Fairweather

All are easy answers: Haiti, Colombia, Guatemala, USA. Because despite the fact that poverty exists in all of the choices you present, the human spirit remains most visibly alive in mine.

Nope. You're a sad little man.

So tell me Prole, will you be just as full of glee when Castro dies?

W, I'm not sure I agree with your point entirely, but guys like Prole and Jim are hard-left idealogues through and through and likely don't see the same evils in Castro that they rightly recognize in Pinochet. I'm glad you see the similarities. As wretched a pig as Pinochet was, I can't help but wonder if he was the lesser evil of the time. What if a man like Pinochet had been unleashed in Colombia in 1971? Would we now have 3000 'disappeared' there instead of 70,000 dead? I'll admit to my biases. I would rather live under just about anygovernmental system than communism - including a dictatorial bastard like Pinochet. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't resist his brand of injustice just as fiercely.

Hmmm. Seized power in a coup. Never elected. 3000 killed or "disappeared" under his rule. I wonder if Prole will be just as happy when Fidel Castro finally goes on to his reward.

Your lesbians will be difficult to turn, but I will secretly ply them with verse from Atlas Shrugged and The Road to Serfdom - even if it means I must submit to some sick fem version of waterboarding, or find myself bound at the ankles dragging behind a Jeep Wrangler.

...a Union in which I would make you my personal slave. Fag.

WTF?? That's a serious threat - as opposed to an excuse to cut down a perfectly healthy tree.

You've just come full circle. A union only on your terms. A case to be made only for your ideals.

Simplisticly speaking - no. You can't get out, period. And you don't need to go back to the Federalist Papers, lots of historinas have already rummaged those for you. I would seriously suggest the aforementioned book. It is quite an intriguing read. Then why did it take a multitude of Congressional votes to "re-admit" each and every Confederate state individually back into the union between 1867 and 1870? If succession was never valid in the first place, the rebel states should have been considered wholly American on last day of fighting, don't you think? And Jim, how will Ecotopia ever rise if it is expressly forbidden the right to succession?

Will your 'insurance' also bring the neighbor's childred back to life? Believe it or not, trees sometimes DO threaten life and property. We had the top snap off of a 100' Douglas Fir during a windstorm about 10 years ago. A side-branch pierced the roof above our bedroom and nearly went into the bed itself. We were in another room when it happend. Our neighbors had their house litterally cut in half by a Fir during the same storm. If a tree is a serious threat it should be cut down - and two more planted in its place.

Do you know how old, tired, and just plain ridiculous that argument is? Suggesting that someone who isn't serving should remain silent is just as stupid as suggesting a Canadian has no right to an expressed opinion about an American-led action. You, of course, are free to leave your cushy state-supported life in Canada and join the NGO of your choice. Putting one's beliefs into action! Isn't that what you stand for? You could even put your skills to use in Darfur - if you have any.

A valid use of the preemption doctrine.

Succession was not specifically prohibited. In fact, New York and, I believe, Vermont had considered it at earlier points. (Disgust with the war of 1812? - I can't remember) The Confederate constitution virtually mirrored the American version and contained even stronger guarentees re property and personal liberty. (Granted; slaves excepted) The fact that Fort Sumter was deep in Confederate territory and that it was surrendered without loss of life (1 dead during a cannon malfunction) left Lincoln with no justification for war. Then why were four Union states allowed to continue on with slaves? (Maryland, Kentucky, Delaware, Missouri) Also, breakaway West Virginia. Lincoln didn't issue his emancipation proclamation until Sept 22, 1862 after it was clear that the Union Army was getting its tail kicked back across the Potomac and northern newspapers were editorializing (rightly) for peace. Politics, not morality. True, that. I disagree. Raising an army with the sole purpose of imposing your will upon your neighbor through invasion is just as wreckless as invading a far off country under false pretense. More so, even.

Are there any left?

Unless you are 100% certain what your triggers are, I would keep an Albuterol inhaler warm and available at all times while climbing. My lungs get tight in March and April with tree pollen and I use an inhaler sparingly when I run outdoors during these two months. I did notice tightness once on Mount Hood during a very, very cold January climb, so I can't be certain that pollen is the only culprit. Go out and buy a 'peak flow' meter. They're only about 30 bucks. It might help you guage your own lung performance, and keeping a log of the readings might help your doctor better advise treatment.

Um, that whole "R" and "D" pedulum thing has swung back and forth a few times since 1861 my nowcentric co-sprayer.

...instigated by a president now wrongly revered as one of America's greatest leaders: Should generals Scott and Sherman (particularly), and Lincoln have been tried as war criminals - responsible for the deaths of over 600,000 uniformed troops and unknown numbers of Confederate civilians? How about conditions at the prison camp in Elmira, New York? Liberal moralizing seems to be too often expressed in violent ways. Some things never change.

Really, Matt - you aren't actually interested in our opinions, you're interested in promoting your own. I would be more accomodating if I believed you were the least bit open to real debate or the slightest change in you own belief system, but time and time again you revert back to your 'endless question' strategy - where you dissect some unimportant flaw in a challenger's reply and pick at it like a scab, all the while ignoring the greater point. I think I've already 'confessed' that Rumsfeld and Cheney are guilty of manufacturing some of the so-called evidence that got us into Iraq. I certainly believe they should be held accountable in some way that won't damage future leaders' ability to conduct war. Being held accountable in a foreign court is not acceptable in any way. I don't think it has been effectively demonstrated that he authorized specifics, but he certainly condoned it tacitly. I have yet to be convinced that the torture revealed at Abu Grab rises to the level of atrocity. I am much more concered that the soldiers responsible for killing that Iraqi family and raping their daughter are publicly executed. Yes

Thanks for sharing, dumbass.

This might help you overcome your serious mental affliction: http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7501020220921158523&q=penn+and+teller+bullshit

Update: 323.5! Time I will never get back.

The fruits of Iosif Vissarionovich's literacy and health care program. Something for the left and SC to be proud of! Accolades indeed. Communist imposed Ukranian famine victim? 10 million of these folks - but at least they died knowing how to read and write! I think you're being too hard on SC. Honestly. How can a guy who owns both land and a 27 foot yacht be a real collectivist? These past couple years I have come to the conclusion that Sexual Chocolate, while liberal - as most wealthy urbanites are - is most certainly not a communist. I think he just likes to play devil's advocate to an extreme, or perhaps is conducting some sort of social experiment right here on cc.com. Save your harshest barbs for Prole (formerly j_b) and Jim. I'm convinced their version of freedom would have us both loaded onto railcars and "re-educated" in short order.

So does this mean you're going to let some homeless man squat on that nice sailboat you own... rent-free? (The one you're trying to rent out on another thread.) Put your money where your mouth is SC! Ahh, but of course it's left-leaning folks like you who prefer to be generous only with other people's money and property, no? Honestly, you do make a point about private property but on an unrelated level: Do any of us really own property insomuch as witholding tribute from Ceasar will result in government foreclosure?