archenemy

I never seen a dog get off whilst cleaning himself. But I often hear men mention it. Very strange.

If you could eat your own, what would you need me for?

Funny, most men enjoy that. Maybe youv've been married so long you forgot what it was like.

6.5012897 - natural logarithm of the beast 665.999998734 - number of the Pentium beast

pie

your dick

If he hasn't been mentioned: any solo from Zakk Wylde

My problem is that I am just not clear enough.

Yes, right after making your dinner.

I feel your pain. And for all the shits who bitch about homeowners' subsidy for mortgage interest write-off, fuck you. This is what we get in return. Everyone pays. Everyone.

that's where I am posting from. Thank God for wireless.

Metal heads would not be against emos b/c we just don't give a fuck

Crack is fun. Uh, I mean aid.

If he can't figure that out, he probably has a real tough time with that Tampax

And bowling balls are not edible.

That is exactly what is happening in Seattle right now. I could raise my rents by a pretty good % and my renters wouldn't leave. I'm not going to do that, but I could.

You people act as if you never see tits n ass. How is that possible in this country? Jeez, get over it.

???? I think I replied with a basic variant of "I don't know how they would rule, didn't I? Is "I don't know" an acceptable answer? How would the Supreme court rule Peter? Here is the answer: The SC would not rule on this. They use a system of precedents and there are none for this (as far as I know--correct me if I am wrong here. Maybe Mattp can set me straight if I am totally missing the ball here).

Yes, and it is my sincere hope that they, along with all the other people suffering under horrible gov'ts, are successful in securing their own rights. What about the Right of Self-Determination? If the people of Iraq want to secede, why shouldn't they be allowed to? Why should Sunnis be forced to live under Shia's or vice versa? Exactly. More power to them. I will not be mailing them guns though.

The Pres, traditionally, could only do this after he Federalized it. This has only been done once. Of course, Bush pissed all over that when he changed the rule recently (which obviously I disagree with) State of Emergency has a different air about it and is used mainly to help people after a disaster. therefore, things like civil rights are rarely called into question. I didn't know that part about the Generals. Cool.

Yes, and it is my sincere hope that they, along with all the other people suffering under horrible gov'ts, are successful in securing their own rights.

To me this question asks how the Supreme Court would rule. That is usually what I think of when someone asks if the Supreme court considers something legal. This is entirely different. This is whether one agrees with a possible Supreme Court ruling, as opposed to what the Supreme Court ruling was. Again, this is not the job of the SC. The US SC is an appellate court (primarily) and does not hold original jurisdiction over cases like this. Learn your legal system people, you are responsible for knowing it. Girl Power Rules! Indeed. Losing Sandra Day O'Connor sucked.

I think I did, in my reply post. Now you know how it feels.

I think it's pretty clear that the Iraqis in Basra find themselves to be under the control of tyrannical government. That is why they are fighting and shooting and stuff. Yes. And this has to do with our gun ownership rights how?

To me this question asks how the Supreme Court would rule. That is usually what I think of when someone asks if the Supreme court considers something legal. This is entirely different. This is whether one agrees with a possible Supreme Court ruling, as opposed to what the Supreme Court ruling was. Again, this is not the job of the SC. The US SC is an appellate court (primarily) and does not hold original jurisdiction over cases like this. Learn your legal system people, you are responsible for knowing it.