LowerCaseRepublican

QUOTE(JUGGERNAUT @ Jun 29, 2005 -> 02:16 PM) Morality is subjective & therefore best determined by the will of the majority in a nation. Best determined by the majority of the people? Well, we've seen how well the majority goes along with the good and moral things **cough, Final Solution cough** As HL Mencken used to say: Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard. But we're a Constitutional republic that cherishes the rights of individual liberty instead of losing that at the expense of mass hysteria or mass bigotry. It helps to remember that.

http://blog.dccc.org/mt/archives/003059.html Earlier this month, Soros joined an ownership bid being led by entrepreneur Jonathan Ledecky. Their group is one of more than a half-dozen angling to take over the Nats, who are currently owned by Major League Baseball. In addition to being a well-known currency speculator and philanthropist, Soros is also known in political circles for having pumped more than $20 million in the last cycle into groups seeking to unseat President Bush and elect Democrats. While the Soros-Ledecky group is not seen as the frontrunner to win the bidding for the Nationals, who should be awarded to their new owner at the end of the 2005 season, the very prospect that Soros could have a stake in the team is enough to irritate Congressional Republicans. "I think Major League Baseball understands the stakes," said Government Reform Chairman Tom Davis ®, the Northern Virginia lawmaker who recently convened high-profile steroid hearings. "I don't think they want to get involved in a political fight." Davis, whose panel also oversees District of Columbia issues, said that if a Soros sale went through, "I don't think it's the Nats that get hurt. I think it's Major League Baseball that gets hurt. They enjoy all sorts of exemptions" from anti-trust laws.

From a fairly conservative John Podhoretz (1988 speechwriter for Reagan, worked at the Moonie Times, works at FOX News, National Review, Weekly Standard, etc.: "If any book in recent memory reads as though it has been written out of greed - a greedy hunger to separate millions of conservative book buyers from their hard-earned 25 bucks - it is Ed Klein's "The Truth About Hillary." This is one of the most sordid volumes I've ever waded through. Thirty pages into it, I wanted to take a shower. Sixty pages into it, I wanted to be decontaminated. And 200 pages into it, I wanted someone to drive stakes through my eyes so I wouldn't have to suffer through another word." You can read the whole article here: http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/48801.htm Another one of my favorite portions was that Klein said Hillary was a lesbian because she has lesbian friends. I have lesbian friends too. Who knew I was a lesbian? http://mediamatters.org/items/200506230001 -- Fun link with a ton of factual errors that Klein has discussed in his book.

With all this talk of the (supposed) repression of Christianity, I'm reminded of Jon Stewart's recent take on this. "Perhaps we can one day live in a country where people are able to freely practice their religion in broad daylight. Perhaps even wear the symbol of their religion around their necks if they so choose. And maybe, God willing, we can even have an openly Christian president...or forty three of them...consecutively."

At least it saves us from another media circus like the Blake and Jackson trials. Now the media can spend its time covering important things like shark attacks.

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 08:04 PM) I checked it out last night. It was a perfectly fun movie if you knew what to expect of a silly zombie movie. And seeing as I consider it a silly movie I don't put as much stock into Romero's social commentary as others. It was much more funny than scary and I liked many of the new ideas, such as smarter zombies, using tools and such, the fireworks bit. But thats not to say the film has a bunch of things I didn't like. As some mentioned earlier the ending didn't work for me, the leader zombie's moan was annoying (although I still liked him), people getting shot in the head got boring and some other small flaws got to me. Also I was originally intrigued by the film's synopsis about dead reckoning protecting the city and emphasizing the protection of the city. But the film didn't really go that way. Dead reckoning was uninteresting and it seemed like the only protection the city had was a river and electrified fence. Of course considering they were just keeping out stupid zombies I guess it would be adequate. 7/10 And for those of you who didn't know, this was done on a 15 million dollar budget in Canada! So the whole idea of them going to Canada was kind of goofy especially considering half the cast was Canadian. Also I'd be guessing there will be a sequel considering it did well at the box office. Oh and I was giggling at Tom Savini's appearance, he was credited as Machete Blade... I think, any significance there? Oh and apparently Greg Nicotero and Simon Pegg from Shaun of the Dead were zombies but I must have missed them. In the original "Dawn of the Dead", Savini was a machete wielding biker. His social commentary was by no means subtle but it was cool seeing him expand on the end of "Day" where the zombies were starting to be able to use guns etc. And that was hilarious that so much of the film was done in Canada (yay tax incentives) But they made it believable that it wasn't Canada...much better than that one J-Lo movie where they said it was taking place in Chicago yet they had Toronto landmarks in the background.

1. Wish that there would be skilled people who know what they're looking for and trained in what to do doing this sort of operation. 2. I put the odds of the success of this at about the same odds I gave to Farrakhan to get 1,000,000 people at his Million Man March.

QUOTE(BurlyMan56 @ Jun 25, 2005 -> 09:00 PM) The movie f***ing sucked...Don't waste your money like I did last night...20 bucks down the drain.... Wait til you can rent it... Why did you think the movie sucked? And also, Yoda, where are you at? I thought you'd totally be posting in this movie thread.

QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 06:36 PM) I am not sure how to phrase this, so I am sure it will come out wrong and I will be attacked for it, but where does the line for 'tolerance and respect' end? Sometimes, groups trying to promote those things cross over into 'acceptance'. I can tolerate and respect others, but I don't have to accept them. (For the record, I have no problem with gays, etc.) If it were my religious belief that homosexuality is wrong, I can tolerate them for being different, respect them as human beings, but in no way do I have to accept their lifestyle as normal, when to me, it would not be. So then I would be looked down upon as the intolerant one, which wouldn't be the case. A while back there was a post about a handbook a school put out that tried to make homosexuality out as a good thing. I think that is just wrong. You don't have to say it is a bad thing, but to simply promote it as an acceptable lifestyle is wrong, when there are alot of people who don't think it is. I think alot of people are more 'in the middle' on homosexuality in general than most people think. I personally don't care one way or another. You are gay? Good for you. You are not? Fine. But if my religious beliefs were that homosexuality is wrong, maybe gay people should just be tolerant of me? NOTE: The extremists of that Baptist Group, or even James Dobsen are way beyond acceptance, and I am in no way implying them in my question of acceptance. The lunatic fringe on either side of these type of issues rarely deserve tolerance or respect. EM, not trying to attack you -- just wanted to enumerate a few points. It isn't that they're not being tolerant of you -- it is that: Before the Supreme Court decision, in many states sex between consenting homosexual adults was an illegal offense and you could be put in prison (however, putting them with more men doesn't seem like the best idea haha) They are not allowed to engage in a civil institution -- marriage is a civil institution run by the state and it is optional to have it in a church. They are being denied tax incentives that are given to married couples, the ability to see their significant other while they are receiving care and do not receive many other powers that are given to a significant other as a result of marriage. And all of this sudden "sanctity of marriage" horses*** -- if they believed in the sanctity of marriage then Bush has no further to look than his own brother who cheated on his wife numerous times with prostitutes and got herpes in Hong Kong (it came out in the divorce proceedings) http://talkleft.com/new_archives/004880.html -- Original link to the NY Daily News in there...Or Newt Gingrich cheating on his wife while she is receiving cancer treatment or the numerous Vegas driveup wedding chapels, etc. etc. The "sanctity of marriage" is pure religious rhetoric which clouds the fact that marriage in the state is a purely civil institution. I also fail to see how more loving couples who want to be monogamous is going to destroy the "sanctity of marriage" as well. There is even a case in Urbana of Carle Hospital firing a nurse after they found out she is a lesbian. I doubt you'd be getting fired some place in the US simply because you were a Christian. And I'm fairly sure that this practice is more common than we'd like to think http://www.dailyillini.com/media/paper736/...ut-932342.shtml has the story. They wouldn't even let her stay with her significant other in the hospital as she lay dying. Homosexuals cannot adopt children in many states. While they may have competent loving homes that can take care of children, many states believe that the kid will "grow up gay" if they are in the household. http://www.lethimstay.com/ has a story of how the state of Florida is removing a child from the only family that he has ever known simply because the parents are gay. So, the state allows children to stay in terrible homes with incompetent parents simply because parents that they could put them with are homosexual -- which makes no f***ing sense since numerous studies refute the idea that gay parents and their adopted children are less "happy" or "well adjusted" as heterosexual couples raising kids. And if all these "pro-family" groups don't want gays to adopt these children, why aren't they stepping up and adopting them themselves? You don't have to accept their lifestyle as "correct". You should simply respect the idea that the US Constitution does not allow for such discrimination and as such, they should not be denied as they have been in the details I enumerated above. We fought/are fighting in Afghanistan to remove a religious theocracy that put religious beliefs into state policy, discuss how Iran is wrong for using sharia in the development of their state policy but then nobody calls the Dobsons etc. of the world out on their blatant hypocricy of condemning Taliban/Iranian state/religion melding yet at the same time the Focus on the Family type groups want a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, 10 Commandments up everywhere, gays cannot be allowed to adopt, etc. etc.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 01:57 PM) f***, apparently Prior IS God. Anyone have a pitch count on the Almighty? 49 pitches so far.

Prior is getting the workout everybody's been asking for finally.

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 01:53 PM) http://www.baseball-reference.com/o/olerujo01.shtml He's a .295 career hitter, I'd call that a great offensive threat. I'm just talking the past few years when he's been less than stellar (i.e. his recent stint with the Yankees)

Wee Willie flies to LF. 1 out.

QUOTE(brijames @ Jun 26, 2005 -> 01:50 PM) Crede is a great defensive 3rd baseman. He's the Jon Olerud of the hot corner -- not a great offensive bat but a great glove that you want.

Lee 5-4-3 DP. End of the inning.

Neifi with the infield single.

Korey screws up with a bunt and grounds out. 1 away.

sPod grounds out to Walker. End of the inning.

Prior gets called for a balk. Ozuna advances.

Ozuna singles. You can cancel the post game show.

Crede flies out to Burnitz. 2 outs.

AJP fouls out to Blanco. 1 out.

Blanco popped up to Ozuna.

Hollandsworthless grounds out to Garland. 2 outs.

Barrett pops out to Willie. 1 away.