minx

gee ya think? now you are just being sarcastic. and.....? your point is? Under my hat. shush! no one was talking to you anymore.

no

mmmm....frozen speach

gee ya think? now you are just being sarcastic. and.....? your point is?

You, yourself, You. there's a spelling joke here somewhere.

gee ya think?

i am not surprised to find out that YOU know that.

speach -passion fruit

Bravo! Speach! SPEACH! i em so onered dat ewe wont mi to speach. i dunt half eenything too sae thow

y'all can kiss my arse.

rumr--fuck man relax. they way it read to me was that he had been out for 4 days intentionally hiding. like a game or a prank. that'd make him a brat in my book for sure. of course i'm glad they found him alive and well. it never actually occurred to me that a sicko was involved. i thought tragic hiking accident instead.

the kid was hiding????!!!! whadda brat! his parents ought to have to pay for the rescuer's time.

ammendment news home | top | world | intl | natl | op | pol | govt | business | tech | sci | entertain | sports | health | odd | sources Presidential • Cabinet • Congress • Supreme Crt • Other US Govt House Approves Flag-Burning Amendment Email this Story Jun 22, 3:08 PM (ET) By LAURIE KELLMAN WASHINGTON (AP) - The House on Wednesday approved a constitutional amendment that would give Congress the power to ban desecration of the American flag, a measure that for the first time stands a chance of passing the Senate as well. By a 286-130 vote - eight more than needed - House members approved the amendment after a debate over whether such a ban would uphold or run afoul of the Constitution's free-speech protections. Approval of two-thirds of the lawmakers present was required to send the bill on to the Senate, where activists on both sides say it stands the best chance of passage in years. If the amendment is approved in that chamber by a two-thirds vote, it would then move to the states for ratification. Supporters said the measure reflected patriotism that deepened after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, and they accused detractors of being out of touch with public sentiment. "Ask the men and women who stood on top of the (World) Trade Center," said Rep. Randy (Duke) Cunningham, R-Calif. "Ask them and they will tell you: pass this amendment." But Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said, "If the flag needs protection at all, it needs protection from members of Congress who value the symbol more than the freedoms that the flag represents." The measure was designed to overturn a 1989 decision by the Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 that flag burning was a protected free-speech right. That ruling threw out a 1968 federal statute and flag-protection laws in 48 states. The law was a response to anti-Vietnam war protesters setting fire to the American flag at their demonstrations. The proposed one-line amendment to the Constitution reads, "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States." For the language to be added to the Constitution, it must be approved not only by two-thirds of each chamber but also by 38 states within seven years. Each time the proposed amendment has come to the House floor, it has reached the required two-thirds majority. But the measure has always died in the Senate, falling short of the 67 votes needed. The last time the Senate took up the amendment was in 2000, when it failed 63-37. But last year's elections gave Republicans a four-seat pickup in the Senate, and now proponents and critics alike say the amendment stands within a vote or two of reaching the two-thirds requirement in that chamber. By most counts, 65 current senators have voted for or said they intend to support the amendment, two shy of the crucial tally. More than a quarter of current senators were not members of that chamber during the last vote. The Senate is expected to consider the measure after the July 4th holiday.

giant popsicle NEW YORK - An attempt to erect the world's largest popsicle in a city square ended with a scene straight out of a disaster film — but much stickier. The 25-foot-tall, 17 1/2-ton treat of frozen Snapple juice melted faster than expected Tuesday, flooding Union Square in downtown Manhattan with kiwi-strawberry-flavored fluid that sent pedestrians scurrying for higher ground. Firefighters closed off several streets and used hoses to wash away the sugary goo. Snapple had been trying to promote a new line of frozen treats by setting a record for the world's largest popsicle, but called off the stunt before the it was pulled fully upright by a construction crane. Authorities said they were worried the thing would collapse in the 80-degree, first-day-of-summer heat. "What was unsettling was that the fluid just kept coming," Stuart Claxton of the Guinness Book of World Records told the Daily News. "It was quite a lot of fluid. On a hot day like this, you have to move fast." Snapple official Lauren Radcliffe said the company was unlikely to make a second attempt to break the record, set by a 21-foot ice pop in Holland in 1997. The giant ice pop was supposed to have been able to withstand the heat for some time, and organizers weren't sure why it didn't. It had been made in Edison, N.J., and hauled to New York by freezer truck in the morning.

there better be a bloody good reason for that! Have patience, and a TR shall come! hopefully it was a successful defense of your work.

so it just has cock flavoring but no actual cock in it? hmmm....

Alpinism.

well heck chaps, if you're coming in all the way from Minnesota, i think i could make it just to meet you.

i just really like boobies. they make me laugh. google search will yield all types of boobies

sheesh--might be safer in the building than being evacuated

there better be a bloody good reason for that!

was he a tree hugger?

just thinking...for a .9 sport revelation? except that it's 5.death to the first bolt.

i thought princely used to be 5.8? doesn't seem as sustained as godzilla to me. or maybe it's just the days i've climbed each pitch