Peter_Puget

Now there is a man who despite once claiming he was not a conservative provides the strongest arguement for societies to be conservative!

I meant this: Good question ChucK! I would throw into the mix at what point is a complete disregard for the truth a lie and ask if in spray debates is it ok to lie?

As in existential phenomenology . not really read some stuff years ago but honestly know less than nothing.

Rod you left out my questions!

I'd like to think of it as physical courage!

Here's man who has influenced my thinking.

Good post Rod but what do you think of the questions ChucK and I asked?

No! He disagrees with some of my heroes! He does have some groovy ideas!

R - If those first moves were only 4th class I woulda still stick clipped!

Oh Iain I am not arguing against Bush and Co. telling falsehoods. I am saying that the imminent canard is a lie and I am asking a serious question about falsehoods in political debates. Since Bush and Co were telling untruths why don’t we expose directly the untruths? Why rely on new untruths? Wouldn’t that help to purify the whole political process? I say let honesty prevail! Let hypocrisy if it exists die! Let's all lift the debate!

For those confusing immediate with imminent here’s a nice link: Link Note the link is from an offically approve Fucktard source! PP

Good question ChucK! I would throw into the mix at what point is a complete disregard for the truth a lie and ask if in spray debates is it ok to lie? Let's take this whole "imminent threat" canard. I think if you were read the SOTU address before the war President Bush clearly and unequivocally states that the nation should act before a threat was imminent. That the imminent canard continues to be commonly accepted indicates yet again a leftward bias (or perhaps simple incompetence) of the US media. Here is a somewhat new link of the continued imminent lie link

Nasty 12a? Well maybe if you don' stick clip the first bolt and slip!

Sorry to dissapoint Alpine. Here is what I said concerning Howard: "I don’t own him and I don’t agree with everything he says but I do understand how he chafes at the restraints and conditioning imposed upon him by the liberal/media/government entity. " I reject the very notion that I am responsible for anyone elses comments whether they support or do not support my position. I'll admit that "fucktard" may be offensive to some. I am somehwat confused as to what the limits are in spray. If you feel "fucktard" is too much then I must say that I am dissapointed you do not say that openly in the forum so that others will know the limits in spray. "Guilt by association" is an old ploy that is just another way to avoid confronting another's argument head on. I see no reason to be obligated to respond to such tactics. PP

You're a girl after my own heart there Minx. That's what I use too.

I calculated my BMI and as usual I am in the overweight zone. I would have to loose a bit over 10lbs just to make it into the very top of the healthy zone. My physique is unfortunately pretty darn unremarkable. I may not be very fit but I am sure I could handle a two day prussick trip pretty easily. So – is the BMI a scare tactic or does the average Amercian have no muscle thus throwing off the averages or should I try to loose weight? Has anyone else calculated their BMI and thought the results goofy? PP

Jim Sadly Jim my parents are liberal beatnik types although they moved libertarian for awhile they now believe in gun control! I was sent to experimental hippy dippy schools where I was fed a diet heavy in this kind of stuff. I can remember some of these very same studies being discussed. Of course I ate it up only to discover later that things didn’t work out the way I was told they would. I learned that a few hundred years ago Malthus presented what amounted to be the same story. For years Malthus had been used as an example of silly thinking in economics classes. Turns out that many of these studies have now replaced the “Malthusian example” and at the time they were first published were held up to ridicule by many economists. (an economist by the way is someone who studies resource allocation) As I became aware of how BS these studies were I realized that they were not impartial scientific research but in fact part of a broader political campaign. I believe that the author’s “sexing up” their issues in these articles is far more of an egregious sin than any as yet unproven sexing up of CIA reports produced by our president Mr. Bush before Iraq was liberated. Free your mind Jim! Jim quote: The guy is an industry shill. How about some orginal thoughts PP - ya gotta get those right-wing sites off your favorites list, or at least add some balance to them. Your slings and arrows cannot penetrate the truth which shields me! Ian – keep digging dude. I don't know anything about kerry. One thing I do know is he would be a better president. As would my former candidate endorsement, a braying donkey with a nasty meth habit. Check this out from a liberal who once called Mother Teresa the “whore of Calcutta”: Tavis: Do you think that President George W. Bush deserves to be reelected? Hitchens: [sighs] Well, it's a tough call for me. I wasn't-I certainly wasn't for his election the first time round. I didn't want Albert Gore, either, and I'm glad it wasn't Gore, by the way. One has to face that fact. I must say I'm a bit of a single issue voter on this. I want to be absolutely certain that there's a national security team that wakes up every morning wondering how to take the war to the enemy. I don't have that confidence about any of the Democratic candidates, but I think that a Kerry-Edwards ticket would be made up of people who have shown that they are serious on this point, yeah. So I'm not dogmatically for the reelection of the President, but I'm for applying that test as a voter. Heck the link is from NPR even ChucK and Jim would approve! Slothrop Petey, better talk to your boy HRoark. He's not exactly engaging in civil, respectful discourse. But you like his tactics because he's on your side, right? This condescending argument doesn't go very far. Howard is a man, and in the words of Charles Bronson just before he kills Henry Fonda in Once Upon a Time In the West , a dying breed. I don’t own him and I don’t agree with everything he says but I do understand how he chafes at the restraints and conditioning imposed upon him by the liberal/media/government entity. I do agree with that bit about condescending arguments not going very far which is why yours stopped short of the plate. PP

Hey HRoak - Notice the tactic Jim uses. After admitting that the much publicized projections were in fact totally wrong he attacks the man! There you go! The perfect example of the same process that produced the original reports. Arrogance, condescension and lack of respect for others - I dream of a society in which everyone has respect.

What happens when you ignore substitution and technological change. PP

Here's another groovy TCS article by my man D. Kling! Nothing really new but it's still a nice read...

I'm on the cutting edge of the English language! But actually both spellings are correct. So stop being such a dumb downer!

Hail to the Chief

“ Settle down ?” That’s so precious. As far as all your “points” who cares? I don’t. My point had nothing to do the verdict but rather asks if this is this important work for national governments to be involved with. Please reread my post. I will admit I was mostly making a playful retort to Snoboy after his post. PP

..right after we finish with those issues we'll jump on the even more intractable spanking issue..... The Canadian Supreme Court, which presumably has nothing better to do, has just outlawed spanking in most circumstances: [The law] exempts from criminal sanction only minor corrective force of a transitory and trifling nature. On the basis of current expert consensus, it does not apply to corporal punishment of children under two or teenagers. . . . Discipline by the use of objects or blows or slaps to the head is unreasonable." The article further reveals that there are apparently professionals who spend time meditating on the question of whether the hand, or an implement such as a wooden spoon, should be used to spank your wayward child. Personally, I'm a spanking agnostic. I have difficulty imagining hitting my children, but this may well be because I have no children. And while my parents, who made a point of reading the latest in child psychology studies, firmly believed that the principles thus obtained were best applied to the base of the spine with a sharp smack, I have, as yet, shown no marked tendency to turn into a serial killer. Even though they were not averse to the use of "objects or blows to the head", however unreasonable. But whether or not spanking is good for children, I find it very hard indeed to imagine that this is a matter with which the federal government of a modern industrial state needs to involve itself. Not unless they're going to really get involved -- like sending someone to pick up the damn yardstick and chase your children around the house when you get tired.