Spicy McHaggis

Shhh! My tactics are top-secret. Actually, with all the good vibes I've gotten over the sig, all my other cool Trojan football pics will go to waste. Oh well.

Who's the guy getting his talking points from O'Reilly, again? There's nothing wrong with being an ideologue if you're open-minded and your ideology is sound. Practicality should not decide the rightness or wrongness of an issue, only how it should be carried out once it's been evaluated ideologically. Go fuck yourself. I never judge someone's character based on what they think the government should do, neither should you. Unless you were joking... in which case: happyhappyfuntimesLOLzz! Did you actually read my entire post... you know, the one from which you quoted me? Given that you have no qualms about taking a private citizen's money away from him, that's a scary proposition. You know, nuking China would really help curb overpopulation. It's certainly practical, and you're all about results. Would you support that? If you were talking about classical liberalism, I'd be right there with you. It's a shame you mean political liberalism. Also, you must be living under a rock if your observations have led you to support politically liberal economic/fiscal policy. Why don't you lead the revolution?

Dude, I know. The campus is insane. Girls that look and dress (for about 80% of the year) like that are EVERYWHERE. I tell you what, I guarantee it's a recruiting tool... hell, they signed me! Iggy, I pretty much agree with you on the circle of logic analysis. My only point in this particular case is that the Arkansas/Auburn and Auburn/Florida games occurred consecutively. As far as Arkansas's close games, let's look at last year... Texas played a cream puff schedule last year and had to survive Oklahoma State, and yet they came out and beat USC in the Rose Bowl for the national championship. USC had a good amount of quality wins and that validated Texas. In my opinion Arkansas's win over Auburn validated them. What I'm saying about West Virginia and Louisville is this: let's pretend that they each play San Diego State in place of their game with each other. Let's say both teams win out. All you can say is that the won every game of an easy schedule. There is no way, under that schedule, that West Virginia or Louisville would be put in the championship game ahead of, say, a one loss Michigan team. Now, let's talk reality. Outside of the West Virginia/Louisville game, West Virginia and Louisville will have played nobody. So the only thing the winner of that game can say is, we beat an undefeated team. But what does it matter if those wins come against losers? An unblemished record doesn't mean anything when it comes against teams you are supposed to blowout. They will not have beaten a good team, just an undefeated one.

Speaking from personal experience, I couldn't agree more with your initial cliché. However, it still should not be the government's job to take care of that. Charity is for private people and private groups. A government funded clinic is NOT a free clinic. Free clinics are only born out of charity, where donations are freely given. Government involvement almost never decreases costs. Set aside the idealistic argument of my libertarian values. Let's talk practically. If the government is not under pressure to be efficient with spending, your taxes will go up, costing you money. If the government is under pressure to be efficient with spending, they will nickel and dime both the patients they insure and the hospitals to which the insurance is being paid. The hospitals, which are businesses, are not going to stand by and lose money because of government funded insurance. They will increase their fees, which will be paid by private insurance, thereby recouping what they lost from dealing with the government. Private insurance companies, which are businesses, are not going to stand by and lose money because of an increase in hospital fees. They will increase their premiums, which will be paid by their customers, thereby recouping what they lost from paying higher hospital fees. Higher insurance premiums cost you money. I'm all for keeping people healthy. I care about every person, regardless of citizenship status. Charity should still be private.

Thanks for the compliment on the sig. With regard to the USS Cole, we are only disagreeing because of our opinion on when it's okay to blow people up. I concur with everything the fact check article says about the Cole. I just think that President Clinton, as commander-in-chief, could have exercised his authority without waiting for definitive proof. I don't think he could have ever gotten a 100% guarantee, but more importantly, under the military/intelligence climate he was facing, he didn't need a 100% guarantee. And I don't doubt for a second that there would have been a bunch of morons talking about wagging the dog, but it would have been the right thing to do. The key here is: I'm not assigning full blame to any party for our country's current situation. I'm just as interested in the facts as you are.

Caught by that sneaky transitive property, ONCE AGAIN! Damn.

Slayer, one of my biggest pet peeves is being called a racist. I don't think society laughs at itself enough. I feel you can be racially conscious without being uptight about every little joke. And that's how I live my life. I'm the furthest thing from a racist. I'm not going to pull out the "my best friends are (insert ethnic group here)" card, but it's pretty stupid to imply that about someone if you don't actually know them.

You're REALLY reaching snuffbox. The article is about universal health care, presumably an STD test would be on the house. Tijuana is not the cleanest city in the world. Presumably, an easy Tijuana stripper would not be the cleanest lay in the world. Hence the joke. I said NOTHING that implied ANYTHING about ANY ethnic group. Stop reaching. Try sense of humor once in your life. Eric, so what, felons can't buy medical insurance? I'm not talking about whether or not you treat people dying in the streets. I'm talking about people being treated for things the rest of us go to private practice and pay for... and them being treated AHEAD of graver cases. Your biggest problem is you think that having the government involved is good. I'm all for charity, I give to charity. But the government's job is not charity. Private hospitals should do what private hospitals want to do.

CAL is compared easily to Michigan?...the blowout loss at Tennessee must have been stricken from your memory...truth be told...Pac 10 doesnt have another team beside USC that is top 10 caliber much less top 3 caliber and Wisconsin is easily every bit as good as Oregon or Cal and without a question better than UCLA,WSU or any of the other schools I'd give the Big 10 the edge right now, but they're not far and away the better conference.

I'd love one that treated the people who follow the rules.

We are arguing over who is responsible, and who takes great pains to avoid civilian casualties.

Wait, I'm trying to figure this out... you're from Wisconsin, so you know precisely what about the illegal immigration problem? See, over here in LA, a 10 hour wait in an emergency room lobby is pretty common. And they're usually filled with four types: the illegal immigrant, the poor, the uninsured, and those in real trauma. Many times those four things can be found in the same patient. Other times they're separate. But one thing is for sure, regardless of your condition or the state of your insurance... if you don't come in by ambulance, they will put you BEHIND people that are there for flu shots, antibiotics, garden-variety broken bones and sprains, etc. You have to demonstrate a pretty grave condition to get admitted before people who are there for things that could be accomplished in a basic checkup. If you want anecdotes, I have those too... one including a five hour wait I had to endure while my potassium level was at a fatal deficiency. The single biggest problem in ERs is the fact that they are required by law to see everyone who comes in, and the overwhelming majority of them are illegal immigrants seeking basic medicine. When illegal immigrants are attracted to this country by jobs and the benefits we take for granted everyday, you would think that such an outstanding universal health care system in their own country would have a bigger impact. I don't get my talking points from Bill O'Reilly, and I don't get my jokes from washed up wrestlers. La Raza is a big thing over here for the more racist Mexicans, so lay off. This folder needs a sense of humor. Just so you know, I don't care if my stance on illegal immigration is the same as O'Reilly's just like I don't care if my stance on marijuana legalization is the same as Nader's. There are morons on every side of every issue.

"Edwin, I don't think Arkansas is #6, but I do feel that they should be ranked ahead of the fourth (Auburn, WHO ARKANSAS BEAT) and fifth best (Florida, who was just beaten by Auburn, WHO ARKANSAS BEAT the week before) teams in the country and maybe the sixth best team (Tennessee, who was beaten by Florida, who was just beaten by Auburn, WHO ARKANSAS BEAT two weeks ago) as well. If that means dropping all those teams down, that's fine. If all the legitimate national title contenders from the SEC are ranked below shitty Arkansas that only beat Alabama and Vanderbilt when those teams' kickers choked away game-winners (Are you dense? ARKANSAS BEAT AUBURN, the fourth best team in the country), then that would somehow make West Virginia and Louisville less likely to play in the title game." Does this make sense to anyone? I feel like I'm missing something here. You are missing something. You're missing the fact that some people are prepared to validate the weak sauce schedule of either West Virginia or Louisville based solely on the fact that one of the teams, who dominated a weak sauce schedule, will beat the other, who also dominated a weak sauce schedule. There is no reason the winner of West Virginia/Louisville should be taken seriously. Because that would be that team's ONLY QUALITY WIN. There will be no other measuring stick for that game's winner. All you'll be able to say is that they beat an undefeated team, which means nothing based on their schedules.

And how do you ensure that?

SuperJerk, the whole point of the first two quotes was to get you to start naming issues so I could show you how independent my thinking may or may not be. If I feel something is true, it is because it is backed up by facts and logic. That's something you can't know from a message board.

Edwin, I don't think Arkansas is #6, but I do feel that they should be ranked ahead of Auburn and Florida, and maybe Tennessee. If that means dropping all those teams down, that's fine. But I'd rather have Arkansas ranked a little too high, then risk the prospect of West Virginia/Louisville determining a national championship contender. I would hope that everyone in this thread would agree that we need a playoff. It seems like this is the time of year that we always come around to that conclusion. We should have it, and that's the end of the story. With regard to the Pac-10, USC and Cal compared easily to OSU and Michigan. Oregon is better than Iowa. Washington State, Washington (with Stanback), and UCLA are equal to Penn State, Minnesota, and Wisconsin this year, and could contend with Purdue. It's a wash between Arizona, Oregon State, Arizona State, & Stanford, and Northwestern, Michigan State, Indiana, & Illinois. I'd give the Big 10 the edge right now, but they're not far and away the better conference. As far as the Trojans go, like I said before we have more things to worry about than the rankings. They have a bye week, Oregon State, and Stanford to work out the kinks. And there are some kinks. They better worry about beating Oregon, Cal, and Notre Dame before they worry about their ranking.

Man, all it takes here is a half-inch of rain and its Storm Watch 2006. Southern Californians are such pussies.

Good for the President. He is absolutely a man of high character, and that is one of the reasons why I voted for him. I just wish he would cut down on the spending. That wouldn't REALLY help the self government.

It's amazing that, with such great health-care, so many Mexicans would rather come to America and sit in the lobbies of emergency rooms for 10 hours to get free antibiotics. Maybe I'll go down to TJ... I can go to a strip club and get a free STD test the next day. Viva La Raza!

What a bunch of bullshit. Perhaps Vyce can elucidate.

Aside from the fact that Mr. Yglesias missed, COMPLETELY, the primary purpose of the Iraq War, I just want to respond to this: I guess it's a good speech if you're not interested in the truth. Democrats offered no substantive suggestions. Not one. Work with our allies, speed the transition, bring all the groups to the table, pass a global test, those are not suggestions. It's hard to heed a suggestion when it's utterly hollow. When you say, "I'll do better," it means precisely nothing when it is not followed by any semblance of a substantive plan.

Oh good. Well, now we can drop the number to 30,000. Good job USA. I'm proud to live in a country that does the utmost to avoid civilian casualties.

Sorry I didn't quote you before. I figured you would be intelligent enough to figure out I was responding to you. That fact alone makes me different than the right wing hackery as you would call it. Happy? Now, allow me to quote myself: As far as the Cole goes, we were not under ANY burden of proof, whatsoever. Bin Laden had already declared war on us, the CIA had declared war on Al Qaeda, Clinton had condemned the Taliban... if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and talks like a duck, it's a duck. Clinton wanted 100% certification. That exists in a dream world. He was worried about his legacy and his image. He admits that a strike plan had already been drawn up. He should have said fuck you to the Republicans and started the battle. And you know what? If he had started the war on Al Qaeda, and if Bush had stopped it, and if 9/11 had happened after... Clinton would have been golden. I3K, if you want my honest opinion, a country that says they feel war has been declared against them and responds by testing a nuclear weapon... in my opinion that's about as close as you can get to the nail in the coffin. To me, that requires a military response, preferably air strikes. Of course, South Korea, Japan, and China definitely will want, and probably should have, a say in what happens.

Again with talking about my side. You've got to stop that. It makes you sound like a moron. I'm not going to speak for a side in general, I'm going to speak for myself. Also, perhaps you could make use of the electronic record which contains my years of right wing posts. Of course, I don't believe things because they are left-leaning or right-leaning I believe things because I feel they are right. Try me. With regard to Clinton, you don't wait to respond to an act of war because you only have a few months left in your term. Of course, he didn't care about what was right, he only cared about how he looked. You can't say that about our current President. Fact: Clinton received donations from the Chinese. Later, Clinton allowed weapons and technology to flow to a Detroit-based company with ties to the Chinese military. Don't believe me about intelligence... why don't you look up the Clinton administration's "primary purpose" guidelines? And then explain to me why Clinton allowed the number of graduating CIA case officers to reach its lowest point... and, more importantly, why George W. Bush has tripled the number from 2001. Oh, just to help you pull your head out of your ass... I think Hannity is a moron and I don't listen to Limbaugh. Got another one for me?

If you take off your helmet and use it as a weapon, that's assault. You ARE a criminal. If you use your cleats to stomp on someone, that's assault. You ARE a criminal. If you German suplex a guy during a brawl, that's assault. You ARE a criminal. I don't see how you can't rank Arkansas where they are. They beat Auburn. Auburn beat Florida. Florida beat Tennessee. The Razorbacks have won all their games aside from a blowout by USC. They have a case for being the best team in the SEC, and they certainly should be ranked ahead of teams they've beaten. The rankings are not what should be, they're not what will be... they are what is. At this point in the season, Arkansas should be highly ranked. With regard to the Trojans... I, too, am starting to get down on JDB. King, I know you wrote that you thought the offensive line wasn't pass blocking very well. I disagree. I think if you take a look at Booty's mistakes, he was actually rattled simply by the idea of a blitz. Whoever said he buckles under pressure is starting to look correct in my eyes. On the interception Booty threw, he actually had about 1-2 seconds more than he thought he did... and this happened on more than one occasion with less serious results. Booty has GOT to slow the game down, and make his opponent actually have to earn the ability to rattle him. Right now, he is just psyching himself out. That being said, they are still undefeated. I definitely have concerns, but I'm not going to complain about winning. They can't, however, worry about the rankings because if they play this way against Cal or Notre Dame, they probably will lose. Somebody still has to sell me on why Michigan is better.