Fairweather

funny - been teaching the french revolution the past week - having my kids recollect all the time some doorknob suggested shit like this as a solution to a societal problem - comparing it to "the terror" and other moments of the revolution - exactly how succesful is your proposal in improving a damn thing again? A little background on my proposal for your consideration and like-outrage. http://cascadeclimbers.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/868443/1/Criminal_Irresponsibility

You know, Prole, someone should stuff a petrol-soaked rag into your face hole and light it. For an edu-debtor who refuses to work and wants society to pay all his bills, you sure know how to epitomize arrogance.

You Matt(?): Yes, that show he put on will likely cause me to reassess my interest in him as a future candidate. (You should try reconsidering one or two of your opinions someday too.) But let's face it; glamor and smooth talk notwithstanding, Jindal offered up about the same amount of substance and plan detail as Obama. Zero.

Does anyone really think enforcement expenditures would weaken with new tax revenues at stake? The 'drug war' would continue on in earnest, albeit under a new banner.

You mean the "free money"...that isn't really free at all?

Your post is a pretty clear indication of why people like you can never be allowed to govern. As for Jindal; he's my pick for 2012.

Maybe someone gave him a long-overdue blanket party?

We should have been listening to j_b all along!

It's said that those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat it, but I believe it repeats anyway. [video:youtube]

The "Fairness-Doctrine" will simply be repackaged and renamed. If Obama is sincere, then my hat's off to him. But the Democrats in congress just won't be able to help themselves and will, no doubt, try to give Obama cover by attaching the reconstituted bill as a rider on yet another 'critical' piece of legislation they cough up.

Fairweather, you're kidding - right? You can piss on somebody else's campfire all you want but you can't pretend that you are into "real world connections" and that is not to be found on a site like cc.com or, for that mattter, facebook. Suggesting you have superior social skills is questionnable, as well. You've been on this site for eight years and it was big news when you went for a climb with Off White one day. Show up for a single slideshow, spring picnic, group outing, pub club gathering, or ropeup in the year 2009 and maybe you can make a friend. Unless, of course, you are so wildly in demand that you don't have room for any more friends. Ok, so maybe you have a point. I've never considered this site any kind of a social networking gig, but I have made several friends here (who have just notified me they would prefer to remain anonymous ). Maybe the 'teen-stigma' I have attached to MySpace and Facebook is misplaced or outdated, but I will say that the two sites once provided my wife and I a window into the lives of our kids that we otherwise would have missed. And, BTW Matt, I did go to a pub club once. At The Swiss in Tacoma--which, I believe, is the last time the event was held here 4 or five years ago.

Wasting time here is one thing, but seriously, Matt, adults who hang out on networking sites are usually lacking the personality traits which allow them to connect with real people in the real world. Please tell me you're not one of them. BTW; you sound angrier than usual this morning. Everything OK?

Isn't that how herpes works too?

I never understood why anyone over 30 would have a MySpace or Facebook account. I guess that's just me. But here is some food for thought: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,494064,00.html " Once a Facebook member, always a member. The Consumerist blog noticed Sunday that the social-networking giant had quietly made a change to its user Terms of Service (TOS) on Feb. 4. Facebook now declares that it has a perpetual license to use anything you post to your own Facebook page — even if you terminate your account."

Zzzzactly! That one's in the running for Post of the Year.

Sorry if you misunderstood; I'm pro-second amendment. If the story plays out as described it will be interesting to see how the anti-gun folks on this site reconcile their orthodoxy with reality. But if attackers like those in the story initially present as friendly and then attack when close in, it is unlikely a handgun will/would have been effective in any event--not many folks are willing to draw a gun on a potential attacker based on "bad vibes" alone. But again, I wouldn't deny anyone (who has not been deemed mentally ill or convicted of a felony) their constitutionally protected right to bear arms.

Strong enough to shout out loudly for help and, according to the story, found below the road "standing up". Now he's too weak to describe his attackers? It's either a very poorly written/reported story, or something is being omitted in print or in fact.