OT Right of way question? [1 pt]
 

*****************************************
If the liberals represent left wing or port tack, and
the conservatives are "right", the right wing or
starboard tack, and starboard tack has right of way
over port tack
*****************************************
1. Why are there so many collisions? [1pt]
*****************************************
2. Why do liberals fail to give way when they are
always in the wrong? [1 pt]
*****************************************
3. Why do liberals protest and lose? [1 pt]
*****************************************
4. Given that race appeals can be elevated to higher
courts, why other options do liberals have aside from
installing unfair judges to decide the outcome of race
protests? [2 pts]
*****************************************

OT Right of way question? [1 pt]
 

There's no such thing as right of way. It's burdened
or stand on.

If the liberals represent left wing or port tack, and
the conservatives are "right", the right wing or
starboard tack, and starboard tack has right of way
over port tack
*****************************************
1. Why are there so many collisions? [1pt]

It's everyone's responsibility to avoid collisions. Even if
the port tack boat does not give way, the starboard tack
boat must.

*****************************************
2. Why do liberals fail to give way when they are
always in the wrong? [1 pt]

"Always" is the key word to understanding why this isn't a legitimate
question.

*****************************************
3. Why do liberals protest and lose? [1 pt]

Because they don't have the votes just yet. That will change.

*****************************************
4. Given that race appeals can be elevated to higher
courts, why other options do liberals have aside from
installing unfair judges to decide the outcome of race
protests? [2 pts]

I thought we don't have the votes? How does the minority
party "install" judges. I thought the pres submits names to
Congress, who then accept or reject them.

*****************************************

5 pts for an intelligent response.

OT Right of way question? [1 pt]
 

I'll give you 1/2 point for #2.

Jonathan Ganz wrote

There's no such thing as right of way. It's burdened
or stand on.

quibbling--take one lash.

If the liberals represent left wing or port tack, and
the conservatives are "right", the right wing or
starboard tack, and starboard tack has right of way
over port tack
*****************************************
1. Why are there so many collisions? [1pt]

It's everyone's responsibility to avoid collisions. Even if
the port tack boat does not give way, the starboard tack
boat must.

Ok, now back up your words with some common coutesy!

Can't there be a common ground? It all starts with being
honest and not an extremist.


*****************************************
2. Why do liberals fail to give way when they are
always in the wrong? [1 pt]

"Always" is the key word to understanding why this isn't a legitimate
question.

Ok, change that to "most often". The point here, is a majority
of the country is not liberal, yet you want to force your views on
them and call them stupid?

*****************************************
3. Why do liberals protest and lose? [1 pt]

Because they don't have the votes just yet. That will change.

No likely, that's why lies, swearing, and slander are the most
common responses. Intimidation tactics just shows you to be
an extremist, not an enlightened individual. Assumtions on
your part are equally unfair, as well as rude and disrespectful.
If you want your points to be considered objectively, then
use logic not slander.

*****************************************
4. Given that race appeals can be elevated to higher
courts, why other options do liberals have aside from
installing unfair judges to decide the outcome of race
protests? [2 pts]

I thought we don't have the votes? How does the minority
party "install" judges. I thought the pres submits names to
Congress, who then accept or reject them.

You appeal when you lose.

Do you think it is right that the majority of California supports
the death penalty, and the 9th circus court of appeals deliberately
counters this? This is not the will of the people.

OT Right of way question? [1 pt]
 

I don't quibble. I'm stating fact. The words right of way
imply no compromise or doubt. Burdened/stand are not
enough to follow the rules.

Common courtesy is part of the starboard boat's responsibility
also. Sometimes (though rarely) the starboard boat should
give way.

Not liberal about what? Gay marriage?? Most people don't
consider the issue to be that important. A good economy?
I didn't realize that was a liberal-only agenda. Thanks for
clarifying. Not putting our military in harms way unless
absolutely necessary? I thought that was supposed to be
a non-partisan interest.

Very likely, but not in Congress for this coming election.
I don't mind a bit of grid lock. I think it's a good thing.
Bush will likely lose, and that's what we'll get. Then you
can blame Clinton, I mean Kerry.

I appeal when I lose?? Is there something wrong with
appealing judicial decisions? Isn't that what's supposed
to happen? It's called due process.

If we always went by the will of the people exclusively, we
would have some pretty bad things going on. That's why we
have three branches of gov't. They *balance* each other.
You complain about the judiciary, but the politicians are
the ones who appoint them and can remove them. Or,
they can change the Constitution. It's been done 17 times.
However, as an example, the gay marriage ban failed to
pass in the Senate. A half dozen or so Republicans, including
McCain, voted against it. Do will still blame the judges?
Don't you think we have better things to do that worry about
two guys pudding each other?

FYI, I was ardently in favor of the death penalty for years.
Now, I'm mildly against it. I think it's much more cruel to
force someone to live behind bars for crimes.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Bart Senior" wrote in message
et...
I'll give you 1/2 point for #2.

Jonathan Ganz wrote

There's no such thing as right of way. It's burdened
or stand on.

quibbling--take one lash.

If the liberals represent left wing or port tack, and
the conservatives are "right", the right wing or
starboard tack, and starboard tack has right of way
over port tack
*****************************************
1. Why are there so many collisions? [1pt]

It's everyone's responsibility to avoid collisions. Even if
the port tack boat does not give way, the starboard tack
boat must.

Ok, now back up your words with some common coutesy!

Can't there be a common ground? It all starts with being
honest and not an extremist.


*****************************************
2. Why do liberals fail to give way when they are
always in the wrong? [1 pt]

"Always" is the key word to understanding why this isn't a legitimate
question.

Ok, change that to "most often". The point here, is a majority
of the country is not liberal, yet you want to force your views on
them and call them stupid?

*****************************************
3. Why do liberals protest and lose? [1 pt]

Because they don't have the votes just yet. That will change.

No likely, that's why lies, swearing, and slander are the most
common responses. Intimidation tactics just shows you to be
an extremist, not an enlightened individual. Assumtions on
your part are equally unfair, as well as rude and disrespectful.
If you want your points to be considered objectively, then
use logic not slander.

*****************************************
4. Given that race appeals can be elevated to higher
courts, why other options do liberals have aside from
installing unfair judges to decide the outcome of race
protests? [2 pts]

I thought we don't have the votes? How does the minority
party "install" judges. I thought the pres submits names to
Congress, who then accept or reject them.

You appeal when you lose.

Do you think it is right that the majority of California supports
the death penalty, and the 9th circus court of appeals deliberately
counters this? This is not the will of the people.

OT Right of way question? [1 pt]
 

I don't quibble. I'm stating fact. The words right of way
imply no compromise or doubt. Burdened/stand are not
enough to follow the rules.

If you were stating fact, you would have said that there are give way and stand
on vessels, burdened is no longer used.

Common courtesy is part of the starboard boat's responsibility
also. Sometimes (though rarely) the starboard boat should
give way.

Also, its not only common courtesy, in some instances the rules require the
stand on vessel to take action.

OT Right of way question? [1 pt]
 

Gee, and I've never heard of Republicans doing that. With all the
Republicans in Congress, I'm surprised it still works.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Dave" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 10:15:32 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"
said:

I thought the pres submits names to
Congress, who then accept or reject them.

That's how it's supposed to work. Used to be that way. Now he submits the
names to Congress and the Dems filibuster so Congress can't accept or
reject
them.


Dave
S/V Good Fortune
CS27

Who goes duck hunting with Jamie Gorelick?

OT Right of way question? [1 pt]
 

"Bart Senior" wrote in message
et...
*****************************************
If the liberals represent left wing or port tack, and
the conservatives are "right", the right wing or
starboard tack, and starboard tack has right of way
over port tack

"Right of Way"????

Your political ignorance is matched by your understanding of the Coll Regs.

Why are you doing these political posts?????


Regards


Donal
--

OT Right of way question? [1 pt]
 

Politics is the only profession that requires no experience.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Donal" wrote in message
...

"Bart Senior" wrote in message
et...
*****************************************
If the liberals represent left wing or port tack, and
the conservatives are "right", the right wing or
starboard tack, and starboard tack has right of way
over port tack

"Right of Way"????

Your political ignorance is matched by your understanding of the Coll
Regs.

Why are you doing these political posts?????


Regards


Donal
--

OT Right of way question? [1 pt]
 

It doesn't. There is a time delay. It will take years
to get rid of the freak jurists on what is commonly called
the 9th "circus" court. Those reprehensible judges think
they have the right to vote against the will of the people.

They have betrayed the trust of the people they serve
by assume people are stupid and unable to make the
right decisions about those matters. Instead those judges
violate the spirit of the law at every opportunity.

Someday, they will die off and everything they have done
will be overturned by sensible judges who follow. We'll
get rid of those extremist liberals sitting on the bench and
put real American's back there and make 9th circuit court
into a court the people can respect again.

Jonathan Ganz wrote

Gee, and I've never heard of Republicans doing that. With all the
Republicans in Congress, I'm surprised it still works.


"Dave" wrote

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 10:15:32 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"

I thought the pres submits names to
Congress, who then accept or reject them.

That's how it's supposed to work. Used to be that way. Now he submits
the
names to Congress and the Dems filibuster so Congress can't accept or
reject
them.

OT Right of way question? [1 pt]
 

Time is what the founding fathers intended. Nice and slow and
steady. They do have the right to vote "against the will of the
people." They can do whatever they want. Of course, there
are consequences. Other laws can be passed and the Constitution
can be changed. Mostly, the legislature makes laws that get
around a particular issue by making them precisely.

Sorry, but I'm just not up for a quick civics lesson at this point.
Figure it out for yourself.

--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com

"Bart Senior" wrote in message
.. .
It doesn't. There is a time delay. It will take years
to get rid of the freak jurists on what is commonly called
the 9th "circus" court. Those reprehensible judges think
they have the right to vote against the will of the people.

They have betrayed the trust of the people they serve
by assume people are stupid and unable to make the
right decisions about those matters. Instead those judges
violate the spirit of the law at every opportunity.

Someday, they will die off and everything they have done
will be overturned by sensible judges who follow. We'll
get rid of those extremist liberals sitting on the bench and
put real American's back there and make 9th circuit court
into a court the people can respect again.

Jonathan Ganz wrote

Gee, and I've never heard of Republicans doing that. With all the
Republicans in Congress, I'm surprised it still works.


"Dave" wrote

On Thu, 15 Jul 2004 10:15:32 -0700, "Jonathan Ganz"

I thought the pres submits names to
Congress, who then accept or reject them.

That's how it's supposed to work. Used to be that way. Now he submits
the
names to Congress and the Dems filibuster so Congress can't accept or
reject
them.