mr_genius

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 09:07 AM) And with our convient control the media, we can pretty much do whatever we want. I Photoshopped those pictures to show Nancy Pelosi hanging out with Bin Laden, they are ready to debut in our conservative pawn (the New York times) tomorrow morning. blahahaha

Oh yea, another "scandal". This is really nothing. He worked at a law firm that defended someone from Iran, WHOA SCANDAL! You guys are totally racist against Iranians. Racists.

QUOTE(The Critic @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 08:33 PM) I made the horrific mistake of clicking on the link to the Courtney Hole story.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 09:32 PM) Well, I've completely changed my mind. Liberal Democrats Well, I was just talking about the fringe groups, not liberals in general. And I was glad that conservative groups let the guy speak, as should all invited speakers be allowed to.

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 09:15 PM) 1. I guess only conservatives hate dictators. 2. What are you implying -- that only liberals have ever charged a speaker? Give me a break. Everything isn't a political war between Democrats and Republicans or (western) conservative and (western) liberal. I'm just happy no White Sox fans charged Mahmoud Ahmaniac! It was the conservative groups on campus that had a "problem" with him being there (or at least they were the ones which were vocally against it), so they would be the demographic that would be most likely to try to break up the speech. If the liberal groups are so offended by the guys hate speech, how come they feel that they need to attack some guy from the minutemen or throw urine laced pies at pro-GOP speakers but give the guy from Iran a total pass? I think politics has a lot to do with it. If GW Bush is against someone, they feel by default they have to at least quietly support that person.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 09:05 PM) In Columbus's own journals, it states that the goals of the journeys were made for mining and production of gold for Spanish coffers. Subsequent activities de las Casas and others who were there in their primary sources discussed the pursuit of gold being a primary factor -- hence the wording of the question. The global consequences question is more for the way that the Spaniards treated the Natives (i.e. cutting the hands off the people who did not get them gold, etc.) De las Casas does an excellent job of discussing the offenses. It is more of 'if the ends justify the means in that situation, what happens if all use those means to get a positive end?' Yea, I guess the original motives for Columbus' journey would be a issue as to answer the question 'should we celebrate Columbus day?'. But I get the feeling that this debate is going to much more based on what happened to the natives after mass settlement began. Should people be allowed to move where ever they want with no regard to the population already in the vicinity?

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 08:40 PM) Wednesday I'll be throwing questions at them using role reversals (if it was right, what if you were a Native or if it was wrong, what if you were a European who was making money from the activity), global consequences (what if everybody acted in that way) Your question is being phrased in a way which suggests what response you would like to hear. You might want to change "to make money from" to "move to and settle". Also, your question of "what if everyone did this" is not a legit question. Everyone has done it. Many suggest the origin of Native Americans arrived from Asia during the Pleistocene Age by the Bearing Strait. Cultures from around the world have been moving and fighting since written history (and certainly even before). So your suggestion that this is only something that happens with the United States is misguided at best. And, for disclosure, I don't think we should celebrate Columbus day. The mass slaughter and seizure of the "Indians" land was tragic.

Did you guys watch any of Hillary's interviews on the Sunday morning news shows? thoughts?

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 08:20 PM) Well, conservative indoctrination. Well, I don't think you have to worry about that. Most of the non-mathematical science professors I had in college were definitely lefty wing. Some of them were good professors, others just required memorization of their misguided opinions.

I don' have a problem with the Iranian leader speaking at Columbia. It's also great to see that we didn't have conservative students charging the stage, attacking the guy, and making fools out of themselves (like their liberal counterparts did during that speech for the guy with the minutemen).

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 06:56 PM) That quote came from the NEWS of the LA Times, or is that an editorial? The guy that wrote that is a NBC news military analyst, a go-to guy when they want an "expert" to evaluate things. Also writes columns for the LA Times. He is "analyzing" the troops

QUOTE(NUKE @ Sep 23, 2007 -> 08:46 AM) Yeah, go look at history. Go look at all the rich young men who risked losing everything to go off and fly for the RAF against the Nazi's even before the U.S. entered WW2. Go look at the men and women who left high paying careers behind to enlist in the army after 9/11 ( I know several of those kind of people personally ). I've been doing this for a long time and I have seen a very broad cross section of the military in my time here. I can state for a fact that there are just as many people from middle/upper class backgrounds as there are poor kids. I stand by my statement and I have just as many examples backing my argument as you have yours. Your condescending attitude and poor attempt at humor just make you look that much more ignorant. I agree, this attitude that everyone in the military is either: a) a dumbass or b)blood thirsty muslim hating racist It's total nonsense. Some people just cannot understand why anyone would want to serve their country as a member of the armed services. Here's a link to some statistics on the military http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalS...ty/cda05-08.cfm You got Democrats in news rooms like the LA Times writing this kind of crap "We pay the soldiers a decent wage, take care of their families, provide them with housing and medical care and vast social support systems and ship obscene amenities into the war zone for them, we support them in every possible way, and their attitude is that we should in addition roll over and play dead, defer to the military and the generals and let them fight their war, and give up our rights and responsibilities to speak up because they are above society?" ... "But it is the United States, and the recent NBC report is just an ugly reminder of the price we pay for a mercenary - oops sorry, volunteer - force that thinks it is doing the dirty work." Then these same people will claim "We are just looking out for the troops interest."

Another innocent victim of the vast right win conspiracy http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070922/ap_on_...c_fundraiser_45

Classic some guy that works at the DMV puts up a chistmas decoration and the ACLU busts in there, tasers him, sues him and demands hate crime charges be leveled all in the name of separation of church and state.... oh, but a state funded muslim school is fine. lol

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Sep 21, 2007 -> 04:32 PM) I guess I can add another Thompson related story. Fred Thompson is a big fat idiot!

QUOTE(DrunkBomber @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 06:04 PM) How long until Chris Hansen came out of the kitchen and told you that you were on To Catch A Predator?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 05:34 PM) I did? Where did I accuse anyone of being a racist? And Texas as the most racist state Oh, duck the question, typical racism technique. for shame

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 20, 2007 -> 10:42 AM) Meh. Doesn't work in this version, doesn't work in yours. you're a racist. racist racist racist. see, you just accuse others of being racist to cover up your deep hatred for black people. it's very obvious, texsox. you are from texas (most racist state) and use the racist term 'texas' (tex is short for texas) in your sign on name. don't try to defend yourself, you are guilty of hate. guilty, my racist friend, guilty.

Attempted murder does seem a bit severe. Were they really trying to kill the kid? It's obviously felony assault though. As far as the shotgun incident, if he attacked someone then he should be charged too. If he was just holding a legal gun to scare off a group of attackers thats hardly a crime. But I wasn't there so I have no idea what happened. I'm sure stories vary from person to person. So if no one was injured you can't really charge someone with that crime when a bunch of witnesses are all contradicting each other.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 19, 2007 -> 05:41 PM) There's a chance he might have liked that. Oh yea, good point. that plan could have totally backfired.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Sep 19, 2007 -> 05:44 PM) What few news programs they have are okay, but its mostly editorial/ opinion programs passed off as news. QUOTE(mr_genius @ Sep 17, 2007 -> 08:57 PM) Seriously though, if someone thinks that the O'reilly Factor or Hannity and Colmes is news, they are fooling themselves. Those are opinion shows, nothing more or less. As far as the other FOX news shows or outlets, they are no worse than most of the news you consider accurate.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Kgzfu_b6v44

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Sep 19, 2007 -> 04:16 PM) You're really stuck on this whole taser thing now, aren't you? Yea, I guess I have been posting a lot about tazers lately. But just imagine the rating boost for Hannity and Colmes if he did that.

Seriously though, if Ron Paul keeps going to the GOP primary debates I think Sean Hannity might crash the stage and tazer the poor guy. No joke. It could happen. And I like Ron Paul, I'm just worried about his safety.

it's just too bad the police didn't tazer the Senator when they had the chance. now look at him, he's totally out of control, filling appeals hanging out with the ACLU...