C Dubya 04

In my time there, it seems to be more geared towards 2 groups (left & right), neither of which really listens to the others arguments and thinks about them, but more or less sticks to what they've always thought. But it is fun stuff to argue about.

Somehow, I think he might change that stance should he be offered. Call it a hunch. -=Mike I agree. You really can't say that you'd like to be VP will you're still running for President. After he officially drops out I think he'll take the position if it's offered. I think that the fact he hasn't really trashed Kerry this past week is a sign that he will.

Clark's campaign was almost as remarkable as Dean's to me. I'll admit that I got caught up in the excitement when he entered (of course his complete lack of substanced quickly soured me). I can't think of any other candidates that campaigns peaked at the start and then went slowly downhill the rest of the way.

So, a moderate is a liberal and someone who leans to the right isn't a conservative? And it matters that he's registered as an independent now, but it doesn't matter that he was registered as a republican? I agree that independent and moderate aren't the same, but it's ludicras to say that moderate is another term for liberal. There can be moderate conservatives & moderate liberals. And, I respect O'Reilly for once standing by his word. He said he'd appollogize if no weapons were found, and he did.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/SHOWBIZ/Movies/02/...reut/index.html Tuesday, February 10, 2004 Posted: 9:30 AM EST (1430 GMT) LOS ANGELES, California (Hollywood Reporter) -- The original "Star Wars" trilogy, one of the most-requested DVD episodic film franchises, is expected to be released as a four-disc DVD box set September 21. A global rollout on DVD is expected within days of the domestic release, according to Lucasfilm Ltd. and 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment. The trilogy, featuring the classic franchise films "Star Wars," "The Empire Strikes Back" and "Return of the Jedi," will be released on three DVD discs, with a fourth disc likely to hold a newly made documentary about the "Star Wars" franchise and never-before-seen footage, among several other bonus materials, said Jim Ward, Lucasfilm's VP of marketing and distribution and the DVD trilogy's executive producer. "We are currently in the process of restoring and remastering all three titles for the DVD release, so we're still working on details of the marketing strategy," Ward said. "But I believe that it is safe to say that it will receive tremendous exposure across all media." Lucasfilm and Fox chose the September release date to maximize on holiday gift buying during the Thanksgiving and Christmas seasons, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment president Mike Dunn said. "We sold about 17 million VHS 'Star Wars' units during two fall release periods in '95 and '97," he said. Combining huge consumer demand for the "Star Wars" franchise with being first out of the gate during the busy fourth-quarter home video market, Fox and Lucasfilm are hoping to cash in on DVD sales throughout the holidays and up until the theatrical release of "Star Wars: Episode III," which is set for release nationwide May, 25, 2005, Dunn and Ward said. Each of the three films in the "Star Wars Trilogy" has been digitally restored and remastered for sound and picture quality, Ward said. "First and foremost, the DVDs will deliver the very best possible sound and picture and take advantage of everything the medium can offer," Ward said. "On top of that, we are creating added-value material that gets inside the creation of the 'Star Wars' films in a fresh and fun way. We want watching this DVD collection to be as memorable as seeing the movies for the first time." The films of the "Star Wars Trilogy" will be sold exclusively as a collection at a still-to-be-determined retail price and not separately, Fox executives said. However, retailers have been known to break up DVD box sets and sell individual titles after the first month out on store shelves.

Huh, and I thought that the Philly Citypaper was only there for concert listings and prostitutes, who may or may not be men. I hate to say it, but this article reeks of conspiracy theories. We may have been looking into their oil before the 9/11 attacks, but I really think we were going after Bin Ladin.

Billy King needs to be the next to go. Has he made one single good decision as GM? Kenny Thomas, 7 years, $57 million. Trading for Robinson. Giving Snow 5 more years. Also, Snyder needs to step down. It was a crime when he let Brown go without getting any compensation from the Pistons. It's fun watching Larry leave Darko on the bench this year though. I'm really glad they didn't end up drafting Carmelo. He'd be getting 5 minutes a game instead of averaging 20 pts.

"Flat-out wrong. In the case of a gang rape DNA evidence would be all but useless. Victims can be drugged, stunned, knocked out, or blindfolded. Rapists can use condoms. Absence of evidence is not evidence of innocence." I didn't say gang rape. One person. Semen found. DNA doesn't match. DNA proves innocense. "Wrong again. The eyewitness evidence is what would establish innocence; that only one aggressor was involved would be the key fact. The DNA evidence would be secondary to the analysis." In my example, the person was convicted because of an error by the eyewitness. The DNA was then used to establish innocense. I know these are extreme examples, but DNA is being used to establish innocense in both.

Well, in a rape case, DNA could definitely be used to establish innocense. If the semen was not a DNA match of the convicted, they had the wrong guy. Also, if there was a murder where there was a witness who saw that only one person committed the crime, that person was cut and subsequently got away. Later a convicted person was DNA tested and did not match the blood at the scene. The DNA evidence in this case would establish innocense. I'm just using these to defend my argument about DNA.

I think that DNA evidence can prove innocense in cases. If there was blood or other traceable evidence found at the crime scene and it was later DNA tested and does not match the convicted, that would prove their innocense. I'd say that I would be surprised if no person had ever been wrongly sentenced to the death penalty. I don't have time to look through cases, so I won't argue to strongly, that's just my opinion. I'm for the death penalty though. I just think it should be used in only extreme cases.

Quick recap.... A girl who lives with her mom (who had drug problems in the past) and her brother wants to be popular. To hang with the most popular girl in school she starts stealing & doing drugs & whoring it up. Things spiral downhill from there. Mom's worried, lots of fights, problems with the new friends, etc.... That's the general gist of it.

What do you think the result of a gay couple getting married in MA and subsequently moving to another state? Could that state not honor their union?

In God we trust being on money causes no harm to anyone. Being denied the same rights as other Americans does.

I can't accept that as a reason. That is your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but that does not change my mind. I think that civil unions would be an appropriate compromise. The term "marriage" can apply to straight couples if they want, and gay couples can have civil unions with equal protection of the law.

I'm a big fan of the first & LA Woman, but voted for Strange Days. I enjoy all three albums, but the deciding factor was "I can't see your face" which is one of my all time favorite songs.

Unfortunately Smues, there is a large portion of this country that is either not comfortable with gay people, hate them or fall somewhere in between and do not want gay's to be married. Then there are the people who hold the bible up and hide behind it and say the sanctity of marriage is jeopardized by allowing gay people equal rights. All that is complete and utter bullshit, but it is the mindset. I've of course yet to hear a valid reason to disallow it, which is why I'm all for allowing equal rights to all people in this country.

I'm a little lost as to your argument, but I think we're saying the same thing. A marriage can really be performed by anyone for anyone, but I think it's important to give gay couples the same protection under the law that straight couples have. It's not saying that someone is married that's the issue in my mind, it's recognizing the union by the gov't that is.

Well yeah, that's all that gay people want. They don't want to be recognized by the church, just by the government. It's not the union being recognized by God that they are striving for, it's equal protection of the law.

If you go with this philosophy, you open up a whole new can of worms. You would have to change all of the tax laws for marriages, because they're church things, not governmental not to mention countless other things, such as automatically giving a surviving spose the deceased possesions in the event there is not a will. Marriages are already a governmental entity as well as a church one.

And it said they forced anything on the kid where? Oh, right. She's a second grader. Growing up in the values of her home. She's not old enough to have investigated the wide array of religions and philosophies in the world. Her parents have raised her with their system of values and beliefs and she's interpreted them as best as she can. That's a pretty bold assertation you're making, under the circumstances. I was actually responding to the person who said "Teach your child that that isn't true if you don't believe it.", not to the general article. Unfortunately three people responded while I was typing. As far as the article goes, I don't really think you can put any blame on the little girl. And i think it's a real lame reason to suspend a 2nd grader.

Better yet, educate your child, but don't force any religion on them. Share your beliefs, but don't prevent your child from developing their own.

Include me in the soccer is boring category. I would watch any sport before I sat through a soccer game. Kent Brockman: Halfback passes to the center, back to the halfback, holds it, holds it, holds it.

1. Disco Biscuits - New Years Eve '02 in Philly 2. Gov't Mule anytime 3. Allman Brothers 8/6/00 at Montage Mountain 4. Lollapalooza 92 (i think), it had Tool, Rage, Dinosaur Jr., Fishbone, Primus and Alice in Chains 5. A Festival down in Maryland that had Leftover Salmon, God Street Wine, Charlie Hunter & Bela Fleck playing.

Hey, I agree that it's time to let that one die.

Yeah, but they're interpreting the constitution, not writing laws. I think that there is difference there.