DaVinci

Total BS. When we ask for Proof, you claim to not belive in it. When we show evidence that does not support your rants you ignore it and avoid answering them. Like when we are talking about the economy and you discount the DOW, NASDQ, home ownership....ect and only focus on one issue.

You have no evidence of any crime...So you could say "suspect" but not criminal party. Unless you are trying to call all Republicans the criminal party. But if you want to go down that road, I suggest you stop before you are shown that both partys have idiots in them.

Like when you claim to not believe in facts?

You keep saying that like you have some proof. Yet you never provide any. Saying it 100 times will not make it true.

I like it http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070328/ap_on_re_us/plastic_bag_ban I'd like to know who the one that voted against it was and why?

The World would turn against us if we did anything other than warn them. I don't see why they should get a pass.

No diversion...I answered your questions and asked one of my own. You asked why they didn't serve and stated that their lack of serving reflects poorly on their dad. So it is a valid question to ask if you think other childrens lack of service reflects poorly on their parents. You just don't like it since it shoots holes in your rant. Answer the questions...Or drop the stupid stance that the Bush twins lack of service reflects poorly on GWB.

I think they have had the opportunity, but since they were not in power it just didn't make great news. But I really wonder why the dems have ignored what Jefferson did? I mean he was caught on video and he was found with 90 grand in the freezer?

Not true at all. The Dems have done the SAME things they claim the repubs are doing yet they do nothing. Case in point: Patrick Kennedy crashed his car while high in DC...Yet the dems jump all over Rush. William Jefferson was caught on tape taking a 100,000 bribe. He was found with 90,000 in a freezer. Yet he was just appointed by Pelosi to a big commitee. Even the hint of a republican doing something wrong is front page news and the dems scream for them to be put to death. Yet they over look their own problems and even promote the people involved.

Yes, that they make their own choices, not doing what polls want. Not at all. Maybe he said those EXACT words and they, living in America and all, said, "No, dad we don't support the war". Or maybe, "Dad, I would rather get a job." Again I ask, did you serve in the Army? if not does that refect poorly on your dad? And I don't see Clintons nor Gores kids in Iraq either...Does that reflect poorly on Clinton and Gore?

Not a valid reason. "I don't like him!!!!" is not an impeachable offense no matter how much you don't like him. For a person who claims to know about the impeachment process and law, you seem to forget, or just choose to ignore, that he has not done anything illegal that you or anyone else can produce any evidence.

That is not an impeachable offense. Find some evidence that shows he committed a CRIME, not "I don't like what he did". Then sure, try to impeach him.

Losing your USPA would do nothing at many DZ's. I can think of major DZ's in just about every state that do not require USPA membership. Parachute Center in California for one. How about one for the pure irony factor...West Ten skydiving whoos owner is on the USPA BOD does not require you to be a USPA member I can also think of a bunch of others that claim to demand USPA memberships, but I have jumped there without for years.

Not even close to the same thing. The USPA requires that you follow the FAA's rules. That is not the same thing as making a rule that skydivers must follow.

Most pilots disagree with that statement. How is it a canopy would fall under different rules than a plane?

No, but DZ's should have seperate landing areas or not allow 270's on group loads in the main landing area.

While I agree with you about treating vets with respect, the point of this thread was to Bush bash by trying to drag his daughters lack of service into it. Like people wanted to ignore the fact we don't draft people. I answered the Bush girls are not there since we don't automaticly draft children of high ranking political types and they didn't enlist since they are rich and don't need the advantages the military can bring. BV took the low road and posted a graphic picture of a soldier that was wounded trying to compare his accident to the opportunities the military can provide. His low ball tactict was the same as asking the family of a dead skydiver if skydiving is worth it.

I said most. You seem to have some reading problems...Look at getting glasses. Also, I guess you think the Clintons didn't do a good job either. I don't see their little girl over there either. And I guess Al Gore didn't either since his kids are not in Iraq. And before you start trying to say GWB did a bad job since his girls acted stupid...Remember Al Gore III was arested for Pot http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/South/12/20/gore.son/

Lame, sad, and pathetic of you. How about we mention the 100's of thousands that used the GI Bill to get a better education? Those that got job training? No, instead you will take the low road.

Because they didn't enlist. You can make all the claims you want about what they "Shoulda done". But for all your bitching about their lack of service....Did you? I did. They are not in Iraq for the same reasons that most wealthy peoples children are not...They didn't need the opportunities the military can provide. Bringing up the fact they are not serving is nothing more than dragging them around to try and attack their dad. And thats pathetic. I can understand trying to attack GWB's service, but to attack his kids is just lame.

It is also a fact. Why pass laws to prevent what is not the problem? Gun violence is the problem and the solution is not to prevent legal gun ownership. My guns have never killed anyone.

During the depression the US Government (FDR) made it illegal to own gold. EO 6102 in 1933 (I think) it became illegal to stockpile gold. The price of gold when you turned it in was about 20.00. Once the gold was turned in the Gov raised the price of gold to 35.00 and it remained that way until Nixon took the US off the gold standard. Edit to add EO 6102:

He also said that he does not think it is safe, but you ignore that to find only what you want. I see you claim yourself to be an expert and claim myself to be an idiot....Well if you say it, it must be true Your own source claims he does not think it is safe. "Tashkin said that while he still believes marijuana is potentially harmful, its cancer-causing effects appear to be of less concern than previously thought. " So your OWN source says that he thinks it can be harmful...Sheesh talk about selective reading! Oh please, you think you are the only one that reads? There are guys that can "prove" there were aliens on the grassy knoll. So thats one point for the medical crowd, but not the tokers. Drop the "your an idiot since you don't agree with me attitude" and maybe bother to actually read a post that disagrees with you and you will find I have stated several times that I AGREE that more studies should be done and terminal cases should be allowed. Quit looking for a fight and you might not find one. I just think that the tokers are hurting you more than helping you.

Your study shows that it is not linked to cancer....But the same thing was said of cigarettes before also. But your OWN study does say: "Earlier work established that marijuana does contain cancer-causing chemicals as potentially harmful as those in tobacco, he said. However, marijuana also contains the chemical THC, which he said may kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous." And he also says: "Tashkin said that while he still believes marijuana is potentially harmful, its cancer-causing effects appear to be of less concern than previously thought. " So, whle ONE study has show it MAY not lead to Cancer....The guy still thinks it could be harmful. And you guys are saying it is safe. This guy says he thinks it is not. And I have said it before....I would let terminal people smoke it and use them as a test. I have no issue with it, but to claim that it is safe and a wonder drug is still unproven....so do the tests. And a drug that has unkown effects should not be legalized for recreation...just cause.

Thats just funny coming from YOU of all people. "Hello pot, this is kettle calling, do you read me?" You just hate it when I show you have double standards...Like pretty much you have all the time. And how all your posts are attacks trying to imply you are better than everyone else.