Dr. Tyler; Captain America

Yeah... fascinating. It's not often that one comes across an honest-to-God xenophobe.

1. Mainline to Liberal Christian Protestants (100%) 2. Orthodox Quaker (94%) 3. Eastern Orthodox (87%) 4. Roman Catholic (87%) 5. Liberal Quakers (83%) 6. Seventh Day Adventist (80%) 7. Hinduism (78%) 8. Mainline to Conservative Christian/Protestant (77%) 9. Unitarian Universalism (76%) 10. Sikhism (69%) 11. Bahá'í Faith (61%) 12. Jainism (61%) 13. Mahayana Buddhism (60%) 14. Orthodox Judaism (60%) 15. Neo-Pagan (59%) 16. Reform Judaism (58%) 17. Theravada Buddhism (58%) 18. Islam (51%) 19. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) (50%) 20. Secular Humanism (48%) 21. New Age (47%) 22. Taoism (43%) 23. Jehovah's Witness (42%) 24. Scientology (37%) 25. Christian Science (Church of Christ, Scientist) (29%) 26. New Thought (27%) 27. Nontheist (22%) Doesn't surprise me, since I've been somewhat struggling with the possibility of converting to a faith which more suits some of my specific beliefs (even though I agree in large part with Catholicism).

| | V

It wasn't that same thread, though. I found that one, but it didn't have our argument in it. I had a few posts where I showed precedent and whatnot backing up my opinion, and Mike countered with the aforementioned right to profit argument. And yeah, I did have to read that entire decision that day. It sucked ten breeds of ass, but it got me the necessary lines to win my case, so I can't complain.

Because they didn't offer to hand him over (according to Richard Clarke). That was an unfrutiful rumor; they expelled him from the country after the fact, when he had already gone back to Afghanistan to rally up the troops and form al Qaida. And actually, you're not following our rules. We've done nothing but follow your fucking rules, and now that we're on this incredibly wacky and wild mission to fix the world, it's our fucking responsibility to fix these places that are a threat to us (through avowed state support of terrorism), based on the precedent set by Iraq and Bush's preemption policy. No amount of clever rhetoric changes that; we either go into Sudan, or you conservatives are full of eight breeds of shit. At least I'll respect if we go into Sudan. I won't agree with the overuse of our military, but I won't complain about it, either. But if we don't go, we've overseen a travesty.

Yeah, Mike, it really was. It was actually one of our more civil arguments we've had, and I remember it distinctly because I had just finished researching it before you started arguing with me about it. I was talking about free air time provisions and how they would be in the public's best interest, and thus fall under the FCC's charge. However, you countered that blah blah blah it's unconstitutional because of some amazing stretch of precedent that made little sense. I don't feel like finding the thread right now, but if I get up some motivation, I'll find it tomorrow.

Sudan harbored Osama bin Laden for a considerable portion of the mid-90's and currently is a state sponsor of terrorism.

Fuck it, I'm tired of looking for the thread. It was about CFR free advertising provisions as they pertain to the FCC's mission to protect the common good. Mike was firmly on the side of the television stations and their right to profit.

I don't even remember that conversation, but could you refresh my memory with a link..... (I think I am about to be OWNED~!) I don't feel like looking for it, but if you insist. Give me 5 minutes or so.

Hilariously, Mike, I argued with you over this exact same precedent a few months ago and you took the exact opposite side.

I saw someone sell a ghost in a bottle. Shit was tight, yo.

Let's take a vote.

Who is "she" and where was this published? Link, please.

All you have to do is post one or two legitimate sources.

Post the articles they wrote about it, then.

Go ahead. Post the articles. I know for a fact that CNN never touched it, and neither did MSNBC or CBS. Fox may have made mention of it on one of their opinion shows, but they're hardly news.

He laughed it off as absurd. It was mentioned by precisely no legitimate news sources.

Care to back that up? All it did was send some lefty blogs up into arms against him. It had no effect on anything in the real world.

I think it can be argued that this "drama" that didn't exist certainly didn't "rock" the democrats. Drudge was reporting something sloppily. Just admit it.

Actually, you're wrong, Dam. D&D is typically ridiculed by people because individuals waste perfectly good hours and hours playing a roleplaying game with a bunch of pasty-faced, undersexed gothics.

He exploded all over the scene like this was something that would BURY John Kerry. THIS WAS THE BIG THING!!!! And it turned out that it was absolutely nothing. You don't make front fucking page headlines with wailing sirens and obnoxious 100 pt fonts when it's just something "being investigated". He's a fucking tool. He's nowhere near a legitimate news source.

So, whatever happened to the Kerry-had-an-intern-affair scandal that was fueled solely by Drudge?

I'd still argue to nix Hillary from that list, but that's basically what we've been hearing for a few months now.

I can't see him picking Vilsack, just because he'd bring absolutely nothing to the ticket (certainly not excitement, anyway). If it's not Edwards, it's gonna be someone who is a straight shooter and a refreshing face in the process. Edwards fits the bill, but I have a suspicion it won't be him. It's just a hunch though, of course.

They despise each other so much that I couldn't possibly see it happening (even though it would neutralize the Nader/Green effect completely).