Justice

I was responding to the first part. On the second part, I don't see any other reporting on this. Not even a "Rolling Stone reports" notice on CNN. I'm guessing that this report is just greatly exaggerated (As one would think Rolling Stone would be apted to do). Just as well, the press and the military are watching the place like a hawk. Do you really think any other abuses would go on without the press jumping on it instantly? ... First off, where did I condone it? I made that example to show that hey, worse things can happen to you. And secondly, I never condoned it. I admitted how horrible it was, but this is OLD NEWS. STUFF WE ALREADY KNEW. WE KNEW WORSE SHIT HAPPENED. What more do you want? I'll bet this is breaking news to you, too: Two planes crashed into the Two Towers, causing both to collapse and take 3,000 lives. Wow, that's horrible... and three years old. Excuse me, but does that really constitute news anymore? No, not really.

Ah, thank you. Logical minds think alike, I guess.

I don't think you can deny that there is something wrong about it, or write it off as 'humiliation'. But to whine about it months afterwards when it's A) No longer happening and B) Those involved are currently going through the trial process, I don't see how this is really an issue anymore. What MORE can we do? Hell, Abu Ghraib is being demolished soon enough, so you won't even have to bitch about that thing existing anymore. Just please explain to me how this has any more relevance at all, and I'll change my mind. But if it's already being dealt with, and none of the candidates can truly do anything to effect such things than is already being done by the military itself, why should I really give a damn?

<Mike>Mere humiliation. Ho-hum</Mike> Well, considering we have H.S. football players doing things like shoving pinecones up freshmen's ass, there could certainly be worse things... At any rate, this is old news. We knew these things happened months ago (Rumsfeld said there was worse shit and I'd believe him), and they are already in the process of taking care of it. If there were, well, recent developments or recent abuses, then this would be news. But just as well, it's all old. Plus, would you really consider Rolling Stone an unbiased source?

Holy shit. That had to be one of the coolest things I've ever seen. To start watching him parry, and waiting for him to screw up, but it doesn't and then watching him just beat the shit out of Chun Li was fucking cinematic.

I think the bigger problem is what if there were more qualified people who didn't get the job because Golan was in his afffair with the Gov. I don't doubt he might have some qualifications (It'd be pretty hard to spin it past everyone if he had no skills to speak of), but better people may have been passed up because of their relationship.

Smarks Board Name: Powerplay Wrestlers Name: Justin Bowers Nicknames: Height: 5’11” Weight: 222 Hometown: Warren, Michigan Age: 24 Face/Heel: Babyface right out of the gym Stable: None Manager: “Justice” William Hearford. He’s back, baby!! Weapon(s): Prefers not to use them, but when it comes down to it he takes after his teacher with the good ‘ole chain. Quote: Looks: Think Randy Orton, but a bit smaller. Carries himself with the same self-confident aura, but Judge generally keeps that in check. He wears a pair of blue spandex pants with “Justin” on the right leg and “Bowers” on the other, highlighted by deep blue lines and a lightning bolt. Ring Entrance: *BOOM* *BOOM* *BOOM* Blue pyros go up on either side of the stage as “Just Communication” from Gundam Wing starts up, and the crowd gives a decent pop as Justin Bowers walks out waving to the crowd, flanked by Judge, who wears a trainer’s outfit and carries a clipboard (Which you can occasionally see him writing in during the match, generally picking out mistakes and things that need to be worked on) and wears a red hat. “Now entering the ring, weighing 222 pounds and hailing from Warren, Michigan, he is the human lightning bolt… JUSTIN BOWERS!” Justin plays to the crowd, waving and slapping hands a few times before finally sliding into the ring. Stats: ¯¯¯¯¯ Strength: 2 – Can do some basic suplexes and stuff, but he’s not really reliant on his strength. Speed: 8 – Incredibly agile. The guy has a 44” vertical leap, so he doesn’t have much problem catching air, and he’s got a great sense of balance. Vitality: 3 – Not too tough. He has great stamina, but his physical resilience is lacking. Big moves from anyone exceptionally big (7 or up) have potential finishing power on him. Charisma: 7 – Not a huge talker, but fun and energetic when he does, and he has a very addictive personality. Style: A crowd pleaser. Hearford has been trying to teach him the art of psychology and technical wrestling, but Josh isn’t catching on as quickly as he’s needed. He’s highflying, very flashy, and very fast, which works well enough against most cruiser and medium-sized opponents. When it comes to larger or tougher opponents, though, he can have trouble as his deficiency in technical work makes it much harder for his admittedly spotty moveset to stop them. Signature moves: 1) Lightning Strike – Inverted Rana. Powerful move, almost finisher strength. 2) Blitzkrieg – A running Tornado DDT, usually done after hitting the ropes. He uses the momentum off the ropes to really spike this move. A possible finisher for low Vit people or late in a long match. 3) Rolling Thunder: Yes, the good ‘ole RVD move. A flashy, show-off move, it’s over than it really has any right to be. 4) Flashpoint – A very quick spinning Neckbreaker. Done very fast, can catch opponents by surprise with it’s quickness. 5) Springboard Dropkick – His most versatile move. Can be done just about anytime when he’s near the ropes, and he’ll do it towards the outside, on the inside, and even as a counter to a whip! 6) Dropsault – Flipping Dropkick right to the face. He doesn’t have much in the way of striking power, but this’ll put a nice dent in you if you let him connect with it. 7) Tilt-a-Whirl Bulldog – The same on Rey Mysterio does. If the opponent is quick or exceptionally strong, it can be countered into a Reverse Powerbomb. 8) Sucide Moves: Suicide Planchas, Suicide Dives, etc. He’s loves these sorts of moves and if he gets a chance, he’ll definitely go for one, even if it might get him in trouble. 9) Spike DDT – Quick and vicious-looking. A possible desperation or momentum stopper when needed. 10) Suicidas – Just about anything you can think of, he’ll definitely try it once. Common moves: 1) Dropkicks, which are occasionally targeted at a body part (Hearford will usually yell at him to target one) 2) Forearms, palm strikes, and punches. He’s not a striker, though, so don’t expect them to do too much. 3) Snap Suplex 4) Arm Drags of all sorts 5) DDT 6) Reverse DDT 7) Superkick 8) Flying Crossbody 9) Neckbreaker 10) Snapmare 11) Flying Forearm 12) Enzuigiri 13) Bulldog 14) Various Rollups Rare moves: 1) SSP 2) Cross Examination -Reverse Figure Four Leglock 3) Capital Punishment - Pyramid Driver Finishers: Surprise Witness - A simple Diamond Cutter, taken from Judge’s book. Sky High – A Twisting Moonsault. Gets HUGE air for this due to his incredible leaping ability. Notes: Judge will NOT, REPEAT, WILL NOT CHEAT FOR JUSTIN. He will prevent others from cheating (i.e. grabbing the chair away from them, stopping people from distracting the referee, halting a manager trying to cheat), give tips to Justin from the apron, and occasionally sit in as a guest commentator.

Going up right now...

Oh God. Generic being supported by the inquiries own statistics, right? Talk about a weak response... And hell, the poorest saw their tax burden go down 16%. Don't see you taking notice for your own constituency getting benefits.

Uh, that's in your own article... ...Dweeb.

Well, frankly, the Gay Rights Movement is just itching to take it to Federal Court and end it once and for all, for better or for worse.

Well then, my idea is better than Kerry's. Oh, not saying it isn't. Just... yeah. This is one of those topics that REALLY hard to believe, ya know?

He is saying that if they believe they only need fuel to power their country, we will provide them with non-nuclear fuel to power their country, so that they don't acquire a nuclear anything of any kind. In that way, we're saying "Well, if you ONLY want the nuclear power to electrify your country, than you'll take our free fossil fuels, right? They'll power your country and then you won't need to muck around with nuclear materials. Because, you WERE just interested in the nuclear materials for pure electrical reasons, right? Right?" In short, as long as we keep providing them with an electricity source, they can't make the excuse that they need nuclear energy for electricity. Uh... Jobber... Mike is right. fk confirmed it on Kerry's website. They are actually going to give nuclear fuel to Iran.

Actually, that wasn't MM. That was a quote from The Big Lebowski, an excellent Coehns Bros. film. I've made the same mistake before, too. I highly reccommend it. I meant it more as "I agree" rather than to marginalize your opinion.

I think that sums up your opinion best.

Hey, cool. Can we form a club or something? Oi. Moving took longer than I thought it would...

Here you go. It's a bit more complex than just Iran testing a missile, but perhaps that's what makes it so much more disturbing.

Eh, my bad on the last two promos after GSMS's match. My internet went out, so I couldn't get them out in time. Thanks to Thoth and Zed for actually posting them after the fact, especially after the shitty day I had.

So that you aren't pegged as a simple "Party-Line Dem"? Just because you can quote that doesn't really make me believe you. Nothing you've really said on this forum has lead me to believe you actually believe any of that. Perhaps if you actually EXPLAINED your opinion outside of witless remarks and what is generally party-line Democratic statements, I'd put more faith in you. But as of yet, you haven't shown me any of that yet. I don't listen to either, so that's pretty hard. It's because you come off as more virulent and say more Party-line Democrat things on this forums than most of the admitted democrats that gives you such a damn bad rap. You should honestly go into explaining your opinions rather than trying to make little emotional appeals that rely on evidence that is purely acentedotal.

Well then one could argue that there is a major difference between watching coverage on tv of the attacks, and having someone whipser into yor ear, "america is under attack" and not having a clue anything else about. Fair enough, but I still think that even that could cause substantial shock to ones own mind to keep you from doing anything for at least a few minutes, if not more. I doubt any President would have done differently than what Bush did, and frankly I wouldn't hold it against them if they did. It's an utterly stupid way to judge one's character, in my honest opinion.

I'm arguing (And very simply) that your life isn't always indicitive of the economic situation. well either is a grocery store going up in your area. Look nobody said there aren't ANY JOBS anywhere being created. Also it has to do with net jobs created. You have to look at new jobs opposed to how many jobs are being lost at the same time. Outsourcing jobs effects people in the midwest a lot more then people in say, a big city. When a city loses a corporation, hell, there is 100 more to choose from in a matter of minutes. In other cities, if a plant decides to move overseas, you can goodbye to the prosperity of the city and it's residents. And don't just come back with, "well move to the city, asshole" I never said it was; I specifically said it wasn't, and cited it to show him that not all areas are suffering, and to say that "OMG MY AREA SUCKS" is not an argument when it comes to the economy. I slammed him for making a claim on simply acendotal evidence. The job report does show a huge increase though the household survey, one so big that there has to be some sort of middle ground somewhere in there. Even the middle ground is a substatial gain, too. Plus, NoCal, I'm in the Midwest.The rural Midwest. Trust me, the economy is doing great around a lot of rural areas around me, though I've seen slumping around as well. Some companys move out, other things move in, okay? That's how life works. Some towns die off; new towns start up. Welcome to life. I think what baffles me most about this response is that it's clearly trying to come to the aid of someone who doesn't know what the fuck they are talking about, someone who makes you, Tyler, JotW, Robbie, and (To a lesser extent) Jig look bad. Look at his argument: Can you honestly tell me that's a 'sound' argument? I'm blasting him for just posting Democratic Party-line shit (Even though he's a... *snicker*... Libertarian). He follows the God damn party more faithfully than you do. Why the hell are you defending him for doing nothing but make you looks shitty by presenting your own arguments in the shittiest fashion possible (See: They Knew topic on Iraq). Explain, please. Oh, and tell me if you honestly think he's a real Libertarian.

Of course this coming from one of the biggest agenda-pushers on this whole board........but hey it's all entertainment right? Oh not you again... Seriously, this has to be the GAYEST CE FEUD OF ALL TIME. I mean, GOD, I didn't think both guys could be the bitch in a feud, but... o.0

I'm arguing (And very simply) that your life isn't always indicitive of the economic situation. My life is going great, and I got a low paying job as well. I have friends who are doing GREAT GREAT GREAT right now. That doesn't necessarily mean the economy is great though. Just because some people around you are having a shitty time doesn't mean the economy is doing badly. It means they are having a shitty time. People did poorly under Clinton as well, but that's widely regarded as a fantastic economic climate. You evidence IS acentdotal: It's completely based around ancedotes of your life hence why we call it that. Acentdotal evidence is generally not reliable when you are trying to look at a big picture situation. I don't care if you know how badly your friends are doing off, because it's obviously offset by how well my friends are doing. Hence why neither of ours can be accurate economic pictures. I'm not a registered Republican. I have severe doubts that I will actually vote for Bush at the moment because, frankly, I'm not happy with him. But... I do like him a lot more than I'll ever like Kerry. I'm either voting Libertarian or Bush, so don't pawn me off as some party politico. I know I used some big words in there, but, do you think you understand... duder? Perhaps if you, ya know, supported your opinions with some facts, you might be taken a bit more seriously than "Slightly-less conspiratorial INXS wanna-be". Heh, yeah, keep telling yourself that; registration to a party doesn't necessarily mean you subscribe to their ideals (See: Miller, Zell). The reason you have to mention it so many times is because you are really a democrat; I haven't seen you ONCE on this board truly express a libertarian point of view. Hey, let's take a poll: Who thinks that snuffbox is truly a liberal guy? Who thinks that he is actually a libertarian? Post your opinions!

Okay, my entire look at the thing: I think the most important line Kerry said is that "He couldn't think". It shows that he was sufficiently dazed from the sheer incredulity of the entire event. I doubt this goes down any more when you are in charge of the country under attack. I'm sure this probably INCREASES the amount of fogginess because not only is this horrific event going on, but YOU are the person who will be in charge of responding to it. That would sufficiently daze me, and I can completely understand. Do I think that Kerry's bullshitting? A bit; he's trying to use a minor event to make Bush seem unqualified by telling us how he would theoretically act. I really doubt he would do that, in all honesty; an event of that magnitude is such a system shock that I doubt he'd be doing anything but sitting and thinking for a few minutes on exactly what you want to do. Does this change my opinion of Kerry? Not really, no. Does it affect my opinion of Bush? No, not really either.

The reason he's calling bullshit is because there is a lot of legitimate proof that the economy is coming back, moron. Thousands are suffering? THOUSANDS WERE SUFFERING UNDER CLINTON. There will always be people who are doing badly, no matter what the economic climate is. Throwing out generalities like "Thousands are suffering' IS fucking anedcotal because your only proof is your own personal experience. Lemme talk about my area: Our McDonald's and a lot of our smaller shops are opening up newer jobs. VG's (The grocery store in our area), just hired a ton of new people because they added a new wing onto their store. A Save-A-Lot just opened up and hired a lot of people as well. To me, this is indicative of a great economy, because NONE of this shit was happening under Clinton's watch. Perhaps you just suck at life. Or perhaps they are not at indicitive of the economy. But this mixed report (And it is sufficiently mixed: You can say what you want, but when you have two VERY conflicting reports, you can't judge either at face value. I'm sure housing might be a little less accurate, but 629,000 and 32,000 is a BIG fucking difference), you can't make any sure judgements. We've had a huge amount of job gains in the last 6 months, over a million getting new jobs. Suffice to say, you don't know shit. Well, as cited above, you ARE missing a few things. But hey, gotta love that Democratic party, right? And thousands have gotten them back. A general rule of thumb here: Incredibly vague statemenst with little actual backing mean SHIT. Welcome to reality. Indeed, reality sucks. I mean jeez, I just took apart your shittily constructed opinion based on hearsay just like that. But hey, it's all cool, 'duder'. That's how things go.