bmags

so...4 weeks later I finally saw bridesmaids. And i consider it very highly on my all-time comedy list.

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jul 7, 2011 -> 06:17 PM) Google didn't create the search engine, email, or lots of the things they do now. But they sure took them to the next level. If anyone can beat facebook, that is google. naw, i don't believe it. If something is going to overtake facebook it's going to be something organic that starts off with nothing and grows and grows.

I have no desire to waste my time on another google social media project

because if there's one thing her career has taught us, her single minded pursuit is all about the truth.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jul 6, 2011 -> 05:35 PM) They found her beaten, raped, and poisoned in the stairwell in Cabrini. I actually think she survived, but was in a coma and unable to communicate. Yeah, I remember that part. I must be remembering a different case where two boys were brought to the grand jury before semen was discovered.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 6, 2011 -> 04:57 PM) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Missing_white_woman_syndrome Seriously the American public has a bizarre fascination with attractive white women. I bring this up often, but Girl X's incident happened around the same time as Jonbenet Ramsey, everybody knows who Ramsey is but hardly anybody remembers Girl X. One of them got weeks, months, years of speculation about the case, the other got mentioned on the 10 o'clock news a couple times. Was Girl X the case where two boys saw her dead body and then told people they had killed her?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 6, 2011 -> 05:19 PM) I can't, actually. Obama.

A political system based around veganism would be interesting.

QUOTE (BigSqwert @ Jul 6, 2011 -> 04:08 PM) Maybe if it were a dietary choice I'd see your point. I work with others to abolish animal use of all forms. I view it more as a social movement. I think so too.

I don't really consider veganism to be a political institution.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 6, 2011 -> 04:00 PM) I wouldn't use the word "bad" cuz I don't make judgments of people's political views, just as I understand them. He's critical of capitalism as an economic system and said he'd want to try something else (though he would be able to explain that a lot better, if he's reading this) i guess i view anarchy as "bad", but to the left of anarchy would be communist and I don't think he is a communist. I think he's just a scandinavian socialist which in historical standards is pretty light on the spectrum.

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jul 6, 2011 -> 03:43 PM) Further left than BigSqwert and you're also in anarchist territory. Y2HH has the same distrust of corporate money and special interests that the left does. I really don't think he's that bad. Do you think BigSqwert would actually propose a large nationalization of companies in the US? I think he just favors heavy regulation.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jul 6, 2011 -> 04:34 PM) Oh, and also, for the record here...I don't think GW is as good as far right Republicans claim he was...and I don't think he was as bad as the far left Liberals say he was... That said, my voting record makes a pretty clear statement IMO: Clinton Bush Kerry I could not vote for McCain because of his choice of VP, nor did I like what Obama was selling...which was a dream. To say I agree with republicans more than democrats is stretching reality, at best...since I've voted for less Republicans in my life than Democrats. As Lostfan has said, after meeting me, he realized I'm less of a republican than most think...but I hate you democrats most of the time, too. Wasn't lostfan's quote that you were so far right you met bigsqwert on the other side?

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jul 6, 2011 -> 03:05 PM) I prefer either, since you apply universally valid statements only to me, but not yourself...so I say you too, have selective innocence, and since it would be impossible for you to refute such a generalized/global statement, I guess we both win. The difference is I'm not going into the Republican thread trolling calling you guys biased. I know I'm biased. I also try to back up my arguments, as do many of the posters in this thread. You guys might disagree with us, but as trying to back up our claims is a sign of respect. I expect the same.

also, selective innocence. i was listening to a podcast and that word came out. Memory. but, whichever you'd prefer.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 01:25 AM) Unfortunately, my no-sided stance is pretty well documented around here, considering there are things I agree with both sides on. My voting record (back when I still voted), also speaks for itself, as a person that's actually voted both ways in multiple presidential elections. I merely pointed out the obvious, which is standard fare when it comes to politics around here, that one group loves to point to one side, and the other points right back at them...which is what you've been doing for a long time now. We get it, anything the democrats say, is not only correct, but you agree with it. My post about Jesse Jackson was merely showing that it's not just one side that plays these games, it's both sides. According to you, rich people suppress poor people from voting to steal elections...but the other side never partakes in any such voting shenanigans! Don't think I'm going to post here and defend the republicans innocence, either...but don't dare try to play the unfair game, which is exactly what you're doing. We ALL have things both sides agree on. But you have selective innocence. Just because you may think one of the worst presidents in history did a bad job does not make you objective. The dems have s*** on clinton and have s*** on obama all the time in here. You guys act like I haven't been here since 2003 and remember you all during the Bush administration. I'm going to agree far more with a dem president than a republican president. You are going to agree far more with a Republican president than a Democratic president. I remember this much as true. Just because you disagreed with bush a handful of times doesn't mean you are king s*** of objectiveness.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 04:07 PM) Well, that has already happened hasnt it? We pay a hefty subsidy for the Sox to stay in town every year. Otherwise they would be in St Petersburg. And asking the taxpayers to fit the bill again 20 years later? Would never happen, publicly funded stadiums is an era coming to a close.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 03:49 PM) 3 out of every 4 voters wouldnt approve a subsidy to keep the team in town. They had a chance to give the owners a big f*** you we are keeping our team, but they didnt feel like it. Additionally Seattle has the opportunity to recreate the Sonics if they want as all of the logos and the name are protected by the city and the NBA. s*** even people in Cleveland could get it together enough to bring back their team. Frankly the onus is not on taxpayers. The league approved a purchase from owners from Oklahoma. They said the right things, but they never intended on keeping the team in Seattle. If the white sox ownership suddenly demanded a new stadium to be publicly funded, and the taxpayers didn't approve, you would put the blame on sox fans?

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Jul 1, 2011 -> 02:26 PM) The Sonics leaving had more to do with worthless fans than David Stern. come on man, that is not true.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 30, 2011 -> 05:56 PM) ...and we'll get there by pretending the republicans are the only ones that cheat/steal and lie. Got it. That was easy, maybe I'll start calling you Billy Koch. Here's whats great about you. You claim to be above the fray while doing the very same acts that you act that you are above. I made an equal argument and changed the characters, and then you said "yeah well jesse jackson! Dems do it too!" next post "I hate how everyones all dems do it, republicans do it, unlike ME, i'm so rational and awesome". And not once, could you guys ever even take the time to show why, in a decade that didn't see much of any defining moments of "dead bodies stealing elections" did a bunch of proposals to fix voter fraud specifically find as their cure-all, a solution that would suppress minority voting. I'm waiting. But you won't find it because you guys know all you need to from what sounds bad in your gut. And voter fraud that is convicted by way of criminal investigation and prosecution is bad, and poor people are lazy. Meanwhile, I'm so very rational.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 30, 2011 -> 05:53 PM) Well, no, it's not shocking, that's kinda the point. I'd like to see a return to sanity here (and everywhere else, in relation to politics), I'm sick and tired of seeing the, X party does this, Y party does that...it's unfair, it's illegal, blah... They're all doing it if we choose to take notice. It's just easier to pretend your own party is innocent and the other party play unfairly. Party politics is what got us where we are...it's not working, because it's never worked. and we'll get there by making sure poor people can't vote, got it.

a chipotle tortilla is almost 300 calories alone.

you've seen gotv campaigns? SHOCKING

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Jun 30, 2011 -> 04:00 PM) That's ok, Jesse Jackson will ship busloads of them to the working voting stations, free of charge, so long as they vote exactly as he tells them too. No problem here is right, problem solved. yes, jesse jackson has so much power

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 30, 2011 -> 02:04 PM) I don't think he was going for moderate... more like spineless and poll obsessed. so he's a moderate /rimshot