JoshK

Um, have you read *anything* about what you are supposed to do when you encounter a bear? Run away, push people down and scream isn't exactly the recommended thing...

Chechs? Like Checnians, or however that is spelled?

I think I did get the point, but I still think Clinton is irrelevant to this. I don't like Bush's policies either, but the simple fact is being an effective speaker IS part of the job. He doesn't communicate well and he is embarassing for himself and even the country at times.

Would anybody disagree to a cars only access road? No RVs, no tours, etc.

Clinton getting sucked off is irrelevant. That is one of those often brought up right wing repeats Giving a speech and inspiring the country is a president's job, remaining perfect in his private life is not. And, yes, the oval office is his private life while he is in office unless he chooses to let us in at certain times. Clinton's actions did not negatively effect the country, and they certainly aren't as present times.

Paul, about the "fool me once" thing, I stated that I simply find it damn hilarious. I never said it was a reason to vote for him or not. It's just damn funny no matter who said it.

Yeah, I would see it as humor. It *is* funny, that is for sure. the confused bush at the elementary school, his "now watch this drive" scene, the "fool me once...I wont be fooled again", his typical confused looks. It makes me glad I dont like Bush, I can't imagine actually having to pretend the guy isn't a fucking moron. I can imagine the conservative media would be "angry." It's easy to be angry when a film, despite being a humorous look at an old story, pokes fun at a guy that they have so much trouble defending, considering he brings himself down. "There is an old saying in Tennessee. It is in Texas, probably in Tennessee too...Fool me once, shame on you......it fool me...I won't get fooled again" God that is a classic!

Yeah, not really. Moore is at least amusing. Anne Coulter is basically just a hateful bitch. It is true, however, that you couldn't accuse Anne Coulter of manipulating statistics. Just just outright lies.

Yes, I wish I had realized this before doing the climb...it's quite a ways on the PCT otherwise...

OK, griz, have you seen the movie? What exactly in it do you feel is so biased?

Fire sucks. Our neighbor's house burned down a few years ago in one of our big wind storms...guess a generator caught fire or something. I remember checking out all the action the next day as I was home from school thanks to the same wind storm I still remember the noise of the cars exploding in the garage.

BWAHAHAH...now *that* would be great!

Nice opinion, sparky, and excellent abuse of the term "in fact", to qualify a subjective perspective, "really sh*tty". When are you running for President? And who would vote for you? I will most certainly be voting for Kerry. Is he who I want for president? No, not particularlly, but getting the current guy out of there is the main issue at the moment, IMHO. Merv, will you be seeing the movie? I am curious as I'd really like to see the spin provided by some of you Bush supporters. I imagine it will be the standard method of attacking the entire message by concentrating on one or two small points you can argue over and over. It's similar to arguing over and over that saying a red apple is red is lying because, in fact, it has brown seeds.

Saw it tonight...liked it. Mostly stuff I knew, but funny and entertaining none the less. It'll be even more entertaining to see how the right trys to spin Moore's personal motives and what not, and divert attention away from the fact that, yes, indeed, george, cheney, rumsfeld, et all are in fact really shitty people.

Gary, your point is exactly the one I always make. While I disagree with the pope on most things, I give the church credit for remaining constant on that issue. Studies show that ~15% of those put to death were later found innocent of the crime they were charged with. In a civilized society, the death of ONE innocent man is not worth the punishment to any number of others.

...is a horrible thing and not a deterent at all, imho. Despite your views on the subject, check out this article. It's entirely possible that Indiana will execute an innocent man in two weeks. http://capwiz.com/ncadp/issues/alert/?alertid=6022046 "The state of Indiana is scheduled to execute Darnell Williams, a black man, July 9 for the 1986 murders on John and Henrietta Reese in Lake county. Mr. Williams’s case is unprecedented, as the trial prosecutor, trial judge, and four jurors have called for a new trial. " "A Columbia Law School study found 75% of Indiana’s capital sentence cases between 1973 and 1995 had “serious, reversible error.” Mr. Williams is listed as such a case. "

what happened last night?

some of them are for funding reasons, no? I thought that was the deal with MFS but I'm not really up to date.

Yeah, I got it Jon, thanks. Threads change subjects some time, too.

Wow! Had to read this one twice. Seems you just made the case for Bush. Does this mean you'll be voting for GW this November?? huh!? Bush supposedly has a military background, meeting John's criteria. Both of the guys do, in this election. Bush however also meets my criteria of an irrational and poor leader. I used my example of a man who wasn't in the military (FDR) and was a far superior leader.

I re-read my example. I think it's a close mirror of what we have now. FDR wasn't military and he was a great military leader. I, personally, wouldn't call bush a good leader or a rational one, but only history can decide that.

I agree with your position, and I consider myself an environmental access. The road should be rebuilt. Your assertation that democracy itself is in danger is pretty over the top tho.

Why so hostile? That's fine if you believe that. I'm glad there weren't more holding your belief when FDR ran for president...and god knows he was a terrible wartime leader.

Seriously, why does military background have anything to do with it? Being a soldier, a pilot, or hell, even a platoon commander is a far cry from running the world.

Jon, why should a president have a military background? That is BS. I'd rather have the best guy for the job, irregardless of background. Would you rather have a commander in chief with military background and unsound reasoning or a guy who wasn't in the military but is able to rely on his chiefs, take their ideas and make the important decisions with brain power and reasoning?