ACLU - Supporting "terrorism" ?

[DFLofMN]

As far as I'm concerned in reference to the ACLU, I do not think they're some pro terrorist organization or whatever. What I think is that they're too intwined in theory, interpretation, and language to really understand what a severe kind of threat we're facing. To them, it's just a legality or has the potential to result in a series of legalities that will serve to advance their interests. That's what I'm prepared to go with.

Or maybe they do understand it and just don't want to deal with it. It's like anything else.

That is part of their function though.  Because there are many laws that are interpreted with too much leeway, they force decisions in courts (funny our government, though slow at times has a system that works) that make us write better laws, and stay in accord with the constitution.  Would you want any strings attaced to your system, especially purse strings.  That reminds me, I need to renew my membership with them. 

[Giant Saguaro]

As far as I'm concerned in reference to the ACLU, I do not think they're some pro terrorist organization or whatever. What I think is that they're too intwined in theory, interpretation, and language to really understand what a severe kind of threat we're facing. To them, it's just a legality or has the potential to result in a series of legalities that will serve to advance their interests. That's what I'm prepared to go with.

Or maybe they do understand it and just don't want to deal with it. It's like anything else.

That is part of their function though.  Because there are many laws that are interpreted with too much leeway, they force decisions in courts (funny our government, though slow at times has a system that works) that make us write better laws, and stay in accord with the constitution.  Would you want any strings attaced to your system, especially purse strings.  That reminds me, I need to renew my membership with them. 

Which suggests that liberals really do see terrorism as just any other problem. Like bank robbers or gangsters or in some similar category. It's not a war. It's a legality. Wow.

What did Kerry call the terrorists, a nuisance? You bet. Like speeders or drunk drivers.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

As far as I'm concerned in reference to the ACLU, I do not think they're some pro terrorist organization or whatever. What I think is that they're too intwined in theory, interpretation, and language to really understand what a severe kind of threat we're facing. To them, it's just a legality or has the potential to result in a series of legalities that will serve to advance their interests. That's what I'm prepared to go with.

Or maybe they do understand it and just don't want to deal with it. It's like anything else.

That is part of their function though.  Because there are many laws that are interpreted with too much leeway, they force decisions in courts (funny our government, though slow at times has a system that works) that make us write better laws, and stay in accord with the constitution.  Would you want any strings attaced to your system, especially purse strings.  That reminds me, I need to renew my membership with them. 

Which suggests that liberals really do see terrorism as just any other problem. Like bank robbers or gangsters or in some similar category. It's not a war. It's a legality. Wow.

What did Kerry call the terrorists, a nuisance? You bet. Like speeders or drunk drivers.

Kerry said he'd reduce terrrorists to just a nuisance. He didn't say they're just a nuisance now. But that's not in your RNC talking points.

[Giant Saguaro]

As far as I'm concerned in reference to the ACLU, I do not think they're some pro terrorist organization or whatever. What I think is that they're too intwined in theory, interpretation, and language to really understand what a severe kind of threat we're facing. To them, it's just a legality or has the potential to result in a series of legalities that will serve to advance their interests. That's what I'm prepared to go with.

Or maybe they do understand it and just don't want to deal with it. It's like anything else.

That is part of their function though.  Because there are many laws that are interpreted with too much leeway, they force decisions in courts (funny our government, though slow at times has a system that works) that make us write better laws, and stay in accord with the constitution.  Would you want any strings attaced to your system, especially purse strings.  That reminds me, I need to renew my membership with them. 

Which suggests that liberals really do see terrorism as just any other problem. Like bank robbers or gangsters or in some similar category. It's not a war. It's a legality. Wow.

What did Kerry call the terrorists, a nuisance? You bet. Like speeders or drunk drivers.

Kerry said he'd reduce terrrorists to just a nuisance. He didn't say they're just a nuisance now. But that's not in your RNC talking points.

Even so, what's that mean, Fern, and what level of understanding does that suggest he has in reference to the problem?

I don't get it. Raising taxes and getting pro choice judges on the Supreme Court take precedence!

[DFLofMN]

You got to understand Sugaro that terrorism is also a tactic.  It will always be used througout history.  Do we destroy Al Queda? YES!!  But do we also target the root casuses of terrorism where is comes from, such as poverty, low education levels? That Too.

[A18]

Alright, poverty and education have NOTHING to do with terrorism.