LowerCaseRepublican

QUOTE(CubKilla @ Mar 11, 2005 -> 11:35 PM) Throw all sense out when dealing with 1's. f*** him. Burn baby, burn!!!!! Enjoy life in hell you f***. Where's the lib's on this? I guess I missed the memo that non-Republicans endorsed this. This sort of hackery is almost like when GWB said that McCain had an illegitimate black child who addicted to crack during their push polling in the Carolinas.

And if you were really looking for facts regarding my political persuasion, I'm more libertarian than Democrat statist leftist.

QUOTE(CubKilla @ Mar 11, 2005 -> 11:43 PM) It's only facts when they buy your leftist bull-s***. Get another gig dude. It's played. Yeah...another gig is played is one of an adult trying to pick a fight on an internet message board. You can't beat me in a debate regarding the facts so you have to resort to personal attacks. Your mother must be so proud.

QUOTE(CubKilla @ Mar 11, 2005 -> 11:38 PM) It's about time people knew your MO. Don't you think? You brain-washed enough people here. Admit it..... you're pissed the Marines didn't take you cause you couldn't shoot a rifle so you'll talk s*** about them. Damn that brainwashing people with facts. And keep trying to get my goat into a fight, cuz I'm just here laughing my ass off & getting ready to go out.

QUOTE(CubKilla @ Mar 11, 2005 -> 11:32 PM) They must dig that lazy eye right? Wow. You must be cool. An adult trying to pick a fight with a college kid over the internet. Go you.

QUOTE(CubKilla @ Mar 11, 2005 -> 11:26 PM) Get a girlfriend dude..... you're coming off like a big ass nothing-better-to-do loser Wow, that was such a great point, CK. Are you sure you weren't a winner in debate club? And as it stands, I am quite active with the ladies. Its not difficult to be knowledgable about issues and do other things.

I stand behind Chris Rock's idea of "bullet control". Make a bullet cost $5,000 and we will never have another innocent bystander ever again. Plus, it will make people think before they go nuts and try to shoot somebody -- and if somebody does get shot, we'll all know that they must have done something bad cuz "s***, they put $50,000 worth of bullets in his ass!"

This guy should definitely be able to say what he wants to say on stage without being prosecuted for it. Hell the Secret Service has done some pretty hilarious investigations. They went to a Colorado school to investigate a band in a talent show playing a cover of Bob Dylan's "Masters of War" because some parents/kids heard the ending to the song saying it was a threat against the President of the United States. The 1963 song ends with the lyrics: "You might say that I'm young. You might say I'm unlearned, but there's one thing I know, though I'm younger than you, even Jesus would never forgive what you do … And I hope that you die and your death'll come soon. I will follow your casket in the pale afternoon. And I'll watch while you're lowered down to your deathbed. And I'll stand o'er your grave 'til I'm sure that you're dead." http://www.boingboing.net/2004/11/12/high_...lers_singi.html And then they investigated a sticker on a kid's car that said "King George: Off With His Head" saying that his sticker was "borderline terrorism". http://www.rense.com/general58/george.htm This case is just another showing of the Secret Service wasting its time investigating minor threats instead of, you know, trying to catch terrorists. So, your point that only liberals get to use bad humor is a misnomer and an attempt (very poor one) at partisan hackery.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 11, 2005 -> 02:45 PM) If Saddam hadn't destroyed his own economy by invading two countries, the Oil-For-Food program wouldn't have been necessary in the first place. And now we know that most of the money went into Saddam's own pocket anyway. That's right. We voluntarily pulled them out because Saddam wasn't letting them do their jobs. Big difference. :rolly Oh, yes he did. We gave him the technology. He even used them against the Kurds and Iranians. Oh, you're using the race card now? You've just elevated yourself to the intellectual level of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. He didn't have them until the US sold them to him -- exactly my point.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 11, 2005 -> 07:53 AM) Yeah, Reagan put a gun to Saddam's head and made him invade Iran. Similarly, Bush was responsible for Saddam invading Kuwait. It's all the fault of the Bush/Reagan administrations. :rolly You crack me up. Saddam did not have the biological and chemical weapons that devastated the economy, the death counts, etc. Reagan's hand in the Iraq-Iran war cannot be ignored. But keep laughing it off. They're just brown people so they don't count, right?

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Mar 10, 2005 -> 11:23 PM) While that is truly the point, no amout of explaining will get that thru the heads of the resident liberals here. It doesn't matter what kind of person they are, or how hard they work or how amazing they are, THEY ARE HERE ILLEGALLY. And if there was no incentive for corporations to pay them less than the average American worker, do you really think that companies would go out of their way to hire them -- and as the labor laws stand in the US, illegals are covered too if they are being f***ed over in the work force. "It's obvious that if you force companies like Wal-Mart or Taco Bell to pay illegal immigrants the same wage as Americans, then they have no incentive to hire them over citizens."

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Mar 10, 2005 -> 11:25 PM) Geeze. First you guys don't want us to go in anywhere, now you want us to go in everywhere. Make up your minds! I'm simply stating that if the Bush Doctrine is to be held true and not be seen as hypocritical & that the idea of spreading liberty, self-determination (I would love to see Bush answer if he believes in self-determination for Gaza and the W. Bank) and enforcing UN resolutions, then we need to go after every nation where these problems have not been rectified.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Mar 10, 2005 -> 11:11 PM) http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20021002-2.html He did, in the Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq, among other things. Notice all the 'Whereas'es which outline the reasons for our actions. Among them are: Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait and Whereas Congress in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has authorized the President "to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677" I'm not saying Saddam was a great guy but the US should not be the world policeman & not using the military unless there is a direct threat/attack on us. And if we are to getting to be in the role of international enforcer against countries that have violated numerous UN resolutions, when are the bombers headed out to Jerusalem and Tel Aviv?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Mar 10, 2005 -> 10:19 PM) When stuff like this happens, the DEM and GOP labels should be tossed out the window and let them face the music. Partisan politics being what it is, some peole feel compelled to defend "their" guy. Correct. If they were idiots -- they should face the music. I just get an extra kick that Delay is one of the biggest proponents of "personal responsibility" yet it always seems to evade him whenever he's got his back against the wall.

IIRC, it took Vietnam veterans from the US military years to sue successfully for damages suffered as a result of Agent Orange as well. This is almost like the use of depleted uranium but that's another debate for another time /horrified at government treatment of veterans who got sick from Agent Orange & Gulf War Syndrome after talking with chem weapons expert (and former US Army Major) Doug Rokke.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 10, 2005 -> 09:59 PM) Well, since you asked... "Halved" from which time period? The period where Saddam ruined Iraq's economy by waging a nine-year war against Iran? Or would that be the time period after Saddam invaded Kuwait, which resulted in UN sanctions against his country, thus causing even more poverty? Saddam caused the malnutrition in the first place, skimmed an estimated $7-$21 billion in the Oil-For-Food scandal, would not cooperate with weapons inspectors (a blatant violation of UN resolutoins), and yet a regime change was not justified? Bulls***. And which country intensified the Iran-Iraq war, got the death counts much higher, assisted in devastating that economy etc. and then just left like nothing had happened? Oh wait...saying it was the US would be anti-American Sharon's treatment of Palestinians in Israel is systematic torture, violation of human rights, shooting of children, etc. How come one country gets invaded and the other gets billions in aid? I mean if we're gonna hold up the spreading of freedom and allowing for self-determination in countries, then we should apply it everywhere, not just arbitrarily when it suits politically. Then there is Uribe in Colombia whose relationship with the paramilitaries there shows numerous violations of human rights of innocent civilians -- but again, millions in aid. If we're so committed to human rights/freedom/liberty as the Bush Doctrine says -- why the disparities here of invasions for some & billions in aid for others who systematically abuse human rights?

I don't know why I'm talking about this quandry here but... So this time next year, I'm gonna be doing my student teaching and then *gasp* out into the work force. Anyway, I got this letter in the mail from some national honorary group in social studies/history that I could join for having a good GPA etc. Now here's the debate -- my 'rents want me to join because these Greek letters of this organization will help me get a better job, etc. etc. etc. I say that its essentially a stroke job for the ego & I don't need some organization to let me know that I've done well in school. Any employer that would hire me simply on that basis -- I probably wouldn't want to work for them anyways. Anyway, fellow Soxtalkers, what should I do?

Gotta hand it to the prominent Republicans to stand up for their tenet of personal responsibility instead of handing off blame via lies or diffusing it to other people.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 10, 2005 -> 06:54 AM) Good question. The answer is that the UN never would've supported an invasion based on those reasons alone (and didn't with the WMD reasons either). Unfortunately, countries like France, Germany, and Russia didn't want an Iraq invasion, regardless of what Saddam was doing, because they wanted to continue to do business with him. When the Oil For Food Program began, Iraq's oil output was limited to 700,000 barrells/day. The three aforementioned governments lobbied hard to raise the limit to 2,000,000 per day. Hell, France and Russia didn't want any sanctions on Iraq's oil exports. And the US population likely wouldn't have supported a war based on this either. And lets not even mention that according to the Nuremberg Tribunals, pre-emptive strikes are a crime against peace (entailing crimes against humanity & war crimes in them -- as per the NT definition) & that the wonton devastation of Baghdad was a war crime ("shock and awe" anyone?) I seem to remember a time when US business interests wanted Saddam taken off the list of terrorist nations and didn't care that he was murdering people, harboring Abu Nidal, etc. -- but the Reaganistas did the exact same thing in doing business with him. Its difficult to have a moral higher ground when our country has to say "Do as I say, not as I do".

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 10, 2005 -> 02:51 PM) Would that be because they're illegal aliens and they shouldn't even be in the U.S. in the first place? :rolly That said, I agree that the exploitation of these people is disgusting. What's even more disturbing is that this type of "employment" is better than what's available in their nation of origin. I defer to the Maddox page regarding illegal immigrants because its my position -- http://maddox.xmission.com/c.cgi?u=walmart

http://www.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=2&mid=6920 Taco Bell has agreed to work with the Immokalee Workers in Florida to improve wages, working conditions, etc. My friend Dann was able to go to Immokalee and see this with his own eyes. The stories he shared with me made me sick. He shared with me stories and photos of the delapidated trailers these workers were forced to live in for shelter (a very very liberal interpretation of four walls and a roof) and their rent was a vast majority of their salary. Also, farmworkers who pick for Florida growers who sell tomatoes to Taco Bell earn between 40-50 cents for every 32-lb bucket of tomatoes they pick. For example, the Immokalee-based "Six L's Packing Co., Inc.," one of the nation's largest tomato producers and a contractor to Taco Bell (according to the industry journal "The Packer"), still pays 40 cents per bucket. That is the same piece rate paid since 1978. At that rate, workers must pick and haul 2 TONS of tomatoes to make $50 in a day. [According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the median annual income of farmworkers today is $7,500.] Workers are denied the right to organize and the right to overtime pay for overtime work. They receive no health insurance, no sick leave, no paid holidays, no vacation, and no pension. But Taco Bell is really beginning to step to the plate to try to alleviate some of these problems. Since they have a policy already that says they won't get meat from places that mistreat animals, its nice to see them add humans onto the list. They're refusing to do business with farmers that don't make the appropriate changes (and I have a feeling that Taco Bell's $$$ will make them change the things for the betterment of the workers)

After being in Texas and witnessing my cousin beating the s*** out of his toddler son (cracked a wood spoon -- the long handle part -- over the kid's ass), I'm not a big fan of corporal punishment as a means to punish a kid. Of course I told that to my cousin who said "Spare the rod, spoil the child". He almost kicked me out when I said "Yeah, but show me where it says 'Break it over his ass'." And even more about the rod comment from the Bible, the shepherd's rod has a crook on the end to pull the sheep back in gently rather than beating the f*** out of them with the stick.

Spiff about 50 and the Game making peace

Gee, well isn't that nice Who here thinks that 50 is just a contrived piece of crap manufacturing beefs for simply selling records instead of being legitimately angry? Its a good PR move to get extra publicity for his s***ty CD to keep his name in the news to sell more albums because it was just "convenient" that his fight with the Game happened to come 2 days before his new album was due out. But I'm sure they had a legit fight.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 03:19 PM) Not done with your fishing trip yet, are you? :rolly Pot. Kettle. Black.