Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Sprry75

Pages: 1 ... 57 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64 65 66 67 ... 69
Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Jeff For Fan Club President!
« on: July 13, 2006, 03:35 AM »
Lol...   ;D

I wish I knew where to read these... rumors...

No you don't.  Trust me.

Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Jeff For Fan Club President!
« on: July 13, 2006, 03:18 AM »
When it comes to sneaky know-all bastards in the Staff, I could think of a few places worse than JD.

Totally.  IHOP.  It would suck to work there.  Worse than the Mos Eisley cantina.


This site's about collecting, not bitching about what other people think, so I'm going to have to step in and ask you to lay off the insults and attacks.  People aren't all going to like this stuff they're entitled to voice that opinion... 

Talk toys and why you like or dislike them, but leave the personal opinions of each other out of it.

Roton7 hata.


The Legacy Collection / Re: Fan's Choice Returns
« on: July 11, 2006, 05:57 PM »
Who will be making the official "Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Willrow!" T-shirts?

The Legacy Collection / Re: Fan's Choice Returns
« on: July 11, 2006, 11:15 AM »
I'll plunk down for both Vos and Revan.  I've failed at customizing Vos three or four times, and KOTOR kicked my ass, so I'm happy about Revan.

Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Super Hero/Comic Book Movies
« on: July 10, 2006, 09:26 PM »
Having never really been a fan of the Superman comics, I'm unacquainted with Superman's bad guys.  The ones I know--aside from Lex Luthor--seem lame, like Solomon Grundy, Braniac, Bizarro, and Mr. Maalox or whatever.

Batman schools every other comic hero when it comes to bad guys, with maybe Spider-Man a close second, which might be why those characters lend themselves to such great movies.

What could be in store for Superman?

And wasn't General Zod a creation of the movies?  I mean, he wasn't in the comics prior to Superman II, was he?

Anyway, I really liked SR a lot, and hope there's more, but I just don't know what they'd do as far as bad guys.  I'm starting to see why the first movie franchise ended up with Richard Pryor and Nuclear Man.

Watto's Junk Yard / Re: A thread about concerts.
« on: June 26, 2006, 08:03 PM »
I got tickets to Tool for August 29.  I am very excited.  Earplugs are for pussies who want to hear when they're old.  Pussies.

Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Rebelscum
« on: June 26, 2006, 07:59 PM »
I hate Rob.

Watto's Junk Yard / Re: I just shaved my head bald.
« on: June 26, 2006, 07:56 PM »
No, name, you just missed it:

I've never gone all the way, razor to the skin bald....

Heh-heh.  That sounds dirty.

Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Your Judicial Philosophy
« on: June 25, 2006, 04:46 PM »
As a liberal, and therefore a supporter of all things evil, it is my duty, Dressel, to point out that banning the night is unfair to vampires.

Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Your Judicial Philosophy
« on: June 23, 2006, 03:36 PM »

The good ol' days...  :'(

Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Your Judicial Philosophy
« on: June 23, 2006, 12:44 PM »
Still, what do these tort cases have to do with judicial, or political for that matter, philosophy?

I'm a liberal, Democrat, ambulance chasing trial lawyer, and I say MySpace has no liability.  What's your point?

Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Your Judicial Philosophy
« on: June 23, 2006, 12:08 PM »

To come back with the suggestion that Democrats would make an inane decision and Republicans would make a good one is absurd for several reasons, but I'll list just a couple:  1) it presumes a connection between "judicial philosophy" and declared political allegiance.  Despite the conservatives' best efforts, the judiciary is an apolitical branch of government.  With some notable exceptions impertinent to this discussion, liberalism and conservatism are vastly different notions in the courts than on the beltway;

You have got to be joking.  Or high.  I am done disputing this absurd claim of your's by mentioning just a single recent case that everybody knows about.  Ready?

Gore vs. Bush, Florida 2000

Decided purely right down party lines - First in the Florida Supreme Court where that kangaroo court of 7 purely liberal judges gave it to Gore, and then again when appealed all the way to the Federal Supreme Court, where thank God sanity prevailed.

Game.  Set.  Match.

As I said, there are some "notable exceptions," that being one.  The fact remains, though, that no federal judge is elected on the basis of his or her political affiliation.  It is an apolitical branch of government.  Am I so naive and/or delusional as to ignore the role politics plays?  Of course not.  Nevertheless, structurally and constitutionally, the judiciary is apolitical and independent.

Watto's Junk Yard / Re: Your Judicial Philosophy
« on: June 23, 2006, 11:57 AM »
What a boner  ::)

Who was behind the Smith & Wesson lawsuits?  Oh, that's right: Republican[/b] James Brady.  You know, Assistant and Press Secretary to Ronald Reagan?  He's the "lib er, left leaning politician."  Significantly, it was only after the settlement of the primary case (which involved multiple governmental and municipal entities--not private parties--as plaintiffs)  that individual plaintiffs began utilizing the cause of action as a private right of relief.  Additionally, the case settled between the parties, it wasn't a judicial verdict.  The trial judge's political persuasion--who cares?  He or she had nothing to do with the outcome of that case.

Columbine...uh...okay.  Michael Moore's a judge?  Hm.  News to me.  Was Wal-Mart sued over Columbine?  Yeah...didn't think so.  What was your point again?

Maybe you got your anecdotes confused.  Were you thinking of the North Carolina case where police responded to a scene of domestic abuse?  The one where the husband had fled, saying he was going to go buy bullets to kill himself?  The police contacted the two Wal-Marts and told them not to sell the guy bullets.  The managers said okay (thereby undertaking a legal duty; see above), but forgot to tell their gun department clerks.  The guy showed up, bought bullets, and killed himself.  Wal-Mart settled that case for $130,000 based on its exposure under a well known theory of liability called "negligent undertaking."  Again, it was a settlement between the parties; no judge involved.

I don't know anything about that Rhode Island case, other than that Rhode Island is one of several states that have a strict statutory scheme imposing liability on rental car companies for torts caused by their drivers.  Thus, regardless of whether a judge is a Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, he applies the laws as enacted by the state legislature.  That has nothing to do with the judge's political persuasion.  Indeed, I believe that if a judge were to act in opposition to majoritarian legislation, your ilk would call him or her an "activist."

So am I missing something, or are you just talking out of your ass?

Pages: 1 ... 57 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64 65 66 67 ... 69