See other All is Vanity Articles
Title: Attention 4um Members
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://none
Published: May 4, 2008
Author: me
Post Date: 2008-05-04 22:40:24 by christine
Keywords: None
Views: 18280
Comments: 655
I have to be honest, I'm completely distressed at what's happened to this forum. The fighting and the distrust between those for and those against Obama has gotten to the point where, in my opinion, it's destroying the forum. What's the point of having an open free speech venue when everyone is bozo'ing everyone else? When I read my mission statement and what Freedom4um was created to be, I don't even recognize the place anymore. There will be changes made in the near future as I decide what is best for the continued growth of this forum.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-475) not displayed.
.
.
.
#476. To: Red Jones (#443)
He answered one hypothetical question. Blew the little girl's head off in that one.
I'm pretty sure Ol' Ben Franklin meant that anyone who gives up *their own* safety for their own liberty deserved neither, not someone else's safety. Or in the context of my statement, giving up other people's innocent lives for the sake of our own liberty. Not applicable here.
I've hesitated to give my own opinion on this decision because I don't want who I am to give my opinion more weight than it should. My opinion should have no more weight than any other member. This is christine's forum and it's purely her decision, and I purposely avoided giving my opinion prior as it was not asked of me. Having said that, I disagree with the decision to cut the bozo count. One important question is how many people had more than 10 entries on their bozo list. I know of only one, but perhaps there were more. If there was only one, then this action can be construed as an action only against that one person. Was there more than one? Was that question asked before the decision was made? The suggestion that the bozo system is being abused by people who don't want to be accountable is nonsense. The reality is, as pointed out a few times, the discord that is here is not unique to 4um. Forums across the internet are experiencing the same phenomenon, and it has to do with the election season. That's the obvious trigger point. The bozo system has been in place here since day one and even earlier on LP and it was never seriously entertained as an abuse mechanism. That didn't happen until now, when the general election has all political forums in a tizzy. Coincidence? Absolutely not. The problem is NOT the bozo system. I think a small amount of thoughtfulness makes that obvious. Further, any concern that 4um is was being destroyed is also nonsense. It's not. As a meeting place to discuss differences, heated arguments bring more attention, not less. While certainly differing conditions will drive some people away, more and/or different people arrive to replace them. That's normal and healthy in any forum venue. I believe 4um was not broken and should not have been fixed. Such "fix" changes can destablize things even more. Then again, if the result is more to christine's preferences, then the fix was appropriate. 4um should take any flavor that christine prefers, whether it be in content discussed, participants invited to post, or any other particular dimension. My humble 2c.
He may well bomb Iran. He may even launch all the nukes we have left in our arsenals at random countries throughout the world including the US. He may imprison all freedom loving people and order nuke waste dumped in all fresh water supplies. I don't know. The reason I and many others here prefer Obama over the other 2, a reason that has been broadcast over and over and over again but which somehow fails to take (not singling you out as the communication problem seems widespread) due to this phenomenon, is simply that all considered, Obama is less likely to do harm than Cain or Hill. That's it, as cleanly and concisely as I can possibly put it. I couldn't care less when his parents were married, and couldn't care less if Obama lied about the timing. I know you think he'll cause Rodney King style race riots everywhere. Maybe you're right, but I don't think so. Maybe Obama is a racist himself. I think David Duke is too, but I'd probably not care about that if he were in the running. It's not like the president can start ordering whites to the back of the buses. That's not going to happen. At least I don't think so.
Complete and utter BS. It was never true in the past and it is not true now.
Indeed!
Hate to say this, but the last time a depression hit, government nannyism when into hyperdrive. It is easy to lose that sympathy. I certainly did.
So, by his own admission, I characterize JT as willing to murder innocent people to further his own personal interests. Since it is true that he also opposes Obama, then in so far as JT is concerned the statement "accusing people who weren't supporting Obama to be akin to murderers" is certainly true, but it is certainly false to construe that as accusing *all* people who oppose Obama as being akin to murderers. That is false. Angle should know better than to make such a false insinuation. Neil, I'm sure you recall the story of William Tell. After Tell was given no choice but to split the apple on his son's head, the legend has it that Hermann Gessler asked why Tell had drawn two bolts before firing at the apple. You could have just as easily framed your question in such a way as to make JT appear noble, instead of attempting to corner him into a response that we'd expect from a murdering psycho. As a dedicated 2nd amendment activist I understand JT's and christine's passionate views on the issue very well, and that is why I came here. (And my reasons for being quiet lately have nothing to do with the 2nd amendment) If JT was forced to take an innocent life to save millions of others from more of "your tyranny", then trust me, he'd draw two "bolts", and the second (and possibly the first if it couldn't be fired to free the child and offer a chance of escape) would be for you. And, you or any other tyrant would never again have occasion to ask why we place such a high value on our right to keep and bear arms, or question our love for innocent children. We keep arms and suffer the abuse of those who will not take responsibility for their own freedom or the protection of their own children because tyrants could and likely would make us kill our loved ones if we lacked the means to prevent that. The difference between us and the Chinese though, is we can stop would be tyrants from ever issuing such edicts here, or make the price so high that it is as unthinkable to them as murdering an innocent child is to you, JT and me. If you mean to underscore that JT is more passionate in his rhetoric than most, then I'll agree with you. But, if you framed the question properly to illuminate the truth rather than paint an ugly and inaccurate picture of me, then I'd give you the same answer as JT. But, I wouldn't allow you to make my life's work as an activist appear to be the selfish quirk of a homicidal sociopath with a fondness for weapons and a callous disregard for the lives of our precious children.
It was a stupid question to start with. No rights can be gained by killing innocents. Just like no rights can be taken away by not killing innocents. God given rights are just that, God given. Those who believe, that the racist bigot mental nut case, called Obama, would keep his word about not bombing Iran, are under clearly not thinking right.
God is always good!
that is so very well reasoned and articulated. thank you.
We've apparently moved on from this particular hypothetical. My point in what you responded to is that JT consistently failed to give an accounting of himself beyond what he stated at face value. You'll further note that what you responded to was in answer to a request to respond to a mischaracterization that was placed upon me, so of course I stand by my post all the more. There are a variety of answers to just about any hypothetical scenario that can carry moral weight, and they don't have to agree. In this particular case, it appears JT's equates a loss of the 2A with a death sentence. I can appreciate that point even though do not agree with the premise as I know of no other country that has a 2A and people there are basically okay and often doing even better. Ecuador has no 2A and I'm doing just fine! But since JT and others have such contempt for my illustration, if you continue reading this thread you'll see that I've presented one much more realistic -- a presidential candidate who would fully restore the 2A while starting a war with Iran. Please tell me if you think a question of whether to vote for him or not is also something that is unfair and impossible to answer soundly. JT apparently feels it is. JT, though he accuses others of evading debate via bozo, himself has refused to defend himself and justify his accusation of me for a statement I made in the past relating to this very subject. That is, in fact, the whole root of this hypothetical matter. I'm sorry but I must ask: Did you mean to characterize me as a tyrant?
Badeye used to imply as much, but that was before he gave himself a hummer.
Indeed, we retain God-given rights in spirit, even if they are taken away in practice. Yet when one's right to life is taken away, it is gone nonetheless. One element of my hypothetical is that it contrasts real life living and dying with the restoration of an abstract legality. Given the difference in nature between the two, that one is as real as can be and the other just ink and paper, I don't think there's any comparison.
Badeye used to imply as much, but that was before he gave himself a hummer. Badeye's lucky. I wish I had a hummer. Maybe he'll buy me one.
It's debatable whether ANY of the three stooges would be any less of a danger than the others. Clinton seems less of a hard-core leftist than Obama though, and I see her as a lesser threat than he would present. I certainly won't be voting for any of them however.
I heard at one time he was giving them for free.
Well said.
I fully agree. Discussions where many views are expressed are interesting. Echo chambers are boring. I visit this forum for 2 reasons: to get some 'fringe' news (it's true) and to learn something new or check my own views against others by having my own views challenged and by me challenged theirs. A forum where discussions are like: 'yes', 'yes', 'me too', 'I agree with you', 'I agree with you more', 'we all agree more', 'yes, we are all so right' has no value. I suppose that when everyone acquires infinite wisdom then all discussions and debates cease and we all die in peace but, until then, we all have something to learn.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Thanks, that is interesting and good to know. Not that their position cant change, but that they have ruled on the matter.
MY REPLY TO ZEITGEIST: 1John Chapter 2: "21 I write to you not because you do not know the truth but because you do, and because every lie is alien to the truth. 22 Who is the liar? Whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ. Whoever denies the Father and the Son, this is the antichrist." Bump to this excellent well-reasoned analysis. Geez, HOUNDDAWG, you've cetainly earned your respect around here with posts like that.
You and your 2nd Amendment haven't done much to prevent our current tyrants from issuing edicts that have led to the murder of thousands of innocent children in Iraq.
To reason, indeed, he was not in the habit of attending. His mode of arguing, if it is to be so called, was one not uncommon among dull and stubborn persons, who are accustomed to be surrounded by their inferiors. He asserted a proposition; and, as often as wiser people ventured respectfully to show that it was erroneous, he asserted it again, in exactly the same words, and conceived that, by doing so, he at once disposed of all objections. - Macaulay, "History of England," Vol. 1, Chapter 6, on James II.
Yes, and our precious bodily fluids too. (Don't we all hate fluoridation?) In preparation for the W Tell challenge, I did a little bit of plinking over the weekend. I was pleasantly surprised to note that I was able to take a pencil's eraser from 30 yards, 5 out 5. Then I ran out of pencils. By the way, I just read somewhere that Truman was the least popular president ever, at 22%. He was disliked because some IRS corruption issues, messing up the Korean war and for trying to nationalize the steel industry. No one seemed to care one bit about his incinerating or baking thousands of little Japanese babies, and their grannies too. It's possible that his popularity increased after that.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
People on the bozo aren't debaters, they're tiresome and/or offensive boors.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
You're a capitalist pig and a tightwad!
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
LOL!
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
That's exactly what you are. I won't bozo you though. You have done that all by yourself.
God is always good!
Then give them your guns. They'll be so grateful that they promise not to unlawfully do to you what they're unlawfully doing to Iraq. BTW, BO agrees with the expansion of the ME conflict, so why would you be vocally supporting him if that position is "murdering ... thousands of innocent children in Iraq"? He promises "less murdering"? C'mon. Obama responded: “Yes. I think that’s what we need. I think we need more troops there, I think we need to do a better job of reconstruction there. I think we have to be focused on Afghanistan. It is one of the reasons that I was opposed to the war in Iraq in the first place... And we’re also going to have to address the situation in Pakistan, where we now have, in the federated areas, Al Qaeda and the Taliban setting up bases there.” The last response demonstrates most clearly that Obama is not an “antiwar” candidate in any genuine sense of the term. He wants (some) US troops out of Iraq, not to lessen the slaughter of the Iraqi people—as well as casualties among American soldiers—but to shift the scene of battle to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria or some other country, whose people will be targeted in the interests of American imperialism. "
Ole Ben also said this: "In wine there is wisdom, Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Christine, after a sleepless night of deep thinking I was able to produce this brilliant solution. It's not a compromise, it's in fact an improvement over what you have now. 1 - Allow as many bozos as registered members at the site or maybe have a limit of 50 or 100. This way, those bozoed are given a second, third, even a fourth chance to redeem themselves and you don't make it too hard for those who are annoyed by some foul-mouthed primadonnas to keep them at a safe distance. What do you think. I believe that it's a good solution. Maybe Hillary should hire me as a consultant because she's been into solutions lately.
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
Tell me you wouldn't like to have a TV bozo option for Ms. O'Donnell. ;-)
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
Effectively, cristine is lengthening her own bozo list to infinity.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
What's the difference between Rosie and Rosanne? I am never sure which is which. Who is the fat one?
Antiparty - find out why, think about 'how'
There are a variety of answers to just about any hypothetical scenario that can carry moral weight, and they don't have to agree. In this particular case, it appears JT's equates a loss of the 2A with a death sentence. I can appreciate that point even though do not agree with the premise as I know of no other country that has a 2A and people there are basically okay and often doing even better. Ecuador has no 2A and I'm doing just fine! But since JT and others have such contempt for my illustration, if you continue reading this thread you'll see that I've presented one much more realistic -- a presidential candidate who would fully restore the 2A while starting a war with Iran. Please tell me if you think a question of whether to vote for him or not is also something that is unfair and impossible to answer soundly. JT apparently feels it is. JT, though he accuses others of evading debate via bozo, himself has refused to defend himself and justify his accusation of me for a statement I made in the past relating to this very subject. That is, in fact, the whole root of this hypothetical matter. And, you or any other tyrant would never again have occasion to ask I'm sorry but I must ask: Did you mean to characterize me as a tyrant? Let me answer the last one first; of course not. I should have put "you" in quotation marks to make it clear that you were only the hypothetical tyrant and I was intentionally moving you out of your comfort zone while turning the virtual tables for reasons that require no explanation. It was easy for me to do it to you and it could easily cause hard feelings had we not cleared it up immediately. Right? In all of this mis-characterization I think it's worth mentioning that JT served and retired honorably from a career as a NYPD street cop. I'm betting that he went out for that because his desire to protect people was stronger than the urge to shoot some darkies. In fact AFAIK he never did that while on the job, but I'd bet that he did help many people and jail some pretty malo hombres in his time on the job. If I went the distance and retired from NYPD I'd probably resent anyone asking if or implying that I'm a mentally disordered crim, too, Neil. He may display a certain confidence when drawing the line in the sand (and failing to deny the charges) but that's probably because the feds can't afford to piss off the City cops who are the true first line of defense against all the federal agencies in La Manzana Grande. And, the last thing the feds would do is use an honorably retired NYPD officer as the target/victim in one of the feds' famous media show trials, and JT is used to getting the benefit of the doubt from everyone. So, let's assume that he's a stable, healthy, well adjusted law abiding citizen with a high regard for human life and dignity and respect for the rights of all who reciprocate. Unless he robs a bank (or worse, parks in the US Attorney's or some ART 3 judge's spot) they ain't gonna hassle him when he pokes a finger in the feds' elliptical eye. So, he is privileged to a certain degree to speak frankly and to say things that I wouldn't say, because the media could more readily vilify me than him for the purpose of a criminal trial. (How old were you when DAWG first felt you up?" "I was twelve, and I wasn't the first, either! He goosed my sister years before!") You may have also noticed that each time we tried to be unrealistically optimistic about Ron Paul's chances he'd drop a big brown floater in our WHEATIES, too. He just can't deceive himself for even a moment's worth of feeling good, and he won't let me or others get away with it, either. However irritating that may have been, he was right every time. And, if he sees Barry Obama as another hand picked functionary of the slave masters or perhaps even worse because the puppet masters now feel it payback time and whites are going to be put down and held down until the last American lowers the flag and turns off the Coleman lanterns, then chances are he's right about that, too. Is the truth any less true simply because we cannot deal with it? I'll certainly concede (but not for JT-not my place to do that) that I believe that JT has mis-characterized others including you, and I can say this because I've also done this. This is one of the reasons I don't play here now. The acrimony and "win at any cost no matter what I gotta say about your Mama" tone of debate at 4 is just too ruff for me now. (If others enjoy it or are simply younger and healthier and don't take things as personally as I then the problem is my incompatibility, and I made the logical choice to stop crossing swords with objectionable members and to leave the site to those who still enjoy it and benefit from the talk wrestling) Remember that America now enjoys the distinction of being the only English speaking country (but one of several Spanish speaking countries) where the WWF is regarded as a legit sports franchise/corporation. It's not my way to cross swords with vicious assholes, and given a choice between civil debate and LF/TOS-style blood matches I'd opt for the former every time. And, so would you and JT. I know this because when things got testy between me and him or you and I, neither of you savaged me because there was and is a measure of mutual respect between us. And, how do I know this? The same way a sleeping DAWG knows if he's been tripped over or if he's been kicked. And there's really nothing mysterious about the vicious rancor here or elsewhere on the net. it's a natural follow through for too many immature and/or "dull normals" once they're wounded, and they quickly lose respect for their perceived detractors. And, in the absence of hall monitors they often regress.... But, it can be repaired with apologies and resolutions if that matters to you and JT. Both of you are respected here and both of you smart when someone tries to wound you, even if they aren't all that gifted and miss their mark. It's the very thought that someone, ANYONE would even try that hurts JT, you, chris and me. This is the down side to being intelligent, perceptive people. JT goes the extra distance to maintain his patriot bone fides, probably because he was a cop in the agency that's THE RAND CORP's favorite cop corps. Wouldn't that explain a lot of his seemingly quick and pointed responses? The fact is, he's done a yeoman's job of earning folk's respect as a patriot and as a defender of the innocent against those who would harm us and them. No one seriously accuses him of being a govt plant and he's unaccustomed to being accused of having psycho tendencies, too. Cops who are "out of plumb" seldom go the distance. The stress level provides too many opportunities to lose it. On that point he deserves the benefit of any doubt no matter how he replied (or failed to respond) to the blunt interrogatory you employed. (No need to remind me that this wasn't the first insult, and you feel that it was a response not a first strike. I'm aware of this, too) Now, let's talk about you, shall we? In my view you're a great human being with a deep compassion and sensitivity for others, and that speaks very well of you. And, if you believe in the Creator and the Bible, well, I'd say that your name is probably on the goodie list. Your optimism and ability to look for the good in people (no one is all good or all bad, except the Clintons and the Bushes of course) seems to serve you well, and I accept and admire that. I crossed swords with you a few times and once I "got where you're coming from" I realized that we won't agree on some things, and I don't insult your intelligence by trying to "convert you". And I try to avoid mis-characterizing you for two reasons: First, you're a real asset to this website as a software engineer and troubleshooter; And, I'm far more certain of what is kind than I am of what is true. It would be really great if 4um could exemplify civil debate by persons who span the spectrum. And, since you and JT pretty well meet that definition (at least the spectrum at 4) and you both are very fond of christine, I'd like to see you two rise to the occasion and look for the positive attributes in each other for her sake, and for the betterment and furtherance of the mission of this website. And, there will never be a time when America and the world will need good men to find their common ground and stand together more. Remember, if a recognizable percentage of Americans, ex-pats and foreign victims of American imperialism ever get on the same harmonic frequency, we can turn the tide and send the lizards and their private security forces scurrying for their island fortress retreats. (Some disagree with that. Despite the absence of any historical precedent either way, some are sure that I'm wrong and they're right. And, if I challenge them they whip out their love muscles for a size comparison to "settle it like real men". This is my incompatibility problem since others don't seem to mind, so, it's their world and I'm not visiting for the moment) And if we fail to recognize that chaos is part of the master plan and ass bite each other, then 4um will become another political themed mosh pit by default. Everyone is depressed because the world is melting down in front of our very eyes, and the resulting anxiety only benefits those who rely on the chaos. Do you believe it's possible to be gentle with others as a first order of business here and then see if we can build on that? Or, should I just go and play with my dolls and let my nanny put in my Pollyanna curls so, I'll look real purty when the nuclear blast vaporizes me at the speed of light?
Rosanne occasionally says something funny. I would bozo Rosie, not Rosanne. See, I'm not totally intolerant.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
I'm sure the number that have bozo'ed you is small to non-existent, Dawg.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
As a matter of fact, I do have that option. I don't watch her. In fact I watch very little TV.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. But that way you're missing out on the cute, feisty little blond conservative. ;-) Before everybody starts romping on me, I catch snippets when I leave my smoking area and walk in on my wife watching it.
Success is relative. It is what we can make of the mess we have made of things. T. S. Eliot
He promises "less murdering"? C'mon. logic!
BeAChooser was plenty worried about Saddam and his "camels of mass destruction."
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Kraphty debuls...
Saddam planned to deploy 'camels of mass destruction' LOL, funny!
Comments (517 - 655) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latestwell, I guess you're in with Ronald Reagan then. he wouldn't answer hypothetical questions from journalists.
#477. To: Jethro Tull, RickyJ (#449)
#478. To: a vast rightwing conspirator, christine (#450)
Who, pray tell, is hurt if I (it's a generic 'I') can't stand 14 members and love everybody else? Why should I be forced to endure the nonsense or the crap that these losers are throwing at me (it's a generic 'me') as the price I must pay in order to enjoy my interaction with everyone else?
#479. To: RickyJ (#461)
Neil seems to think that Obama is truthful when he says he will not bomb Iran. Why I do not know.
Obama was not even truthful about when his parents got married. To me it is clear why Obama has been chosen to run, to cause more racial unrest in this nation.
#480. To: Jethro Tull (#462)
This would be the Os. The ones who shut down valid debate via personal censorship.
#481. To: Old Friend (#464)
Our government has the constitution on bozo. That is the problem.
#482. To: ratcat (#473)
I've given up on the local level. They will wake up when the depression enters their lives (or martial law).
I don't have any sympathy for people who are either too dumb to see what's happening or so wrapped up in their own little lives that they can't/won't see out.
#483. To: Pinguinite, Jethro Tull, christine (#269)
Jethro Tull freely admitted and has never redacted nor denied, in spite of being given numerous opportunities to do so, that in a hypothetical scenario, he would shoot an innocent girl as a means to an end of furthering 2A rights. The girl dies for the "greater good" he said.
#484. To: HOUNDDAWG (#483)
#485. To: HOUNDDAWG (#483)
#486. To: HOUNDDAWG (#483)
And, you or any other tyrant would never again have occasion to ask
#487. To: Pinguinite (#486)
I'm sorry but I must ask: Did you mean to characterize me as a tyrant?
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#488. To: RickyJ (#484)
God given rights are just that, God given.
#489. To: FormerLurker (#487)
#490. To: Pinguinite (#479)
Obama is less likely to do harm than Cain or Hill. That's it, as cleanly and concisely as I can possibly put it.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#491. To: Pinguinite (#489)
Maybe he'll buy me one.
You appear to be a major trouble maker...and I'm getting really pissed. - GoldiLox, 7/27/2006
#492. To: HOUNDDAWG (#483)
#493. To: Pinguinite (#478)
I believe 4um was not broken and should not have been fixed.
#494. To: nolu_chan (#381)
"I don't know where Bin Laden is. I truly am not that concerned about him"
George W, Bush, 3/13/02 http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/03/20020313-8.html
#495. To: James Deffenbach, HOUNDDAWG (#483)
#496. To: HOUNDDAWG (#483)
The difference between us and the Chinese though, is we can stop would be tyrants from ever issuing such edicts here, or make the price so high that it is as unthinkable to them as murdering an innocent child is to you, JT and me.
#497. To: HOUNDDAWG (#483)
(Edited)
But, I wouldn't allow you to make my life's work as an activist appear to be the selfish quirk of a homicidal sociopath with a fondness for weapons and a callous disregard for the lives of our precious children.
#498. To: Jethro Tull (#428)
She wanted the option of adding up to 6 more, which christine thought would be run counter to debate and the intent of the forum.
#499. To: Jethro Tull (#439)
He saves me $30 a month. I bagged my Wall St Journal subscription because of his econ news.
#500. To: Jethro Tull (#441)
Yeah, Neil is giving me the option of either dismembering a live newborn in order to save our 2nd A, or accepting an Obama promise for global peace.
#501. To: iconoclast (#498)
People on the bozo aren't debaters, they're tiresome and/or offensive boors.
#502. To: aristeides (#496)
(Edited)
You and your 2nd Amendment haven't done much to prevent our current tyrants from issuing edicts that have led to the murder of thousands of innocent children in Iraq.
" The final foreign policy question was on Afghanistan. Russert asked Obama directly, “Would you, as president, be willing to have a military surge in Afghanistan in order to, once and for all, eliminate the Taliban?”
#503. To: Jethro Tull (#449)
Ben Franklin said something similar, I believe.
in beer there is freedom,
in water there is bacteria."
#504. To: christine (#333)
I've incorporated my compromise solution to the bozo filter debate. The total number of slots is now 10 rather than 20. I hope that's a decision that everyone can live with, but if not, I understand.
2 - Have all bozos expire after 30 or 60 or 300 days.
#505. To: James Deffenbach (#377)
I am so tired of politicians and people like Rosie O'Donnell who think that peons shouldn't have any weapons but it is fine for people to protect them with those evil guns.
#506. To: Pinguinite, cristine (#478)
I believe 4um was not broken and should not have been fixed. Such "fix" changes can destablize things even more.
#507. To: iconoclast (#505)
#508. To: Pinguinite, christine, Jethro Tull (#486)
We've apparently moved on from this particular hypothetical. My point in what you responded to is that JT consistently failed to give an accounting of himself beyond what he stated at face value. You'll further note that what you responded to was in answer to a request to respond to a mischaracterization that was placed upon me, so of course I stand by my post all the more.
#509. To: a vast rightwing conspirator (#507)
What's the difference between Rosie and Rosanne?
#510. To: HOUNDDAWG (#508)
#511. To: iconoclast (#505)
Tell me you wouldn't like to have a TV bozo option for Ms. O'Donnell. ;-)
Lord Acton
#512. To: James Deffenbach (#511)
As a matter of fact, I do have that option. I don't watch her. In fact I watch very little TV.
#513. To: angle (#502)
Then give them your guns. They'll be so grateful that they promise not to unlawfully do to you what they're unlawfully doing to Iraq. BTW, BO agrees with the expansion of the ME conflict, so why would you be vocally spporting him if that position is "murdering ... thousands of innocent children in Iraq"?
#514. To: karelian, BeAChooser, christine, FOH, Peppa, Dakmar, Neil McIver, all (#399)
Lord Acton
#515. To: James Deffenbach (#514)
"The largest section of the course will be specialised to focus on using the explosive material in the body, in motorcycle, in cars, and in camels". Camels will be "provided by the Directory of General Military Intelligence".
#516. To: James Deffenbach (#514)
BeAChooser was plenty worried about Saddam and his "camels of mass destruction."
.
.
.