Rex Kickass

What's so inappropriate about my lifestyle? Is it that I go to bed early? That I like drinking PBR beer? That I kinda like watching A Different World?

Here's the thing dude. Chances are, the love of my life will be a guy. When I find that person, I want to spend the rest of my life in a committed, mutual, monogamous respectful relationship. Or as breeders often refer to it - marriage. I don't think that I should not be allowed to be in one because we're two guys. If the state recognizes it - I don't care. I pray and hope that God will. You may say otherwise, but I do what I need to in order to make my peace with God. And hope you'd respect it.

Funny it wasn't a choice for me. I tried to choose to be straight. Never worked though.

It was featured today on Yahoo Sports though. That being said, I think he's right - I could honestly see the difference between 1st and last place in the division being as little as 15 wins.

Once she learns to spell her damn name with a Y like everyone else, I'll care. The only place I wanna watch girls with stripper names are at strip clubs.

Dude. He quoted the NY Times, several times. He quoted John Mearsheimer. This guy is one of the brightest political thinkers of our time. He is from the University of Chicago. But if it will settle this argument - I can compromise I guess... Girls, you're both pretty.

I wonder what kind of linguists they'd be looking for. Not like I'd really have to be worried. There are at least two linguists the army has chosen to NOT have for similar reasons.

Wow. This got ugly. Dag yo, I figure its time to chime in with my moderately radical middle ground. I'm glad Saddam Hussein is no longer in control of Iraq. He was a terrible person who has done terrible things to his own people. That being said, I was against the actions of the United States in its invasion of Iraq last year. Why? Because if we are fighting a war against terror, we gotta hit the real sources. Although there may have been some minor links with terror organizations within Iraq (and most likely without government knowledge), Iran and North Korea - who have no scruples about developing WMD and selling them to the highest bidder are going unpunished. The United States government wasted valuable political capital going into Iraq when it could have been focused on states who traffic in NBC weaponry. Pakistan. North Korea. Iran. Or countries who actively funded terror activities. Saudi Arabia. Indonesia. Yemen. Because of the people involved in the planning of regime change in Iraq, and the ideological positions they took before September 11th, I believe this was not a reaction to the war on terror. If anything, it hampered it. Three different times the Pentagon had a plan to capture/eliminate a major role player in Al-Qaida. They said it was airtight. Senior leadership said no, we need those resources in Iraq. Since then this guy - who's name escapes me atm (Im hungover, k?) - was responsible for the bombings in Shiite cities in Iraq last month responsible for hundreds of lives lost. It's not that we couldn't do both, its that our resources might have been better used if we were more focused. Al-Qaida claimed responsibility for the last week's Madrid bombing. Every large scale attack that they carry out on our soil, or our allies soil, marks a failure in American policy on the war against terror - and for that matter in its Iraq policy since it was couched on the war against terror. It just seems that if we wanna win these guys over who want to kill us (and I think the vast majority of them are winnable) we have to be prepared to show both an impressive amount of force and be willing to bomb them with butter and make it clear that their lives are being made better because of us, not in spite of us. I think we only successfully do the first.

He said "Every republican who" the word who would be a qualifier in this case. In this case, Republicans who didn't care about Monica would not be included. Unfortunately, most of the elected ones did.

Here's a little reality for your argument dude. After the first WTC bombing there were 0 cruise missiles fired. In fact, at the time, the CIA thought they had captured the mastermind for the attacks in NJ. There were investigations and they thought they had rooted out the cell. As to whether or not Clinton fought against Al-Qaida organization after 1998, isn't something we will ever have a clear answer on. Clinton said yes, Bush admin said no. But the Bush administration has admitted that there was an inherited plan from the Clinton administration to fight Bin Laden's organization that sat on his shelf until September 2001. Whether it was 9/10 as they claim, or 9/12, it doesn't make a difference. It was there and they chose to ignore it. On September 10th, the Bush administration threatened a veto on a defense spending bill that would reroute a small percentage of funds devoted to a controversial missile shield program to programs geared to fight the threat of trans-global terrorism. Until September 11th, the biggest act of terror that happened on our soil was committed by Americans. One of whom is from Michigan.

Hey, the DJ speaketh here. Somewhat semi-informed opinion about this. Personally, I think Howard Stern has crossed the line in a few things that he has spoken, etc. But I don't think that anything he has done would breach the line of anything more than a minor fine. If you are running Stern, expecting a fine now and again should be an expected cost of business. He has made a career of pushing the envelope in acceptable broadcast. But it isn't because of him that there are problems. It's because of Mancow and Bubba the Love Sponge and the dozens of other Baby Sterns that try to make a name for themselves by being ridiculously offensive and cross the line. Slaughtering animals on the air in the station parking lot for example. Cooking human flesh on the air (Mancow did that about three years ago). Constant T&A on the radio. It is ultimately bad and good for business at the same time. In many markets, Howard is a hard product to sell because he is caustic and displeasing to a large segment of the radio market. But in others, he is phenomenally successful. The problem isn't about show content. If something is too offensive for a radio market, it just won't last - because it won't make money. Or the backlash will be so violent that it won't justify the gobs of cash it would make to keep. The problem here is the FCC. The FCC has been under a ton of fire by being oversightless in recent years. They have pared back significantly the amount of local public service content that a station is required to have. Right now, its 30 minutes a week of public affairs programming - which can include newscasts, Christian music and PSA commercials. That's it. As a result, huge news events are missed because of reduced staff and local commitment to the community. This was no more apparent than in Minot, ND where a chemical spill happened and there was nobody at the Clear Channel radio building to notify the message to the town. There are no other radio companies in Minot. One person died, because the public trust was not kept in this case. Clear Channel Communications was not fined in this incident. This is a matter of being a censor because its easy. Its easier tackling someone accidentally dropping an F bomb than it is to tackle absentee owners. Because you can get the DJ fired and the problem "goes away." But when you have companies who support your party forgetting to use the licenses the people granted them to inform them of important events, catastrophes, etc. the ability to enforce guidelines is much tougher.

Clear Channel has a stake in XM. Not a controlling stake, but Mays isn't an idiot. Ownership question about the Stern show. Stern's show is syndicated by Infinity (CBS) broadcasting, any station regardless of ownership can run the show, provided they pay the fees and run the network spots. The price runs somewhere around 300,000 a year for medium to large markets.

I'm confused. Why does Ashcroft want to subpoena medical records for Planned Parenthood? Are we talking all medical records? Or are we just talking about minors who had abortion procedures performed? Open ended anythings lead to slippery slopes. Listen, once you start something its easy for it to creep into something else. A lot of people are worried about a constitutional amendment against gay marriage for the same reason. It's a slippery slope. A vague amendment in the constitution that doesn't spell out specific limits to its scope could lead to ultimately the ability to codify discrimination legally against gay people in housing rights, employment rights, etc. on a Federal level. Many people may say its a far leap from what the amendment says - but look at the bill of rights and how far we've gone in interpreting there what the constitution says.

It wouldn't surprise me if he was captured. Or they are close. Or they are trying to bluff him out. Who knows.

Dude, they shared the dais at a rally in 1970. TWO YEARS BEFORE the Hanoi incident. TWO YEARS BEFORE. What are potential politicians supposed to read minds before they share a podium with people years before they run for office? That's like saying that Donald Rumsfeld is guilty of treason because he met with Hussein as an agent of the US government years before Iraq became a rogue state in the eyes of the US government.

I disagree with you. The finest moment in their musical history was pure John Lennon. "Across the Universe." and not the Letitbenaked crap either. A close second, the Electric "Revolution No. 1" from the Hey Jude EP

I don't think Kerry is unstoppable at all, unfortunately Edwards isn't planning on heading towards Michigan - with some cleverly placed TV ads and a few choice campaign stops, I think Edwards can run a strong second in Michigan on Saturday. 20-25% is doable and on three days campaigning, is a great thing for him and for the party. I personally hope that the two camps (Kerry and Edwards) have to go two ballots to determine who wins the nomination - it would make them both stronger candidates - because their fight isn't negative, but one about ideas. This is the first primary battle in a long time where the two main candidates are doing a good job at making each other STRONGER for a general election. Dean has already given Michigan up, now saying he will concentrate on Wisconsin and Washington. That's 9 states he's forsaken since NH last week.

Another four soldiers died this weekend too.

The best part about AWK, is much like Morrissey or the Smiths, buying one album means you'll never need another one, because they're all the same. Heh. If Sigur Ros has a new album out, I'm anticipating it. I am anticipating not liking the Beastie Boys new CD. If only dEUS would come out with a new disc.

The problem lies not in the fact that we have a deficit. That would naturally happen in the cyclical recession because tax revenues decrease and spending on social tasks would need to increase slightly. The problem is why we have this deficit and how it looks for the future of Medicare and Social Security. Although as a percentage of GDP, the Bush deficit isn't as high as Reagan's - Reagan's budgets did leave this country in a budget which became a zero sum game. We are creating a huge deficit by making huge tax cuts which will reduce revenue for the government. This isn't an issue of tax rate reductions - which can potentially have a trickle down effect, but dividend and estate tax eliminations - most of which will not get trickled down at all. It seems that the Bush administration is setting the US up for a situation where getting back into a surplus situation will not be easy to do without painful cuts in either defense or social spending, potentially including Social Security and Medicare. Bush claims to want to restrict spending to 2% growth in non-defense needs, but he submits a budget with double the growth. In fact, Clinton only increased his budgets in non-defense needs by 1.5% a year, Bush has averaged nearly 7%. I remember the phrase "tax and spend liberal," maybe a more apt phrase now should be "spend and borrow conservative."

Your distaste for Bush seems odd given the close similarities between him and Sharon. The DHS has better things to do argument is too similar to "If you don't have anything to hide, why worry?" argument. The point is, we are a free people. We shouldn't have to worry about a government infringing on our freedom to "protect us from ourselves." That isn't protection. What's more the DHS programs rely heavily on funds and resources used at a local level that will not be reimbursed quickly. When many cities and states are finding it difficult enough to get the cash for unfunded mandates that the federal government already requires, additional ones from DHS make local and state governments that much more stretched thin when it comes to providing basic, essential functions. There is an should be an element of risk to being an American. We are a free people. And being a free people means that at times we are subject to being attacked. You can not have total security and total liberty at the same time, a balance needs to be found. I think this balance seemed pretty right on, even after September 11th. Our priorities should have been reinvesting in human intelligence, and communication SHARING - not expanding the roles of wiretaps etc.

The PLO denounced terrorism several times. It was a precondition to talks leading to Oslo agreements. It was done several times in the 1980s when Arafat tried to get to the table. Here's a rough synopsis: PLO "We want to negotiate peace and statehood." Israel "Denounce terrorism." PLO "We unequivically denounce terrorism." Israel"... Liars." Ain't sayin either side is innocent. It's just hard to have good faith when neither side has shown any.

The reason is that I believe all nations of peoples deserve a right to their own self-determination. The Jewish nation realized their self-determination. And the same UN resolution which guaranteed an Israeli state also guaranteed a Palestinian one. Unfortunately, power brokers at the time, never gave one to the Palestinians - and so they are left to fight for their own freedom. Not a fun job.

Yes but Arab Jews are still seen as second class citizens in Israel. Second class in the finest restaurant is still second class f***o.

Live as a palestinian for twenty years or so. You'd probably not value your life as much either.