Lucky...

I hope you respond to my previous post, but I'd like to clarify that your purpose for starting this thread has nothing to do with juries and everything to do with Christianity. Look, if you want people to buy your pro-Christian philosophy and agree with you that killing fetuses is teh same as killing humans, then quit advocation capital punishment and denouncing healthcare for all. By being pro-DP and anti-HC you stuff your position that your drive is about caring for people right in the shitter. All of your positions must be consistent that it's all about the welfare of people or you just appear to be bent on one agenda as an extremist. Seriously, abortion is a bad thing, so let's provide everyone HC, stop killing people via the DP and provide sex education for kids starting before puberty, then we can stop killing fetuses as it would be an unhumane thing to do. Your positions are contradictory, I see people from your camp as extremist agenda-driven cherry-pickers. I've had this very conversation with groups protesting at universities and they kinda reluctantly agree.

I thought it was murder? Damn, I can never keep up with with what the fruits-n-NUTS crowd is calling it this week. Leave it to Mike to poke fun at and trivialize the sufferring of indefensable animals. I come here to revel in the humans I get to share this planet with.

i like this idea. i could go along with it. politicians would quickly learn that if they wanted job security they would learn to control spending. of course there would still be the same arguements about what social programs should get funded, but all in all it would they would probably figure out how to run things more efficiently. Gee, the 2 worst spenders in perhaps world history were reelected. Fascist Ronnie and GWB.

I don't think it is ok. Whenever you move equipment, people and other animals are going to get hurt and killed, it's unavoidable. Wrong/wrong; not getting your point.

If you would like I can research the workplace mortality rates/numbers so we can put to rest the silly arguments that people aren't killed at work incident to providing you goods and svs just as animals are killed incident to the production of vegetables. No, people were incidentally killed bringing you goods and svs, animals are incidentally killed in the production of vegetation. The bounty of plant farmers isn't dead animals, it's vegetables, so the animals killed are not part of their business bounty. I'm making the analogy that participating in the production and delivery of goods and svs is as tied to the incidental killing of humans AS is the purchasing of vegetables and the incidental animal deaths in that process.

I believ it does, you're not one of the sociopaths to which I refer. But instead you have to pretend that torture doesn't exist in most farming, heavily in factory farming. So I would label you a denialist. If a guy like you actually admitted your steak and eggs was a product of animal torture you would be self-forced to quit contributing to the process. Well I'm a pussy that cries when I see the horrible lives and worse death these little victims endure. Anyone to know how veal is raised and still eats it is just garbage with legs. And you're in gross denial that meat is not torture. I'm guessing you haven't seen the videos. I'm guessing you define being mass produced, living in tiny quarters, fed hormones and finally killing by being hung by your legs for a good amount of time and then having your throat cut not to be torture. Even if they aren't kicked and beat, THEY ARE ALL TORTURED.

You mean like GHWB tried and Clinton did. As well, the EXACT OPPOSITE OF WHAT REAGAN AND GWB DID.

NOT Scrooge McDuck swimming around in money that isn't earning anything, like you are. The rich make their money work for them - it can't do that stuffed in a mattress. Swimming around money they aren't earning? I have one of the dirtiest, nastiest jobs right now, what the fuck are you talking about? As an adult I've never received welfare, except unemployment, you really don't know a thing. As for the rich and their money, I was addressing the "fare share" comment by another poster, try to keep it in context for once. The fact that they make their hard stolen money work for them has nothing to do with who pays what taxes. Try to keep up.

Vague scenario, but you're identifying jury nullification as far as I can see. When the jury votes their conscience and ignores the law and the judges instructions, that's jury nullification. Forced? And if it were your criminal trail then he used your const rights to ensure an impartial jury. But of course you're a god-fearing, Republican-loving conservative, so you are not therefore a lawbreaker. Yea, anti-Christian infidels should not only have been excluded, but they should have been shot on site; we need to get back to good Christian values in this country as we did when slavery was alive and well.... ahhh, the good ole days. What the FF wanted in the late 1700's means shit for today, there are probably >100 major SCOTUS decisions regarding juries since then, so fuck the FF. And if that very same panel of people found your way, they would have been geniuses with good Christian / family values like you. Why don't we just ensure that every jury pool has good Christians packed in it by going out and killing all non-Christian types. Oh, I see some Christians have already thought of that. Could you be further away from a logical analogy? K's patients were volunteers at the very least, they sought him out. You could make the argument of mental competency of his subjects, but other than that it's just your opinion. See, you're guilty of the same thing that you accuse the jury of. What you need to focus on is the legislative end rather than the judicial end. Your issue is with the laws rather than the implementation of them. Of the laws in the states, or fed if that was the jurisdiction, you couldn't win with that defense. The only viable defense would that of self-defense if you could prove the cop was not acting with the law and that he was intentionally trying to kill harm/people not in the order of justice. Not without supporting evidence that this cop was defective and was acting with malice. I recall the essence of the case. BTW, present what defense? You come incomplete by not stating what his defense was, you appear to be just another zealot defending a zealot. Pls, get your facts together and make your argument for your fellow Christian killing doctors. That's because the media hates Christians, conservatives and basically, all "good people." Biggest national scandals since WWII? You are so hell-bent on loving Jebus the buttfuck princess that you cannot even see clearly. How about the US devastating several entire tribes in the South Pacific with nuclear testing? How about Watergate? How about Viet Nam, Kent State. Jesus fucking Christ, dude, your vision is so focused on Jebus that you cannot even see straight. If you want a travesty in justice, look at OJ's Vegas trial. The judge kicked off all black jurors and 5 of the 12 remaining said they heard of the 95 acquittal and disagreed with it. Yet I don't hear you harping injustice there, do I? Bullshit. As a person who sits in at murder trials whenever I can, I've seen many, most of the time there's only me and 1 or 2 others, so most murder trials go waaaay under any radar. I think it's pathetic that Americans are so apathetic. What you mean is that since a fetus is not considered a person, the court won't recognize a person who terminates pregnancies to be a murderer. Again, yours is a matter of legislation rather than judicial. Of course that isn't totally correct, as the SCOTUS is the primary legislator and they are within the judicial branch. So yours is actually a matter filing amicus briefs and trying to change the SCOTUS decision. Furthermore, globally you and yours need to quit the hypocrisy in that rushing to the aid of a fetus on one hand, willing to kill for it, then telling those w/o HC to fuck off, not my problem; your message is convoluted with stark selectivity. And yet you back GWB with his Iraq War and consider that not to be Nazi stuff, right? Again, you're being selective. Dude, you have offered shit for information in this case; you brought it, you support it. Did teh defense acquiesce? Complete your post. Trade secret . Let me guess, was this lawyer a Christian too? There's no conspiracy, for bigger trials, like OJ's 95 trial, the jury is sequestered for that reason. But for virtually all trials there is no such right. You have a right to a fair trial, but to a certain point. The jury is admonished not to talk to each other or anyone until the case is handed to them and the trial is complete. If they break that then they do, that's the chance you take which is WHY A DEFENDANT HAS A RIGHT TO SUBMIT A 67-PAGE QUESTIONAIRE. This post has to be a joke. Let's see" Major premise: ALL WHO LISTEN TO LUSH RIMJOB ARE INTELLIGENT AND INFORMED Minor premise: CO-WORKER LISTENS TO LUSH Conclusion: CO-WORKER IS INTELLIGENT AND INFORMED See, the problem here is that you come in with biases like: Christians are good people, non-Christians suck, Lush is smart and so are his listeners, etc. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THE JURY SELECTION PROCESS, VOIR DIRE, IS SUPPOSED TO DO; ELIMINATE BAIS. You are truly one of the least knowledgeable posters here in regard to the legal system. So this was before he was a known drug addict, right? Your version. I'm sure the facts weighed out some real evidence other than Christian bais. IOW's, lie under oath after swearing to tell the truth under God. Are you starting to understand why I think you're being a hypocrite? Again, lie after swearing, under God, to tell the truth. Fortunately for justice, civil suits have the jury as basically advisory. Any judgment can be modified or thrown out via judgment notwithstanding the verdict. But I'm sure if you're ever a defendant/litigant you will want your full rights under the const. and anyone abridging those or asserting you are fucking the system is full of shit. Again, your naivety is starting to become cumbersome. Depending upon jurisdiction, you have a set number of strikes where your lawyer can toss jurors w/o cause, so yes an attny could toss you for that. BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE BIASED. Is this hard or am I beating my head against the keyboard for nothing? Probably, one side would embrace you, the other hate you and use a strike. Hey, I know, maybe that experienced skydiver, if he/she had enough jump experience would make a better FUCKING EXPERT WITNESS THAN A JUROR. But I'm just guessing. In fact, the side that didn't want that juror probably wouldn't have to use a strike, the judge would probably strike you first based upon questionaire. That's because the definition of negligence and even some of the application to a given case is a MATTER OF LAW and is for the judge to define. The jury is the FINDER OF FACT, so they try to understand who's lying and what really happened, take the judges instructions/definitions and conclude the case on that protocol. You seem like a nice guy, very naive, but nice and not real informed on law. You probably have your pockets of knowledge, but law isn't one. So drop your biases and learn first, things will make more sense.

Right, and if Obama resigned and a Republican suddenly took over tomorrow, spending would increase if history over the last 30 years repeats, and these nuts would restore their amnesia. Pls, don't insult us, these teabaggeresque nuts are just Dme haters, nothing more - nothing less. Close elections sure, but when you have the disasters of the Repubs all the Dem candidate has to do is say he's not a Republican. Now you've become like most other conseervative posters and relegate yourself to ad hominem; IOW's, make it about me and not teh issues YOU brought in. I've offered many solutions such as: - Tax increases. Show me a major federal tax cut that has worked for other than the rich, or, a major fed tax increase that hasn't worked well for teh masses. - Stimulus. The pres has done this and it's worked great; market is way ahead of schedule, GDP is really there and unemp has bottomed and needs to be addressed so it can get back to 5%ish. - Education supplements. - HC provisions to ensure it to all regardless of financial ability. - Cut the military in half. We match teh world dollar for dollar and it's time to scale back. I am inline with Obama and was before he took office; do a search and you'll find that very language. The problem here is that your definition of regain is quite different than mine. The gov has pulled teh people out of all messes thoughout time, usually it's corporations that put us there. How about we apply Teddy Roosevelt's model of corporate control and take the gov from tehj grasp of corporations and gove it to the people. The problem here is that you love corporations and feel they do no wrong. Here's the interpretation issue; I NEVER COMPLAINED ABOUT GOOOH GETTING MONEY. I said it was akin to Oral Roberts using Jebus to get the idiots to give him millions, but I don;t have a problem with either. I hardly complained. Solution to what? The Dems in congress? This is what you call a problem because, in your words, they're spending too much. But you say this as you refuse to break down the 12T debt and who accumulated it. If you did you would see that it is your party that did it. I know, I know, you're an independent. Good one, an independent who votes Republican, yea. Come on out of teh closet and declare your Republican ideals; it's ok. I know, embarrassing tho

That's true, the real point of animals being tortured for profit is trumped by their attempt to get people to listen to it via naked girls. People want to think meat comes from a plant. Speaking of which, how many seconds until someone posts a genius assertion about plant sufferring? F the plants. Think of the mice, rabbits, snakes, skunks, possums, squirrels, gophers and rats that are murdered to produce a vegan menu! And those clothes you wear, the car you have, the goods in your house were transported and in that process some humans were possibly killed, so you must hate humans if you continue to buy those items. That's the same comparison. Incidental deaths are not anywhere the same as intended factory ranching where teh design is to raise these animals with the intent of killing them. 115 people die on the roads everyday, so your logic can be applie dto every driver too. Let's keep arguments mainstream; plant farmers don't want to deal with animals - wish they weren't around vs caging them, killing them and processing them as with meat-based factory ranching.

Was the gov out of control when: - Reagan cut taxes from 70% top brkt to 28%, tripled the debt and left a mess? - GWB cut taxes from 40% top brkt to 35% and spent thru the roof, adding 5T to the debt? It looks like your timing is skewed, this mess has been brewing for decades, I guess you didn't notice it then. Eisenhower warned us about the Military Industrial COmplex and we ignored, now we have a corporate-fascist military machine that sucks cash at record rates, yet you have no comment about that. Firstly, no we're not, secondly, and give it to the fascist Republican machine that is responsible for most of this mess?

- No longer represents the people? And they did from 2001 to 2007 whne Bush vetoed 1 bill and let the rest slide, the war, the massive unprecedented debt/deficit? Where were the kooks then? The teabagger kooks, where were they? Did the House represent us then? It's partisan BS. - Started in 2007. Anyone with a few brain cells realize that's when the Dems took the House and tied the senate, but these quasi teabaggers claim they are after the House, so they want to flip control; it's not difficult, drones. - His plea for millions sounds a lot like Oral Roberts plea for millions or Jebus would call him home. WHat a farce, who would be dumb enough to send in their C-note?

That's true, the real point of animals being tortured for profit is trumped by their attempt to get people to listen to it via naked girls. People want to think meat comes from a plant. Speaking of which, how many seconds until someone posts a genius assertion about plant sufferring?

Nice Hottie, but did anyone see the clip at the end? It would take a real sociopathic piece of absolute trash to not feel for the animals who were being, "processed." That burger you eat, that ham you eat is a product of that sufferring. Poor animals wanting a chance to live, to love pay for it with more than their life, they pay with a horrible sufferring followed by a horrible and painful death as they are hung by their legs, allow the blood to rush to their head and then have their throat slit. I imagine several on here feel nothing after watching that and I am addressing you as pathetic, worthless sociopath.

make EVERYONE pay their fare share and cut the budget at the dollar amount collected would be a good start. Their fare share, what is this, a ride? So do you think spending as much as the entire rest of the world on defense is a good place to start cuts? I don't expect an answer; RUN . As for fair share, what does that mean? The top 20% of wealth-holders hold 93% of all cash, who are you referring to?

So how would you propose paying for the military, medicare, etc? Borrow even more from China? Kallend, you stinking socialist, you know that tax cuts lead to prosperity, didn't you see this under Reagan?

You forgot mispronounce every 'tough' name out there. http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/2007/11/28/bush-makes-an-ass-of-himself-again/

no, that particular reply was about one thing - the irony of you replying to a post commenting about your blatant partisanship and your replying "typical of a rightie" - nothing more no matter how much your ego is wishing it were now, you also post here leading with a veiled insult you have zero value added here other than the humor others can find in your lack of respect for others, your unnatural partisanship and arrogance and the complete repetitiveness of your posts again and again - repackaging the same tired crap in different ways but with no substantive difference so, I'm ok to find humor in it and share that with others now you are free to take umbrage to this post - reverse insult again - cry that I'm not "able" to discuss whatever random point you are pressing here (though it's more not 'willing' or 'caring' to) - and then claim victory. Perhaps a few dozen links to some random sites would be nice also. I believe that's per the template you are using I do appreciate those last two replies being very short - you can be pithy - I was wrong on that. Edit: frankly, you don't really have reason to debate with me here, I'm only really interested in watching how the posters interact. Political debate is such a trivial thing in real life that I just comment to draw out interaction to observe behaviors and opinions. So after your massive ad hominem, you still have added nothing whne the usual suspects have at least tried to. Again., why comment and cry veiled insult, do just that and then say nothing? I guess, what are you gonna say? How do you defend RW idiotic policy? The data is murder for you guys.

Not to mention the corn being used to feed cattle, red meat litterally burning our assholes out. Red meat can be traced to all kinds of health issues, nit just colon cancer, so corn would be a part of that. Jebus H fucking Christ, our load and savior (unless you believe that silly evolution idea) didn't mean for cows to eat corn, or for homo sapien to eat cows, so that mutation of diets creates all kinds of physiological BS.

I almost wish I had - that way, when it gets revised down, we get a break from your diarrhetic post floods for a month. And you're still afraid to. You obviously agree with me.

As I tried to bet Mike (Mneal), it will be within 20% of 4.8% either way. I still feel that way. You are so far off the mark you don't even know why your wrong. 4.8% isn't within 1000% either way. No shit. Your guarded BS is so obvious it's getting tired. I've nailed down what I think, the BEA has supported it, it may get adjusted, but I've also taken a stance there. You refuse to say what it is, just that I must be wrong. Be less of a conservative / Repub and take a stance; tell me what it will be after any adjustment if there are some.

As I tried to bet Mike (Mneal), it will be within 20% of 4.8% either way. I still feel that way.

Do you have a point to make, or more plagiarization?

Yep, agree. Nice to see the one Republican who doesn't want America to tank to then celebrate being right in some, "ends justify the means" rant. Une,p is key, but it is also always the lagger, so this is typical. GDP needs to flip before the unemp rate does, that's the downfall of a capitalist nation; need to restore the millionaires before we restore the poor and MC. The stimulis is largely what we're seeing in this real and great data, does anyone suggest we not stimulate teh economy and wait 10 years for it to pick up 10% a year?