TypicalFish

Creepier than Hillary? I think not... That woman gives me the heebie-jeebies... On a somewhat related note; am I the ONLY Democrat that feels like we are in some kind of denial as far as the people we choose to "worship" as our leaders? They all seem like very polarizing, controversial individuals; with histories that can easily be questioned. A few examples: Bill Clinton (whose presidency I was a fan of, though I feel he did more damage to the legacy of the party than any one man in it's history); let's be honest; HE DID GET A BLOWJOB FROM AN INTERN IN THE OVAL OFFICE AND LIED ABOUT IT UNDER OATH. Hillary Clinton (who almost made me laugh with her "I know alot about health care" remark; you had the ear of the most powerful man on the planet for eight years, and accomplished nothing; I hardly see you as an "expert"); related to the above; A WOMAN WHO CONSIDERS STANDING BY HER ADULTEROUS HUSBAND TO BE SOME TWISTED SHOW OF HER "INNER STRENGTH". That, and she quite frankly creeps alot of people out with her Stepford-esque manner. Al Sharpton (I did enjoy his speech, I think his comment that the right to vote for blacks is sacred because it was earned in blood was very moving); who has yet to acknowledge the fact that he RUINED THE CAREERS AND LIVES OF INNOCENT MEN IN HIS RELENTLESS PURSUIT OF A TRUMPED UP RACE CHARGE FOR POLITICAL GAIN. Finally, Ted Kennedy, the so-called "King of The Convention" (who, quite honestly, looked and sounded a little loaded during his speech); a man who afer a drunk driving accident LEFT A YOUNG WOMAN TO DROWN IN ORDER TO SAVE HIS OWN SKIN. What amazes me was that he would ever consider trying to be elected president with that in his past. Now, I am not saying that the Republicans are a bunch of boy scouts, but can't the Democratic party pick some new "heroes" who don't have MAJOR issues that we have to turn a blind eye to? I am tired of having to look at them in a positive light "in spite of"... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Yeah, that made me laugh out loud, as well... (That, and the "And Dick Cheney, too!" at the end) "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

I don't need one because my d&%k is big enough alrea... Oh, wrong thread... Don't have an aneurysm, Jeffrey... From a (personal) philosophical standpoint, I think gun control, strenuously enacted from the beginning before they were widely available and present in our everyday society, would have been a good thing. Banned for EVERYONE. Period. (And save me the "hobby" bit, there is plenty of stuff that would be fun to have that you can't buy.) That didn't happen, though. Things being what they are, I believe it is the right of every American to be as well protected (armed) as whoever may try to harm them or their family, etc. And on a more "procedural" note, (and this is something I have been giving alot of thought to, especially in the context of some of the gun threads posted here), right or wrong, it IS in the second ammendment, and until someone gets off their ass and makes a change to our contry's constitution, the right to own a gun is the law. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

My take on it, though probably unpopular, is “So what?” The fact of the matter is that our military has been too small for quite awhile, and, short of a draft in times of national need, there is not much that hasn’t been tried to back fill it. One of the harsh realities that the war in Iraq has brought into focus is that we are simply stretched too thin to adequately defend ourselves against multiple attacks in multiple theaters. We have ONE QUARTER of our Army tied up in the Gulf, and one of the unfortunate secrets inside the 5 rings is that that number is inadequate to occupy a small backwards nation with no effective military of its own. What happens if North Korea decides to roll into South Korea? China moves stronger into Hong Kong? Or, god forbid, all of those former republics of the USSR finally hit on how strong they could be if they were a little more closely aligned with one another? None of this has ANYTHING to do with Bush or his administration. Should any of the former scenarios come to pass, the NATO playbook calls for a HEAVY U.S. presence; where are those troops going to come from? In my infamous "one vote" view, it would be irresponsible on the part of any administration to not prepare for the worst. And as far as “debate”, the fact of the matter is that a “draft” is not an optional debatable thing by its own very nature, it’s a NECESSITY. An unfortunate one, but a necessity nonetheless. There wasn’t much debate about it during WW1, WW2, Korea, or Vietnam either. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

I agree completely; to me it sounded a bit more self-important than that, though. (And yes, the bear is STILL killing me...) "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

9/11 Families to monitor Congress Just like everyone else; I feel a sincere amount of sympathy for anyone who lost a loved one on Septemeber the 11th; but I genuinely have to ask, what qualifies them to dictate to the elected Congress of the United States how the recommendations of the 9/11 investigation are implemented? Or am I missing something (besides their inherent interest, of course)... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

EEEEEEEEEE!!! I was right with you up until now. Horrible, just horrible. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

The Stork, both for my tall lankiness and (at the time) hair that stood up... That, and I guess I resemble the character from "Animal House"... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Beware the man who's only photo of himself is him hiding his pudgy body behind his bling-mobile... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

On the conservative side, I would probably have to say Fox News; if for no other reason than alot of conservative commentators claim it as their own (even Ann Coulter will tell you it is the only non-nut channel with a distinctly conservative slant). As for liberal bias; I think there are far too many to mention. And I am a dem/lib. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Wow, now I'M lost... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

One answer: peacefuljeffrey. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Is there a circuitous way to Hell? "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

I'm still waiting for the answer to THIS question... And there was some talk of a line forming somewhere... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Not saying the original posting is good or bad; but I kind of doubt that he thought we wouldn't "get it"... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Kind of like WMD's? Oh, NO; Flame Suit ON... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

EDIT: Turns out I was wrong, it was a black '68... I remember that he had "Lamb Of God" or some such engraved in the valve covers... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

No, not really. Not much of a surprise that they gave him all of their personal possessions either. What surprises me is how much weaponry you can buy with a camaro and a rusty old fridge Yeah, but it was a SWEET Camaro... A '69 SS I believe... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Has anyone seen this film? I watched it last night, and it put me in a FOUL mood regarding my fellow man... "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

How'd they end up hanging out with John Ashcroft? You lost me. Note the "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Pretty sure those suspicions (among others) were the reasons for the search warrant. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Without debating the BATF's mindset, I am pretty sure the original intent was to serve a search warrant for the very reason that they didn't have reasonable cause to formally arrest Koresh. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

I do agree that in the end something needed to be done, but there were PLENTY of chances throughout the encounter (on both sides) to avoid the end result. Tragic, really, for both the non-combatant Davidians and peace officers alike.. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Afternoon Jack and Coke, drunk out of an extra-large pyrex measuring cup. Sitting on the balcony watching the Pacific. Vibes to everybody; life is good. "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET

Only because I am watching a documentary and it also happens to be a pet interest of mine. A moment from the documentary: As the FBI "rented" tanks roll into the compound, they have loudspeakers blaring "This is not an assault!"... What exactly DO you call it when you drive a tank through the wall of a building firing CS gas shells that explode in flames because they ignite what the sprayed particulate is suspended in? Surreal. It's like the moment in "Mars Attacks" when as the Martians are killing everyone, the electronic translator developed by the Army is still saying "We are your friends..." "I gargle no man's balls..." ussfpa on SOCNET