of the Republican Party will be found.
To whom it may concern, I would like to take back what I have written in the last two sentences of my response to the assassination question. I must have been morally impaired when I wrote that: the truth is, no man, however horrible, deserves that horrific Roman style of punishment. I would like to replace those statements with the opinion that it is ok to "put heat on" world leaders instead of assassinating them. I would also like to apologize for my incorrect spelling of the word "assassinating." Shame on me, shame on me. On a different note, I would like to wish everyone a happy summer as it is vast approaching, and to remind everyone to be responsible. By that, I mean using your best judgement and truly being the master of your own destiny, instead of letting some drug or social phenomenon (partying) secretly run and ruin your life. As Americans, young or old, we have a responsibility to maintain the status of "competent human beings," (or to at least strive to attain that status, as the case may be.) What good's a democracy when the people running it (YOU) are a band of morons? Think about it. Peace out...
"OK, what is the deal with Colin Powell? WHAT IS HE DOING? NOTHING! To tell the truth, when every Republican was raising him on a pedestal, when every Republican was chanting his name, when every Republican was trumpeting him as the greatest thing since Jesus, I wasn't. Here's why. First of all, I think he's a Democrat in Republican's clothing and was bought by the elephant party's big money during the '96 elections. His views on abortion and affirmative action would be appaling to the majority of my party, those who are members of the Colin fan club. Second, I don't know what the Hell he's doing as Secretary of State. A military general as our chief diplomat? I don't think so. The man has the personality of a sofa and the face of a German shepard. Maybe Attorney General or Sec. of defense, but of State? Passing over Brook Burke and Angelina Jolie for the job might have very well been Bush's greatest mistake yet. Now here we sit, almost two years into the Bush presidency, and what is Powell doing? Farting around in the Middle East! Is he buying time? Maybe. Is he doing anything productive or important? Definitely not. I never thought I'd say this, but I actually saw more production out of everyone's favorite little troll, Madeline Albright! I agree with conservative mouthpiece George Will when I say that I think Powell with stay in his position for right now, but not for long. He'd better get off his tush and get a legitimate summit meeting or something going soon, before the rest of the country and the world catches on to his inefficiency. Pretty soon, everybody'll be dying for some "Wild On in the Middle East."
Boy, if I were Sharon, I'd probably have to grin and bear this one. Only a complete idiot would believe that the timing of this attack didn't relate to Sharon's DC visit. As far as I'm concerned, the prime minister would just be playing into the terrorists' hands if he stuck back in Gaza, which he looks poised to possibly do. The nation of Israel is really at a crossroads here. It's too bad that they need to hold back on retaliation for the loss of innocent life, but it seems to me like the only viable option to save even more innocent lives down the stretch. Peace out (my new catchphrase).
Gee, that's an easy one. Er, NO. The US shouldn't be assasinating anyone, except possibly in retaliation for them assasinating one of our high-ranking officials. But even then, assasinating a world leader like Arafat or Hussein is definetly out of the question. But should we drag them down the Appian Way (ed.note; you damn dirty apes!) kicking and screaming as we defecate on them? Hell, why not?
Movie Trailer for AL 2004: the Final Judgement
(Darkness, announcer's voice)
"In a world..... where darkness and suffering plague the cities.... where the people have no voice.... where nothing is as it seems...
"One will rise up... a man, with the power to reunite the human race..."
(Shadowy figure steps out of a dim hallway, looks up into the light and a face, glistening with sweat beads, emerges.)
(Carmina Burana is blaring in the background as he slowly walks to a podium in front of many screaming fans)
"This summer... brace yourself... for the greatest comeback story of all time!"
(Symbol crash, music stops, the camera pans in on Al Gore)
Al, looking at his audience-"You aint seen nothin' yet."
(Thunderous music starts up again, the screen goes black, the words AL 2004 slam onto the screen, soon followed by the subtext)
(The camera goes back to Al)
Al- "I'm baaaack!"
(The screen goes blank, and the words "Fall 2004" linger on the screen. Fade out...)
I really wish that the word "torture" was much more narrowly defined one. In previous skirmishes between the Israelis and Muslim terrorists, Israeli special forces used to feed Islamic militants fried pork and wrap them in pig intestines to make them talk, giving them the idea the this immersion in pig byproducts would taint their image in the eyes of Allah and prevent them from their glorius, well-earned afterlife. (Keep in mind that many if these men were mass murderers.) If eating pig skins is torture for these fanatics, who's to say that taking away ceremonial beads and prayer mats isn't torture as well? So here's my take on the subject. Based on the common American principles of cruel and unusual punishment, I think that the terrorists in Cuba and everywhere else should be exempt from our form of torture. Am I saying we Americans should extend our full consitutional rights to these animals? No. I just think that in order for us to paint a clear portrait of how the terrorists should be treated, we must clearly delineate the context of the word "torture", and that this can be easily done by applying the basic, conservative practices spelled out in the greatest governmental document ever written.
I would just like to answer this question by stating that I think that Sharon's criticism of our president's authority has been greatly exaggerated. Who can blame a man for getting a little ticked off at some who lives thousnads of miles away and tells him how to run the country HE was popularly elected to run? Do I think that this "contempt" is a major issue, one that could light the fuse for World War III? No, I don't. Are there more important issues at hand in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict? Of course there are. I thought that I'd just add some of my thoughts about current events down here at the tail-end of my commentary. I thing that Sharon is doing a good job, all things considered...Colin Powell shouldn't have met with Arafat, because documents found in his Ramallah compund link him to multiple terrorist groups like Hamas, thus making him a cowardly terrorist... Somebody needs to talk more about this rediculous soda tax they're trying to pass in California, (I heard about it on the John and Ken radio show, and MAN, is it stupid)... I don't care if Al Gore runs for president in 2004 or not, he's still going to lose to the best president this century... If you have any questions, comments or concerns about what I have stated above, feel free to e-mail me at Geniusboy99@aol.com. (If you have any death threats or hate mail, you can go ahead and send those to dhl29@cornell.edu.)
