NUKE_CLEVELAND

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 10:56 PM) Wow And I am pro-choice. I believe abortion should be safe, legal and rare. But when you have abstinence only being promoted in schools, many parents either unwilling or not knowing how to talk about safe sexual practices with their children, etc, then it is no wonder that these children are growing up into adults who don't know their ass from their elbow when it comes to safe sexuality practices. Plus, I don't see all these pro-lifers who want all these women to have these kids, I don't see them paying the medical bills and paying for all the needs of the kid for 18 years. If you want them around so badly, take care of them. Why should children, who are totally not ready to be having sex yet, be tought how? The excuse that "well they're going to do it anyway" doesn't wash with me.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 06:26 PM) One thing I don't understand is how conservatives can be for the death penalty but on the same hand be against pro choice. The Vatican teaches a consistent ethic in life, Pro-Life and Anti-Death Penalty. Makes sense to me. Very simple. Killing the innocent is wrong. Killing the guilty is justice.

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 06:23 PM) Just because you are pro choice does not mean you are pro abortion. I see his point clearly. How can you be against killing known criminals who have commited heinous crimes and be for letting a woman kill her completely innocent child. Do you not see the irony?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 06:14 PM) Isn't it ironic that Iraq loved the death penalty and torture, like Nuke, and we are sending in guys like Nuke to stop them. I think its also pretty messed up that you're comparing us to the Hussein regime when they tortured and killed people for no reason other than to satisfy their own sadistic urges.

QUOTE(WilliamTell @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 06:04 PM) No offense to you Chuck Norris lovers, but I'm happy he didn't win this one. I'm sick of this Chuch Norris thing, I hear it everyday from multiple people and it's driving me insane. I think its awesome. It'll get old eventually but for now its still funny.

QUOTE(Soxy @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 06:00 PM) Against. It's a flawed system, and an error made under this system is too horrible to imagine. I also don't want anyone killing in my name--even if it is after a full judicial trial. Like Rex said, I'm against murder and in my eyes if it's a gang banger pulling the trigger or the government pulling the proverbial trigger it's the same. I also really don't feel that it is implemented fairly and equally across race (white people get it less) and gender (women get it less) and socio-economic status (rich people get it less)--so we don't even seem to implement it fairly. eleni new york If there anything flawed about it its that its not the manditory sentence for all serious crimes.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 05:31 PM) Without research, I'm guessing that there have not been 19,000,000 DNA death penalty cases, yet there have been mistakes already. So the odds would seem to be less than 1 in 19 million. You misunderstand. There is a 1 in 19 million chance of someone having a spot on DNA match with another person.

That thing was also FAKE! Nobody beats Chuck Norris!! NOBODY!!!!! One roundhouse kick and all those pussies would go flying into next week. Then Chuck Norris would teleport himself into next week and kick them into the week after next.

QUOTE(rventura23 @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 02:11 AM) I liked Uribe in the 9 slot, but if hes second I think its better to have Crede 9th over BA I totally agree with that. Especially since Uribe is prone to go through prolonged slumps at the bat. Having a free swinger like him batting second doesn't make any sense.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 01:04 PM) Even DNA isn't 100%. I'm glad y'al trust the government so much. What is it something like 1 in 19 million? Id say thats pretty fullproof.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 01:11 PM) South, north, wherever, it will continue to frustrate me when people willingly allow themselves to be duped into voting for a political party that only cares about them on election days, and then screws them up and down the rest of the time. Yeah, like the Democrats and black people.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 10:55 AM) It was more of the "f*** you" vote against the PA/Fatah. Hamas is/was an organization that had no other outlet for their anger/frustration/outrage than to take up arms. As we both know, the PA was corrupt. Hamas did not run on a platform of "driving Jews into the sea" but rather ran on their cleanliness when it comes to the topic of corruption. Add in the fact that they are also a social organization giving food, medical care, etc. to people who need it -- and it is no wonder why people would vote for them. As Tex said before, people vote for beans and beds before other things. Plus, we all know how effective over-the-top nationalism can be as a rallying point for anything. Look at when the IRA created Sinn Fein. After gaining political power, the attacks by the IRA went down since they had a legitimate avenue now to discuss their displeasure & do something about it diplomatically. While the IRA tried to use both attacks and political power for a while at the start, it blew up in their face (no pun intended), they found political power to be much more effective. For the US/Israel to immediately say that they won't talk to them is f***ing stupid. At least show up for f***'s sake. I mean, Bush is the one saying that democracy needs to be on the march through the Middle East and they should be free to pick their leaders. Well, that's what happened. While I think its optimistic to think Hamas will go the way Sinn Fein did I suppose its certainly plausible. They are now in charge of something for the 1st time and with that, hopefully, will come a sense of responsibility. If they want official recognition and support from Isreal and the west, however, they have to do something concrete such as renouncing their terrorist policies and renouncing violence.

QUOTE(CrimsonWeltall @ Jan 29, 2006 -> 11:08 AM) No, but because of current implementation (mistakes, possible biased use, can be very expensive due to long appeals process), rather than principle. This is the one area of the capital punishment debate I agree with the other side on. The way we implement it is rediculous and very arbitrary. Uniform sentencing standards, and the need for fullproof evidence ( DNA and the like ) would go a long way to resolving that issue.

If he'd kept his yap shut Id have said succeed against anyone but the Sox. Now, after he ran his f***ing mouth and ripped damn near everybody my vote goes to fail and retire. He did such a good job of being quiet and working through his injury problems the last couple of years but as of now he can go to hell.

QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 10:45 PM) http://home.comcast.net/~wepon1984/ultimateshowdown.swf I have watched it half a dozen times and still can't stop laughing. Not sure if it's old or not, but either way, I'm sure everybody hasn't seen it yet. I saw that on fark earlier today. I think your avatar is funnier.

QUOTE(BHAMBARONS @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 09:58 PM) I need to conduct a nationwide poll for my research paper, and I figures this is the best way to get it done. I also need to use some reply's so if you give your first name and state would be greatly welcomed. Please try and keep it civil Thanks Tom Happy to oblige. I am a firm believer in Capital Punishment not only as a deterrent but as a means to achieve justice for those who commit the most heinous of crimes. Those who argue against it say that it is not a deterrent and is imposed in an arbitrary and racist fashion. They are correct. In its present form it is a broken system. Capital punishment needs to be implemented in a uniform manner for the worst of crimes and the convictions should be backed up by unmistakeable evidence ( think DNA matching and the like ) so as to prevent innocent people from getting the axe. There are also those who say that life imprisonment is a viable alternative to the death penalty. These people are wrong. You give a life sentence to someone who does something so heinous and is so incapable of rehabilitation that they should never breathe free air again. If these people are so terrible then why should the public pay to warehouse them in prisons for decades? Rob. Arizona

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 01:36 PM) You just need money to benefit from the GOP. Im have money but Im not rich, yet Ive benefited from the GOP rule in government.

QUOTE(FlaSoxxJim @ Jan 26, 2006 -> 11:35 PM) Damn, you beat me to it. Truer words were never spoken. The south is full of a bunch of redneck dupes - including the family I married into. Republican voters in the South are "redneck dupes" huh? Keep right on talking that way. Keep right on insulting people just because they dont vote the way you want them to. Keep right on with that elitist, bulls*** attitude of yours. Keep right on not learning the lessons of the 2004 election cycle that insulting people for their political views only motivates them and strengthens their cause. The fact that the Democratic agenda is comprised entirely of personal attacks against the President and his supporters & defeatism in the War on Terror will ensure Republican dominance for years to come.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 08:12 PM) LOL...at least she's picking a seat that she won't have a prayer in Hell of winning. I'm glad she's not challenging Liebermann and screwing us up on that one, or running for a seat where we actaully have a pickup chance. I dont want her to win.........just siphon off enough votes to get a Republican in there.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,183108,00.html It doesn't say if she'll run against Fienstien as a primary challenger or a 3rd party candidate but if its the latter theres an opportunity for the GOP to snag themselves another seat. GO GREEN PARTY CINDY!!!

Most reputable used car dealers include a free carfax report upon request but if you dont get one then you might end up with one of these. http://www.cnn.com/2006/AUTOS/01/27/hurric...cars/index.html

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 07:03 PM) Link LITTLE ROCK, Arkansas (AP) -- Conservative commentator Ann Coulter, speaking at a traditionally black college, joked that Justice John Paul Stevens should be poisoned. Coulter had told the Philander Smith College audience Thursday that more conservative justices were needed on the Supreme Court to change the current law on abortion. Stevens is one of the court's most liberal members. "We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee," Coulter said. "That's just a joke, for you in the media." Coulter has made a career of writing and lecturing on her strongly conservative views. At one point during her address, which was part of a lecture series, some audience members booed when she cut off two questioners. "I'm not going to be lectured to," Coulter told one man in a raised voice. She drew more boos when she said the crack cocaine problem "has pretty much gone away." OMG what a stupid b****. :rolly

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jan 28, 2006 -> 08:30 AM) RTFA. In Bolivia, nobody in civil service can make more than the President, so they'll all be taking some sort of pay cut. All that money (plus lowered cost of living standards) should be enough cash to hire plenty of teachers and doctors. I don't know what Bolivian legislators make but even if all of them followed suit, you might be able to hire enough teachers and support staff to open up 1 or 2 schools. Either that or open up 1 hospital. Of course if the new President of Bolivia donated the fortune he made selling cocaine his whole life he might be able to make a sizeable difference.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 04:49 PM) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4652940.stm Good to see a politician asking to take a pay cut and then enacting it for the benefit of the country. Exactly how many teachers is that 50% pay cut going to hire? If President Bush cut his salary in half he might be able to hire 4 teachers, in a nation of 300 million. Symbolism over substance. :rolly

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Jan 27, 2006 -> 04:44 PM) http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=8383 What about the fact that in 2003 the US sent intelligence agents into Iraq to cook up "facts" to justify the invasion? Details. Details. Once again you go on some looney leftist website and parrot their rediculous accusations as if they're fact. :rolly