sexual_chocolate

Jeesus Trask, you're paying 2 grand? For two non-problem trees? Sounds fishy to me....

Meat doesn't go bad, especially bacon. Cook it and it's fine. Serious. In the old days, there was hardly a refrigerated storage method, and most seemed to live. But, bacon is pretty fatty, and I've been hearing about your waist-line, so the green might be a pretty good excuse to make a banana smoothy instead!

I fail to see the connection between Trask and a brain.

Plus, as Mtgoat forgot to mention, we even breathe the same air as the terrorists. This often gets overlooked when we politicize these issues.

I like it! It's usually really hard for such an ad to make it on the networks, cuz of the power major corporate advertisers have, so it's nice to see a counter-example.

Oh my god that's so not funny cuz you know it actually happens. People get dumped around Christmas, lose their kids, parents won't talk to them. Bobo, what are you trying to say, my special friend?

Good one, trask. Stick to your sex jokes.

I think I LOST 15 lbs over the holidays. My wife left, my parents didn't have me over, my kids left with my wife. I got sick. I couldn't move or eat. It sucked.

MG, that's bullshit and you know it. The SUV controversy isn't simply about what's dangerous to the owner of one; it's also about the effect they have on the rest of society. It's illegal for me to go dump DDT into Lake Washington, and for damn good reason: It will adversely affect the welfare of OTHERS. The same argument applies to the use of SUVs. Come out of your idealised dream-world. There are people out here.

Ah. You were kidding. Right? Even if not, I still think this labeling helps secure the battle-lines, helping to erase the discomfort of ambiguity on both sides.

Center of what?

It was somewhat rhetorical, as explained above, yet you probably sensed a dis-ease. One reason was that I didn't know they were (more?) dangerous for their operators also. Are they, statistically, so? And this can be shown in an incontravertible way? Just curious. My second question dealt more with some hesitations I have in dealing with issues of choice through legislation, and where the line should be drawn. That's all. Thanks.

Come on, Fairweather, stop with the generalizations. You're just out to bash.

I say the above with a painful sense of irony, and as a repetition of an oft-stated defense. As to my own opinion: I agree fully with you in that education must continue, reporting of facts must continue. And I fully agree that legislation can be an effective tool in protecting the rights of humans to live human lives, free of egregious dangers perpetuated simply because power and money enables one to do so.

"But aren't the ones inside the SUV safer? And shouldn't consumers be free to spend their money on what they want?"

I know, Trask, but my deeper question is how the labeling occurs (liberal/conservative), ie. how issues become labeled as such simply by association with a given political/cultural/religious group. I could make the case that "gun control" is actually a conservative position, and "total gun rights with no background checks or registration or other requirements" is really an extremely liberal position, one that has no technical or sentimental support in the US constitution (only a (what's the word? Pro-active?) reading would lend support, usually a stance associated with "liberals").

Agreed. What I'm interested in hearing are your ideas on what might constitute progress in addressing these issues....Perhaps step one is trying to understand them clearly? Or....?

Instead of the "liberal/conservative" dichotomy, why don't we address actual substantive examples in making our case? I've read one thing: "channels 4,5, and 7 are anti-gun.", which I took to mean that the individual felt the media to be "liberal". (Actually, is this substantive? Are they anti-gun? And if they were, why is this labeled a "liberal" position? Only because a previously labeled "liberal" entity endorses it?) Facts, assertions, opinions....

From my somewhat limited exposure to foreign news sources, I would hesitatingly agree with this, but I'd also have to ask you what indicators you are using in establishing this opinion.

What's Blogs and Drudge? If I knew, perhaps that would answer my next question: Media ownership and hegemony has never been as monopolistic as now? I believe 6 major corporations own 80%(?) of the airwaves? Translation: More centrally controlled than ever.

Come on, just answer his question. But in the meantime.... Hey, the reason I come back to this with you is a previous reply you made to a comment of mine regarding fast food and kids. You talked about kids eating at McD's, and I said kids shouldn't be making their own dietary decisions. You agreed, but you had built an argument on the assumption that they indeed did make their own decisions. Pause.... You know what's interesting here is that I just realized that whether or not they should make those decisions, they in fact do. And there is a massive industry hoping that they will continue to make those decisions for themselves, making ad campaigns all the more effective. But there's more to this, namely individual responsibility. Right? Or could one say that there is an age when human beings are inherently incapable of claiming such individual responsibility, and as such, should be protected? (Protected against.....? A free market place?) Is this agreed on? Then comes the question of what form the protection should be: Families being forced to counsel their children about the negativities that lurk right outside our door, while the government protects the rights of those spreading the negativity? I'll just end it here, cuz my mind's spinning a bit much right now....and I need to think about it all some more.... To mtgoat: the ideals that you espouse-in what form do you want to implement them? Implementation consists of policy change....hmmm.

No you don't. You don't know what you'd do without me, love.

Sheesh. You only hate me when I love you, don't you?

Sheesh. A 5 year old shouldn't be making its own dietary decisions, now should it?

where'd ya find that?