peacefuljeffrey

It's one thing to have an "I don't like America" attitude, and it's quite another to ASSAULT Americans -- especially those who are not the ones making the political decisions we are forced to live with. Spitting on someone, in case you didn't know, is a form of assault and battery. Once you cross that line, you can't maintain that you are morally better than the people whom you criticize. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

. . . for me to poop on!! - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Which is exactly what I'm craving to do this weekend.

One example in recent memory of left-leaning news bias: coverage of the "assault weapons ban," not limited to what it made illegal, what will become legal again if it sunsets (and I hope it does), and what the affected weapons are capable of doing. CNN ran a story that had to be corrected later (and the "correction" even hedged) that had a Florida sheriff "demonstrating" why a "banned" rifle was so much more devastating than an unbanned one. He fired the "banned" one into a cinderblock and it shattered. He fired the unbanned one into the ground. Of course, the cinderblock was unscathed. (Duh) The major news outlets continue to lie that the AWB is what is protecting us from guns that "spray bullets" and are "high powered military rifles." Do these claims fit more with a right-leaning bias or a left-leaning one? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Look, I got nothin' against eating these things, but I have to be completely honest about why I could not make this "my diet": It feels too strongly like something's missing. You could even call it an "addiction" if you like, but I MUST have something animal in my meal if it's going to feel, for me, like I really ate a meal. Think of the headaches that people get when they don't get the morning coffee that they're used to. It's kind of like that. I'm an omnivore. If I weren't meant to be, my body would not be able to digest meat. Vegan-pushers really need to stop attempting to equate obesity and health problems with eating meat. It is not due to eating meat, but to eating TOO MUCH of a VARIETY of things. A meat eater who chooses lean cuts, or who takes the skin off chicken, for example, or who just EATS MODERATE PORTIONS is not going to become obese or have clogged arteries etc. There is more at work in the making of an obese, unhealthy person than just eating meat, and it's time the vegans and vegetarians stopped with the intellectual dishonesty surrounding the causes of these problems. It's very transparent, and it actually harms the cause because their credibility falls into question. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Thanks for the list of SIDE DISHES Now what the fuck we gonna kill for the main course?!?! - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

I'm the wrong guy to try to get touch-feely with.

Oh, okay, let's pretend that the U.S. senator was being a two-faced asshole, trying to buddy up to a guy he also berates every chance he gets. THAT was the rest of the story there, and most people would probably tell such a duplicitous shitwad to fuck off, too. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

You sound like a child ... they (the Democratres) started it. When will you realize that all politicians are scum bags. I've probably said that very thing half a dozen times or more on this very forum. But that wasn't what I was asked nor what was being addressed. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

So, is this part of the petty, juvenile name calling you go on and on about in a different thread? Well, once I realized that the other side wouldn't observe a moratorium on such name-calling, I figured, "Why unilaterally leave my own expressive ability at a disadvantage?" - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

No, but it has moved from a certain anit-american sentiment to "hate". Lance Armstrong was spat on in the time trail. That would never have happened a few years ago! So the answer is that the U.S. should and must do everything it can, change itself in whatever ways necessary, to make itself unhatable? Because from where I stand, I think that it is the French assholes who would spit on Armstrong who are the ones who are wrong here. Whatever America did to make itself unpopular with the French, what the fuck are they doing taking it out on someone who had nothing to do with it? Should we spit on all French tourists because their government failed to stand up to the Nazis, and caused us to have to lose our fighting men to liberate them? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

The catch with this Arab Waco question is that in this example, you're establishing the FBI/ATF claims as fact. This is just how it happened last time, but later turned out to be somewhat less than factual. So I'm not sure the answers you get will prove the point you are trying to make. I'm going to pass on this as trollbait until it's better defined. Besides, who gives a shit about the allegely aggravating factors here, like "he changed his name," or "he's been described as unstable"? These are NOT MATERIAL, but Bill uses them to inflame the situation. The allegation of a past shootout is not even material, unless that is why they're seeking to arrest the guy. Likewise, is there something criminal or aggravating by the camp being "composed of his followers"? What, this is not allowed? Shit, I'VE "bought chemicals that can be used to make weapons"! I probably have a bunch of them in my house right now that could make a pretty good boom! (The thing is, I don't even know which combinations to use or how to make them!) One good one that I typically have 10 to 15 gallons of on hand at any given time ... is GASOLINE. "Ooooooh. Look out -- I'm a bad dude!" This whole question was troll-bait ifever there was troll bait. If you want to discuss the rationale for raiding the Branch Davidians, why the hell can't you just raise the specifics of THAT example? Answer: you thought you'd trap us into contradicting ourselves. I can't even say, "Nice try." - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Aren't you putting the cart before the horse, in this your puerile, transparent allegory for the Waco raid? You ARE being a troll, here, in that you're trying to bait those of us right-wing-wackos who condemn the Waco raid into supporting the same thing when the subject is an Islamic extremist. You don't give us much credit, Bill, and I find it very insulting that you seem to think you're so intellectually superior that you can essentially toy with us like this. It's intellectually dishonest of you. I picture you sitting there plotting, saying, "Wait til I turn this around on them and tell them that they just supported the raid on the Branch Davidians! Heeheeheehohoho!" You are putting the cart before the horse because you are not examining why the raid became necessitated in the first place. If this Islamic bad guy could be picked up in town in an uneventful arrest, the rest of the shit would likely never hit the fan. The Feds, in this case (as in Waco) baited the whole scenario into transpiring. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Oh, yeah, I had forgotten -- France's anti-American sentiment BEGAN when some idiots started objecting to the term "French fries." - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Did you watch those videos?! Don't pretend to me that those people were bashing chickens with sticks, or throwing cinderblocks at the heads of pigs, because "business" requires them to do so. Those are sick individuals who glory in torture and hurting and killing. So I put to you AGAIN: why would closing factory farms eliminate the problem they pose to society? You might as well claim that demolishing a crack house will solve the crack addict problem. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Exactly. Thank you. Ever wonder why these people ignore things like this when they conveniently don't support their hyperbole? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Um, what about the votes that went to other candidates in other parties? You said, "The amount by which the greater number of votes cast, as in an election, exceeds the total number of remaining votes." The total number of remaining votes would include the votes cast for Bush and any other candidate. Again, you and others are confusing "majority" with "plurality." Most presidents do not win the presidency with anything like more than 50% of all votes cast. If you think they do, please post which presidents have. I am not aware of any but can't say that none ever have, either. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

We have far too many liberal activist judges letting these criminals off with ridiculously low sentences to be able to say this was an untainted experiment at best. What's your argument: do nothing to the psychotic torturers, but take away the farm industry so there are no farm animals for them to torture? Where will the torturers end up? Will their tendency to be psychotic just go away then? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Then they should abandon the asshole-ish parts of what they do and say, if they want to be taken seriously. If they stopped with this idiotic pretense that animals should matter more to people than people do, they'd attract more support. If they stopped with the terror tactics, stopped supporting terrorists who kill humans and destroy property, stopped with the abhorrent in-your-face-insulting ad campaigns (ridiculing Mayor Giuliani for his prostate cancer comes to mind, those heartless FUCKS), then maybe they'd get some respect. As it stands, they may be right about mistreatment of farm animals, but they are a far cry from warranting any respect. And a prerequisite I have for supporting someone is I must have reason to respect them first. Since you admit that they are aiming for the eventual total NON-USE OF ANIMALS, which I totally disagree with, why would you think I should support them? That's like saying that I should support a gun control group whose eventual goal is total banning of gun ownership, just because this week they're only trying to pass a gun lock proposal. It'd be an idiot to give help "only up to this point" to a group that plans to go well beyond that point once they reach it using my help. Don't you see that? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

That was a pretty vehement "forgetting." He posted that days ago, if I recall. If you were so ardently awaiting his response, as you in this thread indicate, how the hell did you miss it? Nice to offer a pseudo-apology (the word "apologize" does not appear) -- sort of like printing a big lie in a newspaper article read by hundreds of thousands, and then printing your retraction in a 1x1 box that maybe fifty people will even see. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

You might as well HOPE he does a complete 180-degree turn regarding gun rights, because so far in his legislative record he has been 100% anti-gun. What's worse is now this inane posturing like he's some sort of friend of gun owners; like we'll somehow forget all the anti-gun nonsense he's voted in favor of in the past. (And he's pulling the old trick of trying to distance hunters from gun owners. "I'm a hunter like you, and 'we' don't need 'assault weapons' to hunt ducks! Forsake your brethren! We're not coming for your duck gun! (Yet!)" Lying sack of shit. That's my reason for NOT voting for him. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Dude, you are gonna make their brains overheat if you keep pointing out the fallacies in their arguments. Anyone who owns private property or is the proprietor of a venue has discretion to ask people to leave for whatever reason he chooses. If they don't leave when they are told to do so, they are, in the eyes of the law, trespassing. That's just the way it is. - They were protesters, just as if they held a sign. Should the organizers not be allowed to restrict the location of protesters, or should protesters be allowed to take over an event if they have the numbers. -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Oh, fine, quibble over details like WHO was responsible for a decision! Why can't you just be civil and let the Democrats here carry on as though this was something Bush himself ordered? You big meanie! - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Just like the BATFE, the IRS, and the FDA, the unelected bureaucrats of the FCC are an unchecked power running amok in this country. They need to be cut off at the knees, their power GREATLY rescinded. You won't get any argument out of ME that they're right to engage in the censorship they've been doing. But at the same time, there are people out there who broadcast quite irresponsibly, as far as subject matter and content being obscene. If they didn't run rampant with their in-your-face exercise of their first amendment rights, people wouldn't spring out of the woodwork to clamor for censoring them. I'm talking about the Howard Sterns of the broadcast world who think that just because they CAN say some asinine thing, they MUST, or they're "not free." Self-restraint is DEAD. It needs to be REVIVED, and there will be less call for censorship. What, Howard Stern can't entertain his moron fans without resorting to disgusting shit disguised as "entertainment"? - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

Last I heard, the dead still vote in Chicago. Never heard of than happening in England, France, Spain... LOL! Who runs Chicago, and has for decades? DEMOCRATS Maybe it's the DEMOCRATIC PARTY you think the U.N. should monitor! Why did you have to surreptitiously switch from talking about national presidential elections to local Chicago elections, anyway. Did you think we're all just too thick to notice your deception? Uh uh. You don't live in the U.K. and read U.K. papers, do you? So how do you know that just because you're not aware of electoral shenanigans in the U.K. that that means there never are any? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Don'tcha know? You use it as though it's irrefutable proof sometimes. - -Jeffrey "With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"