$3,000 a month on porn? I don't see how one man could possibly spank it to all that smut unless he's outsourcing some of his wanking to India.

So the only person in this whole story that has a set of balls is the one ignorant shithead on the school board who got his or her way.

"We are SO good at being racists.

Posted by Hagbard_Celine

We Americans like being number one at everything. Unfortunately, that includes the bad stuff too."

Actually, we aren't even close to #1. The American perception of what is "racist" is among the broadest in the world. If you label every behavior as "racist" then of course we are all racists. In other countries people are just not as self conscious about it. They aren't less racist. Talk to a person from western Europe for a while and your PC American mind will find all sorts of "prejudice" in their remarks. They haven't been trained to police every little word like we have.

Parts of the US are among the most ethnically/racially diverse places on Earth and large scale racial incidents are very rare.

"In 2004, French investigators blamed the disaster on a strip of metal that fell on to the runway from a Continental Airlines DC-10. This was found to have burst the Concorde's tyres, which ruptured the plane's fuel tanks as they broke up."

They don't check runways for debris before takeoff?

"Does that mean I am to be referred to as a Hungarian-Lithuanian- Yugoslavian-Dutch-Irish-with a dash of Jew American?"

Yes. I'm an Irish-Italian-Spanish with a dash of Portuguese and English American.

And I'm prejudiced against anyone who isn't.

"My friend's father used to drive around with empty budweiser cans all over his car and even though he was pulled over dozens of times, never once was he given a dui, let alone arrested, simply because he was NYPD."

Sounds like my drunk uncle Frank. He was a detective. Just pull him over when he's blasted and he'll tell you all about it....

Actually, Frank's a good guy.

"WTF does that mean?"

It means that if they were leaders in the business world more people would speak their language.

I never understood why cops are viewed as extra-credible witnesses in court. They are just as likely to be total scumbags as anyone else.

Even a cop who is an angel in his personal life will not bust another cop for most offenses - which proves they don't take the law all that seriously. In NJ their sense of entitlement is out of control. I know a guy who drives around shitcanned all the time and gets out of it because he has a little badge saying he's a cop's brother. That's all it takes.

This cop should not be simply fired, BTW. He should be jailed for a year.

"But all this is a hypothetical scenario. There won't be a war against Iran."

Sshhhh....

GOP fools dream about attacking Iran and DNC fools dream about GOP fools attacking Iran.

Let them dream.

"Immunity? Might give you a bit of sympathy at the most...how's AA comin' along you haggis eatin' leprechaun?"

Haggis (if that is the correct spelling) isn't Irish.

'"the fact that I'm 100% Irish"

Posted by Jomama

That explains a lot.'

How so Live or Die?

By the way, right now, I'm leaning towards 'Die'

;)

All these groups of people that get all huffed up over keeping their language alive crack me up.

People learn to speak the languages that will earn them the most money. If the French and Italians spent as much time working as they did trying to preserve their languages, their languages would probably be more popular.

"I can only imagine what it's like going out to lunch with these guys on the right.

They're so worried about paying for things,

Do they ever pickup the check?"

'I only had the soup and a water.'

All you people who are so worried about Israel's national defense need to hop on a plane and go join the IDF. Because it isn't the job of the US government to defend Israel.

We are fighting a war in their backyard and they've done shit to help us, BTW. (I know, I know, we "can't" use them. I'm sure they have spent many days and nights trying to figure out how to help but they just "can't".) Israel has actually attacked US forces one my time than it has aided them in combat.

"the left just cant have things both ways ANYMORE"

Both sides are total hypocrites on many issues. You have to be in order to support one of the parties and pretend that the two are different, that one is bad and one is good, etc.

You all take the position of "When it benefits my party, the issue is huge and important, when it benefits the other party the same issue is trivial. When my candidates are criticized for something, its just nit-picking. But if I can blast the other side on the same issue, its a big deal...."

To people who aren't beholden to a corrupt political organization like the GOP or DNC, this is obvious. That you people can see it in the "other side" and not yourselves shows a tremendous capacity for willful ignorance. And I'm talking about anyone who unconditionally supports either party.

"Then when he has a chance to gain favor (at least from his own party) he does nothing. Ignorance? Arrogance? I would hate to think I have been on the other side of the eight ball and end up having most of the accusations from the left proven accurate."

I don't identify with the left or the right but I do tend to accuse Bush of alot things myself - although not necessarily the same stuff others worry about.

Crispee - But I do think that anyone in of the presidency would realize the loss of life that would take place in the US should we be suddenly cut off from fuel and would take drastic steps to prevent it.

"Nothing has shown me they have what it takes to stomach any show of extreme measures or use of overwhelming forces."

Same can be said about the Bushies. Everything is this touchy-feely spreading Demcoracy and freedom bullshit. That is not how or why you fight wars. It all stems from this naive theory that "if you show the Middle East the merits of Democracy, they will change....". It is just a new version of the old liberal "if you just explain to the bad people why what they are doing is wrong, they'll change..." way of thinking. Bush isn't tough on our enemies. He's half queer for them.

"BTW is it true about being sure to know what type of Irish pub you're entering (Catholic or Protestant) before you order Jameson's or Bushmill's?"

I have not been there yet but from what I've heard, this is mostly bullshit - especially in the Republic of Ireland. People are tired of that shit. Its more likely to be an issue parts of Northern Ireland but those bars aren't going to carry both brands anwyay.

"P.S. Irish and Scottish are excluded and allowed to make any reference they want."

For the most part Mc = Irish and Mac = Scottish.

"I greatly fear what will happen in the US when the flow of import crude is greatly curtailed or shut off completely."

That won't happen until it runs out. That's what this whole statement to Iran is about: We will not allow you to cut off our supply of oil. And if they won't sell it to us, we'd take it.

Just because it was stupid to get into a situation where we have to rely on these people in the first place doesn't mean we would sit back and let everything turn to crap shoud they decide to cut us off. We wouldn't be the first addict to shoot the dealer and take his stash.

"You feel that you are drowning because you are drowning"

I always wondered how you can make someone feel like they are drowning. It has to involve depriving the person of air. Because if you put someone under water and give them air, that is scuba diving, which is fun.

The war wasn't all about oil.

It was also about the transfer of wealth from the American taxpayer (actually from future American taxpayers) to friends using no-bid "reconstruction" contracts.

And a little bit about Dubya one-upping daddy by "finishing the job".

But it never had anything to do with terrorism or national security.

I wonder if anyone asked their permission.

Two things I learned: 1) Rene Marie is an idiot. 2) Johnson is really scared of black people.

I had a cab driver once at an airport who didn't want to touch any bags that contained alcohol. Didn't bother me. I put my own bags in the trunk anyway. Turned out to be a real nice guy. My idiot friend left his cell phone in the cab and the guy came back to drop it off after he was a good 20 minutes away. Then my asshole friend, who was acting as if the phone was his most valuable possession before he found out where it was, only gave him 10 bucks for his trouble (which was way less than he would have got had he spent his 40 mins round trip picking up another fair).

"You forgot to say "But there's nothing wrong with that" you homophobe..."

Are comparing beastiality with gay sex? Huh, huh? Whose the homophobe now?

Just kidding. Of course they are pretty much the same thing. I actually believe that if you allow gays to marry the next thing that will happen is people marrying their dogs, cats, sea monkeys, etc.

"Why do people automatically think that allow LAW ABIDING gun owners to carry somewhere will increase crime and gun violence? "

Why do people who think we should allow guns everywhere only show an interest in talking about law abiding gun owners as if the other kind doesn't exist?

"I got in the ass with a car antenna once. It really smarted!"

And by car antenna he meant horsecock.

I'm kind of pissed that I was too busy arguing with Goatman and others to get in on the whole car antenna thing.

Especially since you most of you idiots making fun of poor BBob have no clue the fuck you are talking about. There are no less than seven pressure points on the human body that when struck by a car antenna will cause immediate death and twelve more that cause various forms of permanent paralysis.

And I guess none of you have heard of Hitler's famous last words: "I could have taken over the world if only we had a few more can antennas".

Chew on that, jackasses.

"Wow, I did not know Mexican Scientists had this much time on their hands."

I didn't know there was such a thing as a Mexican Scientist.

"Sully suggesting that Texas suburbs are going to suddenly turn into free fire zones"

"You make it sound like the place was a carnival arcade with bad guys marching by and an occasional school child and blue haired grandma thrown in."

So I was a bit over the top. But I don't see how my exagerations are any more ridiculous than some of you pretending that nobody has ever been killed by a stray bullet.

Anyway, this dead horse doesn't need any more of a beating. It comes down to whether you trust the judgement of the dumbest person on your block when it comes to whether or not there should be gunfire in the neighborhood at any given moment. I don't. I don't want him making life and death decisions. I want that guy to believe that if his life has to be in real immediate danger before he's allowed to fire his gun anywhere near where I am living. I'm willing to risk a few household items to keep complex life and death decisions out of that guy's hands.

Many of you disagree. You are much more trusting and optimistic than I am.

"Why do you keep refering to shooting in the street? He was in his yard and so were they.
Birdshot and slugs only travel so far."

On the issue of the type of gun/round - Some crazy old men own rifles, some own pistols and some own shotguns (or most likely, all three). I didn't see anything that says he was cleared because of the type of weapon/ammo he used. So you have to assume that when the next crazy old man uses something with a greater range, that would be OK.

As far as the yard/street thing goes - Bullets are not going to stop at the property line.

If you want to trust guys like Mr. Horn to take the law into their own hands, you have to realize that they are going to make mistakes. The 911 operator was making alot sense and Horn didn't even understand what the guy was trying to tell him. You can't say its OK for this retard to do what he did because he used a shotgun and then act surprised when the next retard uses a rifle and the bullet hits some unintended target.

"If you want to play the what-if game, what if an innocent never gets shot?

This game can be played both ways."

Human intelligence is based on the ability to recognize patterns and to predict future outcomes based on those patterns. In places where people fire guns in the street, innocent people tend to get shot. So it only stands to reason that encouraging gunplay in the streets will result in more innocent people being shot. If you want to pretend that stray bullets/mistaken identity never happens, go ahead. But don't expect others to share your dellusion. I didn't think this is a game but if it is, you are losing.

"Remind me where these assclown thugs who got shot were from?"

Are you asking because you think this is some legitimate way of explaining their apparent lack of morals? I'd hate to upset you again by putting words in your mouth.

"And when they go somewhere else - remember these are the people that put capital into the stock market and are the ones that fund the new speculative ventures......"

I don't think everyone else worships these people the way you do. I think alot people figure that if they leave the country, the sun will still rise in the morning and we will move along without them as if they were never here.

"I never said Texans are morally superior. I said they were mostly honest. For you to assume I said they were morally superior, you must take the stance that most other people are NOT mostly honest. "

No you said that Texans won't get themselves shot because they are honest. Then you said that only non-Texans will be shot. So if being honest prevents one from getting shot and only non-Texans are getting shot, that means Texans are honest and non-Texans aren't. The "logic" of your statements is very clear. Don't cry about "putting words your mouth" just because you are too stupid to realize what you are saying. Think before you type.

"Seems like your making some assumptions, you think this guy is crazy, he was CLEARED by the Grand Jury..."

Did you listen to the tapes? If that guy sounded like a reasonable person and you want to live in a neighborhood and have him around your family, fine. I avoid crazy bastards like him.

"I am MUCH more concerned about crimes being committed and bullets being fired in residential neighborhoods by mentally unstable CRIMINALS"

Seems pretty foolish to me. Bullets are bullets. Bullets don't care who fired them. Mr. Horn was only one firing guns in the street in this case and the 911 operator was clearly concerned that he'd shoot an innocent bystander or a cop. I want to live in a neigbhorhood that doesn't have bullets flying around. You want to live in one with "good bullets" flying around. Good luck with that.

"Get back to me when an innocent gets shot because of this ruling"

What are you going to do then, un-shoot the innocent bystander?

What a jackass.

"I consider this decision very differently. To me it says, "Commit burglary at risk of death.""

But that isn't all there is to it. The decision also says that crazy old men can shoot up their neighborhood if they perceive a crime to taking place.

I'm willing to admit that had the decision gone the other way, less burglars will be killed for their crime and that results in a slight increase in burglaries. Why can't you admit that the consequence of your position, which is slightly more bullets being fired around residential neighborhoods by untrained, mentally unstable individuals?

"You missed the point. 1) Texans are honest. They do not go into other people's homes unless the owner approves. So it is non-Texans who are getting shot by being where they are not supposed to be. 2) A dishonest Texan (a very rare breed) would at least be smart enough than to put him in jeopardy as these ignorant Hondurans did."

Genius, I'm talking about innocent people getting shot by "mistake" because the decision was made to allow nutjobs like Mr. Horn to fire their guns outside in the street at the slightest provocation. After my last post, you'd really have to be an idiot to not know that is what I'm talking about.

You do realize that more bullets flying around a neighborhood increases the chance of a stray hitting some guy mowing his lawn, right?

By the way, your belief that Texans are morally superior to others is hillarious.

"Is it just me, or is it sick to wish death upon your fellow countrymen?"

I think it is sick to wish death on anyone. Are we now pretending that I was serious when I said "I support this decisions, let them shoot each other."? Do you really think I support the decisions? Obviously not. So why pretend the other part of the statement was serious? Save the fake indignation for someone who gives a shit, I just can't take you seriously.

"And if you like the idea of going to prison for protecting your family in your own home, by all means move to California or Massachusetts."

Or New York. Both extremes are quite stupid.

"Actually, this isn't quite true. Texans are smart enough and honest enough than to be where they are not supposed to be."

But we are not talking about a homeowner cornered by an intruder in his own home. This decision said it was OK for Horn to go out into the streets firing a shotgun into people's backs. So unless you are telling me that Texans are going to hide in their basements for now on, your comment makes no sense. Because once you decide to turn your neighborhoods into free-fire zones for crazy old men, people don't need to be doing anything wrong to get shot.

Listen, I support this. I don't want to live in a crazy old man shooting gallery but if other people do that is a personal decision I support as long as they don't whine when the occasional kid gets shot in the face for playing in his front yard.

It basically boils down to Texans having decided that anyone can shotgun someone they can "reasonably perceive" as committing a burglary. Good for them.

That comes with the obvious risk of someone being shot by accident - either innocent bystanders or victims of mistaken identity. The more you encourage people like Mr. Horn, the higher the likeliness that your kids will be gunned down by a crazy neighbor shooting at the PSE&G guy. If harboring some fantasy of gunning down "bad guys" makes that risk worth it to you, then by all means move to Texas. If you don't like the idea of living near crazy people who are just waiting for an excuse to shoot someone in the back, stay away. I just hope that when someone like Mr. Horn inevitably shoots an innocent person, they stay consistent and let him go.

I support this decision made by Texas mostly because it should eventually lead to there being less Texans.

"Obama signed the largest tax increase in US history."

I love how people get pissed about taxes but they don't give a shit that this president spends like crazy - partially because he just signs off on almost every piece of pork that crosses his desk because he can't be bothered to do anything else.

If we spend the money we have to pay eventually dumbshits.

"Why do you keep a 2x4 under your bed? For random imaginary bad guys?"

Yes. That and it was left over from a project in the master bathroom and it was easier to throw it under my bed than put it in storage. I said it was more about paranoia than anything else already. But its also about laziness.

If someone breaks into your house randomly, it won't be to kill you. And if somebody wants to kill you, they won't break into your house when they know you are home in order to do it.

"You really do want to ensure you are at a disadvantage, don't you? If you are willing to use a blunt force type weapon, a baseball bat would be better. It is hard to one handedly swing a 2x4. But maybe you see a baseball bat as an unfair disadvantage to the bad guy."

You mean the imaginary random bad guy who is going to break into my home at night to attack me for no reason? Yeah, I'm not too worried about arming myself against him. If that two by four ever gets used it will likely be in a scenario where I'm drunk and using it on someone I know well who is also drunk. And it that case, I'm glad its a shity weapons

Truth is that if someone really wanted to get you, they'd be stupid to break into your home because they'd have no idea what you were doing, if you have a gun, where it is, etc. Having a gun under your pillow wouldn't stop someone from killing you if they really needed to kill you. But if it helps you sleep at night, like a night-light, then more power to ya....

"I'm in bed. I hear someone entering my house. I pull my gun, point it a the door to the bedroom and wait silently. When the intruder enters my bedroom -- BANG! He's dead. That's how it's going to protect me, bOoB."

Jeeze, and I thought I was paranoid for keeping a two by four under my bed.

How often are dudes attacked in their bedrooms? Pretty much never.

I'm not saying a gun can't protect you but usually the people who are most likely to need that type of protection are criminals themselves. Normal people aren't being hunted by others.

"Considering the minority of "rich people" are the ones footing the bill, I'm not sure why so many care about this. I guess it could mean less handouts."

Considering that is total bullshit I'd have to say you're an idiot.

A better attack on McCain re: the war and national security issues would be to point out for his support of policies that are obviously failing.

"Would you still believe he shouldn't be prosecuted for any crime if he hit a neighbor with his reckless actions?"

Anyone who is defending this guy and who doesn't want to be a hypocrite would have to say "Yes". You can't say you want to allow crazy old men to shotgun people in the back if they think someone committed a crime and then act schocked at the idea of innocent people getting hurt.

If our enemies were to plant someone in the office of the US presidency, they wouldn't have been thought they could get away with their traitor-president being as destructive towards US interests as Bush has been. They would have thought more subtlety was needed......

Just to be consistent, when an innocent person is shot for being mistaken for a robber, the shooter should not be prosecuted in Texas. Because the policy is that anyone with access to a shotgun is judge, jury and executioner. No pretending later that this isn't an idiotic policy when the entirely forseeable consquence of innocent people being shot comes into play. By encouraging citizens to execute criminals on the street by shooting them in back, the decision has been made that if it is OK if a few innocent people die.

This is so fucking stupid - which probably means this is going to be an important issue during this campaign.

"We should have put up exactly the same towers that came down... maybe plus a foot or two. That would have saved millions in design costs at least."

They would have had trouble renting all the offices. Otherwise, I agree.

"Sully, you and your ilk voiced this bullshit when it was Gore vs. Bush, Kerry vs. Bush and are voicing it now. The fact is that when the rigid rightie tank is empty - drained, devoid even of fumes - you turn to "neither one is any damned good." Sully, Gore or Kerry would have made fine president, and O'Bama will make a great one. herm"

Well, Herm, the only thing wrong with your little rant is that I never voted for Bush, I'm not voting for McCain and I'm not a Republican. The fact is the Gore and Kerry were horrible candidates who ran awful campaigns and lost to an idiot - in Kerry's case he lost even after Bush spent four years proving what an idiot he is.

You and your ilk - blind party hacks - are the ones that ensure a constant stream of shitty leaders. Congrats.

"Sully, they were Iraqi guards, not U.S. troops."

But who trained these murderers to gun down women in the streets, huh huh?

We should launch a full investigation to make sure this wasn't a case of itchy trigger fingers. Sure, this person ended up being a would-be mass murderer. But were our troops 100% sure? Did they take unnecessary risks with their own safety in order to be sure? Is there anything we can do to make their shitty, stressful and dangerous jobs worse? If we stop asking ourselves these questions, we are no better than the terrorists. And even though that is just an assinine talking point, it still bothers me and no amount of hardship on the part of our troops is too much to ask just to make sure I don't have to hear it again.

"Badmouthing Kerry in the age of Bush reaches a new highs in absurdity, but then we see such achievements here daily."

There are any number of threads here where you can bash Bush and be on topic. I've posted on some of them. Given your sensibilities, perhaps you should stick to those. I personally believe that our problems go way beyond Bush. Bush was able to win because of a broken system that presented two horrendous candidates as the only viable choices last time around. As long as people keep believing that one candidate is always "good" based strictly on blind party loyalty, we're going to be presented with the same shitty choices. I think its important to expose the shortcomings of both parties because people need to realize that they both work hand in hand to screw us before we'll get around to fixing things. I don't give a shit if you don't like it.

"Sully, is it not possible that Kerry went to war for patriotic reasons, saw what this (Vietnam) war really did and was man enough to turn against it? That reasonable scenario surely satisfies ME. herm"

But you forgot the part where thirty years later he's once again proud of his service during the war and he backs off all the shit he said about other soldiers. Or the part where thiry years later he explains that he didn't really throw his medals away, he just faked it for the cameras. But yeah, other than the facts that his opinion always seems to match his perception of the current political climate and that at least one of these actions that you find sincere were admittedly faked, the story is entirely believable.

I have a bridge for sale, by the way. Interested?

"When you don't have anything real with which to dry to denigrate someone "opportunist" is just a cheap shot."

You didn't ask me why I think he's an opportunist. You asked me about his future actions, which I can't predict.

I've already named a couple of examples of his past opportunistic actions. He saw Vietnam as a way to enhance his resume for a political career and then when he realized that wasn't going to be popular he saw an opportunity to get some attention by bad mouthing other soldiers. Still later, he saw that being a veteran was once again an assett to his campaign and all the sudden his service during the war (and the accompanying re-enactments) are worthwhile something again. Why did he save his childish re-enactments? What do you call someone who throws fake medals away for the cameras? If he was simply living by convictions he would have actually thrown the medals away and he wouldn't have needed the cameras around when he did it.

Look, there are much worse people than Kerry running our government but don't try to tell me the guy isn't a phoney.

"Obvious how, he is a US Senator, already tried a run for the presidency...so what "opportunity" is he waiting for??"

Huh? I don't need to know his present plans to know that his past actions show him to be an opportunist.

Danforth - There will always be a reason to rationalize voting for one of the transparent shills thrown at us by the major parties. They will keep screwing us as long as we keep taking the bait.

Townandcountry - Cheney is a horrible human being on his best day.

"He would have been a very good president."

Well he's not a great senator and he ran a horrible campaign that consistently highlighted a lack of simple common sense so I'll have to disagree.

"His anti-war activities were not self-serving when he testified. Far from it. Get a clue."

I'm not the one taking the incredibly naive stance here. That Kerry is a calculating opportunist is obvious. Grow up a little and stop rooting for the DNC like its a friggin sports team.

"and you still attack Kerry instead of the disgusting garbage attacking him. Pathetic. You deserved the presidency of George Bush."

Danni - You suffer from the thinking disorder I like to call "Good Guy/Bad Guy Syndrome". The chief symptom is the delusional belief that in every situation, there is a Good Guy and a Bad Guy. So if the people who attack Kerry are bad, then Kerry must be good. This, of course, shows a complete lack of understanding as to how the real world works. Frequently, if not usually, both sides in a conflict are self serving bastards. This is the case with Kerry as it pertains to his anti-war activities.

As for your idiotc "you deserve Bush comment" - Last time around, I held my nose and voted for Kerry. Never again. For now on I vote for someone, not against someone. Partisan idiots like you are the reason we are constantly presented with two horrible choices for president. Because not matter how shitty a candidate your party throws out there, you think he's the "Good Guy" to the other side's "Bad Guy" (and the other side thinks the same thing about their guy). Blind party loyalty, which you suffer, is the culprit. You and the people who still support Bush are two sides of the same coin whether you are astute enough to recognize it about yourself or not.

Right now biofuel won't work but with advances through research and development, maybe it could. I love how people want to immediately dismiss this as if they don't know that many new technologies take a while to get right. The other thing I find amusing is that biofuel is "unethical" because it uses up resources that could be used to grow food. Do the geniuses who say this realize how many people are going to starve when we are unable to transport food from the places it is grown to the places it is needed?

I'm not saying biofuel is the answer or even part of the answer. We shouldn't be subsidizing biofuel as much as we should be subsidizing research on alternative energy sources in general. But the dismissive attitude people are so eager to take when it comes to this is ignorant and counter productive. Everyone knows it isn't going to work now. Now shut the fuck up and let's see if someone can get it to work.

Was tough-talking anti-appeasement Bush suddenly possessed by the Ghost of Neville Chamberlain or what?

Kerry went to Vietnam because traditionally, having a military career and fighting in your generation's war was a pre-requisiste to high political office. That is why he brought his camera and re-enacted battle scenes with it while he was there. He was building a resume and taking pictures to back it up. There is really nothing wrong with any of that and his choice was certainly braver than the ones made by people who tried to paint him as a wussy.

But when he came home, he realized that the political climate had changed and being anti-war was the way to go. So he throws his fellow soldiers under the bus as quickly as possible and makes some fake gestures like pretending to throw away medals. His anti-war stance was pure schtick. Being against a phoney who snipes at his former comrades for political gain and being against the war are not mutually exclusive positions. You don't have to think that the Vietnam War was a happy fun time in order to find Kerry's post-war grandstanding a little fucked up.

Having said that, the Swift Boaters for Truth ending up doing the same thing Kerry did when he came home from the war: Throwing another veteran under the bus for political reasons.

"who knows what will happen in iran with a pussy in the white house.....unfettered nuclear advances......"

We have a pussy in the White House now. He grew up a spoiled little rich boy. The guy was a male cheerleader for Christ's sake.

"Scenario: We know for sure an astroid is coming which will destroy the Earth in our
lifetime and there is absolutely nothing anyone can do to prevent it or survive ---

If given a choice --

Would you rather know the exact date this astroid is calculated to
hit and destroy the Earth or would you rather not know."

If I have to know that this is going to happen during my lifetime, then I'd want to know when. Because the decisions I'd make would be alot different if it were 5 years from now than say 50 years from now.

Ideally, I would be given a general timeframe but not an exact date.

I never understood the theory that having only one kid is the most "moral" way of going about reproducing. Having siblings teaches kids that they are not always going to be the center of attention, that they have to share and be considerate of others, etc. And the kind of parent who makes this "moral" decision is usually the type that is not going to spend the extra time teaching their only child the things that the kid would learn naturally from having siblings. I don't see how having one spoiled kid is "moral" at all.

It seems that rather than having embraced the truth that blind loyalty to a party for any voter is counter productive, they are just pissed that their person didn't win the nomination.

Any American who thinks Americans should be taxed in order for their money to be sent to Israel needs to become familiar with the concept of private donations. You have a hard on for Israel? You want them to have your money? Give it to them. But mind your own business and don't worry about what I'm doing with my money.

Anyone who is using their time to cyber-stalk Nanc needs to get a life and a shrink.

"The transition to a new campaign was not well thought out, planned for, and prepared for before it began,"

And people should be prosecuted for that.

"Arab Americans are Americans just as much as Italians, Brits etc."

Italians and Brits aren't Americans. They are Italian and British, respectively.

This could have just as easily happened had he been using a knife during the demonstration.

Their maximum wasteline for a man is about what my waste was in high school when I weighed maybe 155 pounds.

Telling such a blatant lie and getting caught would be less harmful to his campaign than admitting he was wrong to oppose the bill and risk being called a "flip flopper". We are a nation of fucking idiots.

This idea is "flowers and chocolates" naive.

How predictable.