CheesalaIsGood Posted August 30, 2006 Report Posted August 30, 2006 President Bush vs. Governor Bush Two very different men have a debate. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4Nlkc3BLP4
Masked Man of Mystery Posted August 30, 2006 Report Posted August 30, 2006 THEY WERE WHITE?? Suprise suprise...i'm not 100 percent for sure but i'm willing to go out on a limb and say the majority of people in America ARE so yeah...its pretty likely a few white kids are gonna shoot up a school when they feel pushed too far. Its obvious these kids had mental diseases and there are theories about anti-depressents cause a lack of empathy in at least one of them, and by some accounts the other was just along for the ride(and thats not saying he wasn't a fucked up kid too, but Harris was the brains of the operation)... And Snuffbox, do I seem like the type of dude to blame shit on music?? Fuck nah. You know I'm not even gonna say this can be blamed on the parents. The kids were smart enough to work the system into believing they were remorsefull for the crimes they commited prior to Columbine and went so far as to bragging about it in their personal journals. I'm not even 100 percent for sure if the kids liked Manson but thats a moot point. I will, however, step in and say that YES, the violence they witnessed in Video Games and movies DID play a part in devoloping their frame of mine (in that they saw such violence as acceptable). Not one thing can be soley to blame, and its a big tragedy that wasn't politically or racially motivated, so to call it a terrorist attack is not only wrong, its pretty fucking stupid. I think we're going back to that chicken or the egg thing like what happened when the wrestling study came out a little while ago. Does watching pro wrestling or Kill Bill or playing Grand Theft Auto make people do the stuff they see? Or do inherantly violent people watch or play these and then go out and so something stupid? I'd lean toward the later, since I've never once felt the need to jump on a turtle or shoot anyone despite enjoying Super Mario Bros. and Metal Gear Solid 2 or whack someone with nunchuks even though I like Enter the Dragon. When it comes to terrorism, we have to remember that these folks are being taught a perverted form of Islam. I've listened to lectures on CD by a college professor who's spent his life studying the faith and according to him, Muslims are taught to generally be very peaceful and the word jihad has been taken very incorrectly by these people to mean holy war, when the concept is more about trying to improve one's self to be a better Muslim. Besides, if we're going to profile based on race, we're opening big huge cans of worms here, not only the ones mentioned, but we're going to look very, very bad in the eyes of the world in several respects.
snuffbox Posted August 30, 2006 Report Posted August 30, 2006 I saw another 'study' recently presented on one of the cable news channels (Cnn I think)...it reported that a recent surge in teenageers having sex and getting pregnant may be attributed to the 'degrading music' on the radio these days (London Bridge, My Humps, Promiscuous, etc etc). I laughed. The people who actually listen to this music routinely are the inherantly un-bright and highly impressionable variety (thus why they only listen to whats fed to them) and those people will always be apt to make poor decisions whether theyre young or old. There's your study CNN.
Jingus Posted August 30, 2006 Report Posted August 30, 2006 Um, earth to CNN, teen pregnancy numbers are WAY down from ten previous decades.
Art Sandusky Posted August 30, 2006 Report Posted August 30, 2006 As great as that is, you just know it's going to give the abstinence-only sex education policy all kinds of "political capital."
Dr. Zaius Posted August 31, 2006 Report Posted August 31, 2006 Hasn't it already been shown that the states with "abstinence only" programs are also the states with highest teen pregnancy rates?
Dr. Zaius Posted August 31, 2006 Report Posted August 31, 2006 That's the Devil's lies! So...you're saying playing Led Zeppelin IV backwards isn't a reliable source?
snuffbox Posted August 31, 2006 Report Posted August 31, 2006 For those that think all Arabic people are terrorists (and it appears there are plenty of you here) you have a really smart friend in the Senate. http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/08/31/D8JRIA3O0.html
Art Sandusky Posted September 1, 2006 Report Posted September 1, 2006 They drive by day and kill by night! Apparently terrorists are a left over Quinn Martin production.
Dr. Zaius Posted September 6, 2006 Report Posted September 6, 2006 For those that think all Arabic people are terrorists (and it appears there are plenty of you here) you have a really smart friend in the Senate. http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/08/31/D8JRIA3O0.html I actually enjoyed this quote much, much more: During a fundraiser Wednesday with first lady Laura Bush, the three- term Montana senator talked about terrorism, tax cuts and the money he has brought to his state. That was (in order) the new GOP mantra: scare, borrow, spend.
CheesalaIsGood Posted September 6, 2006 Report Posted September 6, 2006 For those that think all Arabic people are terrorists (and it appears there are plenty of you here) you have a really smart friend in the Senate. http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/08/31/D8JRIA3O0.html I actually enjoyed this quote much, much more: During a fundraiser Wednesday with first lady Laura Bush, the three- term Montana senator talked about terrorism, tax cuts and the money he has brought to his state. That was (in order) the new GOP mantra: scare, borrow, spend. Oooooh Burn!
Guest Dangerous Donnie D Posted September 7, 2006 Report Posted September 7, 2006 The people who actually listen to this music routinely are the inherantly un-bright and highly impressionable variety (thus why they only listen to whats fed to them) and those people will always be apt to make poor decisions whether theyre young or old. There's your study CNN EXACTLY! So my point stands.
Guest Felonies! Posted September 7, 2006 Report Posted September 7, 2006 For those that think all Arabic people are terrorists (and it appears there are plenty of you here) you have a really smart friend in the Senate. http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/08/31/D8JRIA3O0.html I actually enjoyed this quote much, much more: During a fundraiser Wednesday with first lady Laura Bush, the three- term Montana senator talked about terrorism, tax cuts and the money he has brought to his state. That was (in order) the new GOP mantra: scare, borrow, spend. Oooooh Burn! More like "Ooh, BURNS!"
CheesalaIsGood Posted September 7, 2006 Report Posted September 7, 2006 For those that think all Arabic people are terrorists (and it appears there are plenty of you here) you have a really smart friend in the Senate. http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/08/31/D8JRIA3O0.html I actually enjoyed this quote much, much more: During a fundraiser Wednesday with first lady Laura Bush, the three- term Montana senator talked about terrorism, tax cuts and the money he has brought to his state. That was (in order) the new GOP mantra: scare, borrow, spend. Oooooh Burn! More like "Ooh, BURNS!" Good point.
Guest Felonies! Posted September 7, 2006 Report Posted September 7, 2006 I'm all about keeping Democrats out of power just on general principle, but Conrad Burns seems like the worst politician around. Grouchy old coot who is totally out of touch with his constituents, as well as being out of touch with what constitutes proper speech and behavior for a senator. I mean, it's funny when my grandmother says mildly offensive stuff at dinners, but this guy is going around saying "I hate living in Washington with all those niggers" and stuff! And I thought that was an isolated incident, but then he keeps going on like this. Oh well. It's just Montana. Who gives a flying fuck about Montana.
Dr. Zaius Posted September 8, 2006 Report Posted September 8, 2006 I'm all about keeping Democrats out of power just on general principle, but Conrad Burns seems like the worst politician around. Grouchy old coot who is totally out of touch with his constituents, as well as being out of touch with what constitutes proper speech and behavior for a senator. How does Burns being out of touch with his constituents make him any different than the rest of the party, exactly? His position on Iraq? Abortion? Affirmative action? Gun control? The minimum wage? Social Security? The right to privacy? Civil liberties? Burns sounds like a typical "mainstream" Republican to me.
Vampiro69 Posted September 8, 2006 Report Posted September 8, 2006 Each party has idiots in its wing. The Republicans have Burns, Ted Stevens while the Demos have Robert Byrd and Ted Kennedy. We all have crazies representing our parties.
Dr. Zaius Posted September 8, 2006 Report Posted September 8, 2006 I'm trying out my new "left-wing hack" gimmick. What do you think?
Dr. Zaius Posted September 8, 2006 Report Posted September 8, 2006 Go back to flinging shit I beleive I was.
Dobbs 3K Posted September 8, 2006 Report Posted September 8, 2006 Well, this thread certainly went downhill.
Slayer Posted September 9, 2006 Report Posted September 9, 2006 It's a CE thread, it only has downhill to go
Rob E Dangerously Posted September 9, 2006 Report Posted September 9, 2006 So, any objections to constitutional amendments limiting the President's powers on pardons and recess appointments? My ideas for those amendments On Pardons: The President can only pardon people convicted of a crime. The Constitution says: "The President shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." My rewrite: "The President shall have power to grant reprieves and pardons for people convicted of offenses against the United States, except in cases of impeachment." Impact: No more Marc Rich's, Richard Nixon's, or Casper Weinburger's. On Recess Appointments: The President can only appoint someone for the rest of a Congress if that Congress has been out of session for 30 days. The President can appoint someone for a 6 month term if he appoints the person before the 30th day of recess. The current constitutional sentence on recess appointments: "The President shall have Power to fill up all Vacancies that may happen during the Recess of the Senate, by granting Commissions which shall expire at the End of their next Session." My rewrite of that: "The President shall have the power to fill vacancies during a Recess of the Senate by granting Commissions which shall expire 180 days after being granted, unless the President issues a commission thirty days into a recess of the Senate, then the commission shall expire at the end of the next Session of the Senate." Impact: No more making a recess appointment when the Senate takes a week off. The recess appointment was created when the Senate went on recess for 6 months back in the 1800s.
snuffbox Posted September 9, 2006 Report Posted September 9, 2006 Gerald Ford's 'pardon' of Nixon was probably for the best.
SuperJerk Posted September 13, 2006 Report Posted September 13, 2006 Gerald Ford's 'pardon' of Nixon was probably for the best. The general public might not have, but I think most historicans will agree with you. Some have said the executive branch couldn't function properly as long as the bulk of its time was being spent dealing with the investigation into Watergate.
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now