birdlike

Sorry, I gotta correct myself here. I realized later that Walt Handelsman is Newsday's political cartoonist. The guy who does "Zits" is Jim Borgman (who also does very good political cartoons). Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Hatred makes you type quickly? Sorry, I'm gonna need you to repeat your post... All I'm getting on this end is this annoying buzzing... Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

The Home Depot is not a party to what shoppers and contractors who make purchases at their store do when they leave. They cannot stop those contractors from agreeing to employ the illegal immigrants (or legal ones) who linger around the store. They are not doing anything but selling stuff inside the store, and providing a place for customers to park. I am with mnealtx, the police should be called, and they should do their job and cart off the squatters. You can't say that The Home Depot is "causing" this, or even aiding/abetting it. They are simply in business to sell items. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

You mean, like, they could maybe put some of the effort they put into sneaking here into FIXING THEIR OWN FUCKING COUNTRY?! How many people can pile into a lifeboat before the lifeboat becomes useless to all of them? The U.S.A. is being treated like a lifeboat by illegal immigrants. It will only float for so long if people keep jumping into it. Eventually it will sink just like the boat they jumped out of. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

No, not really--just the breakdown of law and order. I mean, they're being ordered to provide services to people who are lawbreakers. What's next, homeowners being ordered to give milk and cookies to burglars? To provide pillowcases for carrying stolen loot? How do you get around the obvious absurdity of this? If they are known to be these illegal immigrant laborers in the first place, they should be being rounded up and deported, not SUPported! Ah, your same old end of civilization as we know it argument. OK, carry on. No, my point is that if legal businesses are forced by the law to cater specifically to those who are clearly breaking the law, on top of having no legal right to gather and loiter on private property, then the law is completely upside-down. And if we can't have laws that punish the lawbreakers instead of taking from the law abiders to reward the lawbreakers, things are truly fucked up. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Exactly. What the naysayers always ignore is that the guns will be concealed (by requirement) and that presumably those who are carrying will be smart enough to make sure to be discreet about it (and not open their mouths about it). So what would happen, the gang of kids would attack a random teacher and chance finding out that he/she wasn't armed? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Of course. I'm probably one of the staunchest pro-gunners on here, but I won't say that this will keep people safe like some magic shield. What I imagine is that some teachers will be armed, some won't want to be (per their choice). And if a Dylan&Klebold come to attack the school, and classes are cowering behind locked doors with their teachers, those teachers who are armed will be able to stop the rampage if the D&K come through their door, and those teachers who are unarmed will be like all the others who have preceded them...in helpless death at the hands of spree-murderers. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

YES, they should. But many people will predict bloodbaths and the such. You mean after predicting that in 40 states that have passed licensed concealed gun carry laws and having that NOT come to pass, those morons are still willing to stand up and say that stupid shit all over again? Well, if they haven't learned after 40 examples, what's one more? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

You're right; for that, I DO love Texas. It makes perfect fucking SENSE! A whole lot more than continuing to do what we've been doing, which is proved to stack the victims like cordwood. Isn't it said that the definition of "insanity" is to do the same thing repeatedly, hoping for a different result? Well, we've repeatedly forced would-be victims to be defenseless for far too long. Only a fuckin' idiot would say, "No no, keep doing that -- eventually it's gonna work!" Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

You took apart two parts of a whole, which changed the meaning. I was saying that "one must be guessing; therefore there is a chance that his God is a nonexistent thing--really just a concept of an entity without any such entity actually existing." The second part ("really just a concept") is the extension of the first part ("here's a chance God is nonexistent, just a concept but not an actual true being). Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Exactly! So perhaps to differentiate PROPERLY, those currently referred to (wrongly) as "Native Americans" should be referred to as "ORIGINAL Americans". Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Does any of your nitpicking alter the fact that Candians are Americans? What Canadian refers to his nationality as "American"? How can you possibly be comfortably arguing in such bad faith? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Last time I checked, Canada was the largest country in America (north or south). Oh, please. Do you dispute that on this continent, people refer to the two countries as "America" and "Canada"? When Canadians travel abroad, and people ask them where they're from, do they say, "Oh, America"? Or do they say, "Canada"? And do they call themselves "Americans," or "Canadians"? Why would you split this hair like this? I'm asking, do people in Canada refer to blacks there as "African-Canadians," or "African-Americans" (which is even more absurd, as I've made clear above), or just "blacks"? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Guys, are you enjoying your little irrelevant sub-thread? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

I guess if you're determined to see the question as rooted in bigotry, you're gonna see the asker as a bigot who just wants to be able to say "nigger." So, when someone uses a term you find bigoted, you immediately become bigoted, yourself. Interesting. I would never in a million years be able to reconcile your ability to hold yourself above others when you do the same things they do and yet condemn them for it. (And in this case, condemning people who don't even do the thing you find bigoted!) Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

America isn't a country. Yes the politically correct do say "African-Canadian," although most of the blacks I know better fir the label 'African.' In a few years they will become "African-Canadian." Their kids will be Canadian. I'm not sure why you're splitting hairs about my calling "America" a "country." Was I supposed to say, "The 'United States of America' is the only 'nation' "? Seems rather tangential to the point. But back on point, if Africans arrive in Canada and are "African-Canadians," and their kids are just "Canadians," why then aren't the kids of African immigrants to America just "Americans"? That's the whole pith of the hyphenated-American debate, isn't it? My heritage, as a white person, is from Poland and Russia, but I don't call myself a Polish-American. I'm just American, same as a black person whose heritage is from Africa! And what about white people, descendants of, what is it, Dutch(?) settlers in South Africa, who come to America? If I called them "white," should they frown and say, "Sorry, I'm African-American!? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Billvon, it appears that you have the directionality reversed. I think a euphemism is the term that is used because it is the one that is not offensive. So "African-American" is the term that people demand to replace the offensive "black". "African-American" is therefore the euphemism. Here's Webster: euphemism: the substitution of an agreeable or inoffensive expression for one that may offend or suggest something unpleasant. also, the expression so substituted. When I say that "African-American" is the euphemism, that means it's the agreeable term that replaces the "disagreeable" term "black." I personally do not find the terms "black" or "white" offensive. They are merely convenient descriptors and have their place. I have never used "black" to be insulting or condescending. What I find offensive is forcing me to say "African-American" just to avoid being called racially insensitive. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Then you take issue with the people--any and every--who mention the context of Obama's race at all? Good! I agree with you. Anyone who wants people to not discriminate based on race should never be glad that someone of a given race accomplished something either. We hear about "the first BLACK person to fly solo around the world," or "the first BLACK person to summit Mount Everest." That's ridiculous and patronizing and, well, racist. How can they get around the idea of perceiving that as, "Hey, black people, glad you could finally catch up to us and accomplish what we whites/asians/etc. have been doing all this time!"? If I were a black guy and was the first to fly solo around the world, I'd be pissed off that people tried to give me an award for being the first BLACK guy to do it. How fuckin' patronizing can you get?! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

How on earth is it any more "accurate"? It may be more specific, but at least you can call a person who is, well, black a "black person" and you'll be correct about it (all you have to do is observe that they are black); but if you call a black visitor from England an "African-American," you'll just be plain wrong... Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Whoa...wait...what?? How can you say that there can't be a recognized difference between those called "blacks" and those called "whites," but that you can differentiate based on where they're from?? Is there a physical difference between people because they're from Africa or Europe, but biologically you don't recognize that the skin of the African is FAR darker, and his features are VERY different from those of the European?? What about Asians? I disagree. I don't think we should care about it (that's why more non-racists are the whites who keep objecting to race-based preferences, rather than those who obviously are interested in perpetuating recognition of differences), but I definitely see that there are discernible differences. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

More like "thawed COSTUME in a freezer." Just another hoax. More and more reason to believe less and less in people who make "paranormal" claims. Every plastic model on a string is less reason to believe in alien spacecraft. Every blurry picture of a dude in a gorilla suit is less reason to believe in bigfoot. Every bullshit photo of some meaningless shadow is less reason to believe in ghosts. I think that when hoaxsters are exposed with proof that they were lying, they should be publicly pilloried, and left in the pillory long enough to die of dehydration. I have had enough of these fuckin' assholes. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

You really do miss the 'good ole days' when you could call a spade a spade, don't you? I guess that if I were being asked to do some deep thinking, I'd go the cheap route like you are going and just call the guy asking the question a racist and be done with it, rather than have to burn a few mental calories. You can feel free to recuse yourself right now, no harm no foul, if you don't want to do anything but make cheap allegations when you don't know me or what you're talking about. I promise I won't even ask, "What happened to jenfly00?" Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

No, not really--just the breakdown of law and order. I mean, they're being ordered to provide services to people who are lawbreakers. What's next, homeowners being ordered to give milk and cookies to burglars? To provide pillowcases for carrying stolen loot? How do you get around the obvious absurdity of this? If they are known to be these illegal immigrant laborers in the first place, they should be being rounded up and deported, not SUPported! Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

Shoulda turned your head to cough. By the way, no, the post is not meant to be a troll at all. And I am not trying to get people to discuss that word. I really just want to look at what I feel is the absurdity of using "African-American." I'm opposed to the entire "hyphenated-American" thing in the first place, but it's particularly stupid to apply "African-American" to blacks in America when no other country does this kind of thing to desperately avoid the word "black," and if you're talking about a black person in any other country, you're essentially stuck calling them black. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire

It's cool the way it's subtle about the statement it makes: when it comes to peace in the middle east, no one's fuckin' listening. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire