NUKE_CLEVELAND

I don't see how "erroneous" certain statements are when Muslims are in a horserace with the Sudanese to see how many innocent people they can knock off in any given time period. Oh wait, a lot of the Sudanese ARE Muslims. I'll take religon of mass murder for 2000 Alex.

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Oct 23, 2006 -> 01:23 PM) A relative of the Bush family killed a cop. This just makes the Ted Kennedy jokes so MUCH funnier!!! http://www.boston.com/news/local/connectic...ral_judge_dies/ Uhh. Was this Bush relative drunk? Was he stoned? Blinded by rage? Or was this simply a tragic accident in bad weather that really deserves no comparison to Kennedy's alcohol soaked driving of his date off a bridge? You're no better than LCR with nonsense like this.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 23, 2006 -> 07:17 AM) My new favorite quote of all-time Justice Scalia http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/J/JUD...-10-21-20-02-29 Scalia is easily my favorite SCOTUS justice. Not only is he a voice for the right wing but he's funny as hell when he speaks on certain things.

I dont know why but that reminds me of that scene in training day where the convict gets out of a conviction by packing his ass crack with peanut butter.

QUOTE(Brian @ Oct 22, 2006 -> 09:45 PM) Whoops... Just last week all the talk shows on SIRIUS NFL Radio were talking about the Chargers as though they were world beaters and look at them now. They're f***ED.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Oct 22, 2006 -> 06:24 PM) Nuke, this guy's gripe is that he was involved with getting the flag raised and no minority was shown helping with that -- talk about historical revisionism. And your point about PC over historical accuracy goes all the way back to the 1940s -- "One of the marines I interviewed said that the people who were filming newsreel footage on Iwo Jima deliberately turned their cameras away when black folks came by." Who needs to be seeing the uppity negroes fighting when we have a segregated white power structure to uphold. Really? How about the Native American guy who was prominentely featured in the film? Have you seen it? Probably not. You can't even make an attempt at good ol-fashioned PC whining without contradicting yourself. This sort of nonsense from you gets REALLY old sometimes. /rolly

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 22, 2006 -> 05:55 PM) The same thing for both teams...injuries, injuries, injuries. I was wondering what Philly's issue was. They looked like worldbeaters last week and now they look like yesterdays garbage. Who'd they lose?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 22, 2006 -> 05:57 PM) Given that fact about Hollywood, I find it difficult to believe that such a thing could happen by chance...it almost has to be some effort at historical accuracy, given the statistic Nuke cited. In this country historical accuracy

QUOTE(SoxFan1 @ Oct 22, 2006 -> 04:54 PM) Uh oh, things not looking good for Matt Hasselbeck. His knee is hurt bad from what I saw. Looks similar to the Carson Palmer incident. Seattle is in freefall right now. They're about to lose again. Same goes for Philly. What is going on with those guys?! They lost again today also.

Only in a hypersensitive, pussified society like ours can someone lose his job over something silly like that.

Going to see the movie this evening............and not really concerned about any of this. Why? Because........... On 19th February, American soldiers began landing on the island. Over 250,000 men and 900 ships were involved in this amphibious operation under the command of Admiral Richmond Turner. The main objective was to capture the island's three airstrips and to to obtain a forward air base for the planned Allied attack on the Japanese home territories. Just to give their complaints some perspective, that makes the 900 black soldiers who served a whopping .36% of troops involved in the fight. Nobody wants to leave out or minimize the contributions of black soldiers in the war but come on, it's not like they played a major role here.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 21, 2006 -> 08:41 PM) Yea, but he's a Democrat, save one issue. Anyone want to bet that if Congress ends up 50-50 that Joe gets coerced into becoming a Dem again? Nah. If they couldn't coerce him into bowing out he surely wont listen to anything like that.

QUOTE(juddling @ Oct 21, 2006 -> 06:08 PM) I kicked Bono in the nuts i don't care if she is innocent or guilty she gets my props.......

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 21, 2006 -> 05:49 PM) Double voting - people vote Absentee and then show up at polling places. According to that report, it's much more common than people voting who aren't citizens, and is much more likely to wind up working because most poll-workers don't have immediate access to enough detail of information and training about how to dela with it. Secondly, absentee voters are much more likely to be subject to intimidation because it's possible for their ballot to no longer be kept secret - someone else can get their hands on it once its outside of the voting booth. . As I believe the report I cited shows, this is simply not true. In theory it sort of makes sense, but even without these sorts of laws, it's already illegal to vote as a non-citizen, and the government has had high rates of success in both catching and prosecuting people who have attempted to vote while not being citizens. This law is simply an overreaction to a hypothetical problem. If there were actually evidence out there that the problem were real, then these laws might have more usefulness, but the reality is that the non-citizen-voting problem simply doesn't exist. Again, read the post. If you are mailed an absentee ballot then your precinct or district or whatever should track that and if you try to show up and vote again, if they are doing their jobs, they should catch you and turn you away. As for the intimidation, I really, REALLY doubt that some political machine is going to send goons to harass you about a vote you already cast. Id really like to see documentation of someone being harassed over an absentee ballot and then you have to prove to me that it's more of a problem than that same political machine having those same goons hanging around the polling place and bothering voters. You have a big hill to climb to successfully make that argument.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Oct 21, 2006 -> 05:31 PM) No, I'm just making the moral equivalent that it is a dumbass politician making a phony threat to justify a nationalistic effort to secure oil supplies to the dumbass kid posting on the net. Either both lying are bad or neither is bad. Somehow, one is okay with 1/3 of the American public and the other is being seemingly over-zealously condemned. To secure oil supplies? Come on LCR. If that rediculous argument had any merit we would be talking about "the illegal, immoral, unjust, ( insert other ways to describe how horrible it is here )" invasion and occupation of Canada. If this were about oil as you incorrectly suggest then Iraq would have been way down the list. By the way. Only you and other leftists like you are calling Bush a liar.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 21, 2006 -> 05:26 PM) Actually, it really doesn't strike a hard blow against voter fraud at all, and just recently we were given the evidence to be able to say that with something to stand on. As part of the "Help America Vote Act" passed after the 2000 debacle, the government actually undertook a study of where and how voting fraud actually happens. The large majority of vote fraud actually is either related to coercion or is related to problems with the absentee balloting process, while it appears that the type of vote fraud that these sorts of measures would try to stop is almost non-existant. Link. If stopping voter fraud were actually the goal, then the easiest way to do it appears to be the elimination of absentee ballots, because they make bookkeeping errors, double voting, and coerced voting much more likely. The reality is that all these measures do is make voting more complicated, harder for people to accomplish, and especially tend to disenfranchise the low-income voters who either aren't as informed about the new laws or who are less likely to have the required ID's. I fail to see how reaching into your wallet and pulling out a SS card ( which are issued to everybody ) or a drivers license makes voting more complicated. You present your ID, they check your name off on the roster, you vote. Its not like they're asking for a 1st born child here. In states that are overrun by illegals like Arizona ( thanks to the utter failure of the government to correct the problem ) protecting the validity of elections demands such a law. For people to fret about whether low-income people are going to be disenfranchised due to not having the ID kind of rings hollow as nearly all of them of voting age have some form of ID. Also to say that certain people will not be able to vote because they didn't know they needed ID also isin't that strong. If someone in this apathetic nation of ours is motivated enough to vote then they surely watch the news and can read signs posted outside polling places. Another point. How does the absentee voting system cause double voting and coersion? Seems to me that if you are mailed an absentee ballot your name should be checked off on the roster as having recieved one. Additionally, how does a person who votes absentee find themself subject to intimidation when you are voting from somewhere other than the polling place?

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Oct 21, 2006 -> 05:15 PM) If they are so disgusted by the wasted resources towards this case then...why...are...they...wasting...resources...now with the FBI etc.? So, let's get this straight: Lie about the possible use of weapons of mass destruction, explicit details of where it would take place and how they'd be used -- start a war and it is seen as okay by 1/3 of the population currently. Lie about the possible use of weapons of mass destruction, explicit details of where it would take place and how they'd be used -- go on trial and possibly get a 5 year prison term. Add in the fact that Bush laughed at the fact we haven't been able to find WMD in Iraq during a press dinner and it looks like we've got some people here creating a double standard when the one standard would work just perfectly fine here. Either it is fine for both to lie and joke about it or it is okay for neither. Filibuster in 5.........4.........3......2..................1........... Lets see here. Some dumbass kid makes a phony bomb threat and you're trying to equate him to the President making a decision to go to war. It's not so much a double standard as it is you being opposed to the war and trying to equate anything that's wrong or distasteful to it in a vain attempt to make a point. /rolly

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 21, 2006 -> 03:36 PM) Here's something to ponder...what will happen first...a world series trophy on the north side, or a clean city government in Chicago? Neither. The sun will supernova and destroy the galaxy before either of those 2 impossibilities happen.

QUOTE(AbeFroman @ Oct 21, 2006 -> 02:58 PM) You may find it refreshing to go back and read all my posts on the mortgage boom thread. I think you'll find that I think taxes help, a tiny bit, but that the heavy lifter is monetary policy. I'm glad we've finally resolved this issue on whether Reagan can be credited for improving the economy: result; No... mostly, he can be credited a tiny bit You and those who think like you have resolved along time ago that Reagan didn't have much to do with the boom of the 1980's. That's fine. To say tax policy only has a minimal impact on the economy and to dismiss it completely, as you have done and continue to do, is simply wrong. If I remember the Morgatge thread correctly that was a long drawn out talk about how tax revenue was affected by tax policy not so much about economic growth, but even you were forced to concede what should be common sense about tax cuts pouring money into the economy. I must be slipping also as it took me this long to catch you taking me out of context in your 1st response. You said I credited Reagan with falling interest rates and inflation but if you read the post, you will see that's not the case. I made the point that the Democrats were bitter about falling inflation and interest rates but I didn't credit Reagan for it. Additionally, you quoted me as saying that the economic recovery was one of Reagan's "ultimate victories". That's also not so. Helping turn the economy around was certainly a fine achievement of his administration but the fall of Soviet Communisim and of the Iron curtain were truly historic victories. When you are going to try to point out other people's shortcomings and accuse them of flip-flopping you would do well to pay attention to detail and make sure you have your own ducks in a row.

http://elections.us.reuters.com/top/news/usnN20175534.html Liberman is clobbering Lamont in the latest polls. I couldn't be happier for Liberman. His party didn't want him anymore and now he's set to remain a senator anyway, just with an I next to his name instead of a D.

http://elections.us.reuters.com/top/news/usnN20250933.html This is certainly good news for other states who are trying to get the same thing done and strikes a pretty hard blow against voter fraud.

QUOTE(Greg The Bull Luzinski @ Oct 21, 2006 -> 02:28 PM) How is Gary, Indiana not on this list. ... Seriously. Are we talking about human debris here or industrial pollution?

QUOTE(santo=dorf @ Oct 21, 2006 -> 01:58 PM) What ever happened to the ban on attacking or making snarky comments about a group of people (i.e Muslims, "leftists," "right wing nuts.") You mean like this? I dont start it.......I just finish it.

QUOTE(AbeFroman @ Oct 21, 2006 -> 02:01 PM) What? thats it? oh come on Nuke... you know I don't care about the signature thing. What I do care about is how you can address some relevant points. Like how you can justify all the flip-flopping you done on economic issues. Or how you seem to look for any plausible reason to credit Ronald Reagan. Please... feel free to address some of my points in my post How did God-incarnate (Reagan) affect interest rates or control inflation? How can tax cuts be so effective when interest rates have a lot more power? Does the Bush economy REALLY prove that tax cuts work? Or might it just correllate to periods of low interest rates? Do tax cuts prove anything if they aren't as powerful as monetary policy. There's a whole lotta contradiction there. I'm pretty sure everyone is gonna see it... There's a whole lot of splitting hairs here but not much else. I'll say it for the 4TH time. Tax cuts help spark the economy and so does monetary policy. Monetary policy is a more powerful tool for doing it but tax cuts still have the same effect.

So 6 of the 10 places are in the former Soviet Union and in China. SHOCKING!!!