Dr. Tom

I saw the 10:00 showing last night, and I'm going again tomorrow afternoon. This was definitely a superb movie, better than the original. No part of it dragged, IMO, as the character and story development were as important to the movie as the action scenes. While the year is only half over, I don't have any reservations calling this the best movie I'll see in 2004. And yes, the review is forthcoming.

Only those who are ineligible to be President should the situation arise. As a two-termer, Clinton is ineligible. If he were a one-termer, he could be the VP candidate.

Nope. I'm not going to vote for Bush (for more reasons than before), but I sure as fuck don't want Kerry to win.

Source please. And one that isn't americaisanationofshittyinfidels.com.

Yet you're eager to blame the US, and you said it "makes [you] sick?" Your methods of not caring differ greatly from mine.

I think I have a .gif or two of her on my hard drive. And no, I'm not sharing them with you lot. If you want them, get some sack and ask her yourself.

I'm confused. I thought you wanted to bring in more troops? Huh? I want Hillary to be the VP choice because it ensures Kerry's defeat. That's it.

Here's your gift.

Hillary would be suicide. A lot of people who aren't conservatives can't stand her, and some of those folks are people who might have otherwise voted for Kerry. She's still too polarizing a figure after the White House years and somehow hornswaggling a Senate seat from a state she'd never lived in before. Besides, there are a lot of good ol' boys who simply wouldn't vote for a ticket that included a woman, and that will hurt, too. Gephardt has to be ruled out, since a Kerry/Gephardt ticket would be two charisma vortexes. While I don't think Gephardt woud cost Kerry nearly the votes Hillary would, he also won't gain him very many, either. Edwards looks to be the best choice. He did OK for himself in the early primaries, and has the looks and charisma to draw voters. Considering Kerry lacks in both those areas, Edwards would help him; he'd overshadow him were it not for the fact that Kerry is simply much better-known. Obviously, I hope Hillary is the choice, since that's the final nail in the coffin.

Actually, some states require you to vote for a candidate of your party in the primary elections. MD is one of these, so Democrats can only vote for one of their own, ditto Republicans. Registered Independents (like yours truly) can vote for a candidate of either party. In the real elections, of course, you're free to vote for whomever you choose.

Future primo office space when we kick them out?

I feel you on that one, Colonel. Interestingly enough, I interviewed for a Comcast job in 1997, working support for their internet service. I interviewed again last year, for what I thought was a different job but ended up being the same one. The starting pay had not increased in the six years between my interviews. THAT is pretty shitty.

The "double standard" mentioned is the same one that applies in any case of rape or sexual assault. It comes from the belief that men are always looking for sex, and thus would enjoy being sexually assaulted by a woman. While there's probably a good deal of accuracy there, I don't think it's universally true, but it's pretty much universally accepted. As for hot teachers, my French teacher in freshman year of high school was off the hook. I was tempted to ask her what "deep dickings" translated to in French...

Comcast's pay must be teh suq.

This is correct. We want to see if disabling guests from reading the board makes things faster during high-traffic times.

With the right spin, this could be very damaging to the Democrats. Walter Mondale, 1984: "If elected, I will raise taxes." How many electoral votes did he get again? 10? 13?

Tom's also gone to bad for a lot of people he's vehemently disagreed with when they've come under fire recently, too, making "RVDMARK4:20'"s (OMG a wrestling reference and a pot reference in one screen name -- YOU WIN TEH PRIZE) post even more pointless than it already was. Tom also refers to himself in the third person sometimes, though Tom's not a big fan of it.

You're not very good at reading comprehension, are you? Stick to the WWE folder.

I bet she's ugly. No, she's really not. Quite the opposite.

Six of the eight people reading this thread right now are anonymous. Really, I don't get the point of that.

You're right. We should simply execute him and be done with it.

Who cares? They still die the same when you shoot them, they still scream the same when you throw them in a Napalm pit, and they still blow up the same when you bomb the shit out of them. Three guesses as to my solution...

Again, you'd probably have to try to be more wrong. This is the way it actually went down. A couple people complained to goodhelmet (don't ask me why) about "flaming" in the CE folder. These were people who made ridiculous posts and got a good, deserved drubbing from the forum regulars for it. Helmet made a thread about the situation, calling me out to explain it. I did, saying that hated debate is sine qua non to any CE board, and that what happened in ours was mild in my experience (which it was, and still is). He went on about the Grand Unfairness of Things for a while, and the compromise was that the disclaimer that used to be at the door to CE was put into place. That let people know they were stepping into potential hostile territory, and not to go in if they couldn't handle it. People who have been posting there from the beginning have never once complained about "flaming." They know what it's like to argue politics, ethics, religion, and things like that. A couple thin-skinned folks complained, and the disclaimer was put into place. It's not that the board rules didn't apply in there; it's that, right or wrong, the rest of the staff saw CE as "my" forum (and I was the local mod for it before I became a global), and my position has always been that "flaming" was a ludicrously overrated messageboard offense. People who tear up because a stranger called them a name on the internet have some issues they need to work out, and I'm not going to censure someone who makes good points and good posts because some ninny got his panties in a twist. Suck it up and deal or move on. Ah, so those damn CE people up and ruined the whole board. Boo-hoo. Plenty of people made confrontational, "flaming" posts in other forums. Don't blame a few folks for the sins of everyone else. For the bad press CE has collectively gotten recently, I'd take a million folks like Marney, Mike, Tyler, NoCalMike, Cerebus, Vyce, Powerplay, JotW, kkk, and a few others over any of the idiots and serial whiners who have ever fouled this board with their presences. Which pretty much shoots that theory that the CE folks killed the board right in the ass. I don't recall anyone saying it wasn't. The point is that there's no global rule against it today. Flaming has always been a silly offense on any board, and we finally got tired of catering to ninnies.

So what you're saying is that it's OK to flame outside of HD? As long as you agree with Tom, though. Check the revised board rules, genius. You'll find nothing in there that says flaming can't be done outside of HD. Heck, you won't find anything in there about it at all. I wonder if that was deliberate...