It’s not anything like that at all. Have you read the rest of this thread or indeed anything in a newspaper or something? Get a clue.
Some papers were found last week; it hasn’t yet been determined that they are all of the missing papers. And let’s not forget that there are still the ones from Roberts’s service in the solicitor general’s office that the Justice Department is still refusing to turn over.
Oh, but I forgot, IOKIARDI/IOKIYAAR, ainnit?
Do you have those stupid acronyms coded to some key combination on your computer? I’m just wondering because you use them so often, not even realizing that while you pat yourself on the back for your cleverness you look like a retard to 9 out of 10 people don’t understand what they mean and an idiot to the one that does.
Please don’t take this the wrong way, but I’ve just got to tell you I find you absolutely fucking hilarious. And when I say “don’t take this the wrong way”, I mean don’t take it to mean I think you actually have a sense of humour.
AD, a quick google suggests that the first one is “It’s okay if a Republican does it”; presumably the second one is “…if you’re an [A-word?] Republican”. How this applies to me, a (currently) Labour-voting UK resident, is entirely beyond me. It’s clearly beyond rjung too, but he doesn’t let that stop him. He has ninja conservatives to misspell!
Oh, I know what they mean, so put me down in the “thinks he’s an idiot” camp. A general rule of thumb: if someone has to ask what it means it’s not funny, witty, or clever.
Perhaps we need to add another acronym to the standard arsenal:
WRCTOAAR,HPIOIYAAR: (When rjung can’t think of an actual rebutal, he posts IOIYAAR).
OMFG!! You’re totally right. Roberts is Satan. It’s clear he is the diabolical puppet master behind all of the evils of western civilization. I bet he’s the one that found the hot coffee mod for GTA that caused the hurricane to wipe out the gulf coast. That evil bastard. Get the flaming pitchforks kids.
I’ll ask again, because I love repeating myself. Do you have anything indicating that these papers contain anything negative about Roberts, cause this is startin to sound like one of them tinfoil hat “if I can’t see the papers then they must be the evidence I’m looking for” dealies.
You mean besides the fact that the Bush Administration is so gung-ho in not letting anyone see them?
“Timmy, have you been taking cookies from the cookie jar again?”
“Who, me?”
“Timmy, what’s that behind your back?”
“What’s what behind my back?”
“Whatever it is you’re holidng behind your back.”
“You don’t know I’m holding anything behind my back.”
“So take your hands out and show me.”
“Don’ wanna.”
“Do you have a cookie behind your back?”
“You don’t know I’m holding anything behind my back.”
Gosh, by the Harborwolf school of thought, Timmy must be innocent! :rolleyes:
And gosh, by the rjung school of thought, Timmy must be guilty! Because we don’t know he’s not done anything! Jesus fucking christ, do you have any indication that “the Bush administration” are preventing you from seeing them? I’ll answer for you, because you’re fucking stupid; no, you fucking don’t.
You’re a fucking cretin, you know that? You are an embarrassment to people with hair, let alone people with a semblance of critical thinking skills. Jesus suffering fuck, you don’t even know that there are even any papers withheld from the fucking Reagan library, and you’re apparently too fucking dumb to think of any credible reasons why an attorney’s client might not want their papers made public for any reason other than that they paint their attorney in poor light. You are a fucking idiot, and you are so astoundingly blind that you can’t help but see conspiracy anywhere you look. It’s amazing you make it out of your house in the morning without accusing the spiders in the bathroom of being Republican stooges. Hell, it’s amazing you can put on your trousers without accusing the right leg of conservative intrigue.
You are exactly why, whenever there’s a real scandal, politicians of any stripe can point and say, “look, they always think we’re up to something, what can we do?” And you know what? They’re right! You are why they get away with it, because you have no sense of proportion whatsoever. You’re the fucking Laurel and Hardy of political discourse. Get a fucking clue.
Kick ass! I’ve got my own school of thought. I mean, it’s not as cool as a school of rock. It’s a schoolf though.
I tell ya what Rjung. Why don’t you tell us what these mysterious papers contain. You seem to be the expert. I’m sure you’ve got loads of guesses as to what these papers say. Do please share. I’m ever so excited.
And thanks for the :rolleyes: there skittles. I love you too.
Sarcasm shouldn’t be practiced by the unskilled, y’know.
And by your argument, I guess we should just throw “probable cause” out the window, eh? Never mind about past patterns of behavior or suspicious activities; unless we’ve got dammable proof in big blinking neon lights bolded and triple-underlined, why, everything must be innocent and aboveboard, of course! It’s a pity we didn’t have you practicing law back in 1995 – you could have wrapped up the OJ Simpson trial in an hour all by your lonesome…
Now that’s an interesting thought… Are you sure you considered all the implications of that statement, oh skillful one?
stands and cheers
Rjung has been an embarassment to these boards for years, he’s the antithisis of “fighting ignorance”. Nice to see him FINALLY called on it. Go Dead Badger!
Now RTF is going to pop in and tell me I’m just a right wing stooge. Or he would if he hadn’t been strangely absent these last few months.
Whereas unintentional irony is for the masses, apparently.
Or maybe it was Rosemary Wood.
You do know how recess appointments work, don’t you? Mebbe you wanna take a look at Article II, Section 2 of the constitution and refresh your memory. Recess appointments do not circumvent the constitutional requirement of Senate approval - at least not for very long. You might also be interested to learn that none other than George Washington in 1795 used a recess appointment to get William Rutledge installed as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. Rutledge was eventually rejected (for both his political views and his occasional mental illness) by the Senate during their next session.
Hey, why bring all the bells and whistles. How about just providing any fucking proof of anything? I would dearly love to think that you aren’t just some knee jerk paranoid partisan hack.
Yes, I do. That, of course, won’t stop you from taking an opportunity to flex your brain for the masses, however.
GOP CW is that they’re going to absolutely kill the Dems in the midterms because of their obstructionism. I have a feeling that if the Dems oppose any of his justices, he’ll recess appoint them (maybe more than once) and hope for a friendlier audience in '07.
But then again, you probably already knew that, too.
Life is full of disappointments. 
At least I have more pattern recognition skills than a mayfly, which is more than can be said for the Bush apologists.
Truly, you are the Detective Rorschach of political investigation.
I’m a bush apologist now? I’m finding out all sorts of things about myself in this thread.
Tell me more about myself oh great guru.