FlaSoxxJim

Hey, PA, how did you figure out how to vote more than once?!

QUOTE(Heads22 @ Jan 20, 2006 -> 09:28 AM) Damn Flaxx anyways. ! You're making me drink alone?!? This board is turning me into a social liability. And I'll drink to that.

I figured anybody who knows a good thing when they come across it would be lining up to by Soxy a drink. I mean, I'm sure NUKE's got a nice pair of legs, but COME ON!

And much to her dismay. . . he beats the 24-second shot clock. That's gotta hurt.

Wilson Picket died of a heart attack today at age 64. Play some "Mustang Sally" or "Midnight Hour" and raise a glass to one of the great R&B/soul singers. http://msnbc.msn.com/id/10929971/

QUOTE(Balance @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 04:46 PM) Of course, how do you determine what country the terrorist attack came from? And how can you say that "Country X perpetrated the terrorist attack" as opposed to "Some guys who happened to be from Country X perpetrated the terrorist attack"? I think France is posturing, more than anything else. Who needs to know who is actually responsible. Just nuke Mecca.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 19, 2006 -> 04:31 PM) It's not the big news story of the day, because it doesn't fit 'Bush sucks' in content. /back to exile yeah, I figured there had to be a logical reason. Not that the one you've suggested is it, mind you.

I saw this on Raw Story last night and I figured it would be the big news lede of the day. I assume it will get a little more coverage tomorrow.

Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont: Meanwhile, in an absolutely stunning surprise, the Justice Dept. is going to release a 40-page document tonight that concludes the warrant-less eavesdropping program is legal. A leaked copy of the report is available for download at rawstory.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 18, 2006 -> 02:17 PM) November Santorum: "The K Street project is purely to make sure we have qualified applicants for positions that are in town. From my perspective, it's a good government thing." January Santorum: "Well, I don't know what you mean by Senate liaison to the, quote, 'K Street Project.' I'm not aware of any Senate liaison job that I do for the K Street Project." I guess he's forgotten that standing meeting he had EVERY TUESDAY for four years. The Pubes are a bunch of forgetful fockers, eh?

My condolances Rex, you poor f***er.

I think that "Great Debate" idea of Tex's is just what this forum needs to bring us all together.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 18, 2006 -> 10:02 AM) ^^^^^^ Gore and Hillary = pwn3d!!!!! Every time those 2 open their mouths a bunch of hypocritical leftist drivel spews out. :puke I'm not altogether down with what Sen. Clinton said, but both of Gore's speeches (the first one this thread referred to and especially his reply to the non-factual and impotent White House pushback) were very good.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 18, 2006 -> 12:07 AM) I took what he said to be basically the same thing you said which was that I believe Christians should not be bashed at all but that any other religon is fair game. I do not believe that at all. All religons should be free to worship as they see fit. My biggest problem is that its ok to bash Christians at will in the media. Thats wrong, its hypocritical and its bigoted. If I spouted off about Jews or whoever around here the way the media spouts off about Christians every day Id have been banned long ago. I do respect that position, but I also think a lot of it is perception. I think it is wholly consistent and correct to support the rights of mainstream Muslims while denouncing the evil and inhuman acts of an extremist minority. But I think the same can be said of Christianity and any other faith. It's the extremists that give all religion a bad name.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 11:55 PM) Go find me one post where I denigrate Jews or Muslims or Hindus or anyone else for that matter. I wont hold my breath. Your response to Tex' post seems to be knocking the proposition that practicioners of Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, and Buddhist traditions might feel the same sort of persecution complex you are feeling on behalf of the beleagered Christian Right. If not, then I don't follow your response and you can tell me what I am missing.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 11:52 PM) I see what you're driving at and we both know thats simply not the case. Try again. Spoken like a person with deep, deep concerns about tolerance of religious beliefs. Well, for Christians, anyway.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 11:49 PM) How do you say that in the Muslim, Hindu, Jewish, and Buddhist traditions?

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 11:37 PM) Your buddy just brushed all Christian Conservatives as whackjobs. Thats just f***ing bulls***. You me and Fla all know that people who follow idiots like Robertson are a tiny minority. All of this was springboarded off of Hacket's commentary, which WAS directed at the extremist whackjobs. You suggested that calling an extremist an extremist was going to cheese off the larger (and on the whole, more rational) group of Christian Conservatives. I'm simply voicing a reasoned opinion that the Christian Cinservative vote is not exactly one the Democrats are going to pick up particularly easily, so stirring up that already politically mobilized group may not be so dangerous for the Dems as you suggest.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 11:09 PM) It was a question, not a statement. And I even relented... but it's nice to know you can't read that part or chose not to acknowledge it and turn it into a pissing contest. Again, what the f*** have we turned this into? This forum is bull s***. And I include myself in it. I'm done here. Have fun being assholes to each other. It's unfortunate, because now, this forum won't last. This is relenting? As far as I could read it (not very far, admittedly, since I can't read that part or choose not to acknowledge it and turn it into a pissing contest.), that relent still leaves Al and Hillary staying up late at night talking on their supersecret Bat Phones trying to figure out who is going to say what about this administration and the GOP Congress - institutions that any sane person would know are well beyond any sort of reproach. :rolly I believe a GMAFB is in order.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 11:20 PM) Like I said. You would think by now Democrats would know better than to stir up the Christian Conservatives. I guess they havent learned anything from 2004 and thats good news for my side. The Christian Conservatives are already mobilized, they are a solid GOP voting block, and stirring them up (or more precicely, calling whackjobs whackjobs) isn't going to cost Dems a whole lot of votes. Meanwhile, they are becoming a heavy anchor around the neck of the GOP. And every time this vocal minority is appeased at the expense of moderate Repubiclicans, fiscal conservatives etc., it is another blow to the unity of the GOP voter base.

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 11:13 PM) He compared Republicans to Osama Bin Laden dude. Thats over the top and he's gonna pay. Actually, I think he compared one group of religious extremists to another group of religious extremists. He's not the first to do so and he won't be the last.

QUOTE(mreye @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 10:52 PM) Did I miss something? You missed Kap's Grand Coordinated Dem Unification Theory, in which the MLK Day comments of Ray Nagin, Hillary Clinton, and Al Gore (who did I miss?) were all carefully orchestrated components of a coordinated campaign of unknown purpose. I merely assumed Hacket's comments, made on the VERY SAME DAY (dun dun dun!!) must have been part and parcel to the same nefarious Democratic scheme. And I don't expect, desire, or deserve an apology, Kap. I said my said your piece, you said yours.

Meh, I'm sure it's just more coordinated Dem grandstanding on MLK Day.[/Kap] Paul Hackett

QUOTE(Cknolls @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 12:35 PM) Who are these thousands of people? How do we know there are thousands? Do they have names? Or haven't they been leaked yet? Ames is different because it was Clinton doing it. No outcry from MSM, just praise and adulation. Do you think the Gorelick wall had anything to do with the gov't. not being able to look into Moussauis' computer files? Clinton was the best. :puke :puke The 'thousands of people' comes from FBI staff who have been sent out on wild goose chases for four years. The report said the bureau got about a thousand phone numbers a month to investigate and they have been doing that for 4+ years since 9-11.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Jan 17, 2006 -> 12:06 PM) The Gorelick story has been debunked. He did argue that case, but it was rejected and the Clinton administration did not act on it. And there's also a big difference between Aldrich Ames and eavesdropping over thousands of random citizens who might be tied in to someone who might be tied into someone. In either case, if the Ames case is true, the Clinton adminstration was just as wrong. The question would be who in the FBI authorized that search. Did that go up all the way to an executive order? Because the administrations actions regarding wiretapping did. I love the "They all do it" defense, because it's so four year old in nature. It's OK for you to do the wrong thing, because everyone else did! Abu Gonzales was equally uninformed on the Ames issue during the Larry King interview from which this comes. The Aldrich Ames home search occurred in 1993. As such, it could not have been done in violation of FISA because FISA was not espanded to include physical searches until 1995 (by Bill Clinton).