ivan

hey, .500 is a fantastic batting average! (assuming the guys still in are in fact guilty)

simple answer: master and commander, far side of the world. there is only 1 woman in the entire film. see has no lines. she's visible for only 10 seconds.

At this point many people around the world are threatening the U.S., but none have done the U.S. and everything the Constitution used to stand for more harm than the administration of George W. Bush. The leaders of this administration have collectively done what no other terrorist or enemy of this nation has ever accomplished and by their words and deeds are undeniably treasonous felons to a person. Nixon was a god compared to W... I guess you must think that if you repeat this enough it will be true? But you're always light on specifics. The Patriot Act? Which sections? The real ones please - not the ones you read about on some leftist website. Are you familiar with Woodrow Wilson's Sedition Act of 1918? Do you really think today's supposed "limits" even compare? Illegal War? How about the concocted Spanish-American War and subsequent occupation of The Philippines? War of 1812? Nicaragua? Invasions (repeated) of Mexico? Again, Joe, your history is very shallow. There's a rock down by The Columbia River that's missing its idiot.... something's missed in dithering over this superlative of "worst president ever" though - the fact that the guy's bad, period, even if it be the worst, or 10th worst, or whatever. yeah, our country has no doubt done more fucked up things then invade iraq - this doesn't mean right-minded folks ought not disagree w/ what's going on now, express their outrage, and advocate for change. i believe it is generally true that our nation is less secure for having taken this unilateral, aggressive action in the middle east. also, we have sullied the democratic virtues we extoll by maintaining secret prisons and jailing people w/o trial - remember last week when the gitmo folks said another inmate was dead? the cause - suicide. how many times did the apartheid south african government say the same shit? i'm not saying we're as bad as that, but g.w. has certainly created reasons to at least make the comparision.

i wrote a real long reply, then decided it'd be simpler to delete it in favor of something you'd more easily understand: you're a dumbass! questioning the goverment is a right, by your own admission, he died to defend I don't see where Scott is questioning anyone's right to speak out against their government. He is simply stating an opinion held by many - that this mother dishonors her dead soldier-son's beliefs. It's quite a jump for you and Matt to imply that Scott would invalidate anyone's free speech rights. The only people you hear that kind of nonsense from are hard-core lefties like Crux and others here on this site who often call for censorship in radio and television media. that still doesn't make sense - are you saying then that the mother of every soldier has to keep their opinions to themselves when they differ w/ their brave boys? you use this word "dishonor" it seems in place of "disagree."

Unlike the cadre of chicken hawks who post here, SH put his money where his mouth is, enlisted in the Army, and apparently survived a tour in Iraq. That being said, he came off like a retard before he left, and it looks like things haven't changed too much for him. BTW, glad you made it back so you could post stupid shit. in that case i'll second that so what do you have to report then about the big sand box? i love my brother jon - upon his return in 2003 he was five times as angry, 6 times more insensible, and 20 times more hurt on the inside though. war doesn't appear to improve anyone's disposition.

my hope is that when that comet strikes the earth in 2012 and kills us all, that plows strait into IB and spares the alien archealogists of the future the same amoutn of bullshit... might be good if it split up in the upper atmosphere too and a big chunk atomized the middle east also and dollywood!

is it possible for one's actions to be incoherent, too? so what's your story, again? an honest question, actually - you seem be familiar but i have fuckall recollection of where you went or what you've been doing. you remind me a hell of a lot like my little brother.

a related story from abc news: "A military panel recommended that an Iraq war veteran who wore his uniform during an anti-war demonstration lose his honorable discharge status, brushing away his claims that he was exercising his right to free speech. Marine Cpl. Adam Kokesh, a member of Iraq Veterans Against the War, argued that he did nothing wrong by participating in the March protest in Washington, D.C., because he removed his name tag and military emblems from his uniform, making it clear he was not representing the military." who better than a soldier to criticize a war? do you want a ballerina giving you the play-by-play for a baseball game?

i wrote a real long reply, then decided it'd be simpler to delete it in favor of something you'd more easily understand: you're a dumbass! questioning the goverment is a right, by your own admission, he died to defend

you didn't answer matt's question, scott, which is one i'd repeat - true, it is not the job of a soldier to question a decision of the commander in chief, but IT IS the monstrous responsibilty of citizens to do just that - citizens like the parents of soldiers - and soldiers too when it's election day. the question of wether this war was necessary can must definetly be answered - if not by you, then perhaps because your sensory organs are not in proper working order - those of us w/ eyes and ears in good repair know damn-well the invasion of iraq, a nation w/ no wmd, a nation neatly contained at an expense 1/1000 of the war currently being fought, and a nation not a cesspool of anarchy and terrorism, was not necessary. i bet you donuts to dollars more innocent iraqis are or will be dead as result of our war then would have died if that scum-fucker saddam had been left to wither away under u.n. sanctions.

other tried n' true techniques to garner shit: a) discuss any snaplinks ye might find on yer route b) mention amount of outdoor retail experience ye might have c) dither about the quality of yer wind-resistant apparel d) use the expression "stumptown!" in more than 90% of yer posts to all!

be ready for a nightmare of windfall past snow creek wall if you do though (assumign the 2 guys w/ handsaws and axes haven't cleared the 300 billion downed trees since last month)

jeebus - so for the record sounds like a helmet could indeed have been helpful hope she mends well

bolts make the indians cry

portland rock gym - outside?

the greatest tragedy of recent years was losing klenke - this was his true forte

all the cool people are cheating

wooooord. the fishing advice is invaluable, too.

right back at you, Vanya wouldn't be an interweb argument w/o some name calling, eh, moi druk?

maybe it's just that classic adage? when you got a hammer, everything looks like a nail? maybe when you got a bolt-cutter, every bolt looks unnecessary?

my little brother's in iraq for his 2nd trip right now - if he gets greased there, i don't want my anti-war arguments being dismissed by the same stupid fucks who go after sheenan as being unimportant because they're just the emotional words of a family member - logic speaks for itself - stop looking at motive! also i'm not certain to what extent she has refused to accept her son's decision as i haven't really heard much of what she has to say - i assume the death of her son was just the catalyst spurring her to act on opinions she already held.

why must it always be a semantics argument? "wrong" is a personal label, as are all words. ultimately, whether this is a just or unjust war will depend upon the people who look at it (how will it be taught in history classes, 200 years from now i wonder? will it be in the same category as sand-creek and wounded knee, i wonder?) - it's simplest i suppose to defer to the majority though in choosing a label - on dec 8, 1941, there was an incredibly small minority opposed to war w/ japan - in march of 2003, america as a whole was much more uncertain. there were huge protests immediately. 4 years later, a very large chunk of america, likely a majority, would label this war as unjust. again, wtf is there this cyncism as to motive? who gives a shit why sheehan or the democrats are opposed to the war? the point is, do they have a point? is this in fact a just war? at any rate, while i'm a jaded asshole, i'm not so far gone that i think a grieving mother and a large # of democrats are opposed to the war simply so they can get their faces in the papers. they are geniulely opposed to it - deal w/ their arguments then, not their motives.

fuck you sheaf - why should i read or comment on your crap if you're not going to stick around for it? quit ruining a perfectly good beer w/ your fucktard performance

C'mon, show some class. Class? Like using a child's death for a political campaign of personal destruction, engaging in a seditious game of anti-Americanism, meeting with despicable dictators who are actively trying to undermine us? That kind of class? i'll call you an asshole not for questioning her politics, but her honesty - do you seriously think she's using her dead son as an excuse for pursuing her political goals? disagree w/ her all you want - but she does have a geniune complaint. i can't say that her chilling w/ chavez is classy, but refusing to accept her son's death in a wrongful war is.