All things being equal, you’re absolutely right. As you’ll notice, this was prison guards and prisoners. This is hardly a situation where it’s appropriate or legal: these prisoners have reason to believe that they’ll be subject to different treatment by these guards because of this incident. I mean, sure prison sucks, but gurads are there to ensure that people don’t get out, not to administer punishment.

And we won’t even get into “nigger” — heck, I’m likely to be sent to prison just for typing that word — yet blacks use it all the time.

Offensive is your personal opinion and should not be protected. You have the right to be offended, but I have the right to ignore you.

Read my post. GWB is a lot more than a traditional Republican.

As for the destruction of other enconmies: when central banks won’t raise interest rates or adjust their currency according to exchange market values, they deserve what they get. Don’t you believe in a free market economy?

Soros doesn’t neatly fit into the liberal or conservative mold: he’s staggeringly wealthy and has benefited from both parties in different ways. To cast him to one aisle or the other isn’t accurate.

“the group infamous for its over the top, hate-laden ads (reference Bush Hitler)”

The particular ad you’re referring to was never run as a part of any moveon.org campaign. It was submitted by someone in an open competition for an open, user moderated moveon.org “create an advert” contest. It didn’t win, and it was removed from competition as soon as the administrators realized it was there (thanks in part to Matt Drudge). To say George Soros funded such a poor idea is like saying that Bush was responsible for 9/11 because he’s very close with the Saudi Royal Family.

Death by affiliation is a dangerous game to play — especially in politics(”someone” accused John McCain of being crazy and having illigitmate children in ‘00 during the Republican primaries).

“He, in essence, ‘bought’ the democratic party.”

I think you want to stay away from talking about the “buying” of any party. He had an agenda: get rid of Bush.

If you look at the contributions made to the Republican party and the legislation that comes from that side of the aisle, it’s hard to say that George Soros had any more effect on the Democratic party (that were trying to get rid of Bush anyway) than, say, a manufacturer looking for environmental kick-backs. I’d contend that a manufacturer probably got more bang for their buck, but that’s just me.

You’re call, but I think when it comes to money and politics, it really gets to be pretty ugly for both parties: wouldn’t you agree?

I seem to know a bad idea when I see one.

Same thing with wardens unfairly punishing gay prisoners.

Well Its hard to see what physical damages an establishement clause violation causes. Maybe the monetary damages of the amount of money the government is spending on the activity? But if I am right that there are few cases of physical damages, this means that the government is able to violate the establisment clause easily. And the only people able to ocmplain are the ones rich enough to fund litigation.

then again, proving psychological damages can’t be that much. And these are more than just being offended.