Lucky...

WASHINGTON: Hey Jefferson, why are all these coloreds' running around freely? JEFFERSON: I dunno, maybe they figured out how to get out of their cages; next thing you know they'll be moving on up to the Eastside! Hey, there goes that one I fucked yesterday.

Good point. I am sure we were called 'insurgents' by King George at some point. To add a little to the thread: If you look at the last 8 years of Bush&Cheney Inc., they: 1. Repealed the right to a trial by jury for any person detained by the federal government. 2. Repealed the right to a speedy trial (8 years in gitmo without even a phone call) 3. Withdrew from the Geneva Conventions (CIA Torture policy) 4. Worked very hard to repeal Row vs. Wade 5. Repealed the protection against unreasonable search and seizure (i.e. NSA Wiretaps of American citizens without a court order - in violation of the FISA Act) 6. Repealed the Posse Comitatus Act, which allowed him to use the military in law enforcement activities on American soil, expressly against the constitution. And then we have tax cuts for the top 1% of the uber-rich, giveouts to big oil and corporations on the taxpayer dime, the outsourcing of American jobs to India and China, the 500 billion dollar trade deficit, 150 dollar a barrel oil, raping the social security trust fund, reduction of worker rights and busting up of unions, the deliberate lies told by the administration in the runup to the Iraq war... Did I miss anything? And that's just the stuff we know about... So far the democrats have told the justice department that they are going to respect the rights of the states to set drug policy and not prosecute individuals that are in compliance with state law, a right that was not bestowed to individuals in the Bush administration. So, we have the democrats adding rights, and Bush trashing the constitution/bill of rights every chance he got... So is it the democrats or the republicans that are trying to "stifle your rights?" Tried to shove thru the 28th Homophobe Amendment.

Yea, it ws taxation w/o representation; that's not political at all

Would that include the founding fathers and the Revolutionary War? Wendy P. Nice one. Yes, the Rev War and the Emancipation Proclamation were 2 of the biggest liberal acts of all US history.

Why? Don't most radicals come from that side? Right, because they're the toughest Exactly, those liberal people who kill abortion doctors; you're so right And what does let's say PETA do? They might throw paint on a fur coat, tear up an animal lab or protest on a ship like Greenpeace. Libs ruin property, conservs kill people. Pls show me which American liberals embrace those and in which fashion. He ws simply illustrating the ignrant redneck who is scared and w/o HC or a job grabbing their gun and toting a bible to justify it. That explains the above. Did he measn 1933? Let me teach a bible thumper a few things: - Hilter took office early 1933 - He soon after set up concentration camps to house these people: -Liberal Democrats -Socialists -Communists -Homosexuals -Anyone not in-line with fascist Nazi ideals He would have sewn triangles on their jumpsuits to identify their pref from the above list. So educate us as to how Obama is like that. Pls try to stay in this solar system. Which freedoms/rts? How has Obama done anything to remove or limit that? How has Obama done that? Also, freedom of religion also means freedom from religion. I don't think you get that. How has he done that? So what's your beef? Who's 'shoving it' down your throat? Who's doing that? I despise drugs and agree, but drugs do permeate into all of society. We can skydive alone, we can't use drugs alone. Sure. How is Obama stopping that? I think Dems are closer to compulsory service than are R's. Most Socialist nations have CS, so you are on the other end of that with your party. It's not that simple, it's about spending 1T and 5k lives to unsettle that region when no real good will come of it. You have clammered constantly about this deprivation, but have yet cite one with support. They won't, they're full of hot air. Ok, I'll stay out. We'll just agree with you then.

Agrred, 100%, born classism. Class mobility used to be an option, not much anymore. That was the American dream, a lot of immigrants have been dissolusioned.

Use of corrective lenses certainly correlates positively with age but if 30-40% of people in their prime* have corrective lenses it's hardly irrelevant. Using technology to nullify the selective effects of a negative trait isn't that interesting though. What's more interesting, imho, would be a situation where it became "cool" to have glasses, or perhaps one in which having glasses became associated (rightly or wrongly) with a positive trait such as intelligence, and became preferred in the selection process. That would be a true "bastardization" of natural selection. * sorry for the old data but I'm lazy. That ref is from 1971; is it possible you could find an older study perhaps? I'll look something up. I checked, didn't find anything relevant. But how about this, needing glasses isn't binary, it's progressive. I bet the number of people with incredibly poor vision at a young age is limited. And at the same time, not wearing glasses and having poor vision could actually promote reproduction...if ya get what I mean . Of course beer goggles definately promotes reproduction where otherwise there would be none.

Right, remove most/all svs so then nature can take its course and select the ones who do not make it. I got ya. You mean selection by a dictator. Here's how the line of question went: MARKS: the same goes for what is happening to us in the US today, when the entitlement programs become more than the country can handle the country will collapse and the result of that will be something none of us can really envision. LUCKY: Oh, so Socialist Europe is doing poorly? How about Communist China; how's their NS working out? They have 4 times the people and are the most economically successful currently. Oops, what's that noise? Is it the air being let out of your brilliant theories? MARKS: why don't we ask the dead people in China how well a dictatorship is? china is not natural selection it is selection of a dictator, there is a difference. So with that, countries with greater Socialist programs are doing better, have a better standard of living, have better economies and aren't 12T in debt. This is not a conversation about dictatorships, it's about natural selection and you posed that too many entitlements lead to the destruction of a nation and I have illustrated that that clearly isn;t the case. The country with of the fewest entitlements is doing very poorly. Again, you're shifting the conversation from your assertion that entitlements lead to a countries destruction to how horrible Musslims are; get back on track. And say hi to your mom: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0YIq5Q15L1o

Is this you? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8XmerZEyHE Not funny. Not amused. I am NOT blond. JK

Good point: Cheney

Notice how people don't Reagan and do hate GWB? Look at where they reside on the list of best/worst presidents. Reagan is 10 from the top and GWB is 6 from the bottom; do the math. Reagan wasn't hateable, he was a nice, senile old guy, GWB had shades of mass control and evil intent. Of course taht was when he was under Chenney in his early pres years, the latter years he figured out what he had done and tried to back off a bit. Obama is not universally hateable like GWB, Hoover and the sort, even if you dislike his policies.

FOS is overrated and is one of the least important BOR amendments. The gov can control the where and the when, just not the what. So you can go into your coat closet and scream what you want, so long as you don't bother the neighbors. Try going into a coutroom and saying what you want, but tell me beforehand soI can watch. It is dropped as so invaluable, but to legal schoolars it's a bit of a joke in most cases. Now assembling to protest something is the real place where the 1st is important, but in most cases being able to run a person's mouth is not protected unber the 1st. Most legally unducated people hang on teh 1st as tho it's imprtant beyond all. The most important amedments we have are the 4th and 14th. Even the 2nd just means we can take people down as thye army takes us down kinda thing. I'm big pro 2nd, but not as bif as the 4th and 14th, even the 5th and 6th are highly important. Hearing laypeople run on about the 1st is good for comedic relief. So now how has he denied any person the right to express themselves, assemble, choose religion, etc? Pls cite instances in specific and write the claim as to what he violated. Who shoudl controil it then, the church? Oh grwat, bow to jebus if you want your operation. The go whine about your hero, GHWB, I want my tax contributions back from the Iraq War. You need to flip your calendar from year 1880 to 2009 and welcome. That's not feasable. Costs would be lower because svs would be FAR lesser and people would die from simple deficiencies. Yes I know you just had a tripple bypass, get off your ass and mop the floor. Welcome to politics, it is partisan game - you must be new. But you like the beneifit it yields like the rest of us. I searched and I couldn't find your thread complaining about the non-balance of power when the R's owned the WH, Congress and the SCOTUS a couple years back. As well, you could find mine where I whined about it then and am not now. Let's not be hypocrites and realize all we want to do is win all the time. Is she related to you? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8XmerZEyHE Which is he, Muslim, terrorist or both? With all respect to the greatest people to me, millions is high in respect to died; fought - yes, died - no. I realize you want to make your point so you exadgerate, but let's keep it real and accurate. America's Wars Total U.S. Military Service During War................43,185,893 Battle Deaths................................................653,708 Other Deaths (In Theater).................................14,560 Other Deaths in Service (Non-Theater).............525,930 [/url]http://hnn.us/roundup/comments/44965.html[url] That doesn't include the Revolutionary War, but we weren't America yet then. And can we even deduct the Civil War dead from that number, or perhaps the Union side of it, considering those are Obama's ideals? So how are these people you call Obama's freinds who have ideals that are akin to what the GI's have fought to end? List the friends and the ideals and then tell us how these frinds will influence Obama's decisions on teh country, or are you just trying to pick Obama's friends for him?

Is this you? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8XmerZEyHE

Welcome to politics. Your fav pres, GWB spent his entire first term shoving the Ovetime Bill down our faces and he won, what a guy. Then he fabricated and shoved a $1T to date war down our faces. So if you want your side to be aggressive with their agendas, yet the other side passive, you're not being realistic.

And so did GHWB and GWB would have signed Clinton's ASWB if it came his way, so the only friends we have are the SCOTUS under Heller. But voting against and procatively out to limit them, such as Clinton, are quite diff. Let's see what he does.

But since most people don't need glasses to correct vision until later years when they aren't reproducing, that is statistically irrelevant.

That's what I wrote simultaneously when stated that Republicans want the NS experiment for the lower 50%. I see we agree. The left want to help people, you and the right want NS to eliminate them. That's sheer brilliance. I wonder if we, as humans have helped all those extincted species we've helped control? And what plants do we set free? Run, little plant - be free . The truth is that when humans fuck with it it goes to hell. We're one of the newest species here and the most caustic. How did they ever makee it w/o us? Research "boom and bust cycle" to see how we 'help' our fellow earth species out. Oh, so Socialist Europe is doing poorly? How about Communist China; how's their NS working out? They have 4 times the people and are the most economically successful currently. Oops, what's that noise? Is it the air being let out of your brilliant theories?

But by being removed from the gene pool you have been selected and will no longer reproduce, so even if you did formerly reproduce and your undesireable genes passed on, you will no longer spread your undesireable genes so NS does work for a while until you are removed. So that statement seems a little broad to me. It is possibel to have an undesireable gene and pass iton before selection, but NS eventually works, even if later than it should. What if the illness was caused by the ill gene? Then we've artificially overridden NS and it hasn't worked and won't work if that person reproduces. When you govern reproduction the "natural" in NS is invalidated. True, when you artificailly modify humans you lose teh "natural." At the same time, virtually all of the elders to which you refer don't pass on their genes anyway, so this is moot. Pretty much same as above. Injuries caused by accident aren't really part of natural selection, are they? Unless a specific member of that species was genetically prone to risk. Did they go septic due to genetic reasons or accident? Sure, we interfere with NS that way. Well, NS selection would reduce world population severely. We're such a smart species that we want to limit the popualation of others species yet let opurs run free to over-produce. IOW's, if we let it run its course, it would eventually be gone for good? YES! Or, couldn't we just refuse all people medical care and let nature decide? We've tried that with the lower 50% in the US, Republicans want the experiment to continue.

Bill Gates is the new alpha male....nuff said....we've bastardized evolution.

Here's a better one - show us an income tax cut that only the rich got. So if a tax cut helps the poor 1 penny, than it's a neutral tax measure. Brilliant, Binary Mike. With the lower 50% of all filers accumulating to pay 2.89% of all taxes as of 2007 how is it that even a 50% tax cut would matter? You can't help that class by cutting taxes, you have to increase taxes on top and redistribute. Even if you took that entire bottom 50% of filers and made them all tax exempt it wouldn't be that big a deal. However if you do things like establish universal HC and other programs, that is what is real and brings them up. Furthermore, the trhead reads: Do tax cuts for the rich lead to horrible economic times? Since the rich pay most taxes therefore taxes can only be cut where teh money is, tax cuts help the rich. So do they lead to horrible economic times? Yes, they do; pls show otherwise. You want to flip the question around to read: 'Are there tax cuts aimed 100% exclusively at the rich.' I doubt it, but that's irrelevant as taxes for teh poor are irrelevant, only benefits. The rich want a tax cut, the poor want boost in services, so to act as tho these classes have identical needs is ridiculous.

Maybe you could get Charlie Rangel to pay his, first. Or maybe we could getthese guys to start flying right: http://www.republicanoffenders.com/Bribery2.html Or perhaps start by getting Larry Craig to stop shitting with a wide stance, cause it appears he's shopping for cock and all us pseudo moralists know that's a bad thing. There, we done with your partisan rant yet? OK, now let's talk about all the awesome tax cuts, my friends that have led to sucess for all..... I've asked this a million times w/o an answer, I would think you would concede or go away.

Thanks for the pep talk I will start payin more to the IRS as soon as Kallend, Andy908, Lucky,Cliff, Wonderworld, Quade and Billvon puts there money where there mouth is. Cant wait for never to happen Your only supposed to have to pay more if your concervative Or you could follow Warren Buffet and do as he believes and pay more taxes in higher brkts.....talk about never happening. Hmmm so thats a no to you paying more taxes than the govt. says you owe? You should do some more research cause Buffet has said he doesn't pay enough taxes but has NEVER wrote another check to the IRS for the extra that he thought he owed....... will you be the first?????? Please make a copy of the extra check to prove you beleive that you should pay more If not then STFU!

Thanks for the pep talk I will start payin more to the IRS as soon as Kallend, Andy908, Lucky,Cliff, Wonderworld, Quade and Billvon puts there money where there mouth is. Cant wait for never to happen Your only supposed to have to pay more if your concervative Or you could follow Warren Buffet and do as he believes and pay more taxes in higher brkts.....talk about never happening.

In another argument, you claimed the S&P is much more reliable than the DJIA. OK, here’s a comparison: S&P 500 1993 451 2001 1,160 157% gain DJI 1993 3,435 2001 9,878 188% gain So you see, there’s very little difference between the two even if we ignore the Wall Street Journal and many other organizations/publications that refer to the DJIA as a relevant index by which to determine the countries fiscal health.