Butters

Depends on the context in which you define liberal and conservative. I believe the abolition of slavery was an essentially moral idea. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Actually, they were termed Radical Republicans. (Liberal Republicans came later.) "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

If my information is correct, no one noticed for two weeks. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Awesome Marketing! (Just look at all the free coverage.) "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Exactly. The vast majority of Americans dont know or give a fuck as to what the fuck Aqua Teen Hunger Force is. The show sucks, and there's no reason that a stupid-ass picture makes a potential IED seem less dangerous. The response is understandable. It's best to react and hold those who caused the problem responsible, rather than endure the myriad of lawsuits that would occur if they reacted lesser and innocents were hurt. It's time to put down the Cheetos and the bong and face reality. What is reality? Living in constant fear that any and all electronic devices are potential bombs ... no thank you. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

"We do whatever we want, to whomever we want, at all times." Inignot "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

"We smoke while we flip the bird." Err "I hope he can see this 'cause I'm doing it as hard as I can." Inignot [flipping the bird] "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_mNn4igxZE&mode=related&search= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFwTRlczSOw "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Not Again (Anyone remember Jesse Ventura?) "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Was man born with any desire? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

I ran naked with Ur grandma because I'm a pimp and you're jealous! "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Do you understand the values of a neoconservatist? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

If you cannot see the truth then you are following blindly. If you can see the truth and still follow then you are just a fool. What is this truth that you speak of? Considering the current administration, there is no truth that can be seen. What does this mean? If there is no truth that can be seen (there are many sides but only one truth) then wouldn't both sides be following blindly according to you? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

If you cannot see the truth then you are following blindly. If you can see the truth and still follow then you are just a fool. What is this truth that you speak of? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

I would consider following without any information sources, following blindly. I would consider following with limited information sources, following ignorantly. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

I agree that if you are not a leader, you are a follower. But being a follower doesn't mean you are following blindly. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Why do you assume (along with many others) that they are blindly following? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

If there was an agreement then America should be able to provide proof of the agreement. No, I think we probably do. However, there is a difference between passive and aggressive intelligence gathering. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

It doesn't matter, you can not do what they did. If they had to apprehend the individual they should have informed and obtained consent from the local government. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

How do you know that the bird desires to fly anymore than I desire something I can do but don't? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

I gave up on objectivity just to ram some of the right wings own hypocrisy down their collective throats.. You appear to know hypocrisy well. Is that an Amazona arausiaca I hear? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

I cant help that they were too fucking stupid to research GW and his NEO CON buddies... and SOOO many of them have gleefully rammed all this morality and WAR crap down the rest of our throats for 6 years....Turns out they voted for Incompetence.. arrogance...and a president that turns out to not be so moral after all. How many of these has he and his friends broken in the six years..??? http://www.biblepicturegallery.com/free/Pics/10_Comm.gif I got three real easy.. Thou shalt not covent they neighbors OIL Thous shalt not lie Thou shalt not misuse the name of GOD( Supposed personal conversations with the entity telling him to go to war) Thou shalt not murder hunderds of thousands of people in your greed for OIL Is that an Amazona aestiva I hear? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

I disagree. What Hillary Clinton said is that Bush is walking out on his responsibility for an exit plan. Bush has never had an exit plan, he has always believed the Iraqis would just love us to death and probably invite us to stay. Now that things have gone tits up, all he can do is escalate the war, and as for EVER getting out, well that's something the next President will have to figutre out because he is going to wash his hands of the mess and go back to the ranch in Texas. He's like the yahoo who rides a horse through a china shop and can't understand why he should pay the bill for smashing the place up. Iraq's a real mess and I'll be damned if I know what the answer is either. We've brought down a regime that kept Al Qaeda OUT. We should consider there were once reasons why Reagan, Bush Sr., Rumsfeld, et all were once buddy-buddy with Saddam. By turning him out we've created a shit storm and it's as dangerous to leave as it is to stay. But occupations don't work and the longer we stay the worse it gets, as we forestall the inevitable with blood and more blood. It's why we never should've gone in the first place, it's why Bush Sr. didn't do it. But now that Boy George has gone and stirred up the hornet's nest, he's only too happy to dump it in somebody else's lap, as he wanders off into his "place in history". What did you disagree with? I stated that Bush does not appear to have a plan to end the war and thus Bush will most likely not end the war, just like you. I then stated that the democrates are the most likely to win the next election and the democrats also do not have a plan to end the war. This is bad for the democrats so they are pushing for Bush to end the war. The problem is that if Bush ends the war it increases the likely hood that the republicans could win the next election. Thus the best choice for the democrats is for Bush not to end the war and for the democrats to begin planning how to get our of Iraq now so they have a plan when the win the election. "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

Red Bull - Do I get sponsored now? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch

This is a joke right? "That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch