LowerCaseRepublican

Can we now refer to the Lakers from now on as "Kobe and the Pips" starring Kobe Ross?

Goddamn, you really got f***ed hard. Lucky me only has papers and an open note test for my finals.

6 page paper and turning card of volunteer work, 9 page paper, 20+ page paper and presentation, open note test and a take home test (don't know what it entails since he hasn't handed it out yet) The 6 pager and the 20+ pager are done and turned in. Just gotta worry about the 9 pager, open note test, presentation and the take home test.

I'm going to Mississippi!

I saw this cartoon and laughed. Kinda off topic but figure I'd share it in the thread since so many people are outraged at the corruption of Annan, but not the other corruption noted. http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=191c7b9599f51f92 Discusses the downfall of the dollar and how it is a danger to the US.

Can't be much worse.

Reminds me of the school my friend is observing at for the secondary education program. We have a middle school placement (so basically junior high) and during the teacher meetings, the administrators and some teachers talk about how kids need to be medicated, what kids should be medicated etc. It's insane -- they keep the kids at their desks doing worksheets for the whole day and then wonder why they are fidgeting in the slightest.

Anything for Big Pharma selling more drugs.

As long as they get used for food etc. and people aren't morons with guns then it's all good. What pisses me off are the people that shoot animals just to shoot them and then leave.

It didn't work too well. They got the equivalent of a papercut when they shot it at an actual person with a high power machine.

Don't know how many people watch Discovery Channel but there is a Mythbusters marathon on most of the day today.

I got a 9: "So close. To the undiscerning eye, you look like one of us."

Evil, the ETA has nothing to do with Al Qaeda, bin Laden etc. From http://www.cfrterrorism.org/groups/eta.htm ETA is a leftist group that uses terrorism in hopes of forming an independent Basque state in parts of northern Spain and southwest France. ETA stands for Euskadi ta Askatasuna, which means “Basque Fatherland and Liberty” in the Basque language. The State Department lists ETA as a foreign terrorist organization, and the United States and the European Union have frozen ETA assets since the September 11 attacks. Spain has long fought ETA and opposes an independent Basque homeland, though its 1978 constitution designated an autonomous Basque region with responsibility for education, health care, policing, and taxation. The Basques are a linguistically and culturally distinct Christian group that has lived since the Stone Age in the mountainous region that straddles the border between modern-day Spain and France. The Basques have never had their own independent state, but they have enjoyed varying degrees of autonomy over the centuries under Spanish and French rule. About half of the 2.1 million residents of the three provinces that make up the autonomous Basque region speak fluent Basque or understand some of the language. Basque nationalists include other areas with smaller Basque-speaking minorities—the Spanish province of Navarre and three departments in southwest France—in their vision of a Basque homeland. Does ETA have ties to al Qaeda? No. ETA’s secular nationalist agenda has nothing to do with the Islamist fundamentalism of Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network, and there is no credible evidence of any systematic cooperation between ETA and al Qaeda, experts say. ::Cues NBC "The More You Know" music ::

Popups? What are popups? /Firefox User

Canada does have a war crimes statute that they can try people for war crimes committed anywhere in the world.

Guinness. Oh, I forgot...it just tastes like candy

No, please. Let's talk policy. I respect the troops enough not to throw them into a bloodbath invading a nation that did not attack the United States nor was it a threat to the US. Your assertion that I somehow do not support the soldiers is laughable. Questioning of policy is not off limits and if you're really into the mentality that "Only soldiers can question policy" then perhaps you could go discuss it with Iraq Vets Against the War http://www.ivaw.net/ or pick up "War Is a Racket" by former General Smedley Butler USMC.

It's actually quite dead on. The nation of Iraq had nothing to do with the people who attacked us on 9/11. In 2001, Condoleezza Rice and Powell (later 2 of the most vocal people for the war) said that Iraq posed no threat to the United States. If we invaded Iraq for "weapons of mass destruction", then why are we advocating Israel to have it's (previously before Vanunu blew the whistle) secret nuke program. If we had found out about their WMD given their borderline belligerance in dealing with other nations, if they did not allow UN inspectors in, would the US have invaded Israel to take out their nukes? Or how about India/Pakistan? I am much more afraid of walking through a nuclear winter wonderland because those 2 countries can't stop fighting over Kashmir than I was of Saddam Hussein's "weapons of mass destruction related program activities".

Yeah -- those Levitra commercials. I'd love to know what two people in a tub overlooking a valley has to do with a penis medication.

Oddly enough, FOX is running the commercials.

http://www.stillspeaking.com/default.htm Video of the ad. I really don't see how it's controversial since it's damn true. I mean when Jerry "The purple Teletubby is part of the vast homosexual agenda" Falwell states that if there are any gay Republicans, they should join the Democratic party as his means of inclusion -- the UCC's message is damn true.

If I was a father I'd be more worried about my kid asking "Daddy, what is erectile dysfunction?" and all the thinly veiled penis jokes that are seen as "medical advertisement" than talking to my kid about a message of inclusion. Besides, according to the campaign literature from the Republican National Committee, it was going to be the liberals who banned the Bible -- http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/09/24/...ain645393.shtml Photo of it:

As for Peterson: It was a circumstantial case by the prosecution. They had no forensics tying him to the scene. They had no kill site located to which he could be tied. They had no murder weapon. They had no eye witnesses catching him in the act of doing it. I'm not saying that 100% he didn't do it. I am saying the prosecution's case sucked balls and the jury bought it because he was already convicted in the court of public opinion before the actual trial began. I mean he lied about sex. He obviously killed his wife. On Larry King, Grace said he had the wrong bait to catch croppie, so he must have murdered his wife. He bought a boat and didn't tell his dad. He lied to get sex with a younger woman. Clinton did that too. That's not proof of murder.

Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall stated: "The death penalty is no more effective a deterrent than life imprisonment...It is also evident that the burden of capital punishment falls upon the poor, the ignorant, and the underprivileged members of society." Answering your question as to why death penalty cases are more expensive, Jason: Complex pre-trial motions, lengthy jury selections, and expenses for expert witnesses are all likely to add to the costs in death penalty cases. The irreversibility of the death sentence requires courts to follow heightened due process in the preparation and course of the trial. The separate sentencing phase of the trial can take even longer than the guilt or innocence phase of the trial. And defendants are much more likely to insist on a trial when they are facing a possible death sentence. After conviction, there are constitutionally mandated appeals which involve both prosecution and defense costs. Most of these costs occur in every case for which capital punishment is sought, regardless of the outcome. Thus, the true cost of the death penalty includes all the added expenses of the "unsuccessful" trials in which the death penalty is sought but not achieved. Moreover, if a defendant is convicted but not given the death sentence, the state will still incur the costs of life imprisonment, in addition to the increased trial expenses. Over 80% of people executed since 1976 were convicted of killing white victims, although people of color make up more than half of all homicide victims in the US. A defendant who can afford his or her own attorney is much less likely to be sentenced to die. 95% of all people sentenced to death in the US could not afford their own attorney. In 1987, McCleskey v. Kemp, a Supreme Court case brought forth the famous Baldus study that revealed facts that proved the following: "(1) defendants charged with killing white victims in GA are 4.3 times as likely to be sentenced to death as defendants charged with killing blacks; (2) 6 of every 11 defendants convicted of killing a white person would not have received the death penalty if their victim had been black; and (3) cases involving black defendants and white victims are more likely to result in a death sentence than cases featuring any other racial combination of defendant and victim. This case was defeated by a 5-4 vote given the reason by Justice Powell: "McCleskey's claim, taken to its logical conclusion, throws into serious question the principles that underlie our entire criminal justice system."