Justice

"And in today's history lesson, we'll discuss why the colonies broke away from England and their tyrannical Burger King."

97. All the insanely stupid stuff that we've done in the past but managed to ignore so our brains don't explode. *COUGHSKULLRADIOCOUGH*

Damn you kids. You can't mention any of those without the most emotional of them all: 94) Raynor vs. MacPhisto - Last Man Standing

Uh, I don't believe that's been the problem as of late, NoCal. It's just been prayer in general. And considering how this is pretty much completely private in nature, sure, why not.

Yeah, I have to agree. Any real point to the misleading title here?

9) It actually focuses on the fact that it's a WRESTLING SHOW rather than being a soap opera for people who like to hit people with objects.

I really don't mind 'Young and Vanilla' as CJ. He's probably the most like Rehnquist out of the other 8 there is, and Rehnquist was an incredibly good Justice and Chief Justice. I think Roberts (Who seems to be fairly level-headed as is) is a great choice for a non-offensive, balance keeping AND well-qualified head of the SCOTUS.

See, the coolest thing for me is that my dad gets free diesel from the pump at his work, plus my house (Sadly, not my dorm) is closest to the lowest gas prices in the state. So I guess I'm going pretty good in all this mess.

Is this just for single player or the game itself? Cause Halo 2 is just so much better. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> While Doom III's multiplayer might have been a bit anemic from the get go, mods have allowed MUCH bigger games, and just as well Halo 2's multiplayer was simply a rehash of the old game with fewer interesting levels (Plus the controls on getting into vehicles are much, much more finnicky). On a whole, in my opinion, Halo 2 was pretty much failure. It did very little new, and it didn't even succeed at stuff the first game nailed down. Doom III's single-player Experience alone is better than Halo 2, and it's shortcomings in Multiplayer have been fixed pretty much. So yeah, Doom III > Halo 2.

Zuh? Doom III was much better than Halo 2, and HL 2 was excellent. Halo 2 is fairly weak when it comes down sequels, especially those ones. o.0 By the by, a Half-Life movie would be awesome. Gary Oldman would be great as Gordon Freeman.

Just because I know you are going to post your standard reply soon, I'm gonna get this response out now: What is Sheehan's argument right now? A complete and utter pullout of Iraq. Just about no one agrees with that outside of maybe C-Bacon and yourself. Congrats! Actually, I take back C-Bacon. I think he conceded that point a little while back. What's her current popularity? Not that good. She's not making this huge movement around her to support her. She's actually riled up more people against her. Rasmussen right now is showing that 38% of the people disagree with her, while 35% do. The remaining 30 or so percent just don't give a damn about her. Whoops! What is her significance? Little to none after she's become more of a radical political pundit than a mourning mother. Going around, inciting mobs is not mourning. That's not trying to remember your son, that's trying to martyr yourself. Her husband has now filed to divorce her after this action. Like SJ said, had she just quietly had a vigil, remained as non-political as possible, and just shut her damned mouth, she wouldn't get heat like she is now. She'd look like, well, an honest-to-God mourner, rather than someone who wants her face on the evening news as much as possible. She's opened her mouth, and she's hurt herself like Howard Dean did. Now all she is is another idiot with a microphone, nothing more. But again, you haven't put forth anything useful in this abortion of a thread anyways. You've literally become the new INXS of the CE folder. So I'm gone. Hopefully this thread'll die off soon now.

Okay then. Like your last comment was in any way 'thought-provoking'. Anyways, I was showing how dumb it was to try and say "And look who agrees with her!", especially when the statement you put forth was fairly untrue. Perhaps if you could, maybe put forth some new evidence which furthers her case as everyone who has ever come into contact with her further distances themselves away from her current actions, we might have, you know, an honest argument. Something like Y2Jerk was actually doing. But considering who this is, I'm expecting way too much.

Well, if we are going for everyone who agrees with what she's doing... Uh, there weren't too many experts who said 'Don't go into Iraq', either. There were some who (Rightly) said that we should have more troops, more force, and concentrate on rebuilding, but the military as a whole said Iraq was okay. So, uh, you're still a moron. Good for you.

Mother. Fucking. HILARIOUS.

Did you know she has ties to *gasp* MOVEON.ORG! *shudders* Is that better? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Hey, that was MY LINE, damn it! Stick to posting cowboys harrassing liberals in suits.

Yeah, if it's Rickman, it'd be Hardcore or nothing.

Sorry. "Didn't support". Oops. It's weak because simply saying 'he's the one with a lack of commitment because he's the one filing the divorce' IS weak in the extreme. I thought you'd remembered your own argument, but I guess I have to bring it up again. I gave a few good reasons as to why someone would divorce without their committment being in question, and I would hope you'd understand that. Again, I'm not saying the divorce is an 'end-all be-all' argument maker. But it is incredibly suspicious as to why he'd divorce her now. It's odd for her to say he didn't want to be there when he voluntarily re-enlisted as well. And if it counts, she's been drawing on MoveOn.org for support. I don't think she's doing what 'her son' would have wanted, and she's just using his death to get air time. But whatever. If you think she's honest, believe her. I really don't see her as being this incredible martyr she's being made out to be. Edit: Irreconcibile differences is what is listed. A disagreement on using her son for her own personal crusade just might fall into that category. Maybe.

What 'certain points' of Boon's argument, because as it seems, you don't support any of Boon's placed argument. Her motives are in quesiton, and they should be. There's little proof that her son would support such an action, especially his voluntary re-enlistment. I only brought up the 'committment thing' because you brought up an incredibly weak counter-argument to it. As far as I'm concerned, the divorce is still very suspicious, and can't be immediately dismissed with weak counter-arguments. It's nothing definitive, but it's really coincidental if it doesn't somehow relate to this entire incident. It's perfectly fine to invalidate someone who doesn't have honest motives. Remember the Bush interns flown into Florida to storm the Miami-Dade elections off chanting 'stop the Recount'? Because they were flown in and paid to do it, I'd say that invalidates their opinions. Just like if this mom were simply using her son to get her 15 minutes would invalidate her. Yes, the impending divorce should be something to consider when talking about her argument. It's not an 'end all be all', but it is something that should be considered, along with her son's voluntary enlistment. Motive counts when it comes to an argument. Right now, she said her husband supported her, and now he's divorcing her. She says her son support the war, yet he voluntarily re-enlisted. Trying to dismiss that out of hand doesn't make sense.

Uh, I think he was trying to say she should probably concentrate on the family she still has rather than posting her dead son up to get air time. And come on... world peace? You've got to be joking on that one, man. Y2Jerk, I don't think we are arguing the validation of Iraq. I think we are arguing more the honesty of her motives than anything else. Why you are making a point does come into question, just like it would with Bush. Just like if Bush had an energy plan that favored oil companies, you'd call into question the reason why, it should still be done here. This isn't just her debating Iraq. This is her using her dead son's memory to get time to debate Iraq. If her husband is filing for divorce, then there's some relevance in that. And divorce isn't always filed by those who lack committment. A man divorcing his wife for cheating on her, a wife divorcing a husband beating her... those are betrayals which are understandable and not the fault of the filing person. Do they lack committment? I think we could include "Using your dead son to power your public image" as one of those reasons. Your reasons saying 'the divorce doesn't matter!' are fairly weak, man. Motive matters when making a statement, because it shows either just conviction or selfish ambition. The 'why', not the 'what'.

"And that is why you fail." Listening to ANY pundit daily is a dumb thing to do. How about stopping it so you don't get gross generalizations that are often vastly different than the people you are arguing with? Don't we all know that listening to extremists on a consistant basis is a dumb thing? Why do you continue to do it? Oh boo-hoo. How about shutting the fuck up already. How about trying to get pictures of coffins with flags drapped over them? Could we perhaps dig up a few corpses for you to parade around in someone's face? Please, do not try to act like the left is innocent in this entire thing. No one is. This is what happens when you try to 'put a face' on something that had a face, has always had a face, and always will have a face. Trying to parade around the fact like it's something enlightening only leads to the cheapening of the dead by both sides. Perhaps you and everyone else should realize we should let the dead rest, rather than continually trying to dress up their corpse for whatever cause we want to promote. And that goes for everyone.

I agree completely with Boon. I'm not too sure if she's an anti-semite (Frankly, it doesn't really seem so). But an idiot who is trying to strike it big off her son's death, and thusly alienating EVERYONE around her, yeah, I can completely see it, especially with her husband now divorcing her. Yeah, NoCal, show us the 'quotes', and I'll trust you. Otherwise, information leads me to believe the opposite is true.

Is it really hard for you to believe that a grieving Mother that watched her son go off to fight in an injust war full of lies and misleading, might want the President to be held accountable? Michael Moore wants the limelight. Sheehan's son is Dead. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He went over there on his own accord. Sheehan's son made his own choice. She could respect that and not, well, sort of trample all over his grave trying to make a scene. I don't think he'd want that. I can understand a grieving mother and not believing a war. But trying to act like Bush just sent him unwilling to die is a misnomer. Using her son, who willingly went over there, is wrong. If I went over there and my mom tried to prop my death up as an anti-Bush rallying point, I sure wouldn't like it. Perhaps if her son didn't want to go over there, maybe she'd have something. But this seems more like something that her son (And it seems more and more like the rest of the family) firmly disagree with, I think that it's improper.

She's getting publicity and spotlight. She's the center of attention for a bit. 15 minutes of fame. Is it really that hard for you to think that she wants a bit of the limelight?

Adrian Cronauer keeps saying "Good Morning, Vietnam!" to the war in Iraq.

Jack has always supported Universal Healthcare.