SkyPiggie

Darius usually posts Iraq war items which he has read in the indisputably reliable, unbiased and credible "Rolling Stone" magazine. (Yeah, that was sarcasm.) Like maybe this story: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/18722376/the_myth_of_the_surge/print As if a magazine targeting young music-fanatic dope-smokers is THE source for reliable info on the Iraq war. It's interesting how some people are so unwilling to post their sources for others to critique. When they hide things like that, it kind of sends up a big red warning flag right away...

I must know - what did he claim about the popularity of Molson? See here, message numbers 28, 30, 32 and 34. He never did confess his error or the intentional attempt to mislead. Now I wonder if he's not doing the same thing here. Maybe he's been listening to kallend for too long, and has unconsciously absorbed his techniques...

Provide a link to the source from which you got your quote. Are you trying to hide something again, like you attempted to do with your claim about the popularity of Molson beer in America?

Name your source for this info.

Yep. The reason that Mexico's Santa Anna started giving away land in America to those new European immigrants was to let them foreigners figure out how to quell the Indians and make the land safe. Prior to that, very few Mexicans dared to enter the territory, because it was just too dangerous. Then once the white men had accomplished that task, he decided to take it all back for his own people. But the Texans weren't having none of that stuff, and the rest is history...

News:Man charged with assault for hurling a hedgehog Hurling a hedgehog at a teenager has landed a New Zealand man a date in court. William Singalargh picked up the animal and threw it about five metres at a 15-year-old. He was arrested shortly afterwards for assault with a weapon, namely the hedgehog.Source: Metro.Co.UK

The original topic was the number of Americans drinking Molson beer. You are now trying to say that drinking Coors beer is the equivalent of drinking Molson. It's not. Just because the same company now markets both, does not mean that they are the same beers. You shouldn't be trying to pull the wool over people's eyes to fool them like that. You've been caught in a misrepresentation, and you ought to just admit it, rather than try to cover it up or explain it away. You been takin' lessons from Hillary and Obama?

Then you missed the whole history of US immigration. Negative. There were standards back then when the Statue of Liberty was the immigration checkpoint from Europe. If you were sick or a criminal, you didn't get to stay. Plus, in order to be able to cross the Atlantic back then, it meant that you were usually someone who was already skilled, thrifty and enterprising - a good fit for America.

Now I see why you didn't post your source for that number - it includes sales of Coors & Coors Light, which is the large majority of that number. Source: http://www.wikinvest.com/stock/Molson_Coors_Brewing_Company_(TAP) Now try again for a number representing only Molson, which was the subject.

Mexico would much rather create the crises in America, by sending America all their unemployed, their unhealthy, and their criminals. As long as they have that relief valve, they don't have to actually fix all the things that are wrong in their own country.

Great! The governor better sign it...

Maybe that's why Molson is still an unknown beer here in America.

News:Ban on samurai swords becomes law Legislation against selling, making, hiring or importing samurai swords in England and Wales has come into force. Those breaking the law face six months in jail and a £5,000 fine. Anyone found guilty of importing samurai swords will face up to seven years in prison and an unlimited fine.Source: BBC I am relieved to hear that England is now safe from attack by bands of ninja assassins roaming the streets. Phew! That was a close one! Will they come for your kitchen knives next?

They're welcome to offend anyone they want. They're also welcome to suffer the consequences from that offense. Those two things go together. If you think one can offend a large number of people, and escape from all consequences from that action, then you have unrealistic expectations. As a business trying to sell a product, they should try not to offend large quantities of their customers, like 300 million Americans. They made a bad business choice, and now they're correcting it. It's not about political correctness, it's about business.

So you're willing to accept democrats that lie, but not republicans that lie? Are you going to vote for Hillary or Barack, even though they've both now been caught outright lying several times? Doesn't that destroy your confidence that they'll be any different than "Bush & Co"? And look at Pelosi's Congress, which she promised would be the most ethical in history - she's already blown that promise. Your beloved liberals ain't no different from the conservative which you love to hate.

So we should just accept their lying and vote for them anyway? I don't think so. Yeah, that was the first lie to be uncovered. First he said that the preacher had never said those incendiary types of things while he attended. Then in your so-called great speech, he admitted that the preacher had in fact said such things in his presence. So he lied at first, because he thought he could get away with it. Just like Bill Clinton. Is that the kind of President you want? I don't think so. He's since been caught in a second lie also. I don't recall at the moment what that one was. Just type "Obama lies" in Google and see just how much integrity he has. He's just another "say anything to get elected" politician. Hillary lies about sniper fire and hospital care. Bill Clinton lied about black churches being burned while he was governor. The whole freakin' lot of 'em are a bunch of pathological liars that are so used to doing it that it now just comes naturally to them, and they think nothing of it. That's not a quality I want in a president. If you lie repeatedly, you don't have integrity. These two things are mutually exclusive.

They've come to their senses! News:Absolut apologizes for Mexican vodka ad The Absolut vodka company apologized Saturday for an ad campaign depicting the southwestern U.S. as part of Mexico amid angry calls for a boycott by U.S. consumers... "In no way was it meant to offend or disparage, nor does it advocate an altering of borders, nor does it lend support to any anti-American sentiment, nor does it reflect immigration issues," Absolut said...Source: L.A. Times Probably too late to prevent a lot of damage to their U.S. sales. But they need to be taught a lesson not to delve into anti-American politics if they want to sell their vodka in our market. They deserve to be taught this lesson.

Both of the Clinton's are pathological liars who will say anything to try and get their way. That alone is reason enough not to put them back in the White House. And Obama has already been caught telling several lies also. Their true colors are starting to show, and people are noticing. John Kerry has already faded into obscurity. In a few more years, no one will remember or care about either of these liberal bozos either.

So it would be okay for Absolut to market some product to Islamic nations by showing a map of the Middle East with Israel merged with Syria? How about Taiwan belonging to China? South Korea belonging to North Korea? Pakistan belonging to India? The Falklands belonging to Argentina? It doesn't seem like a very good marketing strategy to me. They may gain some customers, but they'll lose just as many, if not more. They should be able to find ways to appeal to one audience, without using nationalism which disenfranchises another. It's dumb. I hope their U.S. sales plummet.

News:Mexico reconquers California? Absolut drinks to that! The latest advertising campaign in Mexico from Swedish vodka maker Absolut promises to push all the right buttons south of the U.S. border, but it could ruffle a few feathers in El Norte. The billboard and press campaign, now running in Mexico, is a colorful map depicting what the Americas might look like in an "Absolut" -- i.e., perfect -- world. The U.S.-Mexico border lies where it was before the Mexican-American war of 1848 when California, as we now know it, was Mexican territory and known as Alta California... Full story, with picture of map: L.A. Times I will not be purchasing any Absolut vodka in the future. Maybe Sweden should disband and return their land to Prussia.

Yep, and the disease is spreading elsewhere around the world too...

News:Bill may shoot down neon-colored guns Nassau County is taking aim at neon- and other custom-painted handguns that officials say endanger police, who may think they are harmless toys. The controversy over the brightly colored but lethal weapons erupted last week after news broke that a Chippewa Falls, Wis., company was producing the "Bloomberg Collection EZ Camo Kit" - a paint kit that can turn pistols into fashion statements. The collection, which mocks Mayor Bloomberg's anti-gun efforts, features "electric" colors - with names like "Manhattan Red," "Brooklyn Blue," "Bronx Rose," "Queens Green" and "Staten Island Orange" that can be spray-painted onto handguns. Mulvey called the company's coloration kits "despicable" and said they put police officers' lives in jeopardy. The commissioner and Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi said yesterday that they are working to "fast track" legislation that would ban Nassau County gun owners from painting their firearms any color other than the standard black, gray, dark green, silver, steel or nickel...Full story: Daily News What about the color case-hardening on old antique firearms? They gonna confiscate those too?

When someone tells me I'm going to hell, or that I'm an evil person, because I don't believe in god; yes. Although depending upon my mood, I might also just consider it humorous.

News:The world's most stable and prosperous nations A one-year investigation and analysis of 235 countries and dependent territories has ranked the premier league of nations. The top ten comprise the Vatican, Sweden, Luxembourg, Monaco, Gibraltar, San Marino, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands and the Irish Republic. The US lies 22nd, partly because of the proliferation of small arms owned by Americans and the threat to the population posed by the flow of drugs from across the Mexican border.Source: Times Online Personal comments: In other words, Janes Information Group considers the right to keep and bear arms to be a NEGATIVE factor in judging a nation's value for it's citizenry. Despite the fact that there are plenty of nations with plenty of gun ownership, that aren't having any problems because of it. Most of the "top 10" are no bigger than a booger. Not one of them could protect itself from a foreign invasion, and would come crying for military and financial help from the U.S. to repel the intruders. They give us "the finger" until they need us, and our guns. "Stability" to these weenies means a strong central government nanny state which will come by and regularly change their diapers. That may be "stable" to them, but it's not as free as America. So the U.S. is being inundated with a criminal element flowing across our border, yet we lose points for being able to defend ourselves with arms? This is the logic of anti-gun loonies. Oh, and look at the bottom 10 countries. Yeah, those are mostly places where only the government is allowed to have guns.

So, the new movie "The Brave One" came out this weekend, featuring Jodie Foster using a gun to defend herself from thugs, and eventually, to hunt down and get revenge on those who attacked her. It reminded me of the old Charles Bronson "Death Wish" movies. In the end, will the detective investigating the shootings catch her and arrest her for murder, or will he let her go free? In this interview, she made the following quote: "I don't believe that any gun should be in the hand of a thinking, feeling, breathing human being. Americans are by nature filled with rage-slash-fear." - Jodie FosterIs Jodie a hypocrite for making millions of dollars off of a movie featuring a gun being used to in self defense, while at the same time saying publicly that people shouldn't be allowed to own guns? Given that this quote was published before the movie started playing, I was surprised that there wasn't an obvious anti-gun climax to the movie.