Rev Roger Sermon #28: Get out while you can.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Blarg!

[Scytano]

I welcome Bush as the titular Pope of the Republican party, for several reasons. Most importantly though, and please listen for it is said here first, by the mid-term elections in 2006 a rift will begin to widen in the Republican party, splitting the moderates from the hardcore religious right. This rift will happen because Bush will make it so, and that is good for Americans of all parties and affiliations. The result will be a marginalization of the religious right, putting it back into the representative 20% (where it belongs) rather than in the driver's seat of the presidency. After 2006 Bush will be a lame duck, the rift will widen, and by 2008 the Republican primary will feature strong moderates to challenge the religious right. That is good for everyone who cares about freedom and liberty. It is also good for chaos, as the order of things under Bush will have been disrupted and change MUST occur. Change is always good, most of the time. When that change causes the religious right to take a back seat, it is very good indeed. So you heard it here people... by 2006 the Republican crack will widen to a rift, and Dobson, Ashcroft, Falwell and all their mindlings will be cast back into the obscurity they so richly deserve.

[East Coast Hustle]

Rog, usually I just find your histrionics amusing...this time I find myself reading a mirror image of my own thoughts...I'm glad I'm not the only one of the "stay and fight or you're a worthless litte pussy" crowd to come to the conclusion that I was wrong and that there's little point in trying to salvage this failed nation...or rather, there may be some point to it, but it's not a cause I'm willing to waste the rest of my lifetime pursuing...I would add that Canada may not be far away enough to avoid the shitstorm when it goes down for real...

[agent compassion]

Scytano,

I think you may be right. Fact is that Presidents need their parties more than parties need their Presidents. And Bush is pushing a hardcore neocon agenda that's scaring the crap out of some of the newbie and moderate Congresscritters in his party. And they can turn their backs on him. Why? Because he's got 4 years left in that seat and that is IT. HE is no longer up for re-election....but THEY ARE.

And if you're a moderate Republican representing a purple district(most districts ARE purple if you look at the electoral votes by county or by percentage) you're not going to jeopardize your own re-election by alienating a whole bunch of your constituents just to follow a lame duck's lead...

[The Good Reverend Roger]

Rog, usually I just find your histrionics amusing...this time I find myself reading a mirror image of my own thoughts...I'm glad I'm not the only one of the "stay and fight or you're a worthless litte pussy" crowd to come to the conclusion that I was wrong and that there's little point in trying to salvage this failed nation...or rather, there may be some point to it, but it's not a cause I'm willing to waste the rest of my lifetime pursuing...I would add that Canada may not be far away enough to avoid the shitstorm when it goes down for real...

Oh, *I'm* not leaving.

I'm going to do as much pointless damage as I can, out of pure vindictiveness.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

I welcome Bush as the titular Pope of the Republican party, for several reasons. Most importantly though, and please listen for it is said here first, by the mid-term elections in 2006 a rift will begin to widen in the Republican party, splitting the moderates from the hardcore religious right. This rift will happen because Bush will make it so, and that is good for Americans of all parties and affiliations. The result will be a marginalization of the religious right, putting it back into the representative 20% (where it belongs) rather than in the driver's seat of the presidency. After 2006 Bush will be a lame duck, the rift will widen, and by 2008 the Republican primary will feature strong moderates to challenge the religious right. That is good for everyone who cares about freedom and liberty. It is also good for chaos, as the order of things under Bush will have been disrupted and change MUST occur. Change is always good, most of the time. When that change causes the religious right to take a back seat, it is very good indeed. So you heard it here people... by 2006 the Republican crack will widen to a rift, and Dobson, Ashcroft, Falwell and all their mindlings will be cast back into the obscurity they so richly deserve.

Um, the GOP isn't the problem.

At least, they are a very LITTLE piece of the problem.

This shit would be going down, no matter WHO was elected.

[Cain]

Whenever I see DHS, I cant help but think of the sofa store called that in the UK.  It just doesnt have that fearful inspiration of the SS, or the NKVD.  Espescially when you think they are sofa salesmen.

[East Coast Hustle]

*thinks Roger should either start with the malicious destruction already or just stop talking bullshit*

just saying.

[Cain]

Oh and to add something serious, it does look like there will be a neocon/traditional republican split of sorts.  I dont know exactly how much pull the party can have on the President, but it does look on the cards. I remember pre-election, teh BBC talking about Snowcroft and other traditional Republicans wanting a return to older based theories of foreign policy.  I didnt see any mention of the domestic situation, make of that what you will.

This country just passed a law allowing the Home Office Secratery to place anyone under house arrest, and a lovely law called the ASBO (AntiSocial Behaviour Order) which have started to be used agsint peaceful protestors, apprently.  But it doesnt sound half as bad as what the US has.  Well, we will see after the elections here what Bush's number one fan decides to do.  Good luck to all you out there.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

*thinks Roger should either start with the malicious destruction already or just stop talking bullshit*

just saying.

Been doing it for years.

And you can just fuck right off.

Just saying.

[Scytano]

There very well could be a split with the PNAC wing. Honestly though, it will depend fully on where Iraq and Afghanistan are in 2007. If those two nations are doing reasonably well, then the PNAC agenda will have been vindicated. If not, then they are out the door and Scowcroft and his ilk will get another shot. I think it is much more liekly that someone like Guiliani will be the nominee in 2008... strong on military and liberal on social issues. At least, that's my hope.

[Bob the Mediocre]

I welcome Bush as the titular Pope of the Republican party, for several reasons. Most importantly though, and please listen for it is said here first, by the mid-term elections in 2006 a rift will begin to widen in the Republican party, splitting the moderates from the hardcore religious right. This rift will happen because Bush will make it so, and that is good for Americans of all parties and affiliations. The result will be a marginalization of the religious right, putting it back into the representative 20% (where it belongs) rather than in the driver's seat of the presidency. After 2006 Bush will be a lame duck, the rift will widen, and by 2008 the Republican primary will feature strong moderates to challenge the religious right. That is good for everyone who cares about freedom and liberty. It is also good for chaos, as the order of things under Bush will have been disrupted and change MUST occur. Change is always good, most of the time. When that change causes the religious right to take a back seat, it is very good indeed. So you heard it here people... by 2006 the Republican crack will widen to a rift, and Dobson, Ashcroft, Falwell and all their mindlings will be cast back into the obscurity they so richly deserve.

I really hope so. It'll take a few more turns toward the police state for my naive idealism to come crashing down, I think

[Hoshiko]

I wasn't sure where to put this, so I might as well drop it here.

SCOTUS rules that drug sniffing dogs can be used in traffic stops without probable cause.

I strongly dislike being the chicken little type, but that scares me for 3 reasons.

1. Most money has traces of drugs on it, and at least one man has been tried because of dogs sensing this. If they've already got a grudge, oh look, we found drug traces on you!

2. I don't do drugs (except that one time...) but most of my friends are potheads, and just touching it can leave traces on your upholstery for a week. My friends can get you high just by breathing the same air.

3. Without probable cause. Need I say more?

I know the constitution doesn't grant us rights. We have to win those in court and sometimes it takes longer than it should, but damn.

Wait until it's you.

[Scytano]

I wasn't sure where to put this, so I might as well drop it here.

SCOTUS rules that drug sniffing dogs can be used in traffic stops without probable cause.

I strongly dislike being the chicken little type, but that scares me for 3 reasons.

1. Most money has traces of drugs on it, and at least one man has been tried because of dogs sensing this. If they've already got a grudge, oh look, we found drug traces on you!

2. I don't do drugs (except that one time...) but most of my friends are potheads, and just touching it can leave traces on your upholstery for a week. My friends can get you high just by breathing the same air.

3. Without probable cause. Need I say more?

I know the constitution doesn't grant us rights. We have to win those in court and sometimes it takes longer than it should, but damn.

Wait until it's you.

Drug traces on money won't be enough to convict you of anything, and if they lead to them searching your car, and you have a brick of blow, then I have no sympathy for you anyway. Ditto with trace amounts of pot resin on the seats. Unless they find a roach or some other tangible evidence, the dog smelling it isn't enough. My suggestion is to not let people who smoke pot get into your car.

[East Coast Hustle]

the problem is that according to the wording of the ruling, they not only don't need probably cause to have drug dogs search your car, but they don't even need to have pulled you over. you could be inside McD's eating a burger and they could just take the dogs around the parking lot sniffing everyone's trunk...it musta taken some serious chutzpah to somehow make this jibe with the whole "unreasonable search and seizure" part of the constitution...