1,523
edits
Changes
no edit summary
::::It's hard to keep track of who you guys don't like around here. There are no listed authors for the source; that's the full reference. Feel free to use your own (references, that is, not memories) if mine aren't good enough. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:13, 1 September 2007 (EDT)
::::It's hard to keep track of who you guys don't like around here. There are no listed authors for the source; that's the full reference. Feel free to use your own (references, that is, not memories) if mine aren't good enough. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 20:13, 1 September 2007 (EDT)
:::::It is and remains a questionable source; don't be surprised if portions are disallowed. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 15:05, 2 September 2007 (EDT)
:::::It is and remains a questionable source; don't be surprised if portions are disallowed. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 15:05, 2 September 2007 (EDT)
::::::So you get to decide what sources are questionable, and you don't have to explain yourself or present any evidence contrary to my assertions? That's the way to foster a productive atmosphere. [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 16:29, 2 September 2007 (EDT)
*Here is what actually happened:
*Here is what actually happened:
:Amen to this. I heard with my own two ears Newt Gingrich discuss these reforms in 1993, to say it was "rushed through" without much debate and consideration is balderdash. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 15:05, 2 September 2007 (EDT)
:Amen to this. I heard with my own two ears Newt Gingrich discuss these reforms in 1993, to say it was "rushed through" without much debate and consideration is balderdash. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 15:05, 2 September 2007 (EDT)
:Also, Ashcroft was doing his job as Attorney General and fiduciary of the public trust; he'd be crtiticized if failed to act in the wake of 9/11. I am rapidly tiring of this approach, that User:Jazzman (and yes, I named Jazzman by name) is using to suggest or imply Ashcroft is the reincarnation of Heinrich Himmler. I am rapidly loosing patience with this garbage. IOW, don't even attempt this crap. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 15:10, 2 September 2007 (EDT)
:Also, Ashcroft was doing his job as Attorney General and fiduciary of the public trust; he'd be crtiticized if failed to act in the wake of 9/11. I am rapidly tiring of this approach, that User:Jazzman (and yes, I named Jazzman by name) is using to suggest or imply Ashcroft is the reincarnation of Heinrich Himmler. I am rapidly loosing patience with this garbage. IOW, don't even attempt this crap. [[User:RobS|Rob Smith]] 15:10, 2 September 2007 (EDT)
::Wow! So I guess when you said personal attacks weren't ok you were being a little [[deceit|dishonest]]? And when you said I shouldn't accuse you of assuming bad faith... it was because you didn't want me to know that you are secretly think that when I said "Ashcroft wrote the Patriot Act" (which he still takes credit for, by the way; I've heard the words out of his own mouth!! I might even have a recording of it somewhere) you thought I ''actually'' meant "Ashcroft is a dirty little neocon fascist"? Or is it that people with power get to make personal remarks, but lowly editors just have to sit there and take it like a fraternity pledge? I mean, I know I'm a Marxist and all (you know, because my user page says I'm the exact opposite, and I've made major contributions to anti-marxists pages, and I've never indicated any Marxist traits whatsoever, and of course, I've made over 1,000 edits to the mainspace and haven't managed to be permabanned -- I've got to be a Marxist!!), but gee, I thought I was still able to make serious edits to the site. Thank you, Rob, for helping me see the light! [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 16:29, 2 September 2007 (EDT)
*Even more hilarious is their notion that the POTUS was personally taking pen to paper and writing up the "legislation". Does anyone actually have any idea at all of a President's day, let alone their week, or the way our government works? They really want people to ignore the fact that Pelosi, Boxer, Kennedy and the usual cast couldn't insert enough abridgments to civil rights! Of course they would later claim they didn't want them, so long as they were allowed on the bandwagon when it was expedient to ride it. And later planned on removing the most helpful provisions, the better to appeal to the Internet Liberal nut jobs they count on to spread their filth. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]]</font></sup> 16:01, 2 September 2007 (EDT)
*Even more hilarious is their notion that the POTUS was personally taking pen to paper and writing up the "legislation". Does anyone actually have any idea at all of a President's day, let alone their week, or the way our government works? They really want people to ignore the fact that Pelosi, Boxer, Kennedy and the usual cast couldn't insert enough abridgments to civil rights! Of course they would later claim they didn't want them, so long as they were allowed on the bandwagon when it was expedient to ride it. And later planned on removing the most helpful provisions, the better to appeal to the Internet Liberal nut jobs they count on to spread their filth. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]]</font></sup> 16:01, 2 September 2007 (EDT)
:TK, I never meant that Bush or Ashcroft *literally* wrote the PA. I'm sorry if it wasn't clear enough, but I thought it was common usage to refer to the head of a government body as the decision-maker. Bush hardly makes any decisions all by himself, and we all know that, but we still say "Bush decided X" because it's more convenient. Feel free to change my wording to be more precise, but I was trying to be more concise. (Heh, I rhymed!). [[User:Jazzman831|Jazz]][[User talk:Jazzman831|Man]] 16:29, 2 September 2007 (EDT)