RobBob

I guess Jon didn't like my Avatar Amnesty day idea.

Yeah, Greg, the bottom line for me is projecting what would likely happen under each regime. If Kerry relies on the UN and European nations to take stands on Iran, on N Korea, on Sudan...well, we know where that will go. Bush may end up like Reagan. Probably most of you don't remember how dumb Reagan was. Now he's everybody's hero. Call him dumb or crazy, if Bush ends up standing N Korea down about weapons, f'rinstance, he may come off looking like a hero ten years from now.

I think that discomfort with criticism was affected, was coached to Bush, but it played poorly. Last night would have been the ultimate debate for Ross Perot to have participated in. We would have gotten some wize-ass zingers and some laughs.

Canadian women aren't bad either. I married one and naturalized her.

Enslave the men; take their wine; use their women as a nightshirt. (bastardized from Ghengis Khan)

During the debate I thought about the effect of the visual...that's where I give Bush such low marks. With the sound off, Kerry won hands down. Bush looked uncomfortable, blink factor was way high, and he was just goofy. On actual content, they both came up short.

...and the crooked-neck look. What was that about? I swear, I don't want to vote for a Massachusetts liberal and a personal-injury lawyer...but when I see the incumbent blithering simian Mel Brooks-Alfred E Neuman idiot speak, it's hard to take.

nalo, don't let the bastards get ya down. I for one salute you for your direct approach, complete with photo. Good on you. PS- If it works, for God's sake don't tell any of the other bozos here about it.

Sooooo...j_b.... can I come over and watch the debate with you tonight?

what i see is 7 pgs of bolting discussion that hasnt been moved to spray and people are voicing there opinions almost as if we were all adults or something... = boring say what you want, if you silence a significant number of the debaters, you've got a pretty weak debate left over.

Since the most outspoken folks on one side of this issue have been banned for expressing their opinions, this thread is like the sound of one hand clapping. Milquetoast.

Then it's okay if I go spray-paint "j_b is a wad" on rocks where it's unlikely that many people will see it very often?

Looks like she's mining for a booger to put on him!!

Here's what I don't understand: If you worry about the environment to the point that you ride a bike, buy only fuel-efficient vehicles or use mass transport, voted for Gore, eschew farmed salmon, make donations to environmental PACs, and in the back of your mind you may even be considering a composting toilet.... ...how in the Hell could you possibly be in favor of defacing millions-of-years-old rock faces with bolt-holes?

I missed the entire bit containing death threats. It's just always surprised me how the likes of Dwayner, who I doubt has ever threatened anyone, managed to get banned because they hold a strong opinion. If his opinion was 180 degrees in the other direction, would he have gotten banned just because he was persistent and 'annoying' with his message?

...and this is different from online "discussion" of other issues in what way?

Cryptic msg from trask to mods: eat balls asseyes

I have an absolutely awful underground record of Jimi & Jim Morrison together in some nightclub. Apparently Morrison had stumbled onto the stage drunker than a goat.

You can't justify going 3 times the speed limit on a public road. Period. Any of you who engage in that kind of mental circle-jerk are selfish in a murderously irresponsible way. Go spend tonight down at the ER. If'n the cops weren't around, I'd deliver a biker-style asswhipping to that fuckwad.

ya quoted a Donovan song, birdbrain (e-lectrica banana, it's gonna be the very next craze; e-lectrica banana, it's gonna be the very next phase; they call me mello-yello... )

I remember the first x-rated movie I ever saw was a Russ Meyer double-header at the local drive-in in the 70s. Five of us piled into a station wagon (I think we paid for 3). No one was 18, but we were armed with fake IDs. The highlight of the first movie was a scene involving a salesman with the farmer's wife in a haystack...then a camera shot outside showing the barn swaying, and the farmer in the foreground busily drilling the soil with some big strap-on auger contraption...a classic sight gag I'll always remember. The best part was when the cops raided the drive-in and confiscated the movies. We got refunded for 5!

Mattp, I will agree with you on these points- What I won't agree with you on is that I would not be willing to think highly of Kerry if there were a persuasive amount of evidence saying that he was in fact a war hero in his swift boat days. It's pretty clear that he wasn't, and he engaged in a steady effort to build a resume. A buddy of mine, who worked around a lot of swift boats while inserting into and extracting from the Vietnamese jungle at night, puts it this way: "He protested the war after he served; I don't think that's a character flaw. He bullshitted about his career, which I've got a problem with. But perhaps the biggest offense he committed was that he testified before congress that most of us who were there committed atrocities. I certainly didn't, and I know of no one who did."

Swiftwater is a composite of Whitewater and Swift boats? AlpineK's statement pretty much sums up the dismissive approach of those who don't want to think about it. I submit to you that the likes of Schachte aren't hardened Bush cronies---they are career military guys calling bullshit because they are offended.

OW, what motivation does a retired rear admiral have in telling the above story other than the way he remembers it? And has he changed his story about who the mission CO was, or wether or not he recommended Kerrey for a medal? I think that "all this obsession" about "ancient history" came about because Kerrey chose to make the image of war hero his primary persona as a candidate. The testimony of career military people who were "there" is something entirely different from media pundits. And honesty is honesty. I started another thread because this is another example where the original issue of honesty is getting lost in people's haste to defend the positions that they have already decided to take.

But the point is that voters need an honest candidate to run against Bush. Claiming that you are the CO of a mission when you're not, claiming that you received enemy fire when you didn't...this is more than puffery. It's dishonesty. It's like saying that you graduated with honors from university when in truth you didn't. Voters are offered the choice between re-electing an idiot who has surrounded himself with lying scoundrels, or voting for a candidate who has attempted to build a "war hero" image on things he really didn't do. He's spent more time on this than he has on enunciating exactly what he'll do differently as president. Poor choice.