Because if they put anyone against him in the primaries, they would be forced to have infighting, pointing out all the mistakes he made. They wanted to appear consolidated and, more importantly, correct. But by putting no one against him initially, the opponents couldn't point to other Republicans that had blasted him then "flip-flopped" after losing the primary & backing him in the nationals. Or at least fewer of them.
That's just a guess -- I've never taken a real Poli-Sci class -- but it seems to make sense.
> Supernatural effects can be measured and and studied scientifically just like anything else.
That is completely asinine. Supernatural means "not of the natural world." If something is able to be measured or even observed, IT IS FRIGGING NATURAL. If it's supernatural, you cannot explain it. Successfully measuring something is to explain something's natural behavior/properties. If it is supernatural, it has no such properties.
I hope you don't have any kids that you have passed your ignorance to. Or at least not this bit of idiocy.
> Thank God Bush got Re-Elected. I can look forward to continued employment and more money in my wallet.
The election is over, you can stop being a mouthpiece. Unless you are rich, that reasoning is utter bullshit. You are suggesting that if Kerry had been elected, you would lose your job. I don't like him either, but being a troll doesn't convert anyone.
> If you oppose the Patriot Act you probably aren't what most people what could call a staunch republican.
Then most people don't know what being a REAL Republican is about. I was a Republican, proudly, because I believed in what the party stood for. Since they don't actually act on the party's intended stance, and quite often directly oppose it, I chose to switch to being Libertarian.
> I once thought that the USA was a freer country than the UK,
I was watching the House of Commons this morning, when they directly addressed the Prime Minister about random (not the best word) topics. At first I wondered how anything could arise through what appeared to be near-chaos (in retrospect, that was probably due more to everyone 'harrumphing' rather than the actual procedure), but I was impressed with Tony Blair, in that he had to know REAL FACTS about whatever someone brought up and he answered coherently. And when he didn't have enough information (only heard that once, but wasn't watching real long), he basically said "I don't know, I'll have to get back to you."
I can't recall one time that Bush admitted he didn't know something -- even though I'm sure he doesn't know anything about most topics -- he'd just answer a question he wanted to be asked, even if it isn't remotely related to the topic. People in the U.S. seem to be equating stubbornness with strength these days.
More importantly, it reminded me of how Bush has said that he isn't accountable to anyone (what's that word again... oh yeah, "dictator"). I wish there were a forum in the U.S. where the President had to directly answer questions from someone, ANYONE, EVER. I know congress would generally treat him (any pres.) with "kid gloves," but at least there would be the illusion that the President had some clue what he was talking about or we'd get more evidence to the contrary. It might look like he has a clue about important subjects instead of placing all important decisions into the hands of his God (AKA Dick Cheney).
> Being gay in the military makes the other guys uncomfortable. That isn't good if you want high morale.
High morale? Take a look at the morale in Iraq. It has nothing to do with gays.
And what if a group of soldiers from Alabama are uncomfortable with black people? Should the blacks be dishonorably discharged because they "let it slip" that they're black? Discriminating for one bad reason or for another bad reason -- neither one is right, regardless of the bullshit reasoning you give.
The soldiers aren't there to feel comfortable, they are there to kill. If you don't like the gay guy in your unit, TOUGH SHIT. You are there to take orders, not to fucking make new friends and have a goddamned "we love each other in a nonsexual way" party!
> You can cop an attitude all you want, but it won't cover up the fact that you're that cancer stick's bitch.
You can cop an attitude all you want, but it won't cover up the fact that you want to take away all personal choices and freedoms that don't fall into your fascist view.
See, I can make ludicrous claims as well and state them as fact. You don't know me (I really hate that phrase...) and you don't know that I'm addicted. I probably AM, but quitting isn't as impossible as people seem to think, if the smoker REALLY wants to.
I routinely post pro-conservative points and get modded up, if it is a valid point and not based on onesidedness. "Clinton recession" pointing out Kerry's $5Mil and ignoring Bush's $XMil (which is >5) makes him out to be biased and ranting.
Actually, not just hard-pressed, but the FIRST EVER to OD. It has never happened.
That's not entirely accurate (well, it is... read on). According to some government-sponsored "research," rabbits "overdosed" on Marijuana. Of course, they force-fed the thing like 1/4 its body weight in MJ, so they could have been feeding it carrots & conclude that they are deadly.
> Take a guess where the nicotine came from, genius.
Let's see, in this case, it's probably made synthetically. It's funny, after your ignorant post, you sarcastically calling someone "genius." Do you think before posting, or just assume that if it is remotely related to a bad idea that it's automatically bad itself?
> Nice and stealthy, smoke your drugs right out in public without the stigma of that nasty old crackpipe.
Ignoring the obvious problems with your point (posted by AC), there are already "stealthy" smoking devices. To smoke crack, all you need is a glass tube. If it's too short, it'll burn like hell, but for a crack addict, I don't think that's much of an issue.
(I've never smoked crack or meth, but I like learning about all kinds of wierd topics)
> smoke/tar smells like crap too? You probably don't realize this because your olfactory nodes are trashed.
Did you notice that the world smells like crap too? It's all a matter of scale & personal preference.
> You want to work on your personal cancer project, fine.
Thanks for your permission, but I suggest you drop the whole "holier-than-thou" attitude if you ever expect to get anywhere in life. Once you are rich, however, you can afford to regain that trait.
> I don't want to be a volunteer in it and you don't have a right to force it on me.
Absolutely. You can choose to go to nonsmoking establishments. However you don't have the right to force smokers to do anything either, unless they are breaking laws/posted rules.
> One of the great pleasures of being a non-smoker
One of the greatest pleasures of being a smoker is blowing it into the face of smokers. Freedoms go both ways. I don't blow smoke into peoples' faces, as long as they don't claim I'm killing them, and they don't try to make what I CHOOSE to do illegal. California banning smoking in all public places is an attack on personal freedoms.
The ultimate test of freedom is standing up for it in the face of that which you don't like.
I want one. Not sure what "one" is in this case, but I want it anyway. Maybe it's the electric toilet paper dispenser on the right side, hanging under the beer bottles. At least that's what it looks like.
That's pretty cool. I don't have anything important to say about it, but a neat idea anyway. How big are the in-tubes on the H.Exch? Any possible flow problems from it? I would assume not, if the temperature dropped...
Slashdot Mirror
> what originates from the US? I can't think of many items that we export anymore.
Fear, war, poverty, although we certainly don't have a monopoly on them.
> If they give him a hard time, does that affect access in future?
No doubt. Reporters are commonly blackballed by politicians for not already agreeing with policies of the interviewee.
Yeah, his lack of historical vision left me gaping with incredulity.
I just wanted to use that word.... incredulity... incredulity... sounds neat. Seriously though, that was a pretty stupid thing for him to say.
> Why go with Bush again?
Because if they put anyone against him in the primaries, they would be forced to have infighting, pointing out all the mistakes he made. They wanted to appear consolidated and, more importantly, correct. But by putting no one against him initially, the opponents couldn't point to other Republicans that had blasted him then "flip-flopped" after losing the primary & backing him in the nationals. Or at least fewer of them.
That's just a guess -- I've never taken a real Poli-Sci class -- but it seems to make sense.
> Supernatural effects can be measured and and studied scientifically just like anything else.
That is completely asinine. Supernatural means "not of the natural world." If something is able to be measured or even observed, IT IS FRIGGING NATURAL. If it's supernatural, you cannot explain it. Successfully measuring something is to explain something's natural behavior/properties. If it is supernatural, it has no such properties.
I hope you don't have any kids that you have passed your ignorance to. Or at least not this bit of idiocy.
> why would Luke even recognize the young Anakin as his father?
Dude... he's got the force. He just, like, knows, man!
> Thank God Bush got Re-Elected. I can look forward to continued employment and more money in my wallet.
The election is over, you can stop being a mouthpiece. Unless you are rich, that reasoning is utter bullshit. You are suggesting that if Kerry had been elected, you would lose your job. I don't like him either, but being a troll doesn't convert anyone.
> When are you guys ever going to forgive us for that?
Forgive you? Hell, most Americans don't even know that ever happened. How can they forgive for something they are ignorant of?
> If you oppose the Patriot Act you probably aren't what most people what could call a staunch republican.
Then most people don't know what being a REAL Republican is about. I was a Republican, proudly, because I believed in what the party stood for. Since they don't actually act on the party's intended stance, and quite often directly oppose it, I chose to switch to being Libertarian.
> I once thought that the USA was a freer country than the UK,
I was watching the House of Commons this morning, when they directly addressed the Prime Minister about random (not the best word) topics. At first I wondered how anything could arise through what appeared to be near-chaos (in retrospect, that was probably due more to everyone 'harrumphing' rather than the actual procedure), but I was impressed with Tony Blair, in that he had to know REAL FACTS about whatever someone brought up and he answered coherently. And when he didn't have enough information (only heard that once, but wasn't watching real long), he basically said "I don't know, I'll have to get back to you."
I can't recall one time that Bush admitted he didn't know something -- even though I'm sure he doesn't know anything about most topics -- he'd just answer a question he wanted to be asked, even if it isn't remotely related to the topic. People in the U.S. seem to be equating stubbornness with strength these days.
More importantly, it reminded me of how Bush has said that he isn't accountable to anyone (what's that word again... oh yeah, "dictator"). I wish there were a forum in the U.S. where the President had to directly answer questions from someone, ANYONE, EVER. I know congress would generally treat him (any pres.) with "kid gloves," but at least there would be the illusion that the President had some clue what he was talking about or we'd get more evidence to the contrary. It might look like he has a clue about important subjects instead of placing all important decisions into the hands of his God (AKA Dick Cheney).
> let's not go so far as to endorse their personal problems
How true... For instance, I don't endorse your unwarranted bigotry and fear.
> Being gay in the military makes the other guys uncomfortable. That isn't good if you want high morale.
High morale? Take a look at the morale in Iraq. It has nothing to do with gays.
And what if a group of soldiers from Alabama are uncomfortable with black people? Should the blacks be dishonorably discharged because they "let it slip" that they're black? Discriminating for one bad reason or for another bad reason -- neither one is right, regardless of the bullshit reasoning you give.
The soldiers aren't there to feel comfortable, they are there to kill. If you don't like the gay guy in your unit, TOUGH SHIT. You are there to take orders, not to fucking make new friends and have a goddamned "we love each other in a nonsexual way" party!
> You can cop an attitude all you want, but it won't cover up the fact that you're that cancer stick's bitch.
You can cop an attitude all you want, but it won't cover up the fact that you want to take away all personal choices and freedoms that don't fall into your fascist view.
See, I can make ludicrous claims as well and state them as fact. You don't know me (I really hate that phrase...) and you don't know that I'm addicted. I probably AM, but quitting isn't as impossible as people seem to think, if the smoker REALLY wants to.
Troll.
I routinely post pro-conservative points and get modded up, if it is a valid point and not based on onesidedness. "Clinton recession" pointing out Kerry's $5Mil and ignoring Bush's $XMil (which is >5) makes him out to be biased and ranting.
> you'd be hard pressed to OD on [THC}
Actually, not just hard-pressed, but the FIRST EVER to OD. It has never happened.
That's not entirely accurate (well, it is... read on). According to some government-sponsored "research," rabbits "overdosed" on Marijuana. Of course, they force-fed the thing like 1/4 its body weight in MJ, so they could have been feeding it carrots & conclude that they are deadly.
> Take a guess where the nicotine came from, genius.
Let's see, in this case, it's probably made synthetically. It's funny, after your ignorant post, you sarcastically calling someone "genius." Do you think before posting, or just assume that if it is remotely related to a bad idea that it's automatically bad itself?
> In fact that's probably the only reason it's still legal in Canada and the US.
That and the hundred million smokers that still want it legal...
> A better solution would be to force the tobacco companies to sell Nicotine free cigarettes.
If your solution is to force a few million people to convert, it's not a viable solution.
> Nice and stealthy, smoke your drugs right out in public without the stigma of that nasty old crackpipe.
Ignoring the obvious problems with your point (posted by AC), there are already "stealthy" smoking devices. To smoke crack, all you need is a glass tube. If it's too short, it'll burn like hell, but for a crack addict, I don't think that's much of an issue.
(I've never smoked crack or meth, but I like learning about all kinds of wierd topics)
> smoke/tar smells like crap too? You probably don't realize this because your olfactory nodes are trashed.
Did you notice that the world smells like crap too? It's all a matter of scale & personal preference.
> You want to work on your personal cancer project, fine.
Thanks for your permission, but I suggest you drop the whole "holier-than-thou" attitude if you ever expect to get anywhere in life. Once you are rich, however, you can afford to regain that trait.
> I don't want to be a volunteer in it and you don't have a right to force it on me.
Absolutely. You can choose to go to nonsmoking establishments. However you don't have the right to force smokers to do anything either, unless they are breaking laws/posted rules.
> One of the great pleasures of being a non-smoker
One of the greatest pleasures of being a smoker is blowing it into the face of smokers. Freedoms go both ways. I don't blow smoke into peoples' faces, as long as they don't claim I'm killing them, and they don't try to make what I CHOOSE to do illegal. California banning smoking in all public places is an attack on personal freedoms.
The ultimate test of freedom is standing up for it in the face of that which you don't like.
> it's just an electric motor with a plastic blade attached.
So are PC fans. They fail all the time due to small amounts of dust. Car fans have to deal with dust, dirt, gravel, whatever flies up & hits it.
> He's got nothing on this guy.
I want one. Not sure what "one" is in this case, but I want it anyway. Maybe it's the electric toilet paper dispenser on the right side, hanging under the beer bottles. At least that's what it looks like.
> ran the oil from the gearbox through it,
That's pretty cool. I don't have anything important to say about it, but a neat idea anyway. How big are the in-tubes on the H.Exch? Any possible flow problems from it? I would assume not, if the temperature dropped...
> a guy with a box around his neck.
I'd like to have a... well, you get the picture.
> "Wow, there's a manual for us ADD folks out there?"
If there were, it would have to be like 2 pages... Who, having ADD, would be able to read a novel?