sundevil777

You have more self restraint than I would. I think I would have tried to field goal kick the dogs head/body, pushed my thumb through its eye, crushed it with my knee, etc. The last dog that tried to chase me years ago when I was jogging got a kick in the face that ended the pursuit. Did the owner of the dog claim that it had never done anything like that before? People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Those things are teflon coated! Not only do they not show skin, but you'd have a difficult time holding on to them. I would have thought that the face would still be covered. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Cull? I'd rather use the term KILL! I don't care at all if you get a clean kill, please just kill as many as you can. Leave them where they fall if you've already got your quota, but please, kill as many as you can, don't pass up any opportunity. That is why I would like them to be exterminated anywhere near roads, which pretty much means everywhere in Ohio, and many other parts of the country. Of course they won't be exterminated, but a LOT more should be KILLED. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Oh, no wonder the dems in congress gave him a standing ovation. He didn't do anything illegal because of DC age of consent laws, so they had no problem with his actions. So, yep, it was indeed Studd's problem, regardless of DC's laws. If libs want to make that their position, then they can have it! People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

What does immigration have to do with it? Bans against interracial marriages were dropped a long time ago because we finally stopped condoning legal racism. The difference between my comparison of polygamy and gay marriage to a comparison with interracial marriage is that polygamy is still illegal, and is still not supported by the general public. Big difference, I think. So, it matters so much how complicated the divorce process would be? I don't think it would be so hard to define what would happen, or at least to provide a framework for the legal system. I don't see how this is such a big problem that justifies it being illegal. Polygamists don't complain too much about the legalized discrimination against them, that is for sure. There are some that do, however, but the media doesn't pay too much attention to them because the general public accepts the discrimination. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Studds wasn't that he was gay, his problem was that he had sex with a minor that was basically working for/subordinate to him. Crazy idea, I know, to actually discuss the real problem that he created for himself (although it wasn't a problem for his own political party) instead of trying to pretend it was about him being gay. Nice try at the diversion. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I think the general public is a little more enlightened than to think these two issues are one in the same. We're not talking about multiple spouses, just two people who want the same rights as thousands of others. Why should we deny them that. Don't call it marriage, hell call it whatever you want. The same reasons you state were used against interracial marriage back in the 1950's. Of course they aren't one and the same. But the issues involved are extremely similar, in my opinion. Why does multiple spouses change the comparison so much? What goes on behind closed doors/no threat to another person's marriage, all the same arguments used apply in support of polygamist rights. Gay rights advocates aren't satisfied with it being a union/same as a marriage but by another name. Many on this site that are in favor of gay marriage say they have no problem with polygamy, what about you? It is for certain though, the general public does will not support it. I generally hate analogies/comparisons, but I think in this case it is very appropriate. You say, "we're not talking about multiple spouses...", and compare the issue to interracial marriage bans, but I can say that we're not talking about skin color, we're talking about gender. Although I put all this energy into this debate, actually it is OK with me if gays can marry. I just like to point out that gays aren't the only group subject to marriage rights discrimination, and if they get it, then polygamists should also. In the end, it sucks that lawyers will be the winners when they divorce. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

At the risk of continuing thread drift on a subject already well worn, I think that if plural marriage can be denied to polygamists without causing such outrage, then why should gays expect different treatment? Gay rights advocates will say that they should be treated as totally separate issues, no reason to link them. I say bullshit, they comparison is absolutely valid. Arguments about what people do in their own home, no threat to other people's marriage, etc. all apply. Gay rights advocates want to avoid the comparison because they know darn well that the general public views the issues as identical, and that there is no way that polygamy will be supported by the general public. It matters not whether you would be OK with polygamy, there is just no chance at all that it will be legalized anytime soon. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Yes, I do think Vitter should resign. I don't think it will happen though, because so many other politicians have similar skeletons in their closet. I think it was Harry Truman that said if you can't trust a man to be faithful to his wife, then he can't be trusted at all (or something like that). I agree with that philosophy, do you? I have pretty high standards for politicians. If Craig had no other skeleton than being gay, I don't think he'd be (or should be) pushed out of office, but looking for sex in an bathroom is much more than that. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Damn, I wouldn't expect anyone to want or have to spend that much to train their dog. The golden retriever I had (don't know if she was purebred, we found her) was super gentle and very easy to train. They are one of the few breeds used for seeing eye dogs. I wouldn't expect that if they were statistically likely to bite. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

At least the democrats arent shoving 'family values' BS down our throats. Practice what you preach. Craig's record includes several votes against gay rights and he supported an amendment to the Idaho Constitution thats bars gay marriage and civil union. I mean come on. Quite right, Craig is a big hypocrite. That doesn't make all Repubs hypocrites though. Craig being forced to resign is an example of 'practice what you preach'. Dems are the party of lower expectations, although they do plenty of 'family values shoving down the throat' when they are speaking to some audiences. That kind of selective shoving is called pandering. The dem party leadership would likely not have forced him to resign because they have lower expectations for the conduct of their members. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Quite right, it is mostly due to how they're raised. The difference between mostly and completely is the problem. I cannot understand how a pit bull or other such breed with a similar reputation is so desirable that it is worth the additional risk. Some attacks cannot be blamed on poor treatment or provocation, and I think the reputation some breeds have for being dangerous is probably deserved. Pit bulls are able to kill much larger dogs, correct? They are able to do this because of their anatomy, strength, and ferocity. Why are those desirable characteristics? Yes, I've met a few that have been nice, and one in particular down the street from me that is really vicious. It is owned by the coach of my son's baseball team. a really nice guy that doesn't mistreat it. Your anecdotal stories are no more valid than those reported in the media. Have you ever heard of a pack of golden retrievers attacking some kid? I've heard of many such stories involving rottweilers and pit bulls. Perhaps all the golden retriever attacks just don't get reported, but I don't think so. I don't hate pit bulls. They have to earn my trust. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

That is a really crappy analogy, and not at all helpful to understanding the issue. Would you be willing to be exposed to what was found? It certainly isn't as effective as it was originally, but I don't think it was determined to be safe, was it? The fact remains that Fox News viewers were much more likely to know the details of what was found. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

But he didn't go to a gay bar to pick up a guy. He did it in an airport public bathroom. BIG difference, I think. There should be an expectation for that not to happen. I believe if he had been a democrat, his party leadership would not have pushed for him to leave. They are the party of lower expectations. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I disagree. Certainly some attacks are due to stupid owners, but examples of good pitbulls that wouldn't hurt anyone don't cancel out all the examples of unprovoked attacks. It seems that I usually hear the owners of those dogs claim that they can't understand it, their dogs had always been such a gentle family pet, etc. To claim that there is not difference in risk for different breeds is not realistic. There are desirable behavioral characteristics that are claimed to be different for different breeds, why should we believe it doesn't apply for undesirable characteristics? People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Are you denying my assertion or not? The question was NOT if a significant amount of WMD were found. Fox news viewers are likely to be better informed of the FACT that SOME were found. I understand that you want the question to mean something other than what it is. I think that the results of polls should never be reported without the EXACT wording of the question clearly included. So often the actual question is paraphrased/edited to cover up the intentional deception. A fine example was a poll result that was described as showing little support for SCOTUS nominee Clarence Thomas. What ws left out of the reporting of the poll result was the question, which started off by listing a bunch of allegations against him. You know perfectly well that the ancient unusable munitions that were found abandoned were NOT the WMDs that Bush, Powell, Rumsfeld and Cheney referred to in statements like "We know where they are" and "This is a mobile bioweapons lab". I agree, but that was not the question supposedly posed to the Fox News viewers. The question asked, according to what Billvon posted, was very simple. The simple, correct answer was more often known by viewers of Fox News. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Why didn't the other two jumpers get in? Were they experienced, but not at RW? People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Are you denying my assertion or not? The question was NOT if a significant amount of WMD were found. Fox news viewers are likely to be better informed of the FACT that SOME were found. I understand that you want the question to mean something other than what it is. I think that the results of polls should never be reported without the EXACT wording of the question clearly included. So often the actual question is paraphrased/edited to cover up the intentional deception. A fine example was a poll result that was described as showing little support for SCOTUS nominee Clarence Thomas. What ws left out of the reporting of the poll result was the question, which started off by listing a bunch of allegations against him. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

Whipped cream at the party certainly suggests that somebody will be licking it off of a stripper. If you don't mind him doing that, or trust that he will refrain from doing it, then you don't have a problem. Personally, I wouldn't expect a girlfriend or spouse of mine to tolerate me touching or licking a stripper, and I would definitely have a problem with a girlfriend that was doing more than looking while at a bachelorette party. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

They were found. Just not very much. One of the members of this site was present when some were found. The fact that there wasn't much and it was old doesn't change the correct answer to the question. So, the Fox viewers were in fact better informed. So sorry. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I'll say it again, it's because no one wants a car that shakes like a f-ing paint mixer. If everyone had one, then they'd wake you up with it every morning, now wouldn't they? Just say you don't like Harleys and be done with it. I don't hate Harleys, and they don't have to vibrate badly. I rode one way back when the 80 cu.in. engine and new anti-vibration engine mounts were just introduced. I was pleasantly surprised by the lack of vibration. What I do hate are outrageously loud vehicles of any kind. V-twins with nearly simultaneous ignition timing and an open exhaust are really good at making excessive noise. What I do think is stupid is the cruiser style/way-forward footpeg position. I think ape-hanger handlebars are stupid. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

The premise of this thread was not that fewer cylinders will result in more power. I know better than that, no need for an engineering lesson for me. I simply admit that enough power can be had from few cylinders, while getting the benefit of the attributes that cruiser bike enthusiasts so enjoy, and I wonder why that isn't popular for cars. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

will the same hold true if the bolded section was rephrased to show an engine tuned for work applications? Not meant to get off subject, but does the number of cylendars really have a huge effect on RPM peaks or does the cam profile claim a larger responsibility here? And to put myself into learning mode here: With the same considerations but with a demand to keep an engine spinning roughly at 600 rpms, would you rather have an 8 cylendar or a 4 cylendar to take up the task? I'll take a shot at answering your questions. An engine with large cylinders will not be able to spin as fast (rpm) because of inherent stresses due to heavier reciprocating parts and limitations on the piston linear velocity. Managing the stresses in both the piston/crank and the valve train are limitations on high rpm engines. If you would want an engine to constantly operate at a much lower rpm than maximum, then a large number of cylinders isn't much advantage, and then you would want a cam profile tuned with little overlap of exhaust closing/intake opening, and an earlier intake closing than normal. Of course if an engine is never going to be operating anywhere near its max rpm, then it is a much larger engine than needed, but you get the advantage that it will be under little stress. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

The big displacement cruiser bike engines are tuned for lots of low speed power and torque. That is exactly what is expected for a normal (not high performance) car. The biggest of the bike V-twins already have similar displacement as some small cars, so they should actually be better suited to providing good low rpm acceleration response. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am

I do realize that most car owners prefer smoothness. I'm just taking a jab at the cruiser bike owners that for some reason prefer the opposite. I can't understand it, or at least I can't understand why at least there isn't some segment of the auto industry where similar characteristics are appreciated. Why don't at least some car owners enjoy the throttle blip bark from the nearly simultaneous ignition of a big V-twin that gives them such joy on their bikes? The owners of such bikes that wake me with that bark are lucky I believe in an afterlife, or else I would be more likely to seek a violent revenge. People are sick and tired of being told that ordinary and decent people are fed up in this country with being sick and tired. I’m certainly not, and I’m sick and tired of being told that I am