Woman to Woman

By Pinouk

September 24, 2006 07:34 PM | Link to this

Hello, nice site look this: replica sun glasses chanel replica sun glasses designer replica sun glasses http://sato.awardspace.com/wholesale-replica-sun-glasses.htm replica sunglasses index

By Pinouk

September 24, 2006 07:45 PM | Link to this

Hello, nice site look this: replica christian dior sun glasses replica prada sun glasses chanel replica sun glasses wholesale replica sun glasses replica sunglasses index

By TramadoL3879

September 25, 2006 02:02 AM | Link to this

I just don’t have anything to say , but shrug. So it goes. Not much on my mind recently. I can’t be bothered with anything recently.

By TramadoL53409

September 25, 2006 03:33 AM | Link to this

I haven’t been up to much these days. Today was a loss. Nothing seems important. I’ve just been letting everything happen without me these days.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 07:57 AM | Link to this

I notice that Shaunti doesn’t point to any facts supporting her claim that we’re “safer since 9/11”… perhaps because the facts seem to support the opposite conclusion.

The National Intelligence Estimate report (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?ex=1316750400&en=da252be85d1b39fa&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss , “Trends in Global Terrorism”), assembled by U.S. intelligence agencies, states that Islamic radicalism is spreading, not retreating, and that the U.S. is distinctly LESS safe than it was before Bush took office. The 9/11 Commission report notes that al-Qaeda’s membership has grown from about 20,000 at the time of the 2001 attack, to over 50,000 today (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-geiger/war-on-terror-numbers-tb29412.html ).

Likewise, the number of terrorist attacks and incidents more than tripled in 2004 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/26/AR2005042601623.html ), and passed the 10,000 mark in 2005 (http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/14390584.htm ), much of it directly traceable to our disaster in Iraq.

Sure, some basic security measures have been taken domestically (as long as they don’t interfere with sweetheart Saudi deals and profit margins, that is)… but do they stack up against our stellar Al-Qaeda recruiting campaign, courtesy of Bush’s regime? Obviously not.

The claim that the country is “safer since 9/11” is ludicrous… the equivalent of driving around town shouting insults and threats at every gang and group you can reach, and then bragging how you’ve installed a floodlight by the garage door. Sure it’s a minor security measure… but the suicidally stupid actions of our government completely overwhelm such trivial improvements.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 08:02 AM | Link to this

Dang, just about anything will screw up these hyperlinks, won’t it? Trying again…

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/24/world/middleeast/24terror.html?ex=1316750400&en=da252be85d1b39fa&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-geiger/war-on-terror-numbers-tb29412.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/26/AR2005042601623.html

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/14390584.htm

By Renee

September 25, 2006 08:29 AM | Link to this

Safer…no. Are security measures being improved? Yes But that by no means we are safer. I fully believe that another terrorist attack could very easily take place on US soil, unforunately.

On another note, did anyone see Chris Wallace’s interview with Bill Clinton? I’m glad Bill answered Chris in the manner he did.

By Man's Best Friend

September 25, 2006 08:35 AM | Link to this

Good morning Renee. Glad to see you on the board.

By Man's Best Friend

September 25, 2006 08:39 AM | Link to this

Sorry again I got so sidetracked arguing with BC about Science. He was a tough cracker to get to admit the truth regarding his own biases. Of course, with the kind of CASH he’s carting home, it’s understandable why he can’t be truthful with even himself, let alone a stranger on a poitical blog.

By Man's Best Friend

September 25, 2006 08:43 AM | Link to this

But I do want you to know that I received your loving message that LESS IS MORE. I will attempt to practice that, especially when I return to Harvey Mudd College next September to begin working on a PhD in Mathematics.

By Man's Best Friend

September 25, 2006 08:48 AM | Link to this

Last quick compliment for you: I believe you are one tough cookie at the poker table. The other day, when you took on the DOG FECES moniker, I was sure it was you, but wanted the satisfaction of having you “tip your own hand” rather than just announcing my suspicion. I took a gamble that the best way to get you to fess up was to falsely accuse your friends and take on Mara’s name. BUT, no matter how high I raised the stakes, you didn’t budge an inch. My hat is off.

By Man's Best Friend

September 25, 2006 08:56 AM | Link to this

I may come back to W2W to chat with you occasionally, but for now I have to get moving on a few projects before I leave Georgia for good next September. I feel that I could learn a lot from you, because you appear to have moved through many spiritual stages in Life already. In return, there may be one or two things I could teach you which might be helpful at the poker table, so I’ll share one later regarding “player patterns”. This is the ultimate “tell” by which I can defeat almost any player. It’s not a physical “tell”, but a spiritual “tell”, which is far more accurate.

By Man's Best Friend

September 25, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this

There are some very important things which I do disagree with you about, however, which I would like to address in future conversations with you. One of the main ones is your apparent assumption that “peaceful coexistence” is always the best way to go in Life. There are some situations, like in a poker tourney, or when at war, where it IS “winner take all”, whether we like it or not. Probably 99% of the time I prefer “peaceful coexistence”, but the Muslims have already gone “all-in” with their widespread financial support for the terror organizations like Hezbollah. Personally, I’m not just going to crap my pants and fold my A-A vs. their 2-7 offsuit like John would.

By E. Lewis

September 25, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this

No

By Tina

September 25, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this

It is interesting how tv today is giving any terrorist all the ideas of how to come in and take us out- but I love 24! I guess we just need lots of Jack Bauers and we will all be saved!

By E. Lewis

September 25, 2006 09:15 AM | Link to this

I lived near Washington DC in the late 1990’s. During my years there, I was never the direct victim of a crime, but I would never say that meant the city was safer when I left than it had been when I moved there. I alone did not make up the statistics. I was simply smart enough not to be in the wrong time at the wrong place.

Luck had a whole lot to do with it to.

I heard someone say that we have to be lucky and smart every time in order to prevent a terrorist attack along the line of 9/11, but the perpetrators only have to be lucky once to pull off a major attack.

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 09:15 AM | Link to this

Diane’s first paragraph says it best, and to apply the view I have had for years in IT, there is no such thing as “Security”, there is merely RiskManagement.

Anybody see this week’s McLaughlinGroup? They discuss both the Pope’s remark’s and Chavez’s comments. And it seems some of the conservatives there are finally acknowledging that some of the anti-Americanism around the world has nothing to do with “Jealous of our Freedoms”. Recommended catch, if you can. McLaughin, a former Roman Catholic priest, had “Big Mistake” as his final analysis on the Pope’s comments.

Yes, I saw the Clinton interview, would not normally be at FOX News except for NBC doing some golf thing. LOL Funny that the big news item is not his corrections of LIES, but rather his ‘testy temper’ etc. Does that connote a media bias?

By Man's Best Friend

September 25, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this

And to you, BC, I have very little to say to a Liar like you but this: With your latest false dichotomy of attemting to pit “real Science” vs. “philosophy” in order to “prove” that only Science has the answers in Life, you’ve shown me and hopefully everyone else here once again that you’re strictly a one-trick pony.

One day, I hope that you understand that many Mysteries exist in Life which Rational Thinking CAN shed light on. However, because Life Itself is ultimately Irrational, Rational Thinking can only take you so far. And, please, try to remember that Irrational Numbers, while impossible to represent completely via the decimal system (or any other Rational Scale, for that matter), are, in fact, REAL NUMBERS, NOT IMAGINARY OR “MYSTICAL” Numbers. As such, it’s not very “Scientific” to simply deny the existence of these numbers just because they can’t be represented in a Rational way. One day when you come up for some air, think it over. Then, you might even further consider the so-called Imaginary Numbers, like the square root of minus one, whose existence was denied for many hundreds of years as well by pinheads like you.

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 09:32 AM | Link to this

Chilao and Mara, why do you keep falling for the “false dichotomy” of who has the “high moral ground” in our battle with the Muslims?? We’re all God’s children, and are thus of equal “value” in GOD’s eyes. All such “moral discussions” ar total crap, on both sides, ok? Get it?

The reason I support the US 100% in our upcoming, unavoidable battle with political Islam isn’t for moral reasons, but is simply for the fact that under Sh’ria, I won’t be able to think as I wish, express my opinions freely without fear, and won’t be able to choose the Life I choose for myself. It’s about freedom, not morals, get it you F-ing idiots.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 09:36 AM | Link to this

So are we expecting another week of irrelevant raving from our new troll? Or is there some hope of discussing the actual topic this time?

By 2D

September 25, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

I used to live in an in-town neighborhood that passed around weekly crime statistics. The stats showed us each crime (date, type, location) that was reported to the police department in a given time frame. Over time, those numbers went down (thankfully so), but I still didn’t feel “safer”. In fact, I moved out in spite of the progress being made. Even with the lower crime stats my perception never changed. Perhaps I felt that the numbers, though improved, were still dangerously high. I’m not sure why my perception never cahnged, but it didn’t.

I believe the same can be said for our national security. If I make the statement “I believe we are safer”, what does that mean? It provides a window into my personal state of mind, nothing more. Can anyone say we are safer? Personally, I don’t think it can be quantified.

Until the people of this country feel as though outside forces do not want to harm us, I don’t think we will ever feel or be safer. Quite honestly, I’m not so sure that is ever going to happen. In fact, I’m quite positive that is never going to happen, regardless of what we do.

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

Tina, we’ve got a great “Jack Bauer” running this country right now. His name is George W. Bush, and he’s done an outstanding job the past five years, as is evidenced by no new attacks on us. And while the Libs here once again are fantasizing that somehow we’re not safer today than five years ago in a lame atempt to discredit Dubya’s good work, the actual facts speak otherwise. But, then again, hey, why let the facts get in the way of a good story, right?

By Just Being Me

September 25, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

You can’t tell me that the administrators of this board can’t do ANYTHING about this invasion of spam.

It really is ridiculous.

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this

The false dichotomy you keep living, Mara, is that anyone who disagrees with your nut-case Lib views must be a Bible-thumping Christian Fundie. So maybe you’re really not as smart as you think you are. When confronted with facts, all your Lib views fall apart, as I will be happy to show you if you doubt DOG’s word. The reality is that you came to your views for strictly emotional reasons, not due to the “facts”. I don’t know which is the case, but my guess is that either you were raised in a wealthy home and were a “princess”, or my stronger guess is that you grew up in a broken home, or one with a very weak father figure. Care to confirm?

By kimberly

September 25, 2006 09:46 AM | Link to this

Let’s see…. They haven’t secured our borders nor the cargo that enters our ports. More people hate us now than ever before. If disaster strikes my neighborhood, I now know I can’t count on anyone, least of all my government. The military and national guard are all someplace else, and stretched way too thin. The camera that takes my picture at the traffic light in my subdivision doesn’t make me feel safer. So, I’m gonna say, “NOPE!”

By Renee

September 25, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this

heyyyyy JBM!! xoxoxox

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 09:50 AM | Link to this

BC, the topic of discussion for the week is once again in your hands. As I told you before, you’re the one who can’t let the cracker Science stuff go because you’re making far too much CASH with those 0s and 1s. I believe the rest of us here already understand that, but you keep denying it as a result of the schizophrenia you have perpetrated on yourself by disconnecting the left side of your brain from the right side.

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 09:55 AM | Link to this

kimberly, do you live in a world of facts, or just fantasies? The standard of proof for security is the ACTUAL LACK OF ATTACKS, NOT YOUR IMAGINARY, UNINFORMED ASSESSMENT OF THE STATE OF PREPAREDNESS IN OUR COUNTRY. And as for your ridiculous assessment that “more peple hate us now more than ever”, what fantasy world have you been living in?? Within a month of Liberation at the cost of many thousands of American lives during WW II, the French were already spitting on American GIs and chanting “Yankee, go home” back in 1944.

By Renee

September 25, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this

good comment Kimberly!!

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this

Like I keep saying, Libs, I wouldn’t care about your brain-dead views if we we at a time of relative peace in the world, but the fact is were not. You don’t have to help out the patriots in the upcoming war, but for GOD’S sake, stop trying to help THE OTHER SIDE. Do any of you want to live under Sh’ria??? As for your asinine claim that the whole conflict is Dubya’s fault, GROW UP. THE THREAT HAS BEEN BUILDING FOR MORE THAN 50 YEARS NOW.

By lozen

September 25, 2006 10:02 AM | Link to this

The invasion of spam and the invasion of el pendejo! It hardly seems worth it sometimes but… addiction is addiction so here I am!

No,I don’t think we’re safer. Brian nailed it: Like driving around the neighborhood yelling insults at all the gangs and then installing a light over the garage door! Yep.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

And yet, Al-Qaeda has more members than ever and terrorist incidents are on the rise. Those are FACTS.

But they don’t jibe with the cheery assumption that “we must be safer… we haven’t been attacked this week!”, so I guess they don’t count.

Y’know, we weren’t attacked the whole time Quantum Leap was on the air, either—so I guess that was an effective strategy too. Post-hoc reasoning is a fun activity (related to the even more popular conclusion-jumping), but it doesn’t mean much in realistically assessing the situation.

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

The nature of conflict lies once again in the fact that while we humans have a far greater intellect than any other animal, our emotional makeup is NOT very different from other pack animals. There’s safety in numbers, it makes sense in a violent world to be a pack animal. And as any REAL SCIENTIST KNOWS, it is our emotions which ultimately motivate our opinions, not facts. ( Emotion and motivate are from the same root word, get it?) As such, I completely understand that kimberly’s opinions are motivated strictly by emotion.

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

The WholeTruth - you probably need to inform Pat Buchanan and Tony Blankley, two conservatives, they don’t seem to be as Enlghtened as you, because they seem to have the same perception as Kimberly of how well Americans are viewed world-wide right now.

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this

So, once again, you Libs have a choice to make today, and the rest of this week, month, and year: Do you want your board back? Until you all answer just what it is that motivates you to support the other side in our upcoming battle with the Muslims, I’m not leaving.

Mara, Chilao, kimberly, care to start the discussion? Just exactly what motivates you to support the enemies of freedom, the Muslims?

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this

Chilao, I’m not here to answer for Pat Buchanan, Tony Blakely, Rush Limbaugh, or Sean Hannity. I speak for myself, in case you haven’t figured that out yet. If some other person in the world shares a small piece of my philosphy or the resulting opinions in Life, that’s fine, but I have no obligation to try to explain or defend anyone’s views but my own. Got it?

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this

BC, kind of funny how you’re bringing up the excellent point that CORRELATION and CAUSATION are not the same thing. So, in your “vaunted research”, how do YOU prove causation??? Hmmmm, could it be that you use STATISTICS to “prove” said correlation within an “accepted” standard deviation, and believe that you’ve earned your CASH for the week? I know in your mind this is fine justification to cart home even MORE of my CASH next week, but I’m not quite convinced yet.

By TramadoL96189

September 25, 2006 10:22 AM | Link to this

I haven’t been up to much lately. I’ve basically been doing nothing , but it’s not important. I can’t be bothered with anything recently. I’ve just been letting everything happen without me lately.

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this

Like I have said from the very beginning, it’s ultimately all about motivation in this Life. All great holdem players understand this. Of course, pu$$ies like BC will never sit at a holdem table, because then they might have to put their money where their mouth is.

So, this week, I’m here to find out just what motivates the Lib Mind. You all have a choice to cooperate with me in my investigation, or I can turn DOG loose to spam your board until the Second Coming, ok? If you want to get rid of Sherlock, you’ll find it easier to cooperate, rather than try to evade my questions, as BC did for nearly a week, causing great pain to all involved.

By lozen

September 25, 2006 10:27 AM | Link to this

JBM, yeah you would think they could do something to block the spam and the egomaniac. Renee, Brian, Kimberly, Chilao, JBM so nice to hear from all of you this morning.

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this

I have to take a break to take care of Sweetie’s leg. I know I’m just a heartless conservative, but it really does cause my heart to ache to have to give Sweetie all these injections. You see, bunnies aren’t the most trusting animals in the world, especially after they’ve been abused by pieces of human feces like BC. It took me more than a year to win her trust back to humans, GOD’S supposed entrusted caretakers of domesticated animals. But, to give her her shots, I have to corner her in her cage, and violate her only safe haven in the world. Because of having to do this for weeks on end, now sh’s becoming confused that maybe I’m rally not her friend, that I’m just trying to abuse her as well.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 10:31 AM | Link to this

Can someone point to a particular reason why we should answer Bruno’s questions… or indeed, respond to him at all? He’s a liar and a coward, in addition to being a spamming troll.

There’s really no reason to pay him the slightest attention. I tried the experiment last week, and he just ran and hid and hurled increasingly incoherent insults.

Just go on with the discussion and scroll past Bruno’s ravings, folks. Mara and Chilao had it right all along; you can’t reason with stupid.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this

I naver bother to read what Shanti or Diane have to say. The opinion of the posters on the blog is much more important. So….We have not been hit since 9/11. We are not a whole lot safer but somewhat safer since then. The TSA is a joke. (wouldn’t want Granny to take over a plane with those nail clippers) Does everyone have a cache of food, water and light? How bout a firearm and ammo? The later is most important looking back on the “law and order” in New Orleans after Katrina. Don’t forget the duct tape and plastic.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this

Naver say never. (sorry spelling police)

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this

The point, friends, is that we here in the US are the entrusted caretakers of the world right now. The UN can’t do it, and will never be able to. As such, sometimes we have to adiminister “tough love” to our brothers around the globe, even at the cost of our own popularity. If we can do it in a loving way, then they will know in their hearts that it comes from a place of love.

In this same way, I hope my rabbit Sweetie knows that I give her the shots because I love her, and want her to live her days out with optimum health.

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this

Ok, lozen, since you opened your big filthy mouth this AM, answer to me why you support the enemies of freedom, the Muslims?

By The Whole Truth

September 25, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this

If you think I’m joking abot spamming your board again, Libs, just try me. So you either answer about your motivations here as to why you’re supporting the enemies of freedom, the Muslims, or the DOG DOO DOO is going to start flying. I’ll be back in a few minutes for some ANSWERS.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this

Nothing much to say today except the DOO DOO is going to be flying soon unless some Libs answer about their motivations.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this

As I said before, you’ve ran off every reasonable conservative in the past, so now you have to answer to me.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this

BC, it’s amazing what a real piece of $hit you are. You have begged for a reasonable conservative to come on here, but have proven time and again that your mind is closed. You’ve created your little perfect mathematical world to live in, but somehow I suspect that at come level you know your whole existence is basically a Lie.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this

So let’s hear it, what is motivating you Libs to attack Bush at every turn, while finding reasons to support the terrorists? I would really hate to screw up your board for the rest of this year. So start answering, or else.

By kimberly

September 25, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this

Just exactly what motivates you to support the enemies of freedom, the Muslims?

What exactly is Whole Troof smoking today, that he equates not feeling safer with supporting “Muslim enemies?” Whom exactly am I supporting because I answer the question honestly? NO I do not feel safer, and NO our borders are not secure. Put the bong down, Dude, (or at least pass it along to someone else.) Time to get some pizza, take a long nap, and quite probably, follow that with a long hot shower and shave.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 10:50 AM | Link to this

Jack: Some of the preparedness precautions are good things, but how has the threat level itself changed in the past few years?

The facts show that terrorism and Al-Qaeda are on the rise, not in retreat. I don’t see how that translates into the U.S. being “safer.”

By Jack

September 25, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this

He gives trolls a bad name.

Hi Kim. :)

By lozen

September 25, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

Hey Jack! Kimberly really was ROTM. We know now, since New Orleans, if there is a terrorist attack we are on our own. We can’t depend on our guvment to help us so you’re right Jack. We need to be prepared to take care of ourselves. Brian, yeah it doesn’t do anyone any good to try to talk to stupid. Ignore is the word.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 10:55 AM | Link to this

Nice try to evade the question, kimberly. Why can’t you answer me honestly? BC evaded my questions regarding his motivations to defend Science as being his GOD for a week, because the ugly truth is that he’s making a lot of CASH by holding this UNGODLY view. SO, what’s your motivation to attack Bush at every turn, thereby supporting the Muslims in our EITHER/OR battle of lifestyles?

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this

Because as I’ve proven time and again, it is emotion which motivates our opinions, not facts. I believe that you may have never actually examined your motivations, kimberly. Surely don’t tell me that is all based on altruism, i.e. “good intentions”. Just what motivates your opinions, kimberly?

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

Lozen: I’m thinking there’s a basic contradiction in votinig for people who hate the very idea of government. We put them in power, and they proceed to demonstrate that “government is useless” by doing nothing—not even their jobs!

It’s kinda like having a police chief who thinks criminals are unstoppable. Shouldn’t we have someone with, say, a slightly more productive point of view in that position?

By Laurie

September 25, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

Both Diane and President Bush are right. This is a war of ideologies, for the “hearts and minds” of the silent majority. Bush’s mistake, however, is that he is relying on military might, not ideology. You can’t do both. You can’t say, “Freedom, democracy, capitalism, individualism and Christianity are best and if you can’t see that, we’ll bomb you back into the Stone Age.” You have to prove it by making an America that lives up to its rhetoric. We need new leadership to deliver the goods, not just advertise a defective product. The Muslim world knows very well that we have great poverty in America, that we place profits ahead of human life in our health care system and ahead of family stability in our economy, that our “democratic” government is run by corporations and a wealthy elite, that women are not free and safe in America’s violent streets and families nor honored in her Christian churches, that drugs, both legal and illegal, enslave millions of disillusioned Americans. They know, too, that American Christians are no more followers of the “Prince of Peace” than Muslim jihadists. The proof of American superiority is at home in the health and happiness of its people. When we create a society that is indeed the envy of the world, that delivers the highest standard of living for all, that truly respects all life and pursues peace and justice with a passion, Muslim extremism will wither away. Terrorism is holding up a mirror to us. We will either see our imperfections in it and set about to correct them, or we will keep trying to break the mirror, refusing to change and perish as a nation.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this

The only reason terrorism is on the rise, BC, is because of pu$$ies like you and your man, Bill Clinton (the OTHER BC), who live in a fantasy world of your own creation instead of the world of facts. The only facts you ever see, BC, are the miniscule kind that can be studied via microscope. There exist higher levels of reality, BC, whether you care to acknowledge them or not. Again, I said levels of “REALITY” involving real things like our bodies. When you think of useless mysticism, I believe you’re thinking of lozen with her (his?) wacky definition of GOD.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 11:03 AM | Link to this

Hi Lozen! BC. We probably would have been hit again had we not taken action. I know that doesn’t seem like much but we did put the hurt on the top brass of Al-Qaeda. More can and should be done but this administration is more concerned about political correctness and not offending anyone than our safety.

By 2D

September 25, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this

Brian… If terrorism and Al-Qaeda are on the rise, but our precautions and preparedness are equally on the rise are we any less safe? I’m not sure.

What would it take for you to feel safer?

By Tina

September 25, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this

I usually sit back and listen to you guys go at it- it’s actually quite entertaining- but wow- TramadoL is actually speaking sentences and not just the boring ol dud he usually is- WOW!

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this

The answer as to what your motivations are, kimberly, is simple. Because you are a human being, your main motivator in Life, like all of us, is FEAR. We can’t escape FEAR, because it is another wonderful GIFT FROM GOD. What we need to be very careful of is simply THE RIGHT APPLICATION OF FEAR. Here, you seem to fear Bush more than the Muslims. If this is the case, I politely disagree with you regarding this point. Care to respond to this question, or are you just going to keep sticking your fingers in your ears and make waggling noises like a 2 yeear old?

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this

Laurie’s got a good point, too. You can’t spread democracy by force—only by example.

Jack: I’d be satisfied if they just showed some concern for the Constitution once in awhile, regardless of our “safety.”

By kimberly

September 25, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this

Just what motivates your opinions, kimberly?

Dude, I’ll answer s-l-o-w-l-y. The question of the week is “Are we safer than five years ago?” Unless each of us is a global “safety expert” thoroughly trained in both the definitions of “safety” and the measurements thereof, then we can only answer the question SUBJECTIVELY. What that means is that I can only answer for ME. I can only tell you whether I FEEL or I THINK we are safer. Based on MY experience, and what I have learned and observed, I do NOT feel or think we are safer.

Now I don’t know why you have a problem with my simple expression of opinion, nor why you question my patriotism or religious faith based on my expression of my opinion as per the topic. That you read so much into it, and then attack others based on your intuitive vibes, is indicative of a chemical imbalance. Just how many voices are in your head this morning?

By Mara

September 25, 2006 11:10 AM | Link to this

Chilao - please don’t feed the trolls…

Brian, Risk management..great point. Also loved the “Quantum Leap” comment. Too funny LOL!

Hey JBM!!

E Lewis - long time no hear! welcome back.

Renee - I felt the same way about Clinton finally standing up to the lies and innuendo being spread via Fox News’ propagandists. But then nobody ever said Clinton lacked balls, they just didn’t like how he used ‘em LOL!!

Kimberly - I’m with Renee…great comment.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 11:10 AM | Link to this

Jack, I hope you ralize that you and I are on the same team. Sorry I intruded on your “space” here. You are the true alpha DOG here, and I am not here to compromise that. I simply want your Lib buddies to think about their misplaced fears, and to hopefully redirect them to the real threat to our freedom, the Muslims.

By WifeBeater/Feces

September 25, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this

*B!tch, (slap), why do you put too much catsup on my fries (slap); Why do you make me beat you like this? (slap)”.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this

So let’s just cut to the chase, Libs, as I have attempted to do many times already. Why do all of you fear Bush, the man who is protecting you from harm, more than the Muslims, the ones who are actually harming us?? And don’t give that cackamamie bull about somehow Bush is the reason that political Islam is here to stay. History records the facts. And don’t tell me about all of your “lost” freedoms under Bush. I haven’t lost any freedoms I’m aware of, have any of you?

By Jack

September 25, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this

“The Muslim world knows very well that we have great poverty in America,”

Our poor equals upper-class in some countries. The jihadists will NOT go away no matter what we do. BinLaden summed it up shortly after 9/11. He said the difference is they are not afraid of death and Americans want to live. This is a big difference. Much harder to fight those who do not fear death.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this

kimberly, keep searching for that false dichotomy that will allow you to dimiss my questions without actually answering them. Why do you fear Bush more than the Muslims?

By randy

September 25, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this

If we are safer it sure isn’t because of the liberal Democrats.

By Tina

September 25, 2006 11:21 AM | Link to this

TramadoL is starting to sound like that damn DOG* no fair- I thought he was gone for good!

By Mara

September 25, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

kimberly - please, PLEASE don’t feed the trolls.

Jack - this administration is more concerned about political correctness and not offending anyone than our safety

I disagree. I don’t think they give a hoot about political correctness, offending people, or our safety. The ONLY thing that concerns them is holding on to power. It’s that simple. If that means shredding the protections of the Constitution, they’ll do it. And they’ll contend that they do so because it will “protect the nation”. But really their whole goal is to use American power to structure the world as THEY think it should be structured, with them at the top and everyone else too afraid to stand up to them.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

Laurie, once again, this isn’t a battle of philosophy with the Muslims or even a contest of who has the “high moral ground”. Muslims hate freedom, and I love it. It’s that simple. Bush defends freedom, while you idiot Libs save all your energy to criticisze Bush at every turn with nary a word of criticism for pukes like Chavez.

By TimothyMcVeigh

September 25, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this

Should my bombing in Oklahoma be held against ALL Christians? Or ALL Roman Catholics, since I am one?

By Jack

September 25, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this

I realize TramadoL. But you get more flies with sugar than with vinegar. I may not agree with many on the blog but I respect their opinions.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 11:29 AM | Link to this

BC, if it interest you, I not only took the actuarial exams about 15 years ago (strictly for the fun of it), but I also received a perfect score of 10 on every section I took. If you have any friends who are actuaries, ask them to determine the “probability” of someone walking in off the street and pulling off that kind of achievement. If you doubt me, just provide a fax nunber and I will fax you my results from the Society of Actuaries. So, while kimberly fantasizes that I’m a little “out of the loop”, but those in the know usually think otherwise.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this

Well, since there was only one Timothy McVeigh who received limited funding, as an actuary I’m not going to worry about folks like him quite as much as political Islam, which is funded by hundreds of millions of Muslims every week through their governments and mosques.

By kimberly

September 25, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this

Mara, you’re right. Sorry.

Jack, Heyyyyy. {;-> I’m with Mara on this one, though. The only “PC” I see coming from this administration is the careful way they avoid offending the religious right. And based on my observations, power and money really IS all they care about. See, nations and governments come and go. REAL MONEY is forever.

By TramadoL

September 25, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this

Youu see, BC, before I take a “risk” and criticize something, I do a lot of research first. My opinion that Statistics are the tool of the Evil One is a VERY INFORMED OPINION. The reason is, that by using linear regression programs, a commputer can create a “meaningful” equation using any random set of data. This data has no meaning in GOD’s mind (i.e. no causation), but any half-smart human can find “meaning” via Statistics (i.e. correlation). As such, crooks like you can then charge me a lot of CASH to simply prove their prejudices.

By When Will You Libs Answer the Question?

September 25, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this

Kimberly, please explain to me exactly WHY you fear Bush more than political Islam, and I will leave you alone. I PROMISE. (Hopefully you’re not an Eric Clapton fan).

By When Will You Libs Answer the Question?

September 25, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this

Mara, you too—Wht do you fear Bush more than political Islam? What was your upbringing like such that you have basically no morals?

By When Will You Libs Answer the Question?

September 25, 2006 11:44 AM | Link to this

Because I’d really hate to have to spam this board for another two weeks until you answer, Mara and kimberly and lozen. Like DOG said, either answer or get the F#ck off the board. I’m sorry that I’m not as respectful of the Lib mindset as you are Jack. If we weren’t at war with a substantial foe, I wouldn’t care so much.

By kimberly

September 25, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this

The reason is, that by using linear regression programs, a commputer can create a “meaningful” equation using any random set of data.

HE ADMITS IT! THE VOTING MACHINES ARE HACKED! THE VOTING MACHINES ARE HACKED! DEMOCRACY IS DEAD! THE VOTING MACHINES ARE HACKED! Really. I’m not kidding. In all likelihood, we’re f-cked.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this

Ok Mara. Why are we not profiling? Are the Democrats not doing everything they possibly can to make our president look bad so they can get their precious power back? This administration hasn’t done anymore to violate the constitution than other administrations. You don’t think the govt has wire tapped anyone before “W”? “W” screwed up by trying to do the right thing by getting the OK fron the great UN.

I do agree that govt is by the money, for the money. Both Dems and Reps.

By Lyrazel

September 25, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this

Are we safer than 5 years ago? No. Were we safe 5 years ago? No. Will we be safer 5 years from now? No. I believe we are more willing to accept the only recourse is to kiss our butt goodbye in case of a natl. emergency than we were 5 years ago because we have seen just exactly how incompetent our government/civil defense/emergency systems are.

By chuck

September 25, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

Good morning. Interesting how people can read the report on GLOBAL terrorism and come away with the idea that we are somehow less safe than before 9/11. Here is the State Department summary of the report. If you want to read the entire report, the website is noted below:

Three trends in terrorism are identified in the Department of State report which are independently reflected in the work of analysts elsewhere. First is the emergence of so called “micro actors,” in part spurred by U.S. successes in isolating or killing much of al Qaeda’s leadership. The result is an al Qaeda with a more subdued, although arguably still significant, operational role, but assuming more of an ideological, motivational, and propaganda role. Second is the trend toward “sophistication”; i.e. terrorists exploiting the global flow of information, finance, and ideas to their benefit, often through the internet. Third is an increasing overlap of terrorist activity with international crime, which may expose the terrorists to a broad range of law enforcement countermeasures. The report notes an overall increase in suicide bombings, especially in Iraq, where terror incidents accounted for almost a third of all terror incidents globally in 2005 and more than half of terror related deaths worldwide. However, some observers suggest that much of what the report characterizes as terrorist incidents in Iraq would be better categorized as insurgent activity and also to some degree as criminal activity.

The report suggests that active, direct, state sponsorship of terror is declining, with the notable exceptions of Iran and perhaps to some degree Syria. Emerging trends that may require enhanced policy focus are (1) attacks that aim to cause economic damage such as attacks on transportation infrastructure, tourism, and oil installations, (2) the growing number of unattributed terrorist attacks, and (3) the growing power and influence of radical Islamist political parties in foreign nations. Recent suggestions that al Qaeda remains operationally active are of growing concern as well. The State Department report suggests an immediate future with a larger number of “smaller attacks, less meticulously planned, and local rather than transnational in scope.” If so, some adjustment in implementation of United States anti-terror strategy and tactics to reflect a more international law enforcement oriented approach, such as that envisioned in the February 2003 National Strategy for Combating Terrorism, may be warranted. As the global economic, political, and technological landscapes evolve, data being collected to identify and track terrorism may need to change.

[http://www.usembassy.it/pdf/other/RL33555.pdf#search=%22Trends%20in%20Global%20Terrorism%22]

By When Will You Libs Answer the Question?

September 25, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

Awful quiet around here. One quick note, Jack. I have actually come to enjoy the taste of Vinegar as much as Honey, because the Truth comes wrapped up both ways.

By WifeBeater/Feces

September 25, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this

Because I’d really hate to have to spam this board for another two weeks until you answer,

variation: B!tch, (slap), why do you put too much catsup on my fries (slap); Why do you make me beat you like this? (slap)”

By When Will You Libs Answer the Question Fashback

September 25, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this

By When Will You Libs Answer the Question?

September 25, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this

Mara, you too—Why do you fear Bush more than political Islam? What was your upbringing like such that you have basically no morals?

By When Will You Libs Answer the Question Fashback

September 25, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this

And Mara, since you love to see two jackasses kick the crap out of each other, why aren’t you cheering as the scum Sunnis and Shiites KILL EACH OTHER ON THEIR OWN TURF IN IRAQ? To me, this is nothing but PURE GENIUS. What do you think, Jack?

By Renee

September 25, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this

Because I’d really hate to have to spam this board for another two weeks until you answer, Mara and kimberly and lozen. Like DOG said, either answer or get the F#ck off the board. I’m sorry that I’m not as respectful of the Lib mindset as you are Jack. If we weren’t at war with a substantial foe, I wouldn’t care so much.

I’m really going to regret this and Mara you can yell at me later…BUT….nobody HAS to answer you and NOBODY has to get the f******* off the board as you so eloquently put it.

Who are you, that you feel you have the right to DEMAND anything, much less an answer from ANYONE.

Okay, Mara, now you can yell at me. But people think because they are typing from a computer, suddenly they are omnipotent.

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this

If we really are F-ed, kimberly, it’s because of cowardly, unpatriotic, brain-dead Libs like you who fear Bush more than the terrorists he is thwarting. Been studying up on Sh’ria, kimberly? If it were up to brain-dead cowards like you, those of us still alive would be speaking Arabic about now.

By Mara

September 25, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this

Kimberly - actually it’s kind of amusing to see how long it takes before flecks of foam begin to literally fly out of my computer screen and screams of ANSWER ME!!!An-sir ME! WAAAAHH!!” begin echoing through cyberspace. ROTFLMAO!!!

Laurie - Terrorism is holding up a mirror to us. We will either see our imperfections in it and set about to correct them, or we will keep trying to break the mirror, refusing to change and perish as a nation

very deep. and this administration seems to have no problem tearing down the institutions of freedom that have empowered us and replacing them with the apparatus of intimidation that we once chastised our enemies for using. They seem to be intent on lowering us to the level of our enemies…

By Lyrazel

September 25, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this

GLOBAL is one thing, chuck.

What about AT home? We are a nation so dependent upon government programs and entitlements that citizens fail to see any need for civic duty beyond voting and paying tax. We expect the government to be there when things go bad and in the past 5 years they have proven they will not be there. The federal government is spending extraordinary amounts of money and time protecting air travel from terrorist attacks but Congress has not yet passed any laws to secure the nation’s chemical/nuclear plants, even though an attack (or bad weather, eh) on just one plant could injure as many as 100,000 people. Most shipping ports only inspect 5% of all incoming cargo. Right now most people are abandoning eating spinach because of a tainted food supply, but has the government looked at OTHER foods possibly contaminated: like meat. No. Vaccine programs are being scrapped—environmental concerns abandoned in the name of budget cuts. Name one city in America that has an evacuation plan for all its citizens—and if it did would anyone know it? Do you have an evacuation plan? Or do you have duct tape and plastic sheeting to protect you in case of Natl. Emergency?

Global concerns keep Americans from becoming aware of how lacking the system-in-place is Nationally. But god bless the petting zoo town in Indiana that got hazmat suits in case of an Al Quida attack……

By WifeBeater/Feces

September 25, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this

By WifeBeater/Feces

September 25, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this

Because I’d really hate to have to spam this board for another two weeks until you answer,

variation: B!tch, (slap), why do you put too much catsup on my fries (slap); Why do you make me beat you like this? (slap)”

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this

Hey Wifebeater/Feces—I’ve never struck a woman, I protect women. It’s John who has had multiple abusive relationships, not me. And, isn’t the Lib argument that the US “deserves” terrorism the same thing you’re trying to accuse DOG of??

By chuck

September 25, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this

I see BC quotes 4 of the most liberal sources in the country. NYT, Wash. Post, Huffington (what a joke). These are conclusions drawn by liberal papers based on a CLASSIFIED document, quoting anonymous sources.

No offense BC, but I would think a science loving dude like you would have a problem with that. Biased newspapers who hate Bush, citing anonymous sources that are criticizing the Bush Administration, based on a classied document that they presumably have been told about, but have not seen.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this

Chuck: You point out that the report qualifies it as active, direct, state sponsorship of terrorism that’s in decline… what about all the other types?

We could be safer if we quit “going it alone” and pretending that this is a problem that can be handled with sufficient explosives, instead of with methodical, coordinated international intelligence-gathering and police work. You know, the only thing that’s been even slightly effective in stopping terrorist plots AT ALL.

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this

Renee, remember, my message isn’t for you at all. Please cover your ears while the DOG DOO DOO flies. You see, I researched W2W before I came on board about five weeks ago. I read many times where BC called out for an intelligent conservative to come on board in order to have a real discussion of the ideas. But, I also saw the reception any takers of this challenge always received from John, Mara, and even BC himself. So, I knew to break down their barriers, I would have to bring some heavy ammo.

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this

So, I regret that you and I won’t get a chance to speak much, Renee, while I deal with the “peanut gallery” that has spawned itself on this board. That’s a shame, because I believe that I could learn a lot from you.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this

Bruno: When do you plan to bring some?

What a sad, silly little man you are!

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this

chuck, my new-found friend—Isn’t it ludicrous how biased BC is, yet continues to bill himself as being a “Real Scientist”? I do respect him, however. Anyone who can cart home that much of my CASH is obviously doing something right.

By Mara

September 25, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this

Jack - I was going to address your points, but I have the sneaking suspicion that your moniker has been highjacked…they phraseology just doesn’t sound like you…

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this

You see, both BC and lozen parroted the actual true definitions of GOD on this board before. Unfortunately, it is only “paper Theology” in their cases, because neither one of them applies the concepts to their own lives. And the reason they don’t apply the wonderful concept of Respect for all of GOD’S CREATIONS in their own Lives is that then they would have to confront the Evil One which lives inside of them, which they are afraid to do.

By chuck

September 25, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this

Kimmie, This statement of yours is somewhat false:

Let’s see…. They haven’t secured our borders nor the cargo that enters our ports.

I was watching an interview on one of the ABC magazine just a couple of weeks ago with the Homeland Security guy who is in charge of ports. He said that at the time of 9/11, we were inspecting only about 10% of the cargo coming through our ports. He stated that we are now up to about 75% and would be up to 95% by the end of the year.

By kimberly

September 25, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this

Wha..? Someone hi-jacked OUR JACK? I will beat the ugly off anyone who jacks OUR JACK!

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this

BC, if spinning your infinite False Dichotomies makes you feel like a winner, have at it. You keep proving time and again that DOG has your number, however, by not being able to leave it alone. Your asinine assertion that you somehow understand Real Science is easily disproven, because any such discussion must also include full consideration of human nature, which you run away from. Like chuck, I believe that you aspire to a sinless life which is impossible to achieve, just in a different way (or maybe not so different). To deal with the resulting guilt, you create false dichotomies which you don’t even believe yourself.

By Mara

September 25, 2006 12:27 PM | Link to this

Renee - Okay, Mara, now you can yell at me

(sigh) That’s okay, Renee. I know how difficult resisting the urge to fire back can be. It seem in spite of everything, Brian has a lot of difficulty, too. But, after all, who am I to say whether validating his over-inflated sense of “rightious indignation” by engaging him in debate is counter-productive or not?

An interesting perspective, though. By ignoring the troll, much as Bush tries to ignore Kim Jong Il, does it merely incite him to greater leaps of inflammatory rhetoric, just like North Korea is incited to greater acts of diplomatic “Kiss-my-azz”? Is Bruno the Kim Jong Il of the W2W board? LOL!

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:28 PM | Link to this

If someone hijacked Jack, kimberly, it wasn’t DOG. Maybe Jack realizes that I’m here to F#ck things up a little for you Libs for a valid reason—i.e. to wake some of you Libs up from your deep slumber. So just lay back, jack, let me be the “bad cop”. I thought we teamed up nicely that way to get Mara to reveal her true age last week.

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

But I’m not here forever, Jack. I’ve got lots of things to accomplish before I check out of this Life.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

That was me Mara.

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:31 PM | Link to this

So Mara, what was your upbringing such that you have no real morals? Why are you afraid to answer?

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this

So, Mara, Silver-Spooner, or no Daddy?

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this

Kim Jong Il is no match for DOG, trust me.

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:36 PM | Link to this

I would give old Kim Jong Il some credit for duping Jimmy Carter in 1993 with that supposed treaty he signed, but that’s not much of an accomplishment to dupe Jimmy Carter.

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:38 PM | Link to this

So, Mara, are we going to hear some answers regarding your motivations in Life, or are you going to just crawl back under your own Lib Troll rock and hide?

By WifeBeater/Feces

September 25, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this

By WifeBeater/Feces

September 25, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this

Because I’d really hate to have to spam this board for another two weeks until you answer,

variation: B!tch, (slap), why do you put too much catsup on my fries (slap); Why do you make me beat you like this? (slap)”

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 12:39 PM | Link to this

Chuck: Excellent news about the port situation improving. Now, what about dropping the failed tactic of military adventurism in Iraq, that’s serving as such a fantastic recruiting drive for Al-Qaeda, and indeed terrorism worldwide?

THAT would improve our safety a great deal, not to mention saving a lot of our soldiers’ lives that are being needlessly endangered.

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:41 PM | Link to this

kimberly, Mara, you have a choice of Daddies here. Do you want me or Jack? Do you want Osama or Bush? You can only show loyalty to one or the other, or else everyone will call you a ‘ho. Get it?

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this

BC, do you really believe the fantastic yarn you’re spinning her about how Bush is the instigator of Al-Quaida? I seem to recall they reached their zentih under your man, the OTHER BC. Kind of funny how al-Quaida is on the run now, living in caves, instead of out in the open like they did under Clinton.

By Renee

September 25, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this

Mara - your 11:58 was HILARIOUS!!

Point well taken, from your friendly chastising!!! LOL

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this

And, BC, maybe you can’t appreciate the genius of getting two Jackassees to kick the crap out of each other like Iran vs. Iraq in the 1980s and now the Sunnis vs. the Shiites now in Iraq, but I bet Mara might appreciate that if she only thought about it a little harder.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this

“Wha..? Someone hi-jacked OUR JACK? I will beat the ugly off anyone who jacks OUR JACK!”

:):):):) Where is my fan?

By The GOD Awful Ugly Truth

September 25, 2006 12:49 PM | Link to this

Likely Renee understands this same concept in terms of texas holdem. When you are the “big stack”, the wisest thing to do is often simply to lay back and let the “small stacks” battle it out, thereby knockong each other out of the tournament without taking any actual risk yourself.

By kimberly

September 25, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this

Well if I have to choose, I want JACK to be my Daddy. He’ll straighten me out, and I’ll thank him for it afterward…. {;->

By GOB

September 25, 2006 12:52 PM | Link to this

I cant help but picture Bruno standing over a deep pit in his basement, holding a his rabbit and yelling, “It puts the lotion in the basket!! It puts the lotion in the basket”

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this

Mara, the silence is deafening. Silver-Spooner or no Daddy? It’s such a simple question. I believe you would answer willingly unless, like BC, you know the answer will prove my point about emotions and motivation. Well, which is it?

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this

Y’know, I keep looking for any signs of Republicans crying for more action against terrorism during Clinton’s terms (1992-2001, for those who’ve forgotten)….

And so far, nothing’s turned up. I wonder why that is?

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this

So answer up, or your name is toast on this board, get it? Hopefully you will one day understand the reason for morals. When folks don’t have them, they can think of very wicked ways to harm you. Getiing the picture?

By DomForLife

September 25, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this

Can you keep all that ho-ish D/s action off the blog? (j/k)

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this

Sorry, GOB, I’m not a hypocrite like BC who only pretends to value Life. My bunnies are treated with the highest dignity and respect.

By Renee

September 25, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this

LOL GOB!!!! That is one of my favorite movie lines ever.

It places the lotion in the basket!!!

Good one!!!

By WifeBeater/Feces

September 25, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this

By WifeBeater/Feces

September 25, 2006 11:52 AM | Link to this

Because I’d really hate to have to spam this board for another two weeks until you answer,

variation: B!tch, (slap), why do you put too much catsup on my fries (slap); Why do you make me beat you like this? (slap)”

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this

And I treat all my “kitties” the same way. Jack might be able to relate to that. You see, real men practice the “2 to 1” theory of romance. If my partner doesn’t have at least twice as many Big Os as me, I feel that I have failed as a Real Man.

By Renee

September 25, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this

Okay, has anyone else besides me read the article about PETA protesting against Six Flags Line Jumping CockRoach eating Contest…….tooo funny.

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this

You see, BC, my “medical career” actually started when I was still a young boy. I trained many future nurses as a young man in the nuances of anatomy. I am still proud today to have been so “selfless” in the advancement of “Science”.

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 01:12 PM | Link to this

GOD loves cockroaches, too, Renee. Thank GOD for that, eh chuck?

By Jack

September 25, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this

OK. Who’s on first?

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 01:16 PM | Link to this

Seriously, how many of you gals here would want a night of romance with BC????? I’m starting to get a clue about his fascination with microscopes, however. Please keep in mind that DOG is more fascinated by the “Big Picture”, however, if one day any of you will be forced to choose between the two of us.

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

Mara can have her name back as soon as she comes clean about her upbringing, Jack. Help me out a little, will you?

By lozen

September 25, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

Well, the lines form. “Libruls” say No we are not safer. Conservatives (chuck and jack (slightly)) say we are safer. It doesn’t matter what the question is. We all already know the answers depending on our political persuasion! And our representatives apparently are the same. There is no way they can work together and nothing is being done in Washington. Heard they aren’t even able to have their annual ball game this year because they can’t agree on the rules for the game! Kimberly, you’re right; we’re screwed.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

Jack: What?

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this

It’s up to you, Mara. You’ve been spouting your venom on this board for a long time. I feel the public has a right to know just what your motivations are. So, once again, Silver-Spooner or no Daddy?

By Who

September 25, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

Keep up, dude, I passed first long ago. Been doing home-runs with her for going on 6 months.

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 01:22 PM | Link to this

Because I would really hate to start the spam again, and ruin the whole board for everyone else due to your obstinacy.

By Renee

September 25, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this

I’m all for animal rights….to an extent!! Those PETA protesters really need a life. I mean marching for cockroaches….how funny is that, LOL.

Jack - 1:13????

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this

And just so you know, not a one of you here except Jack and Renee could ever win a legal trial against even a half-wit attorney, let alone defeat the best in town as I have.

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this

Mara can have her name back as soon as she comes clean about her upbringing, Jack. Help me out a little, will you?

Never, Mara. Think a Megadeth song (when you kill a man, you’re a murderer, kill many, and you are a Conqueror, kill them all, and you are a God). don’t know how this applies to you, but any REAL MAN will tell you RealMenDieDefiant.

By Mara

September 25, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this

Jack - I’ll take your points one by one…

Why are we not profiling? - And you think we’re not? We’re not profiling “Middle-eastern terrorists” the way police departments weren’t profiling “African-American drug dealers” in the 90’s. Profiling in and of itself is counter-productive.

First, terrorism profiling, like traditional profiling, is based on broad and inaccurate stereotypes about the propensity of certain racial, religious or ethnic groups to engage in particular criminal activity. Not all drug crimes are committed by African Americans, Hispanics and other minorities. The overwhelming number of minorities are law abiding citizens. Likewise, not all terrorism is committed by Arabs or Muslims, and not all Arabs or Muslims are terrorists.

Second, profiling in the terrorism context is no more useful as a law enforcement tactic than profiling in the street-crime context. Anti-terror profiling, like traditional profiling, is a crude and inadequate substitute for behavior-based enforcement.

Third, like traditional profiling, anti-terror profiling alienates communities that otherwise are natural allies to law enforcement.

Are the Democrats not doing everything they possibly can to make our president look bad so they can get their precious power back? - I don’t think that they’re doing anything to make the president look bad except for exposing the bad things he is doing. If he really is the stand-up guy that he plays on T.V. then there’d be no dirty laundry to air, now would there? Whether this exposure of misdeeds and obfuscation is ONLY so that they can recover power is debatable. What I do know is that I, and the libs that I know, all hold our civil liberties sancrosanct. We believe deeply that the rights and protections of the Constitution are the bedrock of our freedom and any infringment on them by the government without our express knowlege and permission is anti-American and anti-Constitution. While one could wish that we could be free and safe(r), were I forced to choose, I’d take freedom and danger over safety and servitude.

This administration hasn’t done anymore to violate the constitution than other administrations. You don’t think the govt has wire tapped anyone before “W”? - How many administrations have suspended the writ of Habeus Corpus when we’re not at war? (congress has not passed a “Declaration of War” so therefore, legally, we aren’t “at war…) How many administrations have advocated secret tribunals that use secret evidence, hear-say, and statements procured by torture to paper over their indefinite incarceration of foreign nationals? As for wire-tapping, the FICA law wasn’t enacted until after Nixon, and including electronic surveillance has been refined since that time. What some administrations have done legally in the past does not give this administration carte blanche to ignore existing statutes.

“W” screwed up by trying to do the right thing by getting the OK fron the great UN. - And you really believe that he made honest, good-faith efforts to sway that body into supporting us? Am I the only one who remembers Rummy dissing “old Europe”? Am I the only one who remembers that the UN inspectors were begging for only a couple more months, because they weren’t seeing any evidence to support Bush’s allegations of WMD? Am I the only one who remembers “freedom fries”, “cheese-eating surrender monkeys”, “we don’t need permission from the *UN…” and “yer either fer us, or yer agin us”? Sorry, but that doesn’t sound like any kind of effort to enlist anyone. Is it any surprise that those who proclaimed on September 12th, “We are ALL Americans” would turn away in disgust?

Whether the Democrats would have done any better regarding domestic safety, I can’t say and that’s something I’d be willing to discuss. I do, however, really believe that they’d have done MUCH better on the international front. At the very least, they wouldn’t have ignored the wisdom inherent in the old adage “Never get involved in a land war in Asia”.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 01:31 PM | Link to this

Her up-bringing is no business of yours. I don’t have a lot of brain cells left and don’t have time to figure out who is posting under what name. Please use your moniker. i don’t wish to respond to a false persona thereby offending the real one. Be a man.

By Mara (the one and only)

September 25, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this

Let me explain for Jack—There is an old Abbott and Costello routine called “Whose on First?” involving confusion in trying to call a baseball game because the players on the field had names such as “Whose” and “Whats”. Get it, kids?

By kimberly

September 25, 2006 01:34 PM | Link to this

The S&M (D/s) undercurrent here today is too strong for me. I have to run before I get pulled under!

Fight the good fight, y’all!

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 01:37 PM | Link to this

Well said, Mara! It’s amazing—but sadly, not surprising—that the Bush defenders’ only reaction to having his crimes and failures pointed out is to “shoot the messenger.”

Not every question boils down to a popularity contest for Bush; some can be answered with facts. Facts like the increase in terrorist activity and the increased membership in Al-Qaeda since Bush’s Iraq adventure started. Anyone trying to claim that we’re somehow “safer” in light of those facts has a real contradiction to resolve.

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this

I doubt Jack is old enough to remember Abbott and Costello.

By The Man

September 25, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this

Ok, Jack, I do have deep respect for you, so I will leave Mara’s name alone. Personally, however, I think it’s kind of chicken-$hit of her to avoid answering such a simple question. Due to all the venom whe has spewed here the past few months, I feel she owes some of her victims an explanation. Additionally, she argued that there is no such thing as Modesty a few days ago. Part of my annoying and picking on her is to show her that that’s really not true. All women, except for ‘hos, have pride in themselves and their virtuous good name.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 01:44 PM | Link to this

Good points Dear. Too busy now to rebuff but the govt has been wire tapping since WWII.

By The Man

September 25, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this

BC, the BIGGER POINT regarding the constant criticism of Bush is simply the fact that you Libs spend ALL YOUR ENERGY ATTACKING BUSH BUT WON’T CRITICIZE OUR REAL ENEMIES. The deeper question this generates, then, is one regarding MOTIVATION. I know you amazingly believe that a 90% Democratic press is “fair, honest, and objective”, but us Real Scientists know otherwise. People’s opinions are a manifestation of their emotions. So, I simply want to know what motivates you Libs to keep DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE?

By The Man

September 25, 2006 01:49 PM | Link to this

I have repeatedly asked you to go to

www.ams.org/notices/200604/fea-franzen.pdf

for a Scientific discussion of how all arguments ultimately depend of the assumptions chosen, and NOTHING ELSE. As such, finding out people’s motivations is EXTREMELY SCIENTIFIC.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this

What DOES motivate Bush suppporters to keep defending the indefensible? I’ve often wondered about that….

By The Man

September 25, 2006 01:53 PM | Link to this

So while I repeatedly went into the “belly of the beast” by going to all your crackpot websites, you never once checked out even one of my references. You’re too busy seeking out Creationist websites to fulfill your false dichotomies, BC, to ever check a real source of info. As far as your political assessment of the Middle East, I will once again invite you to go to the Washington Institute For Middle Eastern Studies. It is the real deal, a truly bipartisan project which unmasks all of the Lies spawned by the Liberal Media the past 20 or more years.

By chuck

September 25, 2006 01:53 PM | Link to this

Isn’t that a little disengenuous BC:

We could be safer if we quit “going it alone” and pretending that this is a problem that can be handled with sufficient explosives, instead of with methodical, coordinated international intelligence-gathering and police work. You know, the only thing that’s been even slightly effective in stopping terrorist plots AT ALL.

The only people that really matter in the war on terror are the Pakistanis, the Saudis and our own intelligence. We have thwarted, according to the same Ports director for Homeland Security, dozens of planned terror attacks. We are safer because we are smarter than them.

Kim, what would it take to make you “feel” safer? The truth of the matter is that it is safer to be an 18-34 year-old American Male in Iraq than it is to be one in Philadelphia, PA. That’s right. There are fewer violent deaths per 100,000 among that age group in Iraq than in Philadelphia. By living in fear you are giving into terrorism. If nobody is afraid, then by definition, terrorism loses. We’ve taken enough common sense steps to make us safe enough.

Lozen, I don’t have the plastic sheeting/bottled water thing at all. I don’t care what the terrorists do. I am not going to change my life one iota out of fear of what they may or may not do. I live my life one day at a time.

Our intelligence folks are doing a much better job since we took some of the 70’s era restraints off of them. I am much more concerned about the idea of 100 million illegals by 2040 than I am of a handful of third world towel heads 6000 miles away.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 01:54 PM | Link to this

Jack: True, but has it been doing so illegally (i.e., without warrants or judicial oversight)? And even if so, how would that be an excuse for the current administration repeating the offense?

By The Man

September 25, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this

So keep telling yourself you have answered my challenges if it makes you feel better, BC. GOD knows the Truth. You haven’t answered anyone so far but your own, confused self. And even then, as I stated about chuck, you can’t even parrot your own crap accurately.

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this

Anybody hear the NPR religion piece over the weekend(that early Sunday a.m. show) about all the Hispanics females in Uniontown NJ(Speak of de debil) converting to ISLAM, because it was more in line with their Latino machismo AND gave them a sense of modesty with the hijab(head covering).

By Renee

September 25, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this

Kim, what would it take to make you “feel” safer? The truth of the matter is that it is safer to be an 18-34 year-old American Male in Iraq than it is to be one in Philadelphia, PA. That’s right. There are fewer violent deaths per 100,000 among that age group in Iraq than in Philadelphia. By living in fear you are giving into terrorism. If nobody is afraid, then by definition, terrorism loses. We’ve taken enough common sense steps to make us safe enough.

Chuck, your argument doesn’t make any sense. Just because I don’t feel “safer” doesn’t mean I am living in fear.

If nobody is afraid, then by definition, terrorism loses.

Again, not true. On 9/11 the country as a whole pretty much was not scared of, NOR anticipating a terrorist attack, and if so, certainly not of the magnitude in which it was carried out. And on 9/11, I would say that terrorism won. Just because I walk around and I’m not fearful that an attack will happen, does not take away the reality that an attack could, has, or will occur. So EVERYTIME, they carry out a successful terroristic attack, they are by definition, winning.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this

Chilao. Yes I remember. My favorite is Abbott & Costello meet the Frankenstein. That one had Dracula, Wolfman, and Frankenstein. I wasn’t born then but I liked their movies. Born in ‘50 BTW

By Mara

September 25, 2006 02:04 PM | Link to this

Chilao - Rock on!!

What do you mean, I dont believe in god?

I talk to him every day.

What do you mean, I dont support your system?

I go to court when I have to.

What do you mean, I cant get to work on time?

I got nothing better to do

And, what do you mean, I dont pay my bills?

Why do you think Im broke? huh?

Jack - thanks, darlin’. It does get tiresome seeing my name dragged through the mud, but I will not be intimidated nor blackmailed by some attention-starved nut prying into my private life. If I feel like sharing, as I have in the past, I will. Other than that, it’s nobody’s business but mine.

And yeah. Can’t the moderators do something about trolls abusing the forum?

Hi GOB!

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 02:06 PM | Link to this

Bush was making plans to invade IRAQ in March, 2001. (for the mathematically challenged, note that that is BEFORE 9/11). So that would probably make him a major Visionary, to be able to make plans to thwart 9/11 type attacks, before 9/11.

smarter than we could have guessed, I’m sure. Maybe that The Presidency For Dummies book he was holding when he got off the helicopter was just for one of his kids. LOL

By The Man

September 25, 2006 02:06 PM | Link to this

chuck, I’m with you about the illegal immigration problem being a greater long-term threat. It’s sad that all of our so-called leaders are benefiting via big fat political contributions from the industries which employ the wetbacks, so that the will of the people isn’t being expressed. Too much CASH involved for the Truth to be told. BC knows a lot about doing that, don’t you buddy? Explain to everyone here how that works and why our elected “leaders” won’t enforce the very needed immigration laws already on the books as GOD intended.

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this

Jack - I was joking and being ‘complimentary’ LMAO

since I am abit younger and all.

By The Man With Very Few Brain Cells Left, Also

September 25, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this

BC, the BIGGER POINT regarding the constant criticism of Bush is simply the fact that you Libs spend ALL YOUR ENERGY ATTACKING BUSH BUT WON’T CRITICIZE OUR REAL ENEMIES. The deeper question this generates, then, is one regarding MOTIVATION. I know you amazingly believe that a 90% Democratic press is “fair, honest, and objective”, but us Real Scientists know otherwise. People’s opinions are a manifestation of their emotions. So, I simply want to know what motivates you Libs to keep DEFENDING THE INDEFENSIBLE?

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 02:11 PM | Link to this

Chuck: Actually, the only people that matter in fighting terrorism are the intelligence and law-enforcement agencies actually DOING the fighting… and the terrorist factions themselves, of course. Everyone else is a bystander—and yes, that regrettably includes our soldiers in Iraq.

By The Man With Very Few Brain Cells Left, Also

September 25, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this

Maybe you could call the UN, Mara, about the troll abuse you’re taking. Just have plenty of CASH on hand if you want their “help”. (Hmmm, maybe she’ll tip her hand about the Silver Spoon thing by her response to me waving around some CASH) ; > ] Troll winks to you, Mara. P.S I AM a little younger than Jack, and maybe a tad mor virile at this point. Would that change your choice of Daddies at all?

By The Man With Very Few Brain Cells Left, Also

September 25, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this

BC, excellent point about intelligence being our greatest ally in defeating terrorism worldwide. Pop quiz for you, then. Which of the following Real Presidents BUILT UP the CIA, and which Jackass FOR an excuse of a President EVISCERATED THE AGENCY UNDER HIS WATCH?

A. Ronald Reagan

B. George Bush, Sr.

C. The OTHER piece of $hit with the initals BC

D. George Bush, Jr.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this

“P.S I AM a little younger than Jack, and maybe a tad mor virile”

Doubt that.

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this

cartoon: http://media.pixpond.com/16xnp60.jpg

By The Man With Very Few Brain Cells Left, Also

September 25, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this

You might be right about the virility thing Jack. Can you believe my girl has been complaining that I haven’t been giving her enough “Bunny Love” lately???? I think that perhaps my mentally practice of kissing you on the smacker in preparation for our rumble may have ruined me for Life.

By kimberly

September 25, 2006 02:36 PM | Link to this

Chuck,

I’ll never feel safe as long as religious fanatics roam the planet, demanding that we worship God THEIR way, and trying to impose their religious beliefs into law, forcing the rest of us to comply. Thanks for asking.

By The Man With Very Few Brain Cells Left, Also

September 25, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this

So, Jack, I love you brother and would take a bullet for you, but we’ll probably have to draw the line right there. I did see a funny sequence while flipping channels a week or so ago in a show called, I think, King of Queens. The main character was upset that his wife was hanging around some D-licker, so he started hanging around his buddy more to retaliate. For just a sitcom, I thought the multi-layered homo-eroticism they achieved with some “dream sequences” involving the King and his friend rivaled that of the bath scene in “Spartacus” with Tony Curtis.

By The Man With Very Few Brain Cells Left, Also

September 25, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this

So, Jack, I love you brother and would take a bullet for you, but we’ll probably have to draw the line right there. I did see a funny sequence while flipping channels a week or so ago in a show called, I think, King of Queens. The main character was upset that his wife was hanging around some D-licker, so he started hanging around his buddy more to retaliate. For just a sitcom, I thought the multi-layered homo-eroticism they achieved with some “dream sequences” involving the King and his friend rivaled that of the bath scene in “Spartacus” with Tony Curtis.

By The Man With Very Few Brain Cells Left, Also

September 25, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this

So that’s why I keep trying to find out more about Mara to replace that sick image. I imagine her to be a little on the short side, but thin. What’s your read?

By Jack

September 25, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this

Geez….

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this

Islamic Fascism 101:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/25/opinion/main2037752.shtml

By The Man With Very Few Brain Cells Left, Also

September 25, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this

kimberly, serious question for you. In which parts of the world is religious law being imposed on folks, and where are people free to worship as they wish? If you get this question right, we can then move on to the $200 round of questioning. Do you need to phone a friend?

By Still Waiting for a Response From BC

September 25, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this

BC, excellent point about intelligence being our greatest ally in defeating terrorism worldwide. Pop quiz for you, then. Which of the following Real Presidents BUILT UP the CIA, and which Jackass FOR an excuse of a President EVISCERATED THE AGENCY UNDER HIS WATCH?

A. Ronald Reagan

B. George Bush, Sr.

C. The OTHER piece of $hit with the initals BC

D. George Bush, Jr.

By chuck

September 25, 2006 02:52 PM | Link to this

I have to respectfully disagree Renee. The terrorists didn’t win anything on 9/11. All they did was bring the wrath of God and the United States government down on themselves. The terrorists are either dead or living in caves, running for their lives. If it wasn’t for our desire to keep the President of Pakistan in power, we could have already solved the problem by crossing into that country and wiping the rest of them out.

The so-called terrorists that we are “creating” in Iraq are no better off. They have to face the most awesome military force ever assembled on earth. Hundreds of them die EVERY WEEK. About the only role left for Al Quaida is that of propaganda dispersement. The truth is, I would rather have them over there killing Islamic civilians than over here killing Americans.

The whole point of terrorism is to CHANGE OUR WAY OF LIFE. If they can get us to crawl back into our shell like we did under Jimmy Carter, then yes they will have won. If they cannot bring that about then they have lost.

By Down to Two Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this

Pop quiz for you, Jack. Which of the folowing is the GEATEST ROCK BAND OF ALL TIME?

A. Led Zeppelin

B. LZ

C. The group which consists of Plant-Paige-Bonham-Jones

D. Did any other REAL ROCK BANDS ever exist?

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this

Chuck: Then why are there more of them now than when we started? That doesn’t really align with your “running and hiding” picture of Al-Qaeda.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 03:02 PM | Link to this

You got my read last week. I won’t disrespect her or the other ladies by talking about their looks. This is a blog and imagination rules.

By Down to Two Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this

chuck, DOG is waiting for you if you keep insisting on speaking for GOD. GOD doesn’t favor one side or the other as you falsely believe in either girl’s softball games, or in War, in which everything is at stake. We are all humans, so, therefore, we are all equal in GOD’S eyes. This isn’t about the moral high ground as you keep insisting. I’ts about freedom vs. subjugation. OOOps, that’s right, I forgot that you actually favor subjugation, just YOUR BRAND OF IT.

By Down to Two Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this

Brian, to make an assessment such as yours that there are “more” terrorists now than ever, you have to rely on the “measurements” that have been made over the years which provide estimates of the actual number of terrorists. Has it ever occurred to you that if you don’t think to measure something, then it becomes easy to believe that it doesn’t exist?

By Renee

September 25, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this

Chuck - do you think Bin Laden and the rest of his cronies felt like losers after 9/11, do you really think they feel like losers now? They don’t!! They feel like they are at war with us, but I do think they feel like winners. See, they are willing to DIE for their cause, death in the name of Allah is a WIN for them. Each and every one of the hijackers is right now being idolized, hailed as heroes, eternal life with 40 virgins with Allah, whatever….

And we absolutely have to change our way of life to avoid future terroist attacks. The US has left itself wide open for years. We are the mightiest country, yet the easiest to attack. These terrorists trained in the same country they attacked. They came and left pretty much at will. THIS NEVER SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED AND WE SHOULD ABSOLUTELY TAKE STEPS TO ENSURE IT DOESN’T. Stop letting any and everyone in this country. Right now, tell me what steps are actively in place that guarantee even the likelihood of an attack on US soil not happening again??

By Down to Two Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:11 PM | Link to this

But what you keep ignoring, BC, is the documented CASH trail associated with Hamas and Hezbollah. Their funding is vast, and comes from not only all the Middle Eastern governments, including our “friends”, the Saudis, but from millions of ordinary citizens over there, and HERE IN THE US AS WELL in the form of “charitable contributions”.

By Down to Two Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:14 PM | Link to this

Well, Jack, if it’s okay to let imagination rule in just this one area of Life, then I will say that Mara is the hottest honey pot of all-time in my mind. Forget kitten-cute, forget fine, I’m talking instant wood, Jack, even for an old guy like me.

By lozen

September 25, 2006 03:19 PM | Link to this

Just above this box is the statement “Inappropriate and profane comments will be editied at the discretion of the editors.” Will all of you please email and complain about this c** roach using other peoples’ names, monopolizing this blog, and the profanity too? And the spam! I am so sick of this I’ve about had it. It may be time to jump!

By AllAboutME

September 25, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this

….blame it on Ted Kennedy….

By chuck

September 25, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this

First Brian, the “source” YOU LINKED said:

Officials with knowledge of the intelligence estimate said it avoided specific judgments about the likelihood that terrorists would once again strike on United States soil. The relationship between the Iraq war and terrorism, and the question of whether the United States is safer, have been subjects of persistent debate since the war began in 2003.

Second, It isn’t Al Queda that has increased according to the article:

The estimate concludes that the radical Islamic movement has expanded from a core of Qaeda operatives and affiliated groups to include a new class of “self-generating” cells inspired by Al Qaeda’s leadership but without any direct connection to Osama bin Laden or his top lieutenants.

It also examines how the Internet has helped spread jihadist ideology, and how cyberspace has become a haven for terrorist operatives who no longer have geographical refuges in countries like Afghanistan.

What are they going to do…send me a virus?

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this

Stay, Lozen, can’t deny it is humour. LOL

By Down to Two Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:26 PM | Link to this

Well, lozen, you had yuor chance to answer straight up to Bruno, but you along with the rest here chose the low road instead. How is it looking? Or maybe you’re just jealous that I don’t feel any e-attraction to you, hmmmm, lozen? Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned. (think Hurricane John a few weeks ago)

By Down to Two Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this

And talking about the Kettle and the pot, I seem to recall some very graphic talk from Chilao before with no complaints from you. Oh, that’s right, he’s one of “your guys”, so it’s ok then. Plus, you all just got through arguing with me last week that bad words are just great, all you have to do is change the channel if you don’t like them. Are you catching on yet by what I mean by “Lib Lies”, lozen, or do I need to hang around a few weeks longer?

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

blame it on Ted Kennedy

rule number one of blame: You always have to blame it on the person who JUST LEFT(last employee, last politico, etc etc)

By Down to Two Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

Careful, Renee, you’re starting to sound like a right-winger with that last post.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this

LZ was good. Lost a lot of brain cells while listening to them. I am a Beatles fan. Their later stuff cannot be touched. I like Cream too.

By Down to Just 1.000...0001 Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:38 PM | Link to this

Guys, because I pride myself on meeting people on their “own level”, I am trying to reduce my brain capacity to be more on par with BC’s. Unfortunately, even with only 1.00000….0001 brain cells left, I’m STILL THINKING. I’ll have to undergo further reduction surgery.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this

“Or maybe you’re just jealous that I don’t feel any e-attraction to you,”

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Good one.

By Mara

September 25, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this

Chilao - yeah, it’s humorous…unless it’s your persona that’s he’s jerkin’ off to. Then it’s just gross, disgusting, and nausea-inducing. It’s the difference between skinny-dipping with your friends and finding out there’s a Peeping Tom outside your window.

By Down to Just 1.000...0001 Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this

What’s your Favorite Beatles songs, Jack? Strangely, even though George was not as prolific of a song writer as Lennon/McCartney, my top 5 Fav Beatles songs probably include two or three by George. How about, “I Want to Tell You?”, “Old Brown Shoe”, or Frank Sinatra’s all time favorite song of any artist, “Something”? I also love “Down Bring Me Down” with Billy Preston tickling the ivories.

By lozen

September 25, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this

Here’s the response I received from my complaint to AJC about the fool last week.

*Re: Fwd: Complaint [#7192546] Thanks so much for bringing this to our attention. We are in the process of banning certain individuals from posting on the blogs. Please keep us posted of any other possible violations you may encounter in the future.

Naftal Jahannes Internet Customer Care Representative The Atlanta Journal-Constitution*

Fine and dandy but WHEN?

By chuck

September 25, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this

Renee, I think Bin Laden is in a cave somewhere eating berries and drinking goat’s milk while I’m having steak and baked potato. He’s delusional. He thought Bush would ignore him like Clinton did. I don’t think he’s jumping up and down about his successes anymore. When that first wave of U.S. Special Forces hit Afghanistan he probably messed his pants.

Yes there are some things we should be doing. No doubt we should completely close the border with Mexico and be more aggressive patrolling the coastline. We do however, have over 10,000 miles of borders to protect. What you are advocating is a “bunker” mentality. We don’t have to change the way we live. Look at the Israelis for instance. They have been living with a much worse terror threat than us but they still have schools and churches/synagogues, they still go to restaraunts and plays. They don’t let the terrorists determine how they live. When attacked they just deal with it decisively and go about their business. This is even true in Iraq to a lesser degree. They still have their businesses and go to work. They have learned to live with the terror WITHOUT giving in to it. We need to do the same.

By Down to Just 1.000...0001 Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this

As for Cream, I love one of their less radio-friendly songs the most, “Deserted Cities of The Heart” from “Wheels of Fire”. Speaking of Cream, have you ever heard the Allman Bros. demo tape in which they play “I Feel Free” for the record Execs? I defy any man to close his eyes and tell me if they don’t sound EXACTLY LIKE Clapton-Baker-Bruce. Hmmmm, wait a minute, Jack….Jack Bruce(?). Are you him??

By AllAboutME

September 25, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this

…blame it on Elvis…?

By SusieHomeMaker

September 25, 2006 03:49 PM | Link to this

I don’t believe we’re safer, but I do feel we are wiser. I think 9/11 was a wake up call that basically said “We are not omnipotent, and omnipresent — we can be hurt, so we had better be prepared at all times”. One blogger made a good point in stating that we might have the statisics that say our city/state/town is safer, but if we don’t personally FEEL safer that statistics mean nothing to us.

I think the US as whole is slowly becoming wiser and more aware about a lot of things we have turned a blind eye to before. We are learning from our mistakes and are seeking to correct them. The process may be slower then we would’ve liked, but I feel we’re gaining knowledge daily and are putting it to good use.

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 03:50 PM | Link to this

Mara - I was referring to generally/overall. not his obsession with a married woman. sorry.

By Down to Just 1.000...0001 Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:50 PM | Link to this

lozen, You’re such a wimp. Why don’t you try standing up for yourself instead of whining to the board operator. Jack and Renee are the ones in charge here, I will obey them and them alone.

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 03:54 PM | Link to this

Chuck - you getting a Beer in to offset that goat’s milk?

By Down to Just 1.000...0001 Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:55 PM | Link to this

Susie, I wish there were more women like you who use their brains, unlike lozen who just keeps wailing about her feelings getting hurt. You see, lozen, you can dish it out, but you can’t take it. Susie has never disrespected me, and I have never disrespected her even though we may not agree on much. You regularly have insulted conservatives on this blog long before I showed up. Now that I’m giving you a taste of your own medicine, you don’t like it and keep wailing and gnashing your (false) teeth.

By Brian Curtis

September 25, 2006 03:56 PM | Link to this

Chuck: You’re right that we don’t have to change the way we live… we DO, however, have to change our policies which are stirring up so much anger and resentment in the first place, and we have to change our method of response when terrorist incidents occur.

Leading with the military—a task they’re totally unsuited for—has been disastrous.

By Down to Just 1.000...0001 Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this

Mara, OMG, how did you know that it was DOG who was peeping on you while you skinny dipped???? DOG knows the Answer to the Mystery of the Carpet and Drapes.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this

Ok then. Try sugar.

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this

slowly becoming wiser and more aware about a lot of things we have turned a blind eye to before.

more people know where Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq are now on the geo-map then they knew before.

By Down to Just 1.000...0001 Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this

I’m picking on Mara the most because my previous W2W research indicated that she is the Head Lib here. The fact that she may be an attractive woman just makes it easier to push her buttons and expose her Lib Lies about the rightful place of Modesty. Just watch Pavlov ring his little bell….

By Renee

September 25, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this

Clinton ignored Bin Laden??? Ignored him how. Not getting him does not equate ignoring. Oh, and Bush focusing on getting SADAM is not ignoring Bin Laden at all.

Our borders with Mexico are not the problem. The problem is the additional 10,000 miles of border that we speak of. Keeping Mexicans out is in no way making us safer as far as terrorism goes. Keeping out the people who commit these acts, however, will. I get tired of the republicans focusing on problems not at hand.

And I am in no way advocating changing our way of every day life, as far as church, school, work etc.. but changing measures with transportation. And yes, maybe everything shouldn’t be so easy. Traveling on a plane SHOULD be difficult ESPECIALLY after 9/11. Take an hour to check everyone, if it saves our lives or insures our safety.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this

“we have to change our method of response when terrorist incidents occur.”

Nothing we do will lessen their desire to kill all of us infidels. What method do you suggest?

By SusieHomeMaker

September 25, 2006 04:06 PM | Link to this

I like to learn and I like knowledge. Even if I don’t agree with what someone is saying I still would like to know where they’re getting their opinions from. I don’t believe in No Sex Before Marriage, (If i’m buying the cow, I want to make sure the milk isn’t curdled and spoiled), but I’d still want to hear from people who believe the total opposite because I like to learn and try to glean how their thought processes work.

By Down to Just 1.000...0001 Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this

BC, just keep believing the Lib Lie that terrorism is nothing more than a Rational Response to the horrid USA. Your credentials as even a junior high level Scientist are even now in question. Did it ever occur to you that every other country of the world has their own CIA which tries to influence elections, etc., or do you really think we’re the only “dirty pool shooters” in the whole world??? You see, BC, that’s the disadvantage of having only 1 brain cell left, like you. You can only think of one factoid at a time and can’t consider it’s relationship to other factoids.

By Jack

September 25, 2006 04:08 PM | Link to this

Hey Mara, don’t tell him about the goiter, it may mess up his fantasy.

By Down to Just 1.000...0001 Brain Cells

September 25, 2006 04:08 PM | Link to this

Because even though I’m not far ahead of you BC in brain power following reduction surgery this afternoon, that .00000…..00001 extra cell can make a big difference in terms of the dynamics of the system.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 25, 2006 04:10 PM | Link to this

Yep. And more people know how to spell jihad now too!!

By Renee

September 25, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this

actually BC said it best…changing POLICIES

By SusieHomeMaker

September 25, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this

Yep. And more people know how to spell jihad now too!!

By Down to Just Precisely 1.000000... Brain Cell

September 25, 2006 04:14 PM | Link to this

Ok, BC, the surgery is complete now. I am now down to precisely 1.0000…. brain cells, and I thik I’m starting to see things your way. It’s kind of like word association at this level. Let me try: Bush—Bad, Clinton—Good, United States—Bad, Terrorists—Good

By Down to Just Precisely 1.000000... Brain Cell

September 25, 2006 04:15 PM | Link to this

Wow, you know, I’m getting another strange, but familiar sensation now that I am down to precisely 1.0000… brain cells. Could it be that old P-power raising it’s raunchy head. OMG!!!!

By SusieHomeMaker

September 25, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this

Nothing we do will lessen their desire to kill all of us infidels. What method do you suggest?

Let our actions speak for themselves. After 9/11 we had a lot of Arab countries who were with us when we went after Afghanistan because they were harboring Al Queda. They understood our pain and supported our decisions — it made sense to them.

Iraq, however, makes no sense to the Arab world. We can’t justify our actions as we did in Afghanistan by declaring ourselves, (justifiably), the wronged party. With Iraq, we weren’t attacked, threatened, bullied, anything — and we went in with both guns blazing seeking vengeance for no apparent reason. It’s like a woman who has just caught and killed her cheating husband, who then turns around and kills his younger brother because he may grow up to be a cheater too. It makes no sense.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 25, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this

Nothing we do will lessen their desire to kill all of us infidels. What method do you suggest?

Let our actions speak for themselves. After 9/11 we had a lot of Arab countries who were with us when we went after Afghanistan because they were harboring Al Queda. They understood our pain and supported our decisions — it made sense to them.

Iraq, however, makes no sense to the Arab world. We can’t justify our actions as we did in Afghanistan by declaring ourselves, (justifiably), the wronged party. With Iraq, we weren’t attacked, threatened, bullied, anything — and we went in with both guns blazing seeking vengeance for no apparent reason. It’s like a woman who has just caught and killed her cheating husband, who then turns around and kills his younger brother because he may grow up to be a cheater too. It makes no sense.

By Down to Just Precisely 1.000000... Brain Cell

September 25, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this

Also, lozen, I double-checked with Clinton’s lawyers regarding the use of this blog. They concurred that it is, in fact, an exclusive board, not a public one due to the registration requirement put forth by the AJC. Also, recheck the wording of the profanity warning: Inappropriate comments will be edited at the discretion of the editors. You see, lozen, the editors have the responsiblilty to monitor the comments. There are no instructions to NOT USE PROFANITY.

By Down to Just Precisely 1.000000... Brain Cell

September 25, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this

In addition, lozen, as Chilao keeps pointing out to you, the characters on this board are all fictions of our imaginations. There are no oaths of truth administered when you log onto this board. You sure would make a lousy lawyer.

By Down to Just Precisely 1.000000... Brain Cell

September 25, 2006 04:24 PM | Link to this

So in the end, you can only (1) Kill me OR (2) Shame me off this board, just as DOG has shamed many others off this board already. YEA, I SPEAKETH, SHAME IS A VERITABLE GIFT FROM GOD.

By Down to Just Precisely 1.000000... Brain Cell

September 25, 2006 04:26 PM | Link to this

Personally, I find your struggles with me lozen to be a reflection of your own internal struggles, and nothing more.

By Down to Just Precisely 1.000000... Brain Cell

September 25, 2006 04:27 PM | Link to this

And, as hopefully you have figured out, I don’t shame easily.

By Down to Just Precisely 1.000000... Brain Cell

September 25, 2006 04:29 PM | Link to this

All rise to hear the case of lozen vs. Mr. Peabody. lozen vs. Peabody!!

By Judges Cheech and Chong

September 25, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this

Bailiff, wack his pee-pee!

By Jack

September 25, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this

Hi Susie. Was it on Twilight Zone when the man’s wife was raped and they were cruising down the street when she said”There he is, he did it”. Her husband stops the car and kills the man. he gets back in the car and they continue down the street and she sees another man and says”There he is, he did it!”

A classic.

By Judges Cheech and Chong

September 25, 2006 04:32 PM | Link to this

Mara vs. DOG, Mara vs. DOG.

“DOG, how do you plead?”

“I plead insanity”.

“Insanity?”

“Yes, I’m just crazy about that girl!!”

By Cheech and Chong

September 25, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this

So, Jack, which door do you select today? Door number #3?? OOps, it’s Officer O’Malley from the vice squad, and YOU’RE BUSTED!

By Chilao

September 25, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this

Lozen - you can only be bothered by someone’s opinion of you if you actually CARE about their opinion. LOL Certainly you don’t care, do you?

By Sam Kinison

September 25, 2006 04:40 PM | Link to this

And you all don’t want to hear what I have to say about foreigners with towels on their heads, do you??

By Sam Kinison

September 25, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this

AAAAAARGGGHHH! AAAAARRRRGGGHHHHH! Where’s Jessica Hahn? Jessie, I need you, baby!!

By Andrew "Dice" Clay

September 25, 2006 04:43 PM | Link to this

Or maybe you want ME to enlighten you about relationships between the sexes, lozen? Dice man can tell you.

By Cheech and Chong

September 25, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this

If anyone has a right to complain to the AJC, it’s us lozen. We saw that story about “eating roaches” in today’s paper, and really got thrown for a loop when we realized it was that OTHER KIND of roach that people were eating. Gross me out!! Talk about false advertisement!!!

By Cheech and Chong

September 25, 2006 04:49 PM | Link to this

But really, Chilao, how did all these idiot Libs keep accusing DOG of not being original?? I think Dennis Miller might even be a little jealous at times of DOG’s range.

By lozen

September 25, 2006 05:00 PM | Link to this

Chilao, not bothered at all by some dick head’s opinion of me, no. I’m just sick and tired of this mental case running his pathetic fantasies over and over, using everyone’s name, and f**cking with all of us. At least he’s down to three or four lines now instead of the page-long crap from last week. Still ….

By Gucci

September 25, 2006 05:36 PM | Link to this

BURBERRY.d1.sunglasses-das.com
CHANEL.d1.sunglasses-das.com
DIESEL.d1.sunglasses-das.com
HUGO-BOSS.d1.sunglasses-das.com dg.d1.sunglasses-das.com
dg.d1.sunglasses-das.com/sun-glasses-marc-jacobs-1.html dg.d1.sunglasses-das.com/sun-glasses-boucheron-2.html dg.d1.sunglasses-das.com/sun-glasses-burberry-3.html dg.d1.sunglasses-das.com/sun-glasses-bvlgari-4.html dg.d1.sunglasses-das.com/sun-glasses-caviar-5.html dg.d1.sunglasses-das.com/sun-glasses-cazal-6.html dg.d1.sunglasses-das.com/sun-glasses-cesare-paciotti-7.html

By Brian Curtis

September 26, 2006 08:23 AM | Link to this

So, a new day!

Does anyone on Shaunti’s side have any actual facts to support the notion that we’re safer now? Any evidence that terrorist incidents have declined, or that Al-Qaeda is weaker, or that anti-American sentiment has diminished?

Not opinions, mind you… not just wishful thinking and naive optimism (a specialty of the neocons these days), but facts. Anyone?

Because if not, what’s the rationale for claiming that our safety situation has improved, rather than gotten worse?

By Renee

September 26, 2006 08:35 AM | Link to this

I have a religious tidbit that I want to share. I frequently get emails from people, some people have jokes, others have emails about how good God is etc. Honestly, I don’t read a fair number of the religious ones, and I very seldom forward them to others. I got one today, and out of sheer boredom I read it. One of the lines in the email says this:

I asked God to spare me pain. God said, No. Suffering draws you apart from worldly cares and brings you closer to me.

Now there are several other ridiculous statements in this email but this one in particular stood out to me. This is a God of love, right? He says suffering in the world is bringing you closer to him. What a disfunctional relationship! I must suffer to be closer to him????? While I respect everyone’s views, I find it hard to understand why people don’t think about what this REALLY says. If you aren’t close with me, then I will make you SUFFER so you can THEN feel my love????

There are several other statements in this email, but THIS one really stood out to me. I’m sure the person who sent it to me is in such a haze that they wouldn’t understand why I have a problem with this statement.

Anyway, enough coffee talk with me. Happy Tuesday all.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 26, 2006 09:02 AM | Link to this

I’ve read that poem before. I think what it’s saying is that without any suffering, (personal, worldwide, etc.); would we ever call on God and ask for his help? Sometimes the only time people pray is when they are down and out. When times are good they rarely feel the need for prayer, but once times are hard, they’re down on their knees asking for guidance.

Remember, biblically God is our Father figure, our parent. When we’re young, our parents teach us love and respect in a myriad of ways. One of those ways is to let us fall, (suffer), so that we can learn a lesson on our own. We can tell a child 27 times “Stop falling out with fits on the floor or you will hurt yourself”; sometimes the chid listens, sometimes he doesn’t. But until the parent allows the child to hurt itself from the act (to suffer), the child will truly understand what the parent is talking about.

By Lyrazel

September 26, 2006 09:21 AM | Link to this

Killing any conversation by repeat insults is not just rude, its boring. While I do defend anyone’s right to say what they want even if I don’t agree with the message I too find this blog slipping into a chaos of tedium that is inane. These past weeks have shown how little care AJC puts into this space, the spam has increased with no attempt to remove it—thus its a Vent without a moderator. WTW has had many little napoleons vying for control and the newest ones always believes in its power to dominate—but there is no power here to be had. There is no reasoning with them who only spew, no debate, no conversation, no fun. I take no pleasure in reading sexual derogatory comments about women posters—thought surely some of the others would defend a woman’s right not to be slammed in such a way—being most men and women here advocate—respect. All dialogue is gone and the tedium continues. I don’t have any desire to read another day of comments by this new napoleon—the idea of a week more of tirades—or three weeks more—or seven—without the voices of the regulars who once made this an interesting debating hall of opinion and ideas—is ludicrous. Enjoy yourselves.

By Chilao

September 26, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this

Lozen - if you remember, there was once another obnoxious poster who thought he was too smart(talked all that relay and clone server talk) to be banned by the ajc. And then he just disappeared one day and well all mourned, I’m sure. I know ajc frowns on posting under other people’s names, and doubt they look favorably on some other activities, so who knows.

I DO know, that anyone who tries to post portions of a .pdf not exactly THAT computer competent.

By Renee

September 26, 2006 09:30 AM | Link to this

I hear what you are saying, respectfully, but I find that statement, along with the rest of the poem just ridiculous.

By TramadoL18346

September 26, 2006 09:40 AM | Link to this

I feel like an empty room, but eh. Nothing seems worth doing. I haven’t gotten much done today.

By NetBanker

September 26, 2006 10:09 AM | Link to this

Hey kids! It’s a busy week catching up from vacation. Had a great time in the desert and for anyone has ever thought of going down the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon…DO IT! It was AMAZING! The experience confirmed my belief that God is not in a building with a steeple or an ancient book, but in the tiny flowers clinging to the walls of a rocky canyon and the butterflies in the sunlight streaming through a hole in the roof of a cave just beyond the reach of a waterfall and in the stars in a dark desert night.

I had to laugh when I saw teaser for the blog in the Sunday paper especially after reading 2 stories in Section A from our very own government sources about how terrorism is spreading.

we’ve got a great “Jack Bauer” running this country right now. His name is George W. Bush, and he’s done an outstanding job the past five years, as is evidenced by no new attacks on us. And while the Libs here once again are fantasizing that somehow we’re not safer today than five years ago in a lame atempt to discredit Dubya’s good work, the actual facts speak otherwise. But, then again, hey, why let the facts get in the way of a good story, right?

Knock, knock. Who is there? Reality! If no attacks in X period of time is evidence of success then failure to do anything (Republican claim) by the Clinton Administration was also a success since there was no attack for 8 years on U.S. soil after the 1993 WTC bombing. As for facts, the increase in world-wide terrorism and the numbers of attempts to attack the U.S. would indicate that the probability of another attack is increasing rather than decreasing. How can a rational person consider the U.S. safer if the likelihood of an attack is rising?

By SusieHomeMaker

September 26, 2006 10:26 AM | Link to this

Lozen: I’m sorry you’re not going to stay on the board. I have found your postings to be very thoughtful and insightful and I will miss reading them. Please don’t let a sad, lonely, bitter, person run you away from something you have obviously enjoyed in the past.

By lozen

September 26, 2006 10:30 AM | Link to this

Renee, we are in total agreement on the religion thing. If people are happy and satisfied they have no need to seek out a god of any kind. The church had to ban everything that made people feel good so they would need a god and give their money to the church/king and obey the church/king. That’s why the catholic church made sex (except in one circumstance: marriage) a sin. Sex makes ppl happy (the right kind anyway) so they don’t need a god.

And the parent/child analogy Susie uses is totally it. Human beings are never going to grow up until they stop begging and blaming this invisible man in the sky! We are responsible for our problems, for solving our problems, for forgiving ourselves and others, for being there for each other. Recently a friend was saying, “I thank god for helping me to move here to Atlanta.” I said, “What about me? I found you a place to stay, sent you ads that helped you get a job, encouraged you to make the jump. Why should invisible man in the sky get the thanks?” She said, “You know, you’re right.”

By lozen

September 26, 2006 10:37 AM | Link to this

Netbanker, welcome back! You have been missed. I did that trip in ‘89 and it was wonderful. Did you sleep out on the bank of the river? I worked for the trip with one of the companies out of Moab and we were on big pontoon rafts, three of them with about 10-15 ppl on each raft. I loved it!

By Chilao

September 26, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this

NetB - how many days did you do? I have been to the GrandCanyon 8-9 times, both sides, but have never touched the Colorado River, in that area at least. And did the Ocoee a few months ago, in preparation for an eventual AwesomePlace “full” river trip.(might not go all the way to Mead…LOL)

By Renee

September 26, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this

We are responsible for our problems, for solving our problems, for forgiving ourselves and others, for being there for each other.

Excellent, lozen!!! I agree totally. It’s so easy to have a problem and then say God will work it out. My mother in law does that. She will have no money and say God will work it out. I ask wouldn’t God want you to be pro active and work it out on your own instead of waiting on him.

I heard it best this weekend. It was a cartoon on Comedy Central coming and a tornado was headed straight for this family. The son was like “God, please don’t let it hit us” and the father said “who do you think sent this damn thing” or something along those lines.

Religion is a cop out, in my opinion.

By lozen

September 26, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

Thank you Susie! I also enjoy your posts and learn from you. And maybe…oh, I hate to say this. It might jinx us. But… it looks like the troll might be gone today!
Renee, one of the saddest things i’ve ever heard was a woman who said jesus was her best and only friend and he was all she needed. I’m thinking: can jesus give you a hug when you’re hurting? You need a real friend lady! I know an imaginary friend is better than no friend, and I had an imaginary friend when I was a child but … Good grief. Develop some pple skills and get some flesh and blood friends.

By Chilao

September 26, 2006 11:23 AM | Link to this

The son was like “God, please don’t let it hit us” and the father said “who do you think sent this damn thing” or something along those lines.

Renee, com’on, get with the program. God protects and it is the Devil that causes tornadoes to hit churches and destroy homes.

Of course the especially devout will always point out how MAD
God is that he even has to send those tornadoes to give his bad-bad children a ‘heads-up’.

By NetBanker

September 26, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

Until you all answer just what it is that motivates you to support the other side in our upcoming battle with the Muslims, I’m not leaving. How is a lack of support for tactics that the NIE concludes aren’t working the same as support for the other side? How is asking for alternative approaches to SOLVING the terrorism problem equate to ‘aiding and abetting’ the enemy?

By Renee

September 26, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this

LOL Chilao….of course I need to get with the program. The sad part is, that actually is how a lot of people think.

Lozen - very sad!!

By Mara

September 26, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this

Net, don’t you know that “if yer not fer us, yer igin us”? LOL!

By lozen

September 26, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this

Ah, how nice it is today on this site! Lovely, just lovely!

By Renee

September 26, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

lol lozen…seems like old times huh??

By Curiouser and Curiouser

September 26, 2006 12:31 PM | Link to this

Didn’t that troll, Tobago, used to ramble on and on about Led Zepplin and the Beatles?

By Jack

September 26, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

Does everyone feel safer now that they locked up that 70 year old woman for stealing yarn? i hope the procecutor and those who pressed charges feel good about themselves.

By Chilao

September 26, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this

Friend really into original Delta Blues stuff gave me many cd copies, (Howlin Wolf, Jimmy Reed, JohnLeeHooker, Robert Johnson, etc). I remarked after with “Wow, a LedZeppelin song, a Cream song, etc…LOL, since I had told him I never appreciated blues until it went electric)

By Renee

September 26, 2006 01:00 PM | Link to this

LOL Jack….yeah, I think she needs help more than anything.

Taboga had a different writing style, more italics etc..

By Chilao

September 26, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this

and that is so funny, (for the younger crowd), because those old bluesmen WROTE many of those Led Zeppelin and Cream(etc) songs. LOL

By Chilao

September 26, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this

this post never showed, why I did the additional two after about blues:

Didn’t that troll, Tobago, used to ramble on and on about Led Zepplin and the Beatles?

that would pretty much be anybody over 50 so not sure it means alot. LOL

By Brian Curtis

September 26, 2006 02:48 PM | Link to this

Hmm… No ravings from Bruno all day. Could it be he’s been banned after all? We can always hope.

Anyway, it seems like we’ve got pretty solid agreement here that there’s

1) No solid evidence that we’re safer since 9/11, and

2) Conflicting opinions as to whether we may or may not be better off with our new security precautions, weighed against the increase in anti-American sentiment worldwide.

So the answer to the original question seems to be “No—not in any way that can be proven, at least.”

By NetBanker

September 26, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this

“biblically God is our Father figure, our parent.” Susie you spawned a thought…warning!! If we only have ONE biblical parent and it’s a Father figure then why are the religiously conservative firmly behind the idea that every child needs a MOTHER and a Father? Why did most previous religions also represent the female diety as equal since it takes male AND female to bring life into the world?

By chuck

September 26, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this

BC said yesterday:

…we DO, however, have to change our policies which are stirring up so much anger and resentment in the first place, and we have to change our method of response when terrorist incidents occur.

I’m wondering which policies those would be BC.

On another tangent, these are some of the comments about the administration from one of Brian’s favorite sites, Thinkprogress.org:

T*his treasonous government was letting Osama have access to a dialysis machine on 11 Sep 2001. This same treasonous government removed all rubble from WTC to China to avoid its analysis. This same treasonous government sent a Tomahawk into the side of the Pentagon.

The terrorists are over here, operating freely in the White House!*

Bush is 100% crazy and his so-called “War on Terrorism” is phony! He has not even bothered to capture or kill Osama bin Laden for past 5 years!

*When it comes to George W. Bush, it seems like every time he’s been faced with a choice, he’s made the wrong choice. And not only the wrong choice, but the most wrong choice.

People die every single day because of this fool’s choices.*

*This country will absolutely slip into total fascism and there is nothing that any of us can do about it but make plans to look out for our own welfare and safety. It’s already well under way.

With all the lying and deception that they have gotten away with, do any of you really expect them to be brought to justice. And do any of you really, REALLY think that it will make one bit of difference if Democrats gain any seats in the upcoming election? They are corrupted by the same lobbying interests as the Republicans are.

Most Americans are complete and utter idiots and will deserve what they will get… the loss of the country that they so loved. Even the most imbecilic moron should be able to study certain historic parallels and see what is in store. The US economy is in a very fragile state right now. Within 2 years the current economic policies will drive this country into hyperinflation and then they will use that as a pretext to take over completely. Unlike most idiot Americans, the Neocons have studied history and are duplicating past achievements with great success.

Enjoy your current lifestyle while you can. It will soon be gone.*

Look up the history of the Bush family, starting with prescott Bush. notice the ties to the Nazis and their activities. Look up the connections between the “Military Industrial” complex and many many US politicians. Look up the history of False Flag/Black Ops carried out by various and many US governments across the years. Look up Operations Northwood and Ajax, to name a few. Google PNAC and READ “Rebuilding Americas Defences..” Read “Brave New World” Read the Geneva Convention.*

Bush and his ultra rich backers want control of the entire WORLD. You and your friends will give it to him, or kill (or be killed) countless people you don’t know anything about so that they can have It.

These are the kinds of nutjobs that control the left. These are the ones that “Primary” democrats pander to. I understand that these are not the views of MOST democrats, but it worries the heck out of me that these folks get the attention that they do. These types of comments are also coming from some of the most left-wing members of Congress like Pelosi and Reid and Teddy.

Is there a credible idea for solving ANY of our problems coming from the LEFT? I am just not hearing anything constructive. If the “conclusions” by the NYT are garbage, we’ll find out about it in a few days. The president has ordered that the parts of the document that are not dealing with intelligence sources and methods be released. We’ll be able to see for ourselves if the NYT is once again spreading falsehoods to further their decidedly liberal agenda. This is what he said about it in a statement earlier today:

President Bush, moments ago:

Once again, there’s a leak out of our government, coming right down the stretch in this campaign, you know, to trade confusion in the minds of the American people, in my judgement, is why they leaked it. So I told the DNI to declassify this document. You can read it for yourself. We’ll stop all of the speculation, all the politics, about someone saying something about Iraq, you know, somebody trying to confuse the American people about the nature of this enemy. And so John Negroponte, the DNI, is going to declassify the document as quickly as possible, declassify the key judgments for you to read yourself and he’ll do so in such a way that he’ll be able to protect sources and methods that our intelligence community uses. And then everybody can draw their own conclusions about what the report says. Thank you.

By Jack

September 26, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this

For the Bush Bashers:

I recently saw a bumper sticker that said, “Thank me, I voted for Clinton-Gore.” So, I sat down and reflected on that, and I am sending my “Thank you” for what you have done, specifically:

Lewinsky, Dolly Kyle Browning, Kathleen Willey, and Juanita Broderick. Did I leave anyone out?

planned to wait until he was a little older to discuss it with him, but now he knows more about it than I did as a senior in college.

(especially the White House) and on the job is OK, and all you have to know is what the meaning of “it” is. It really is great to know that certain sexual acts are not sex, and one person may have sex while the other one does NOT have sex.

generation and demonstrating that the ridiculous plot of the movie “Wag the Dog” could be plausible after all.

graceful, Richard Nixon look honest, Lyndon Johnson look truthful, and John Kennedy look moral.

Amendment and 17 witnesses who have fled the country to avoid testifying about Democratic campaign fund raising.

from the Whitewater “mess” and the 55 criminal charges and 32 criminal convictions (so far) in the other “Clinton” scandals.

foreign policy, and flying all over the world on “vacations” carefully disguised as necessary trips.

need it in the first place, and I can’t think of a more deserving group of recipients for my hard-earned tax dollars)

cronies have logged in more time aboard Air Force One than any other administration.

convicted felons and indicted felons-in-exile. We will love to have them rejoin society. (Not to mention the scores you pardoned while Governor of Arkansas)

Laura Bush didn’t like the pattern anyway. Also, enjoy the housewarming gifts you’ve received from your “friends.”

vandalizing and destroying government property on the way out. I also appreciate removing all of that excess weight (China, silverware, linen, towels, ash trays, soap, pens, magnetic compass, flight manuals, etc.) out of Air Force 1. The weight savings means burning less fuel, thus less tax dollars spent on jet fuel. Thank you!

advance for her “tell-all” book and you, Bill, the $10 million advance for your memoirs. Who says crime doesn’t pay!

let Mohammed Atta go free. Terrorist pilot Mohammed Atta blew up a bus in Israel in 1986. The Israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians in 1993, Israel had to agree to release so-called “political prisoners”. However, the Israelis would not release any with blood on their hands. The American President at the time, Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, “insisted” that all prisoners be released. Thus Mohammed Atta was freed and eventually thanked the US by flying an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center. This was reported by many of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first identified. It was censored in the US from all later reports. Why shouldn’t Americans know the real truth?

pass this on. God bless America and THANK YOU (once again) for spending my taxes so wisely and frugally.

Internet, without which I would not be able to send this wonderful, factual e-mail.

Senator, now comes under the “Congressional Retirement and Staffing Plan,” which means that even if she never gets reelected, she STILL receives her Congressional salary until she dies. (Would it not be nice if all Americans were pension eligible after only 4 years?)

already getting his Presidential salary until he dies. If Hillary outlives Bill, she also gets HIS salary until she dies. Guess who pays for that?

they purchased a million dollar-plus house in upscale Chappaqua, New York. Makes sense. They are entitled to Secret Service protection for life. Still makes sense.

around $10,000 per month. BUT, an extra residence HAD to be built within the acreage to house the Secret Service agents.

use of that extra residence, which is just about equal to their mortgage payment. This means that we, the taxpayers, are paying the Clinton’s salary, mortgage, transportation, safety and security, as well as the salaries for their 12 man staff — and, this is all perfectly legal!

By Chilao

September 26, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this

since Atta of WTC/9-11 is not even the same person as Atta mentioned as been imprisoned in Israel, one has to wonder about the rest of it, right, Chuck? LOL

good ones, though, Jack; too bad some might not be accurate.

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/atta.htm

By SusieHomeMaker

September 26, 2006 03:40 PM | Link to this

If we only have ONE biblical parent and it’s a Father figure then why are the religiously conservative firmly behind the idea that every child needs a MOTHER and a Father?

I can’t speak for the religiously conservative but I can speak from my own experience as a single parent. I think a child needs the BALANCE of both parents. Most mothers are much more lenient and/or patient than the fathers. I noticed with my own children I can tell them to do something 6,234,236,890,123,567,098 times and they will totally ignore me; but my brother can tell them ONE TIME and they’ll jump up and do it!! It’s amazing!! Both my brother and myself grew up with our father, (a single parent) — our father didn’t play. He said it once and that was it, if he had to say it twice all h3ll was gonna break loose!

So my brother and I have almost the same type of parenting style, however my kids know that I’m the softie, I will let them slide on things more often than he will. In my opinion a woman raising a child Women will more than likely over indulge and spoil the child — becuase women are essentially more nurturing and forgivng than a man. Most women love their children more than they love their husbands. A child to them, something that has grown inside of them and bonded with them before birth, is probably the only living thing that will proabbly love them unconditionally, with no strings attached. That’s a perfect love. However, children need the mother (female) and the father, (male), in order to have some sort of balance. The father will put the child on notice when he goes to far, and the child knows that he can not cross that line — whereas with his mother he knows that he can jump across the line at least a couple more times before his Mom gets REALLY mad.

Why did most previous religions also represent the female diety as equal since it takes male AND female to bring life into the world? Most religions have a greater understanding of the yin and yang that it takes to make up this world. Some African Cultures are matriachal, giving the female more power than the average Chrstian Culture. Christian Cultures seem to be more patriarchal giving the male total dominance within the relationship with the female being the submissive in all things. This totally is just my opinion so take it for what it’s worth!!!

By Brian Curtis

September 26, 2006 03:51 PM | Link to this

Chuck, who are you arguing with? It sounds like you’re mistaking this “thinkprogress.org” site for “The Left” in general, which is absurd. You’re not, are you?

Because that would be as silly as declaring that lunatics like Ann Coulter and Bill O’Reilly represent “The Right” in this country, when obviously they’re complete raving wackjobs.

“The Left” has provided plenty of plans and suggestions along with its criticisms of how Bush has bungled our national security. Unfortunately, the neocons and rabid screech-hawks at Faux News have ignored those plans in favor of whining about Cindy Sheehan and Michael Moore for a few more hours. That’s not productive discussion, that’s rabble-rousing.

By Brian Curtis

September 26, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this

Jack: In reference to #5:

“Also thank you, Bill and Hillary, for making yourselves—warts and all—look like absolute genius-level, law-abiding saints compared to the malicious chimp currently squatting in the Oval Office.”

By Brian Curtis

September 26, 2006 03:57 PM | Link to this

As for #9… yeah, it sure sucks that the President travels around the country and to other nations, doesn’t it? That’s just a totally unreasonable waste of taxpayer dollars.

Not like ol’ Gee Dubya! He could care less what goes on in countries he’s not bombing or sucking up to. In fact, he can’t even SPELL most of their names, let alone find them on a map.

Really, these are some ridiculous ‘complaints’ that some neocon nutjob cobbled together.

By NetBanker

September 26, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this

Thanks for the welcome back! We only did 2 days/1 night. There were 6-8 people per raft with 3 Rafts so it was a relatively small group. I’d have loved to go longer, but since this was a first experience my partner didn’t want to bite off more than he could chew of the great outdoors. It’s the downside of being ‘married’ to a NYC Jew…camping usually means Holiday Inn or Motel 6. Also, our “base camp” for explorations was in Sedona at a timeshare the in-laws gave us. We really enjoyed exploring that area on mountain bikes and hiking. Also took some rough, dirt roads (hey it was a rental car) up into the more remote canyons to do some easy rock climbing. The night sky was the most amazing part! It’s sad to say, but I’d forgotten how many stars there are in the sky with all the Atlanta light pollution. The Milky Way was so clear one would have to be basically blind to miss it. I was actually having a hard time finding constellations due to all the stars. If anyone is in that area of Arizona I’d recommend taking a day trip on the Verde Canyon Railroad. It’s a four hour trip through a canyon only accessible by train, foot, or on horseback. There are open air viewing cars to enjoy (after picking up a cocktail at the bar in one of the enclosed cars).

After a really quick skim I see that Bruno/DOG was having a field day cluttering up the blog yesterday. I noticed his classic neo-con tactic of attack the character of the person rather than the statement/argument, restate the same things over and over, and start DEMANDING answers to questions while avoiding responding to those posed to you first.

Hey Mara! I forgot that lil’ axiom requires blind allegiance with no questions allowed or you’re barely better than the eeeeeviiilll enemy.

It just occurred to me that GWB is using GOD’s playbook…scare them and/or make them sorry for not being devoted to you in order to keep everyone in line. Good people are the ones in line and everyone else is bad, bad, bad to the bone.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 26, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this

Dear Jack: Why is it so hard for people to let the Clinton debacle go? You profess Christianity a lot, so you must be without sin because you love to throw the first stones so often. Is their no forgiveness in religion/politics for anyone other than yourselves? Have you NEVER done anything that you are ashamed of or regretted doing before? Is Clinton the only one?

Why twist history with distortions. According to you no child in America knew what oral sex was before they heard it on television, and not from white house, they heard it from the local and national news, (you know that liberal press who withholds the truth from the masses?). Why didn’t you change the channel, turn the TV off, tell your child to leave the room, when the television was spewing those words? What do you think Alice in Chains, Twisted Sister, Marilyn Manson, etc. were singing about in some of those songs? Disney Land?

Are you saying before Clinton no man in America ever cheated on his wife? That there was no such thing as sexual harrassment in the workplace? That no Senator, Congressman etc. has ever been indicted? Have you ever heard of Watergate?

Is there any evidence, after the millions of tax payers dollars that were spent investigating, of wrong doing by the Clintons? Can you show it to me?

I’m going to stop here, no since beating a dead horse. I’m going to leave you with these words that saved my sanity after my divorce:

Move on. It’s time to let it go.

By What the heck

September 26, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this

BC, Amen on your 3:53. So true

By Renee

September 26, 2006 04:07 PM | Link to this

LOL, Jack, I think that’s the longest post I’ve ever seen from you.

By Renee

September 26, 2006 04:08 PM | Link to this

Net, I forgot to tell you welcome back!!!

(probably because I’m green with envy about your trip)

;)

By SusieHomeMaker

September 26, 2006 04:09 PM | Link to this

Oh and Madeline Albright was the Secretary of State under Clinton. Someone posted yesterday that GWB was the first president to reflect diversity in their white house. They conveniently forgot about Clinton. He had two females in his office, one was the Sec. of State and the other was the Attorney General. Before Albright, he had a black male as the sec. of state —- I’m trying to find his name now.

By Chilao

September 26, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this

I know MarilynManson did a great version of DepecheMode’s Personal Jesus.

By Down With Chain E-mails

September 26, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this

http://www.breakthechain.org/exclusives/thanksbill.html

By SusieHomeMaker

September 26, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this

Sorry he was the Commerce Secretary — he died in a military plane crash on his way to Croatia. Ron Brown

By The72John

September 26, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this

Hmm…dropping in for a troll-check…can it be that the vile excrement is gone, or is he just biding his mean-spirited time again?

No time to really comment, but I just have to point out that I always find it hilarious when Chuck accuses other people of being irrational and claims that their ideologies are frightening. It just makes me giggle to think of he and his little Christian Taliban buddies sitting around talking about other people being extremists.

Long live Theocracy, right Chuck!

By Jack

September 26, 2006 04:52 PM | Link to this

I casted and yee bit!

“Why is it so hard for people to let the Clinton debacle go?”

Oh Susie. The operative word there is debacle….BTW I have too much sin.

By NetBanker

September 26, 2006 05:04 PM | Link to this

Susie…I agree that it’s the optimum environment to have two loving parents with different genders, but my question was more about religion that actual parenting. If male AND female is best then why is Christianity completely partriarchal with the belief that Jesus died a virgin?

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 07:58 AM | Link to this

Oh Susie. The operative word there is debacle

You are soooo bad….

By chuck

September 27, 2006 08:02 AM | Link to this

You didn’t answer the question though, BC. What policies need to be changed, and what do they need to be changed TO? What IS THE PLAN from the left to solve the problems of Iraq, terrorism, Iran, North Korea, etc.? All I hear and read is that they have one. This is THE PLAN, according to the Democratic Party’s own website:

Eliminate Osama Bin Laden, destroy terrorist networks like al Qaeda, finish the job in Afghanistan and end the threat posed by the Taliban.

Double the size of our Special Forces, increase our human intelligence capabilities, and ensure our intelligence is free from political pressure.

Eliminate terrorist breeding grounds by combating the economic, social, and political conditions that allow extremism to thrive; lead international efforts to uphold and defend human rights; and renew longstanding alliances that have advanced our national security objectives.

Secure by 2010 loose nuclear materials that terrorists could use to build nuclear weapons or “dirty bombs.”

Redouble efforts to stop nuclear weapons development in Iran and North Korea.

That is not a plan, Brian, It’s as the old song says “wishin’ and hopin’”.

If you read the declassified report that the President allowed to be released yesterday, you will see that the President’s plan that is already in effect is beginning to work. We don’t need change, we need time to finish the job.

By Brian Curtis

September 27, 2006 08:13 AM | Link to this

Chuck: That sounds like an excellent plan to me. What aspect of it bothers you and fails to qualify as a “plan” in your mind—simply the fact that it didn’t come from the neocons?

And the president’s “plan already in effect” is actually reducing our safety and NOT stopping terrorist activity at all. Hence this week’s topic. So what’s your point, exactly?

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 08:20 AM | Link to this

Susie…I agree that it’s the optimum environment to have two loving parents with different genders, but my question was more about religion that actual parenting. If male AND female is best then why is Christianity completely partriarchal with the belief that Jesus died a virgin?

Good question — I’m doing a little research on the various backgrounds of Christianity, but until then here’s a thought…..the bible itself is inundated with the works of men, there are only two books in the bible that pertain to women the other 60+ books are about men. The Roman Catholic Church mostly defined our views of Christianity since it was the “first” organized church and the first church to decipher and translate the majority of the Hebrew and Greek texts. Since there is a lot of misognists who are in the Catholic hierachy, that could probably be one of the reasons that Christianity is so “male” dominated.

By Mara

September 27, 2006 08:34 AM | Link to this

Actually chuck, that’s not true.

According to the released documents (which are portions of a classified intelligence estimate) the global jihadist movement is growing and being fueled by the war in Iraq even as it becomes more decentralized, making it harder to identify potential terrorists and prevent attacks.

The war in Iraq has become a “cause celebre” for jihadists, breeding resentment of U.S. involvement in the Muslim world and drawing new adherents to the movement, the assessment says. The growth in the number of potential terrorists is also being fed by corruption, slow-moving political reform in many Muslim countries and “pervasive” anti-American sentiment.

It also says that “the underlying factors fueling the spread of the movement outweigh its vulnerabilities and are likely to do so for the duration of the timeframe of this estimate,”. That “time frame” is said to be up to early 2011, btw.

and an interestin new poll from the University of Maryland -

Another new poll, scheduled to be released on Wednesday by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, found that 71 percent of Iraqis questioned want the Iraqi government to ask foreign forces to depart within a year. By large margins, though, Iraqis believed that the U.S. government would refuse the request, with 77 percent of those polled saying the United States intends keep permanent military bases in the country.

By andy

September 27, 2006 08:34 AM | Link to this

email contact of woman to woman

By Mara

September 27, 2006 09:14 AM | Link to this

Hi guys. One of my friends sent me this and I thought it’d be nice to share it with you all -

“If you go to the web site www.letssaythanks.com you can pick out a thank you card and the Xerox Company will print it and it will be sent to a soldier that is currently serving in Iraq. You can’t pick out who gets it, but it will go to some member of the armed services.

It is FREE and it only takes a second. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if the soldiers received a bunch of these? I sent mine, now you send one too! (Some cool designs - all made by kids!)”

I personally chose the one with the kitten covered by the Stars and Stripes. Too cute.

By Bruce

September 27, 2006 09:19 AM | Link to this

“If male AND female is best then why is Christianity completely partriarchal with the belief that Jesus died a virgin?”

Could it be that Jesus died a virgin because He knew that sex COULD/WOULD lead to sin and He would be tempted beyond His self-control? He refrained from sex the same as He did when He was hungry in the desert and Satan offered Him food. He had to die sinless to show us that through Him we too had the strength to resist temptation. Problem is we, way to often, do not call on that strength in time.

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this

Chuck - can I point out that the problems of Iraq was not a problem even created by the left?. And expect the new Republican administration in 2008 to resolve it.

I personally think Bush SR should have gone to Baghdad in 1991/92. and any “problem” there would have been long solved.

By Jack

September 27, 2006 09:37 AM | Link to this

“I personally think Bush SR should have gone to Baghdad in 1991/92. and any “problem” there would have been long solved.”

Ditto. We are there cause Daddy didn’t have the balls to do it in 91.

By Bruce

September 27, 2006 09:45 AM | Link to this

I’m with you Chilao…

By Renee

September 27, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this

Jesus fighting all that sin all his life, didn’t get him much except nailed on a cross, suffering for three days, then killed, and teased with a reincarnation of sorts.

By Jack

September 27, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this

Jesus died a virgin because he didn’t need sex and didn’t want sex. He had a mission and sex probably never entered his mind other than promoting sex between married couples. Unless someone invents a time machine, we will truely never know.

By VotingTime

September 27, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this

Had Enough?

Had enough Republican lies? Had enough Republican immorality? Had enough Republican corruption? Had enough Republican bad judgment? Had enough Republican incompetence? Had enough Republican fear mongering? Had enough Republican unnecessary war? Had enough Republican high fuel prices? Had enough Republican false religiosity? Had enough Republican secret government? Had enough Republican illegal surveillance? Had enough Republican financial mismanagement?

“…reality has a well-known liberal bias”,…Colbert

Had Enough? Vote Democratic

By Jack

September 27, 2006 10:32 AM | Link to this

Yes vote Democrat and give more of your hard earned money away to the government.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this

Vote Replubican and saddle your great-great-great-great-great grandchildren with more debt, pollution, corruption, and partisanship!!! You can’t take it with you anyway!!!

Vote Independent — There are some more wrestlers out there, or chicken farmers who’d be great leaders!

Vote Libertarian — Why? Well, I don’t know and I don’t care!

By Renee

September 27, 2006 10:49 AM | Link to this

Definitely vote Libertarian. You will see MORE of your hard earned money!

By lozen

September 27, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

Sex could lead god to sin Bruce? Well of course it could when sin is defined pretty much as anything that feels good! Here are my theories. Theory Number 1: Jesus had a wife and children and abandoned them to follow his calling to become a prophet and rant and rave about sin to his fellow jews! That is exactly what he asked his disciples to do, isn’t it? Theory # 2: Jesus wasn’t a virgin but had to be turned into one by the men who established the organized church. Theory # 3: There was no one man called jesus; he was invented by the early christians. Theory # 4: What difference does it make once you decide to live your life based on your own moral code (and living in the 21st century) after a great deal of thought and meditation. Some ppl would rather blindly follow a 2000 year old oriental cult that has been overlaid by christian twists on the rules and regulations of a 2000+ year old misogynist book?

By Jack

September 27, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this

Vote Democrat and you won’t be able to afford children to leave the debt to. Stay poor now so we can have a rich government. It would be soooo nice to be able to depend on the govt for everything. Their housing is so nice and the food stamps are great too. No need to work, everything is free.

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 11:03 AM | Link to this

I think those makers of Electronic Voting Machines, Diebold, etc, have pre-programmed to sum Independent and Libertarian votes as Republican, and a healthy percentage of Democratic votes as well.

Why I have stated previously I do not expect to see a Democratic-controlled Congress or President, in my lifetime, and I hope for at least 30 more years of living. LOL(knocking on wood)

By lozen

September 27, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this

Just as I have done for the past two elections I’ll vote independent. It won’t do any good but I feel better! And I certainly don’t consider my vote a wasted vote. I cannot vote democrat or republican anymore. The system is broken. Just about everybody (except the rich fat cats who run the democratic and republican parties) agrees on that but doing anything to change it will take long, hard work and isn’t an easy thing.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this

Vote Democrat and in just 8 years a smart, educated, independet thinking President can get rid of over 20+ years of trillions of dollars of debt and actually have a SURPLUS in the countries coiffers!!!

Vote Republican and you can get rid of that surplus in less than 4 years!!! God Bless America!!

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 11:20 AM | Link to this

Lozen: If you ever get a chance, you should travel to Italy and visit the Vatican. They have a room within the library that’s behind this big glass. Anyway, that room houses all the texts from different prophets that have NEVER been published and/or seen outside of the vatican for centuries. Have you ever wondered why the Vatican only choose THOSE certain books as the basis for the bible? I wonder about that a lot, especially since I found out that there are hundreds, (maybe even a thousand), more that never made it in……..

By Mara

September 27, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this

Jack, your ranting about how fiscally irresponsible the Democrats are rings very hollow, all things considered. You’re funny. Republicans ceded fiscal responsibility to the Democrats. Clinton raised taxes to pay down a national debt that the previous Republican administrations incurred and ignored. He initiated the pay-as-you-go rules which the Republicans repealed as soon as they possibly could, because cutting the spending on popular social programs so they could fund tax-cuts that mainly benefitted the top 5% just didn’t play well…not even to their base.

Better a “Tax-and-Spend” Democrat than a “Borrow-and-Spend” Republican.

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this

Just as I have done for the past two elections I’ll vote independent.

I have been voting ‘third party’ since the 1980s. Sure it is a cast-away vote, but if more people sent that kind of statement…(we could do a good flush)

as opposed to the people I have known who did not vote until the late evening, since they had to make sure they voted with the Winner. I kid you not..LOL

By Mara

September 27, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this

Susie - did you catch the History Channel presentation of “Banned from the Bible” that was on early this spring? Now that raised some interesting questions about how the Bible was actually written, what was deemed acceptable, and who made those choices. (hint:it wasn’t God…)

oh, yeah…nice 11:16 post

By Renee

September 27, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this

I don’t think ANY party has really demonstrated “how it should be done”. The fact that DEMOCRATS are good and REBULICANS are bad or vice versa is ludicrous. There is good and bad to both sides, which I was I stopped voting Democrat a looong time ago. I do consider myself Libertarian, and even though I generally agree with a lot of the Libertarian views, they are not 100% either.

By Renee

September 27, 2006 11:53 AM | Link to this

as opposed to the people I have known who did not vote until the late evening, since they had to make sure they voted with the Winner. I kid you not..LOL

Please tell us you are joking, Chilao….

By NetBanker

September 27, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this

Chuck and BC, Just a thought on “The Plan”….it seems to me that those items are goals rather than an actual plan. Generally a plan includes specifics, including detailed tasks, along with target completion dates and milestones, in order to achieve the goals. This is not meant to be a comment on the Dems as the Republicans also publish the same type of ‘plan.’

My primary critcism of the current ‘plan’ is the apparent lack of a goal that corresponds to #3 in the list Chuck posted above. This goal identifies treatment of the ‘disease’ of terrorism rather than the just the symptoms.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this

Oh No!!! I missed that one!!! I LOVE the History Channel!!! I hope it comes back on soon — maybe it’ll have some of the answers I’ve been searching for. For instance, wasn’t there passages of scriptures found in Tegris (??) a couple of hundred years ago that was thought to have been written by Mary Magadalene? I would love to know what the Vatican thought of it’s authenticity and what ever happened to the original gospel that was found in the 1800s……

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this

Please tell us you are joking, Chilao….

nope, not at all, what ‘i kid you not’ meant. seriously. some just can not stand to ‘loose’ so they have to be able to say “I voted for the winner”.

By Mara

September 27, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this

Renee - indeed! I’ve voted Libertarian myself, on occasion. But their platform is a bit too “anarchic” for my tastes. As a fiscally-conservative-socially-liberal voter, there’s not really a party that speaks to my concerns. As for the right and left…

Between trying to legislate their version of morality (which usually involves someones underpants) and attempting to enshrine Christianity as the State Religion, Republicans have virtually abandoned the ideals which compelled me, on occasion, to actually vote for their candidate.

Meanwhile, the Democrats are so busy trying to protect us from ourselves, forcing social conservatives into tolerance, and trying to enact well-intentioned-but-ultimatly-unworkable legislation that they have abandoned the middle-class, blue-collar populism that compelled me to occasionally vote for their candidate.

I used to be one of those “independant” voters. I voted for the candidate, not the party. And then the Republicans became Neo-cons. Until they return to being “conservatives” I will not support their candidates, whose allegiance (IMO) is to power and not to the welfare of the Nation. Despite their shortcomings I believe that the Democrats, at the very least, are doing what they do because they think that the country will be stronger for it. So…there ya go.

The least worst party gets my vote by default. Where, oh where, are the statesmen, the visionary leaders, the “uniters”?

By Jack

September 27, 2006 12:18 PM | Link to this

Republicans and Democrats are crooks. Their main job is to get re-elected and line their pockets. The people? Hell, they care not of the people other than what the people can do for them. BTW Clinton inherited that good economy, he didn’t create it. Reagan got us out of the fiscal mess Uncle Jimmy created by screwing the entire middle class by taking our deductions away. All of them are crooks and the “haves” better start looking out for themselves for our beloved govt would love to rule a country of mostly “have nots”

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 12:22 PM | Link to this

lose? that one has stumped me since fourthgrade(loose vs lose)

that was my first awakening, at 8 y.o. I saw a Catholic Bible and realized it had different books than the KJV. Made me go ‘hmmmmm’. Between that and by age 10 playing/socializing (at their parents) with animists, buddhists, hindus, moslems, and the worse Gasp Catholics(joking but not), I realized there were too many DIFFERENT ways to look at things for any one to be right.

By NetBanker

September 27, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

I find it rather telling that everyone (starting with Bruce) focused solely on Jesus and his sex life when responding to my question. Not one person (with maybe the exception of Susie) delved into why there is on female counterpart to God in the Bible when there is so much emphasis on male/female relationship in Christianity. It starts in Genesis with Adam and Eve, there are references to the importance of having children, there are wives and concubines, Noah was directed to collect male AND female…it goes on and on. So why no female counterpart? Maybe SHE was the loving, peaceful, forgiving part of the waring, angry, spiteful male God depicted in the Old Testament. And since man can not create on his own does it really make sense that a MALE diety birthed the Universe and everything in it?

I tend to agree with Lozen’s ideas on Jesus matrimonial state since anyone over the age of 20 in the time of Jesus who wasn’t married with kids was extremely rare. It would have been worthy of explanation to peoples of that time WHY he wasn’t married or have children. I also find it odd that it’s stated somewhere that Jesus was supposed to experience the fulness of human life, yet would never understand the love for a spouse or a child? How could sex have been sinful anyway if Jesus had married? Why isn’t sex mentioned in the 10 Commandments if it’s so darned important? The closest reference I could find is to not lust after your neighbor’s wife, but that is more about not rocking someone else’s matrimonial boat than a statement about sex outside of marriage.

I’d love to see a viable 3rd or 4th party in the races. It just feels like the choices between the 2 parties reduces every race to a decision between the lesser of 2 evils with no GOOD choice. And all the campaign mud slinging going on simply reinforces that concept.

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this

The closest reference I could find is to not lust after your neighbor’s wife, but that is more about not rocking someone else’s matrimonial boat than a statement about sex outside of marriage.

that commandment does not have to do with sex, in spite of the mention of the wife, it has to do with ‘coveting’.

since it also mentions your neighbors a-s-s-, (and they are talking about the beast of burden DONKEY..LOL). there is a real long list actually, in the original(vs. the shortened KJV), of things NOT to covet. The long list is just to make sure you get the point. LOL

which, if we all obeyed that commandment…anybody work in sales?(there goes those commissions, and economic output) LOL

By Bruce

September 27, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this

” find it rather telling that everyone (starting with Bruce) focused solely on Jesus and his sex life”

Net I apologize beacuse I thought your question was: “why did Jesus die a virgin.”

By lozen

September 27, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this

Netbanker, some ppl believe there was a female deity, Asherah, who was equal to Elohim/Yahweh/God way back in jewish history.

The Bible has two discordant creations accounts, Genesis 1 being a much later work of 6th century BC work by the priestly author and the Yahwist one of Genesis 2 and 3 being earlier, probably 8th century BC, although “some interpreters still look fondly back to an origin c 930-900”. This is roughly contemporary with Hesiod’s story of origins, through the Fall caused by Pandora releasing all the afflictions of the world.

There is also a brief Elohistic account of the Creation at Genesis 5. This is different again from the later priestly account of Genesis 1. In this account God, ‘Elohim creates male and female in our likeness. This suggests an almost androgynous origin. It confirms a different idea of God existed at the time.

By Mara

September 27, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this

Net, here’s a theory about the lack of a female deity to balance the male in Christianity. Now this is only a theory…

God, being ALL things, both the water and fire, the earth and the air, the yin and yang, therefore also embodies the male and female. IOW, God is neither male nor female. God is also an ephemeral being, having no “earthly” body, perhaps even being a lifeform of pure energy. As a non-breeding, non-corporeal lifeform, God wouln’t need a gender identity.

another thought -

Since power was dependant upon force-of-arms, it resided with warlords and kings. Males all. The founding of the church could only be done, at that time, by powerful men. Women were property and trophy, not actual individual people. Slaves. Breeding stock. They had no power thus they were unworthy to even mention as a possible recepticle of God’s might. After all, what man could (or would) willingly abase himself, in humility and fear, before a mere female? Even today it tends to be the church ladies who do most of the work while the heirarchy, elders, the powers of the church, are overwhelmingly male. And they guard that power most jealously.

By lozen

September 27, 2006 01:03 PM | Link to this

“that commandment does not have to do with sex, in spite of the mention of the wife, it has to do with ‘coveting’. since it also mentions your neighbors a-s-s-,” And women (wives) were considered almost as important as your a-s-s! don’t forget!

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 01:12 PM | Link to this

And women (wives) were considered almost as important as your a-s-s! don’t forget!

yeah, a mild-step up from the slave-girls you are not to covet as well. I know that one is in there as well. I never knew the long Torah version until I saw the DeadSeaScrolls exhibit.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this

I’d love to see a viable 3rd or 4th party in the races. It just feels like the choices between the 2 parties reduces every race to a decision between the lesser of 2 evils with no GOOD choice

So true and so very, very, sad.

By Jack

September 27, 2006 01:16 PM | Link to this

Isn’t “covet” the desire and adultery the act?

Anyone else glad Dog has been taken to the pound?

By lozen

September 27, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

Susie, I have been to the Vatican but didn’t know about this bookcase you mention. Our tour guide (private company, not working for the Vatican) said, “When you look at all this art and then think what they have hidden away in the basement, it blows your mind. You really wonder what exactly they’re hiding down there.”

This might interest you: “The gnostics claimed they had the inner teachings of the Christ, a tradition that was passed only to a select few. By about 200 AD the orthodox church had identified the gnostic path as a heresy, and proceeded to stamp it out. It is only because of the discovery of the Nag Hamadi texts that we know gnosticism played a major role in the life of the early church. Part of the reasons for the repression of the gnostics were political. The orthodox church identified as a social movement ruled by bishops. The gnostics’ inner path involved instead self-realization. The orthodox bishops found that threatening to their agenda of moral authority. While the gnostics often rejected sex as physical ensnarement, they also often accepted women as equals. By contrast, the orthodox Christians had come to accept family life, but gave the key roles of worship and church authority only to men.” Some biblical scholars believe both john the baptist and jesus were trained in a Gnostic school/monastery because the ruins have been uncovered near the place where john began teaching and baptizing and where he supposedly baptised jesus.

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 01:24 PM | Link to this

Jack - now I ain’t superstitious but please don’t jinx it.

yesterday, same topic, I was thinking “Yeah, the calm before the storm” after Lozen’s “lovely lovely day” post. LMAO

By lozen

September 27, 2006 01:30 PM | Link to this

Amazing, how precocious you were Chilao. Most adult baptists and methodists don’t even know the catholic bible has different books than the KJV or that men and women have the same number of ribs! I acually had a guy at work once argue that men do have one less rib than women! Another argued with me that jews did not write the old testament! Both were dead serious. Ignorance is a terrible thing! And there’s so much of it too.

By Jack

September 27, 2006 01:32 PM | Link to this

“I’d love to see a viable 3rd or 4th party in the races. It just feels like the choices between the 2 parties reduces every race to a decision between the lesser of 2 evils with no GOOD choice”

Amen to that Susie!

By lozen

September 27, 2006 01:36 PM | Link to this

Susie, here’s more interesting stuff about the Gnostics. “Both sexes seem to have been allowed to play an equal part in religious practice and discussion but the ultimate aim of the Gnostic was to achieve a state which eliminated sexual difference - which in effect meant that the women had to lose their femaleness in order to be subsumed into the larger ‘male’ group, whose actual sex was no longer significant. The Gnostic’s use of the terms male and female to describe the division between spirit and matter, and their further equation of the these terms with good and evil inevitably leads to the association of women and sexuality with evil. If woman and femaleness represented human nature and sexuality, then by rejecting these, and in particular sexual intercourse and procreation, Gnostic, as well as certain orthodox Christians influenced by this dualistic outlook, believed they could reach the spiritual heights.”

By lozen

September 27, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this

Somebody said once the quickest way to turn a really religious person into an agnostic is to get them into a college of theology. It really is almost impossible to take christianity seriously when you study it in depth and know the actual history of the church.

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this

Lozen - I opened a Catholic Bible on the kitchen table of a friend’s parents house, we were inside getting something to drink. I was never allowed to play with Catholics again.(now that IS a joke, since most around us were Catholic, we were probably told to come home the next time we needed something to drink…LMAO, can’t have misinformed(translate to educated) youngsters, you know).

By The72John

September 27, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this

Ditto. We are there cause Daddy didn’t have the balls to do it in 91.

Bush Sr. left Hussein in power because he realized that, whatever his flaws, he was the only stabilizing force in the region. Iraq is a constructed state made up of distinct and incompatible factions who were held together first by European Imperialism and later by the Ba’athists and Hussein.

The cowboy “blow ‘em all up and take no prisoners” mentality is what creates half our problems in the first place. As the newly-released report seems to indicate.

Just as a side note, it amazes me that the President thought that what he declassified would, in any way, silence his critics. It confirms almost entirely the objections that have been raised by the ever-growing number of politicians and millitary officials about the effects of this war. Apparently his reading comphrehension is just what we assumed it was.

Oh - and…I’m not sure here, but where in the Bible does it say that Christ died a virgin? I don’t seem to remember that being addressed.

By randy

September 27, 2006 02:28 PM | Link to this

On Mara’s 1:01 post, I totally agree with the 1st paragraph, sex is not revelant, with God. The second anology(i’m assuming that is what you are saying) is probably right also. God is a spiritual entity!

By randy

September 27, 2006 02:31 PM | Link to this

Iozen, Someone once said “every statement”. Christianity holds up under logical scrutiny.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this

BTW Clinton inherited that good economy, he didn’t create it. Reagan got us out of the fiscal mess

Jack, I think that argument is nothing more than an urban legend. I have heard it now for the past several years and I have searched dilligently to find a way to substantiate the claim but I have found nothing.

Reaganomics put us into TRILLIONS of dollars into debt. Jimmy Carter’s 4 years reign as compared to Regan’s 8 and Bush Sr.’s 4, (12 years of Republican rule after Carter), did not “screw the entire middle class by taking our deductions away” so irrevocably that in 12 years the Republicans couldn’t fix it.

Do you REMEMBER why people finally voted a Dem in the whitehouse? Think back to massive layoffs; factories closing, the rich’s phenomenal tax breaks, the unemployed, the high drug rate hence the high crime rate. Think back to the number of welfare recipients on the payroll BEFORE clinton took office, and think back to the number that got off WHILE he was in office. The reason why? J.O.B.S.

Like I said I’ve heard that “Reagan was the one who started the turn around” slogan for years, but I have not found any credence in that theory. I think it’s another myth, sort of like the unicorn.

By The72John

September 27, 2006 02:45 PM | Link to this

Iozen, Someone once said “every statement”. Christianity holds up under logical scrutiny.

Someone once said that the moon was made of green cheese, but that doesn’t mean it is.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 02:50 PM | Link to this

“When you look at all this art and then think what they have hidden away in the basement, it blows your mind. You really wonder what exactly they’re hiding down there.”

Lozen that’s so true!! And you also wonder how very RICH they are too!! The vatican has artifacts that date back to darn near the beginning. I was told on my tour that they had some of the original gold, (in their sculptures and coffers), that came from the Mayans. My guide said that the Spain gave some of its profits to the church to seek its blessings before they went to plunder.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this

Lozen — You have just whetted my interests in Gnostic religion!!! Now I’m gonna be up half the night trying to read everything I can find on the subject!!

By Jack

September 27, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this

Susie. You have no idea what you are talking about. Were you even an adult during the Carter term?

By Brian Curtis

September 27, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this

Amazing that I’m in agreement with Jack, NetB, and Susie.

We definitely need some viable third-party options to get some real choice and real democracy back. One thing the Dems and Repubs both agree on is that they like having a closed system rigged in their favor.

By The72John

September 27, 2006 03:08 PM | Link to this

Susie. You have no idea what you are talking about. Were you even an adult during the Carter term?

Sorry Jack, are you saying that Reagan DIDN’T bury us in a gargantuan federal deficit, much like Bush is doing today?

It really amazes me that you cling to the mythology of fiscally restrained Republicans and Tax-and-spend Democrats when it is so patently false.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this

Susie. You have no idea what you are talking about. Were you even an adult during the Carter term?

Heck — I can READ history just as well as the next Jill or Jack!!!

By 2D

September 27, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this

Lozen… If everyone became true gnostics, wouldn’t the human race cease to exist?

By lozen

September 27, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this

2D, yep. Are you saying that would be a bad thing?

By 2D

September 27, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this

Susie… You’re so right about a 3rd or 4th party. Heck, I’d be happy if it were easier for independents to get into the race. I would be thinking baby steps.

For example, take the 4th district. Could a smart, energetic independent wage a campaign against Hank Johnson? Why the heck not? Unfortunately, the timelines and restrictions are such that it would be very difficult to come up with the necessary signatures and the $$$ to even register as a candidate. Yes, an individual must pay a fee to enter the race (I think 2% of their annual salary). How ridiculous is that?

Personally, I think that ($$$) is why we will never see a viable 3rd or 4th party. The political machine has been coopted by the two largest (and wealthiest) parties and they crafted the rules to keep other contenders out. If there are no contenders, then they stay in power. That is why I am pulling for Lieberman. He may look and feel like a Democrat, but he is truly one who votes his beliefs, even if it alienates his “party”. You go Joe!

By The72John

September 27, 2006 03:44 PM | Link to this

Lozen… If everyone became true gnostics, wouldn’t the human race cease to exist?

The very nature of gnosticism would prevent everyone, or even most people, from becoming true gnostics. Their core beliefs revolved around the belief that only a chosen few could hold the secret knowledge (gnosis, even) that heralded their apotheosis.

By lozen

September 27, 2006 03:46 PM | Link to this

2D, just kidding. That has always been the problem with cults that took the abstinence road. Was it the Shakers here in the U.S. that lived communally, made beautiful furniture, and died out because they practiced celibacy? Never forget the words of B.F. Skinner: “A hen is only an egg’s way of making another egg.”

By The72John

September 27, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this

• He may look and feel like a Democrat, but he is truly one who votes his beliefs, even if it alienates his “party”. You go Joe!*

Bullocks. Lieberman didn’t loose because he alienated his party, he lost because he forgot that the role of a Senator is to represent his constituents. Lieberman deviated from positions that his constituents supported and they did what people are supposed to do in a Democracy - they voted for someone else.

All of the disingenuous disapproval dripping from the mouths of sanctimonious right-wingers like Jim Wooten who claim that Liberman’s election proves that the Democrats don’t get it is laughable. If anyone “doesn’t get it”, it’s the people who don’t seem to understand that politicians aren’t elected to office so they can represent themselves.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 03:56 PM | Link to this

Although I thank you for compliment I can’t take credit for that wonderfully astute statement. I believe it was NetBanker who first made the statement; however it is one of the more profound statements made on the blog today.

I usually vote for the person and not for the party — but as Mara stated earlier, its getting harder and harder to separate the two these days. If a candidate doesn’t stick to party dogma they’re ostracized and abandoned — it’s crazy and sickening. Basically to me it seems that politics in America is based on the needs of the political party — not the people. Sorta makes the statement “We The People Of The United States….” seem like just a dream or a terrible, terrible joke.

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 03:59 PM | Link to this

Yes, Shakers went out because their death rate was greater than their conversion rate. No sex = no offspring. simple biology really. LOL

but they made nice round barns though.

By lozen

September 27, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this

Here’s another recent quote that is so appropos for some of the posters on this blog like Randy’s last attempt at a sentence for the blog for example- (Iozen, Someone once said “every statement”. Christianity holds up under logical scrutiny.)

“It is easy to be certain. One has only to be sufficiently vague.” C.S. Peirce

By 2D

September 27, 2006 04:05 PM | Link to this

John… Sorry John, I gotta disagree with you.

First of all, not to split hairs, but to the best of my knowledge we are a Republic.

Second, also not to split hairs, he was not elected as the Democratic nominee, because he did not represent a majority of the voters who turned out in the primary election (definitely not the entire Connecticut population).

Third, with him running as an independent, we will see if the majority of the people in Connecticut (not just the primary voters of the Democratic party) determine he represents them better than the other candidates.

Fourth, I guess you and I differ on how the elected person should make decisions and “represent” their constitents. I think the elected official should do what they think is right, even if it means going against the overwhelming majority of their constituents.

For example, should the Reps and Sens from the South in the 60s continued to oppose Civil Rights Laws even though their constituents would want them to?

By The72John

September 27, 2006 04:13 PM | Link to this

Yes, Shakers went out because their death rate was greater than their conversion rate. No sex = no offspring. simple biology really. LOL

Hey, they aren’t dead. According to Wikkipedia there are four of them.

I usually vote for the person and not for the party — but as Mara stated earlier, its getting harder and harder to separate the two these days. If a candidate doesn’t stick to party dogma they’re ostracized and abandoned — it’s crazy and sickening. Basically to me it seems that politics in America is based on the needs of the political party — not the people. Sorta makes the statement “We The People Of The United States….” seem like just a dream or a terrible, terrible joke.

I don’t feel that I have the luxury to vote for the person and not the party. Though I have a feeling Net will disagree with me, I see every Republican that takes office as one most step towards anti-gay laws and amendments being passed. While that is not even remotely the end-all and be-all of my existence, I find it very hard to put concerns about my tax rate over concerns that someone is trying to legislate away my right to exist.

By The72John

September 27, 2006 04:21 PM | Link to this

2D, I’m confused…under what circumstances, in your mind, is it acceptable not to re-elect an elected official? If not living up to the philosophical expectations of one’s constituents is not sufficient reason, then what is?

I guess I don’t understand your view of the electoral process…it’s OK to get rid of liberals because you don’t like them, but when liberals remove someone with whom they disagree, you have a problem with that?

Well, that’s a typical right-wing response, I suppose.

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this

Hey, they aren’t dead. …..there are four of them.

Yeah. I just learned that as well. (thought the only ones supporting the villages were breeding supporters of historical sites).

that all reminds me there was one sect that came out of the Oneida Revivalism of western NewYork state that were free-love advocates, very open sexually and generally unmarried.(this about 1840) Don’t remember their name right now.

By The72John

September 27, 2006 04:29 PM | Link to this

Fourth, I guess you and I differ on how the elected person should make decisions and “represent” their constitents. I think the elected official should do what they think is right, even if it means going against the overwhelming majority of their constituents.

For example, should the Reps and Sens from the South in the 60s continued to oppose Civil Rights Laws even though their constituents would want them to?

Absolutely, people should vote their conscience. They should just realize that if that vote goes against the will of the people by virtue of whom they have the ability to vote, they run the risk of losing that right.

That’s why we have re-elections…still hazy on how you think the system should work. Hey, why don’t we just appoint EVERYONE for life. That would be awesome.

By SusieHomeMaker

September 27, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this

Yes, Shakers went out because their death rate was greater than their conversion rate. No sex = no offspring. simple biology really.

I’ve always wondered how ANYONE could do that!! It seems the needs of their bodies would take over eventually. I mean it’s basic biology — once you start to mature, certain urges, (like the urge to reproduce), takes control of you.

I don’t feel that I have the luxury to vote for the person and not the party.

I have tried REAL HARD to separate the man from the dogma; but it’s getting harder and harder to tell these days what is what. I like the heck out of John McCain — he’s tough and he generally speaks the truth. However, I don’t like some of his parties dogma and what they stand for. When McCain ran for President in 2000 his own party sabotaged him. They released pictures of his family, (wife & kid), and said he had a black child, (his child is actually an adopted child from Malaysia with dark skin), but that blatant attack left a bad taste in my mouth for years afterwards.

And then the unprecedented “Marriage Wars” and the Terri Schiavo hoopla was utterly ridiculous!! Instead of talking about security and the war and jobs and standard of living and the rising costs of living — they dug up Gay Marriage and made it a political stance!! Watching that crap on TV I thought I was looking at Larry, Curly and Moe instead of the President and his cabinet.

By The72John

September 27, 2006 04:50 PM | Link to this

I like the heck out of John McCain — he’s tough and he generally speaks the truth.

I liked McCain, a lot. And then he started sucking up to the religious Right. Now he can go back into the tiger cage as far as I’m concerned.

Ok. I don’t mean that last part.

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 04:54 PM | Link to this

I hope Lieberman gets his butt kicked, but what he probably has done is caused a GOP Senator from CT.

I have probably already posted this, but did you hear where he announced his bid for president, way back?

The same place he spent most of high school, locked inside his locker. ahahahahahahahah(thanks to SNL for that)

By Chilao

September 27, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this

D. Oneida Colony founded in NY in 1848; more radical 1. Practices free love (“complex marriage”), birth control, and eugenic selection of parents to produce superior offspring. a. Believed in corporate marriage of all members to each other. b. Communal care of children. c. Equality of genders 2. Leader fled to Canada to escape prosecution for adultery. 3. Colony flourished for over 30 years largely due to its craftsmen making superior steel traps and Oneida Community (silver) plate. 4. In 1879-80, group embraced monogamy and abandoned communism.

By 2D

September 28, 2006 08:22 AM | Link to this

John… Why do you continually want to put me and everyone else in a box??? Does that make it easier for you to bash all you don’t like with one fell swoop???

However, I will answer your question and will use Connecticut as the example since this is where the discussion started…

If the people of Connecticut don’t want Joe Lieberman to be their Senator, then they can elect a different person in the general election.

If the Democratic party doesn’t want Joe Lieberman to represent their party in the general election, then they should not nominate him (which is what happened).

However, Joe Lieberman should not be precluded from running in the general election simply because he didn’t with the Democratic nomination. If he wants to run as an Independent, he should be able to move forward and do so. Doing that provides the people of Connecticut more options in the general election. That would actually provide a better barometer of the will of the people Connecticut. That is a good thing, isn’t it?

I guess my problem lies in the fact that we only ever get two candidates. Those candidates are chosen in primary elections that are generally driven by the more extreme edges of the party. That leads us to a choice where in many cases, neither poses a good choice to the vast majority of people in the middle. That leaves us making the “lesser of two evils” selection. I would prefer to have more people in the general election and give the people more of an option.

By Chilao

September 28, 2006 09:26 AM | Link to this

I was wrong about CT stats, (stating if Lieberman runs it is a GOP win), since the split right now is ballpark(loosely, this being 5-6 weeks to election) 45/45 Lamont/Lieberman. Seems nobody(6 percent) supports the GOP candidate for Senate.

so it will be Lamont or Lieberman.

By Brian Curtis

September 28, 2006 09:32 AM | Link to this

2D: You’re correct, to a point. But the added factor that the Democratic leadership is throwing their support behind this “independent”—something they never do normally, to preserve their two-party dominance—at the expense of the nominal Democrat, reveals something else.

Specifically, it points to a ‘working’ of the already-rigged system to drive out the people’s choice for senator (the Democratic voters of Connecticut, anyway) and prop up one the local, state-level Democrats have already rejected. It shows that the Democratic party leadership has no intention of letting something like local, state- and local actions of their party’s actual voters interfere with their agenda.

This arrangement smells pretty bad, don’t you think?

By DIANA HINTON

September 28, 2006 09:42 AM | Link to this

ITS’ TIME FOR ATLANTA AND THE METRO AREAS TO WAKE UP, WATCH AND PRAY, ABOUT THE OVERALL CRIME IN OUR CITY. LET’S WATCH OUT FOR EACH OTHER AT ALL TIMES AND LET THE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO COMMIT CRIMES KNOW THAT WE ARE WATCHING OUR NEIGHBORHOODS DAY AND NIGHT. WATCH AND PRAY!WATCH AND PRAY! I’M SADDEN BY ALL THE CRIME AND ESPECIALLY CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN. I WAS A VICTIM OF A MAN IN MY HOUSE IN THE WEE HOURS OF THE MORNING AND WAS ABLE TO FIGHT HIM OFF.IT WAS A HORRIBLE ORDEAL TO GO THROUGH.HE WAS NEVER CAPTURED. HOODLUMS! WE PUT YOU ON WARNING , WE ARE WATCHING AND PRAYING. LETS’DEVELOP NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH ALL OVER THE CITY TO SEND A MESSAGE TO CRIMINALS.

By What the heck

September 28, 2006 10:28 AM | Link to this

Diana, Why are you shouting at us?

By Mara

September 28, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this

DIANA - YOU REALLY DON’T NEED TO SCREAM AT US. We hear you without all the caps. Sorry about your ordeal, but how the heck is praying going to deter criminals? “Faith based” security doesn’t work. The watching I can understand. But the praying? It might make you feel better, but it won’t make you any safer. How about “Watch and Record” instead of “Watch and Pray”?

2D - Those candidates are chosen in primary elections that are generally driven by the more extreme edges of the party

and why is that? It’s because the moderates of the party (either party) don’t get off their lazy butts to go down and vote in the primaries. If the elections are driven by the partisan fringe (and I agree, they usually are) then the greater fault lies with the apathetic voter who can’t be bothered to educate themselves about their choices or go to the polls.

By The72John

September 28, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

John… Why do you continually want to put me and everyone else in a box??? Does that make it easier for you to bash all you don’t like with one fell swoop???

As I’ve said before, 2D, when the day comes that you don’t sound like every other cookie-cutter right-winger out there, I’ll stop treating you like one. I’m not holding my breath.

However, Joe Lieberman should not be precluded from running in the general election simply because he didn’t with the Democratic nomination. If he wants to run as an Independent, he should be able to move forward and do so.

I believe that if he gets enough signatures he can…what’s your complaint?

However, you really HAVEN’T answered my question. Under what circumstances do you deem it acceptable for a constituency NOT to retain someone as its representative?

By Chilao

September 28, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this

I live in the rural south, we do “Watch and Shoot” LOL

Lieberman is running as the Connecticut For Lieberman candidate, apparently a party of one right now.

By Chilao

September 28, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this

And we practice on little bunnies. After last week, I no longer felt generous to the cottontails who clean up the old bird seed. Haven’t gotten out the 22 rifle yet, but… LMAO

By Chilao

September 28, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this

And I hope you know I am joking, I have no interest in shooting little bunnies. or raccoons, or opossums or birds.

By The72John

September 28, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this

And I hope you know I am joking, I have no interest in shooting little bunnies. or raccoons, or opossums or birds.

Bunnies and birds taste good…

By 2D

September 28, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

BC… I would absolutely agree. I think the arrangement does smell pretty bad.

Mara… Unfortunately, you are correct. The moderates of the party do not get out to vote in the primary elections, although I would not necessarily call them lazy. I believe making voting days national holidays would turn out many more voters. Maybe I’m wrong, but it’s a strong feeling.

John… I did answer your question. A constituency can vote their representative out when that reps term has expired if they do not believe he/she is the right person to represent them.

So, if the people of Connecticut do not want Joe Lieberman as their Senator, they can vote him out and they’ll now get that chance in November with him running as an Independent. If he hadn’t, then a small number of Democrats would have voted him out.

Also… I would say that if get any support from BC on any issue, you can’t call me a cookie-cutter right-winger.

By Mara

September 28, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this

2D - I’ve long advocated either making election day a federal holiday or moving it to a week-end. I would also say that making it a 2-day event would probably help also. Considering the sheer number of elegible voters, it just seems silly to me that we only have 1 day (and not even a full 24 hour day either) to try and cycle all those voters through the polls. And then we have the voting glitches that now seem to haunt every election. There’d be less chance of disenfranchisement with a 2-day voting period. Problems could be addressed before the polls closed.

I don’t recall if this would require a Constitutional amendment or if it could just be legislated.

By The72John

September 28, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

Don’t think my last response made it through - crashed to server.

2D - you seem to be suggesting that once a candidate has been elected by a particular party, that party should be required to support his re-election even if the candidate in question has spent his term undermining the basic positions of the party.

I suppose you fully supported the right of all those “democratic” Georgia senators a few years ago to change parties as soon as they were elected, hmm?

By 2D

September 28, 2006 12:31 PM | Link to this

John… Which Senators ar you referring to? I can’t remeber that happening as long as I have been a voter here in Georgia.

Also…

I do not like folks switching parties after they have been elected. I think if they want to do that there should be a special election to take a new referrendum on the candidate.

Mara… Not sure how feel about two days for voting (I could be convinced). However, I am all for the national holiday / weekend idea. I would also like to see something that restricts the “exiting polling” being broadcast and declaring probable winners, especially at noon on voting day. Not sure how it would be done, but I feel like those reports may discourage people from voting, especially in a state like FL where voting districts span two time zones.

By Renee

September 28, 2006 12:32 PM | Link to this

LOL @ faith based security. Too funny..

By Monica

September 28, 2006 12:50 PM | Link to this

Hello all! JPT, with some comments…

2D, John might be referring to Zell Miller, who entered as a democrat (at least he was a democratic governor), but is/was a democrat in name only. Am I way off on this one John? Of course, as a teacher I loved Zell…

Mara, I agree with the holiday/voting day. What a message to send to Americans - that the government does actually want them to vote!

By The72John

September 28, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this

John… Which Senators ar you referring to? I can’t remeber that happening as long as I have been a voter here in Georgia.

Then you must have moved here after 2002.

By The72John

September 28, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this

2D, John might be referring to Zell Miller, who entered as a democrat (at least he was a democratic governor), but is/was a democrat in name only. Am I way off on this one John? Of course, as a teacher I loved Zell…

No, but Zell is more of a traitor than Lieberman ever was. I don’t care what differences you have with your party - if you appear as a speaker for the OTHER party’s convention, you deserve to be summarily dismissed from the party and sued for reimbursment of all party funds spent on you.

There were at least two “Democrat” Georgia senators elected to the state legislature in 2002 who switched to the Republican party days after the election. The defection caused the balance to tip in Republican favor. One can only assume that the wretches were swayed by promises of power and influence by the black-hearted Republican slime currently mucking up the state.

By Mara

September 28, 2006 01:18 PM | Link to this

Rooney Bowen, Jack Hill, Dan Cheeks, and Dan Lee…just off the top of my head.

Hey Renee! LOL! We might as well ALL start getting used to a “faith-based” government cuz we already have faith-based Health services (pray you don’t get sick), faith-based Retirement programs (pray you retire before they recind your pension and/or S/S) and faith-based Emergency preparedness…you can guess that’n :^)

Hi Monica!

By 2D

September 28, 2006 01:20 PM | Link to this

John… Sorry, but I think I and the rest of the BLOG (at least someone else) misunderstood that you were referring to members of the state Senate and not GA’s Senators to the federal government.

Funny, though, that you still didn’t answer the question, choosing rather to make backhanded comment about when I moved here. Who were these folks? Do you even know their names or did you simply hear about their “about face”?

By The72John

September 28, 2006 01:35 PM | Link to this

John… Sorry, but I think I and the rest of the BLOG (at least someone else) misunderstood that you were referring to members of the state Senate and not GA’s Senators to the federal government.

Hmm…I don’t think it mattered whether I was talking about state senators or federal, now did it? The principle is the same either way.

Funny, though, that you still didn’t answer the question, choosing rather to make backhanded comment about when I moved here. Who were these folks? Do you even know their names or did you simply hear about their “about face”?

Oh, now this is a little bit of a backhanded comment too, isn’t it? I don’t remember the names of the senators, no, but I didn’t “simply hear about their ‘about face’”, unless you call keeping up with the news through various sources “simply hearing”. My innability to remember their names - names not ever having been a strong point of mine - does not remotely detract from the point.

No matter how much you would like it to.

By lozen

September 28, 2006 01:41 PM | Link to this

Mara, faith based health services, retirement programs and emergency preparedness is so right! Renee I laughted at that one too. What a message to send to Americans - that the government does actually want them to vote! How true, Monica.

By Jack

September 28, 2006 01:56 PM | Link to this

Hello All. Too busy today to blog but a couple of comments. John72, I am disappointed with you letting that dog run you off the blog. You CAN hold your own against him. Net, good to see you are still alive and well. Chilao, try the bunnies slow roasted over an open flame & pour beer on it half way through cooking for that good crispness. Kim, Lozen, Mara, Susie, Renee’, Whiley and Julia, Love ya! :) See ya later.

By Mara

September 28, 2006 02:02 PM | Link to this

2D - State legislators who switch parties once elected are bad enough but when the Federal legislators do so it’s infinitly worse, since they end up “representing” a greater number of voters. I agree with John that those who do such a thing should be required to reimburse their original party for whatever aid they received. I would even go so far as to require them to mail every single campaign donor and volunteer an offer of refund for their donation and for the volunteers, a fair reimbursment for their time and trouble. I’ve always felt that politicians who switch parties are committing fraud against the voters.

By Renee

September 28, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this

No, but Zell is more of a traitor than Lieberman ever was. I don’t care what differences you have with your party - if you appear as a speaker for the OTHER party’s convention, you deserve to be summarily dismissed from the party and sued for reimbursment of all party funds spent on you.

John, you couldn’t have made a truer statement!!!

By Chilao

September 28, 2006 02:06 PM | Link to this

I am glad I was joking about the bunnies. I would really hate to have to do a ClaremontBoy and state “Look what you made me do, I’m starting to shoot bunnies now”. Knew that rifle was well hidden for a reason. LOL

By Renee

September 28, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this

John72, I am disappointed with you letting that dog run you off the blog. You CAN hold your own against him.

Jack, I agree. I just think John was too mature to engage in the “debate” (and I use that words loosely).

By Mara

September 28, 2006 02:13 PM | Link to this

this was tooooo funny not to share -

The leftist presidential front-runner in Ecuador said the devil should feel insulted by comparisons to President Bush.

Rafael Correa, speaking to Channel 8 television, referred to a U.N. speech last week by his friend, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who caused an uproar in the United States by calling Bush “the devil.”

“Calling Bush the devil is offending the devil,” Correa said. He said that “the devil is evil, but intelligent.”

He later said the statement was a personal opinion.

By Renee

September 28, 2006 02:20 PM | Link to this

those ARE funny Mara

By The72John

September 28, 2006 03:06 PM | Link to this

Thanks for the votes of support. I realized the best way to get rid of a troll (still keeping fingers crossed - no news is good news) is to starve it. Given my almost pathological inability to avoid confrontation, temporary retreat seemed the best course.

By Mara

September 28, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this

Keith Olbermann is my hero -

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/VideoOlbermannTracesBushAdminsPre9110928.html

great article.

anyhoooo. gotta go, catch ya all tomorrow

By lozen

September 28, 2006 03:13 PM | Link to this

Saw the piggy preacher on the news last night in trouble again for saying something like, “more people would vote for the devil than Hilary Clinton”. I was on the treadmill while it was on and didn’t get the whole story. Jerry Falwell does look like a pig though. I can hardly stand to look at his smirk.

By 2D

September 28, 2006 03:33 PM | Link to this

John… Not trying to detract from the point, especially since you and I agree that it is to switch parties after being elected.

The men in question are Jack Hill, Don Cheeks, Dan Lee and Rooney Bowen. Not sure of their locations, but they should have been called back and forced to be re-elected. I know that I, as a consituent, would be very disappointed if that happened in my district.

Also… You are correct in saying that it wouldn’t matter if the switching had been done at the Federal, State or Local level. I would be upset regardless of the level of government.

You must really despise me. Even when I basically agree with you on an issue, you find some way to distance yourself. Why is that?

By Chilao

September 28, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this

I think it was ‘the devil would not get out as many voters as Hillary would’, same idea.

I did not think John needed anybody coming to his defense, in spite of ClaremontBoy’s perception of an alledged “undeserved beating” of him.

By lozen

September 28, 2006 03:58 PM | Link to this

Yeah, Chilao that was it. Like I said I can hardly stand to see his face and I was watching it with the sound off.

By Renee

September 28, 2006 04:08 PM | Link to this

I didn’t come to his defense out of need……

By The72John

September 28, 2006 04:17 PM | Link to this

You must really despise me. Even when I basically agree with you on an issue, you find some way to distance yourself. Why is that?

I don’t despise you, but how do you expect me to respond to something like:

Funny, though, that you still didn’t answer the question, choosing rather to make backhanded comment about when I moved here. Who were these folks? Do you even know their names or did you simply hear about their “about face”?

By Chilao

September 28, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this

http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?154893

By Chilao

September 29, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this

Bob’s Story

It is important for men to remember that, as women grow older, it becomes harder for them to maintain the same quality of housekeeping as when they were younger.

When you notice this, try not to yell at them. Some are over-sensitive, and there’s nothing worse than an oversensitive woman.

My name is Bob. Let me relate how I handled the situation with my wife, Debbie. When I took “early retirement” last year, it became necessary for Debbie to get a full-time job along with her part-time job, both for extra income and for the health benefits that we needed.

Shortly after she started working, I noticed she was beginning to show her age.

I usually get home from the golf course about the same time she gets home from work. Although she knows how hungry I am, she almost always says she has to rest for half an hour or so before she starts dinner.

I don’t yell at her. instead, I tell her to take her time and just wake me when she gets dinner on the table. I generally have lunch in the Men’s Grill at the club so eating out is not reasonable. I’m ready for some home cooked grub when I hit that door.

She used to do the dishes as soon as we finished eating. But now it’s not unusual for them to sit on the table for several hours after dinner. I do what I can by diplomatically reminding her several times each evening that they won’t clean themselves. I know she really appreciates this, as it does seem to motivate her to get them done before she goes to bed.

Another symptom of aging is complaining, I think. For example she will say that it is difficult for her to find time to pay the monthly bills during her lunch hour. But, boys, we take ‘em for better or worse, so I just smile and offer encouragement. I tell her to stretch it out over two or even three days. That way she won’t have to rush so much. I also remind her that missing lunch completely now and then wouldn’t hurt her any (if you know what I mean). I like to think that is one of my strong points.

When doing simple jobs, she seems to think she needs more rest periods. She had to take a break when she was only half finished mowing the yard. I try not to make a scene. I’m a fair man. I tell her to fix herself a nice, big, cold glass of freshly squeezed lemonade and just sit for a while. And, as long as she is making one for herself, she may as well make one for me too.

I know that I probably look like a saint in the way I support Debbie. I’m not saying that showing this much consideration is easy. Many men will find it difficult. Some will find it impossible! Nobody knows better than I do how frustrating women get as they get older. However, guys, even if you just use a little more tact and less criticism of your aging wife because of this article, I will consider that writing it was well worthwhile. After all, we are put on this earth to help each other…..

Signed, Bob

EDITOR’S NOTE: Bob died suddenly on August 20th. The police report says that he was found with a Calloway extra long 50-inch Big Bertha Driver II golf club rammed up his behind, with only 2 inches of grip showing. His wife Debbie was arrested and charged with murder; however, the all-woman jury found her Not Guilty, accepting her defense that he accidentally sat down on it.

By The72John

September 29, 2006 09:58 AM | Link to this

How would you escape?

This is a brain teaser, designed to test your reasoning skills and survival instinct.

The Situation You are riding on the back of a galloping horse. To your right, there is a steep drop-off. To your left is a charging Elephant. In front of you is a fleeing giraffe. You are being chased by a lion behind you.

The Question What do you do to survive?

Answer to follow…

By Chilao

September 29, 2006 10:17 AM | Link to this

Jump on the giraffe’s back and sacrifice the horse to the lion, if you are unarmed. otherwise, just do an Indian Jones, like he did the guy with the sword in the marketplace in Cairo, (so much for swordplay)

By Monica

September 29, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this

Hey John, perchance, might I also get the feeling thatI am going around in circles? :)

By The72John

September 29, 2006 10:58 AM | Link to this

Why Monica, you just might have that feeling…

By ferrari

September 29, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this

what do you do when your huband blames everything on you and you cant make him see or admit its him too?

By yani

September 29, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this

i love my husband so much and i want to show him but sometimes he doesnt seem to care we dont live together because he goes to school somewhere else than i do but he comes every weekend to see me and now i think he thinks i am cheating which i am not doing but i just cant seem to make him see that he is what i want he is my love my only love.

By Renee

September 29, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this

Also drunk lol

By Chilao

September 29, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this

Of course if you were on the back of a well-trained barrel racing/cutting horse, just take a sharp left, play chicken with the elephant, veer away at the last minute and let the elephant hit the lion, and both elephant and lion go over the cliff.

By Chilao

September 29, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this

oh LMAO,

get off the booze AND the merry-go-round.

so much for adventure..LOL

By Chilao

September 29, 2006 11:17 AM | Link to this

interesting tidbit: American merry-go-rounds move COUNTER-clockwise and Brit ones move clock-wise.

By Chilao

September 29, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this

in Santa Monica, CA, Ocean Blvd underpass, there is a great wall painting, about 2 blocks long, of the ponies on the pier merry-go-round, becoming free from the merry-go-round and cavorting on the beach.

By The72John

September 29, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this

get off the booze AND the merry-go-round

ding ding ding!

By Chilao

September 29, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this

here’s how I had gotten that one, about a month ago in an email.

Subject: a quiz

Here’s a Quiz for you

You are driving in a car at a constant speed. On your right side is a valley and on your left side is a fire engine traveling at the same speed as you. In front of you is a galloping pig which is the same size as your car and you cannot overtake it. Behind you is a helicopter flying at ground level. Both the giant pig and the helicopter are also traveling at the same speed as you. What must you do to safely get out of this highly dangerous situation?

Scroll down for answer: (I’ll spare you the space): A: Get your drunk butt off the merry-go-round.

when I first started reading it, I started thinking Algebra. LOL

By Monica

September 29, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this

Ghandi… was a revered man in India. As was custom, he walked many miles barefoot, which caused him to have severe callouses on his feet. In his older years, he became very frail and fragile. And, unbeknownst to many, he suffered from extremely bad breath. However, he was always regarded as a wonderful yet mystical man. All of that makes him a…

super-calloused fragile mystic vexed by halitosis.

By lozen

September 29, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this

Ferrari and Yani, stop thinking his problem is your problem! Of course they want you to believe it’s something you are responsible for but it isn’t.
Chilao, loved Bob’s Story - had to send it to several ppl.

72John: Get off the merry-go-round….

By Chilao

September 29, 2006 01:57 PM | Link to this

Three Little Pigs went out to dinner one night. The waiter came and took their drink order.

“I would like a Sprite,” said the first little piggy. “I would like a Coke,” said the second little piggy. “I want beer, lots and lots of beer,” said the third little piggy. The drinks were brought out and the waiter took their orders for dinner.

“I want a nice big steak,” said the first piggy. “I would like the salad plate,” said the second piggy. “I want beer, lots and lots of beer,” said the third little piggy.

The meals were brought out and a while later the waiter approached the table and asked if the piggies would like any dessert.

“I want a banana split,” said the first piggy. “I want a root beer float,” said the second piggy. “I want beer, lots and lots of beer,” exclaimed the third little piggy.

“Pardon me for asking,” said the waiter to the third little piggy,”

But why have you only ordered beer all evening?

The third piggy says - “Well, somebody has to go ‘Wee, wee, wee, all the way home!

By Monica

September 29, 2006 02:11 PM | Link to this

Okay, I know it’s joke day, but I need help! I have to leave for Warner Robins in about two hours, and I see on the front page of ajc.com that I-75 south is closed right now in Bibb County because a plane made an emergency landing there! Does anyone know of another way to get to Warner Robins???

By Jack

September 29, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this

Monica. It should be opened up by the time you get down there.

By chuck

September 29, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this

Monica, One way to go is the following:

Take I-75 south to Macon, Georgia

Go east on I-16 to U.S. Highway 23 South

Continue South on 23 until you get to State Highway 96

Take Highway 96 West to U.S. Highway 129

Take 129 North to Warner Robins.

If you want to avoid I-75 all together then take Highway 19/41 South through Griffin. When it splits, take highway 41 south. Eventually, 41 will go off toward the east, but continue on 341 south. Take 49 east back over to I-75 and follow the signs to Warner Robbins.

Good luck.

By Jack

September 29, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this

Yani. You and Hubby should really live together.

By Monica

September 29, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this

Hope so!! Thanks, Jack. I hope y’all have a great weekend!! Remember to get off the merry-go-round (and the booze) in time for work Monday. :)

By lozen

September 29, 2006 03:11 PM | Link to this

Yani, I disagree with Jack. There is no reason in the world to think you and your husband (I hate the word hubby) should live together. Many married couples do not live together because they are in school at different places or get jobs in different places.

By The72John

September 29, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this

I have a feeling that yani and ferrari are more spam bots that, like Tramadol, have had their HTML links stripped from their handles by the filters.

Both posts fit the pattern that bots use.

By Chilao

September 29, 2006 04:50 PM | Link to this

Lozen - yeah, I figured you would like the BOB one.

and that reminds me of another one: but what do you call a guy in the ocean with no arms and no legs?

and every Robert/Bob I have ever known and told that joke to ALREADY knew it. LOL

By Chilao

September 29, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this

I think those yani/ferrari posters meant to get one of the relationship blogs ANYWAY…LOL

By lozen

September 29, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this

Okay, this week is over! Everybody have a great weekend. Yani and Ferrari are spam bots? What is this world coming to? Bessas and brazas!

By NetBanker

September 29, 2006 04:59 PM | Link to this

Happy Weekend Kids! I never thought it was really possible to drown in work, but it seems to be happening today! Just wanted to drop in to wish everyone well and hope that you each have a fun adventure this weekend.

“There is an adventure in every day. Sometimes it’s not what you expect and sometimes you need to hunt for it, but there’s always one there.” - NetBanker’s Granny