jenfly00

Hmm why is it that inept male lovers ALWAYS roll out the lesbian label when they are the ones having the issue????? They tend to do that also when you look at them.. or listen to them ofr a few minutes and say thanks.. but no thanks to their advances. The really funny part is he seems to have missed the part about being with a good lover. Most men dream about being with two women. I suspect he dreams about being with the same woman ...twice. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Why limit a fun time to only 4 hours??? You just need to find the right lover.. one who hasd energy and an active mind...rather than the typical conservative types who just want to get theri rocks off. What did you say your phone number was again? Seriously, I've never met a woman who can edure 4 hours of sex without uteral pain. I know women who make that claim just because they enjoy degrading men, though. Enduring four hours of sex with a bad lover would be a pain. With a talented, imaginative lover ...days are required. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

We used to have a guy in my old neighborhood a bit like that. From time to time he would run out of his house, holding a gun in his hand and yell at college students were cutting across his yard. He'd yell all kinds of threats about shooting anyone on his property. I think he's in some sort of institution now. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Do you always use the maimed as the point of your jokes? Hey Mr I don't post any information about myself! I think I would like to talk to you in person about this matter, yeah thats a great idea! You and I could debate this face to face

As do I Bill...amazing huh? Any person here that is a veteran or on active duty KNOWS what will happen if you commit an ILLEGAL KILLING Live by the sword, die by the sword. I bet you think this was a justified response to an illegal killing too. And this. Is that all you have? Nazi comparisons? Reminds me of someone else. - Me? I said that the adamant supporters of historical leaders, who went on to become murderous dictators, most likely felt as intensely patriotic as you do now. It doesn't take a nation of 'bad' people to allow freedom to collapse, it takes a nation of otherwise good people who will not or cannot see what is going on around them. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

They all use what is available. With Stalin it was the assisination of Moisei Uritsky, Chief of the Petrograd Secret Police and the shooting of Lenin shortly thereafter. Stalin wanted those responsible to be subject to "open and systematic mass terror". Hitler used Labor riots, Mussolini pretty much worked his way up the facist hierarcjy and used his considerable charisma to build a power base using fear of labor unions and communism to ultimately seize control. The fact that threats are real doesn't preclude them from being manipulated for power. My point, however, is not that Bush is Stalin, Hitler or whatever, but that it takes a bunch of mentally myopic, fearful, flagwaving mutherfuckers for any of them to succeed. Whatever our future, they had them then, we have them now. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Was Pravda considered independent/free? Your welcome. Let's try to keep it to a serious discussion of issues and such instead of comparisons to a Soviet leader that killed more than the little guy with the bad mustache. Actually, the comparison I was making had nothing to do with Bush. The comparison was to the large numbers of people who could not/would not see the potential for abuse. They blindly supported a man who convinced them of a problem, made them fearful of it and directed who to blame for it. Without such lemmings, no leader could gain such power. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

And how does this compare to what Bush has done, or even could do? It's all perfectly legal, just like Stalin. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

I don't think so. That line of thought would not justify illegal intrusions of privacy by our government. But the NSA program is not illegal. I understand that you think it should be, but it is not. There are many ways for you to actively pursue the goal of making this type of program illegal. And you are speaking out, and can pursue the goal of making this type of program illegal. I think it is unacceptable to compare Bush to Stalin for using an intelligence gathering method that has been affirmed as constitutional by the highest court in the land. Are all of those justices also to be compared to Stalin? I don't know who was on the court back then and which voted which way, but I'd be surprised if there weren't some liberal heroes included. I'm certainly wary of such a threat. Fortunately or unfortunately, it is very hard for such things to remain a secret for very long, and even when they are not illegal, our free press is so eager for a scandal that it can become headline news for a long time. A free press is something that Stalin and the current Russian government does not have constantly looking for a scandal to keep it in check. I hope you are right. Regardng 'free press', Stalin gained much of his initial influence and power as editor of Pravda. Thank you for your honest and straightforward answer. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

What is different now? Stalin killed all political opposition, even potential opposition. We have a supreme court that found it constitutional (no expectation of privacy for this info). We have a legislature that could make it illegal if they wanted to. Stalin started his purges using his legal authority as General Secretary of the Party Congress to expel any "unsatisfactory" party members. He solidified his power by ridding the party of all supporters of Trotsky and appointing his own people in their place. Once his power base was established (all completely legally), he went on to greater achievements as one of the most murderous dictators in history. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

You know what? You are absolutely correct ..........BUT (you knew there was a but coming, now didn't you

Stalin was a strong leader who invaded the lives of citizens for the 'good of the state'. What is different now? ...or you could just tell another rat story. But..but.. I thought Bush was a weak leader. Please present your evidence that Bush has used this program to invade your life or anyone elses. Suppose someone in the US calls a known terrorist in Pakistan who in turn calls another person in Iowa. Are you seriously saying you don't want the NSA to know this and investigate the person in Iowa? You seriously think this kind of intel should be just ignored? OTOH, lets take your approach that the NSA has no business knowing this intel and as a result they fail to uncover a terrorist cell and 100,000 Americans are killed in a chemical weapon attack. You would be one of the first to start screaming Bush is an idiot and he failed to connect the dots. So go ahead with your little potshots. I'd rather hear them than to hear that a chemical weapon killed thousands in downtown Los Angeles. - I'm not taking potshots. Unlike Michele , my purpose here is issue oriented and I'm asking you, how do you know it's different ...this time? How can you be so sure? I'm fairly certain most of Stalin's supporters didn't see it as any big deal and justified it as serving the security of the state. I dunno, maybe they told rat stories. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Stalin was a strong leader who invaded the lives of citizens for the 'good of the state'. He would have not been successful without the support of lots of people who supported him in precisely the manner you support our current govt. What is different now? ...or you could just tell another rat story. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Are you so naive as to believe that they cannot do not have access to a reverse directory phonebook? And why exactly would they want to look you up? Are you so naive as to believe the govt. has the time, money or inclination to look up tens of million of phone calls made every day? Do you think they are interested in someone who calls their Aunt Martha to discuss Uncle Barts Birthday. Get a grip, man! - Linking a phone directory to this database would be trivial, and would cost very little. It is a simple cross reference between two database tables. The government can now, at the click of a button, get a list of everyone you have talked to on the phone, how offen you talked, when and for how long, are you really OK with that? \ Wasn't it Joe Stalin who said (about the government spying on the people) "If you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about"? There is little reason to doubt that the supporters here and now would be Stalin's suporters there and then. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Ahhh, the eulogy of freedom. That's what the gun owners said, when they used that excuse about the background checks, too.... "If you're law-abiding, why are you so scared about a background check?" Same principle.... I'll give you that. It is the same principle in a broad sense. There certainly are valid reason for the incursion of the govt into our lives. Where do we draw the lines? Ahh, there lies the rub. As I said above, too many lines are being moved. The gestalt of the individual movements poses some degree of threat to individual freedoms and due process (do you disagree?). I believe the degree of threat is unacceptable for a free nation. I believe the tide of govt incursion threatens what we, as a free people, profess to believe. I believe our country is changing and, indeed, threatening to extinguish the beacon of freedom once viewed round the world. Political loyalities and ideologies cloud the judgment of good men and women. It's time to open our eyes. It's time to speak up against those who attack good citizens (and invite them leave our country) who's only 'crime' is to defend the Bill of Rights. It's time to wake up and act ...while we can. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Dewd, you just made me spill milk all over my desk. That made me laugh out loud. My poor cat wondered what was wrong, and then decided to get to the milk before I got it cleaned up. Too funny...thanks for the laugh! Ciels- Michele When Frick shows up, Frack is never far behind. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

ROFL!!! Only the blindest of hypocites could spend half their afternoon in the forums railing against the loss of free speech, only then to finish up with this beautiful nugget of love and tolerance. I think you are now plagarizing confliciting material. Have you ever considered actually reviewing the material you copy and paste from other's works, then claim as your own? Nice PA. I wonder if it'll slip in under the radar. You would celebrate the open door of free speech. It's a wonderful philosophy that allows even slimy, creepy things to crawl in and have their say. Did you actually have something to say about the personal freedom and due process ...or are you just building playmate points? ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Ahhh, the eulogy of freedom. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

And this will provide the peace and dignity family and loved ones deserve ...how? ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Perhaps it is a matter of (some) people finally waking up and smelling the corruption that is consuming our great nation? For all of our flaws, America has always been a flame on a hilltop. A vision, shining across the world for all those who believed in freedom and liberty. Now, the people guiding our government, regardless of reasons or rationales, extingush that flame ...and America is less because of them. It's time to wake up, my friend ...before the flame is gone. It's not a matter of Republicans vs. Democrats or whether Clinton did it first. It's a matter of what is happening right now. The flame is, indeed, being extinguished. First, I think your are very wrong! Yeah, I never would have guessed that. Second, given you stated belief, was the path just as bad 10 years ago? In your opinion. View what is happening in our country as a gestalt. The whole is greater than the sum of it's parts. Under the present administration thre are a lot of 'parts' that, individually, may have little impact on personal freedoms or individual liberty. Some have been around to some degree or another for a while ...others are new incursions. At this time in our culture, the parts have increased in number and complexity to come together and you have something that is, indeed, greater than it's individual parts ...the extinguishing of a dream, an idea, a great nation. Wake up, my brother. Wake up soon, for I fear the time is coming when it will be too late. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

For exercising their right to assemble and protest? You don't have a right not to be offended. And as for the reverend, I thought part of the duties involves resisting temptation and setting an example for others. Getting into a fight hardly seems appropriate. AHHHHH, another Phelps sympathizer. Just what the world needs. IF you and your buddy the Phelps think America sucks so bad then leave. Going to Indiana are we? j How dare you?! How dare you take cheap ass shots like this?!? How fuckin dare you to invite someone to leave because he supports the very foundations of this great nation?!?!?!? WTF is wrong with you?!? ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Perhaps it is a matter of (some) people finally waking up and smelling the corruption that is consuming our great nation? For all of our flaws, America has always been a flame on a hilltop. A vision, shining across the world for all those who believed in freedom and liberty. Now, the people guiding our government, regardless of reasons or rationales, extingush that flame ...and America is less because of them. It's time to wake up, my friend ...before the flame is gone. It's not a matter of Republicans vs. Democrats or whether Clinton did it first. It's a matter of what is happening right now. The flame is, indeed, being extinguished. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

It's just one of the 'specialness' qualities that women hang on to. I think mostly it's just how we were raised. It's easier to blindly follow conditioning than examine our lives and move forward. Despite opposition from men and (sadly) women, forward we move. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Where did I say you vote Democrat? I said that you denigrate anyone who doesn't toe the Democrat party line. You refuse to acknowledge any viewpoint that is not "Get Bush" and equate anyone disagreeing to Fascist, idiotic or trailer trash..or all of the above (or worse). Again, you shove aside the volumes of direct implication you have posted that she votes Democrat and hide behind the "I didn't say those exact words". Doesn't speak much for character. I won't speak for Amazon, but I surmise, from your prolific posts that you do support fascism in the US. I won't say that your are idiotic but the kindest thing I could say is that you do not have the perceptual wherewithal to see what is going on around you. If I am incorrect in the above assumption, and you are an intelligent, perceptual individual who sees what is happening to our country and yet continue to support it, well my words would be ...less kind. Oh yes, PLEASE show this direct implication... you're equally as guilty of "if you're not whole-heartedly bashing Bush/the administration, you're supporting the Fascists." When someone calls you on it to show proof, or shows that the Libs are equally at fault, you pull out the "uber-right" "fascist" "KKK" labels, or imply that the person is stupid or deluded since they don't automatically and enthusiastically agree with your point. Want to be taken seriously? Argue facts, not emotions. Be able to back up what you say and rebut arguments. There's a saying I heard attributed to a trial lawyer: "If the law is against you, attack the evidence. If the evidence is against you, attack the law. If both are against you, attack the opposing attorney." Guess what tactic you use 90+% of the time? Ummm, the quote was "if neither the law nor the evidence is on your side, bang your fist loudly on the table." Hope you didn't hurt your hand. :) ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

I wonder if it's kinda like standing up for free speech in the McCarthy era ...or having the cajones to vote against the mis-named Patriot Act immediately post 9/11. Could be political suicide. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".