archenemy

Soccer rules! Good for your daughter and for you--how much fun!!! And when the Sounders start up again you two can have fun yelling and cheering for them! Yay

This is completely 100% true. And in my experience, men who see women as equal human beings are much, much better in bed (and in life) than men who adhere to the old-school cock-of-the-walk type.

I can dance naked at my place and have as much booze stocked up as anyone can drink. Love it.

Exactly.

Right on--I wish I were in town this weekend. Good luck to a good performance for your bro!

And is strangely inversely related to the economic well-being of the country. Hmmmmm

I'm sitting on it right now.

i saw a guy in Chetwynd pop out his glass eye and open the bottle in his socket in 92 Do lots of Canadians skullfuck themselves in front of an audience? Or is it mostly a private thing?

I don't think they can read.

I completely agree with both of you on this issue from a moral standpoint. I don't even think it is necessary to refer to any documentation. It is simply wrong to hurt other people. But the argument on a larger scale will always come down to what is legal and what is not.

I live next to the Munsters. They bother me more than I do them. Hard to believe huh?

Did they have arms in their passenger seats?

Okay, this is the only amendment I see that mentions war-related action (except for the one about quarter, and I don't think that applies here) No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation. And it doesn't apply to anyone on our soil--it applies to citizens, residents, and visitors. I don't think people we are at war with qualify for any of those catagories.

Thank you for that clarification--I didn't think about that. I need to chew that over a bit.

As an ideal, I agree that high-density housing is super. But there will always be people like me who simply won't live in them--no matter how well they are built. I will not share a wall with another person. I want my space. And the older I get, the more space around me I want. I know it isn't environmentally sound, but it is my choice. I'll try my best to make up for it in other ways, but I just won't feel guilty for wanting to live the way I want to live.

I think that throughout history, men in war have embraced and santioned torture in its many forms. That is what war is in essence--torture. So to act all shocked like we are so above it all (professional was your word I think) is bemusing to me. Arch, again, shit happens in war, but that is vastly different than adopting torture as an official policy of our nation. We are a signatory to an international convention specifically outlawing its use. That we as nation have formally established policy, infrastructure, and resources explicitly for the purpose of torture has bankrupted whatever integrity we had in the eyes of most the world. Except for scale, after our performance of the past four years we are now indistinquishable from Stalin's Russia relative to the use of gulags, torture, and murder. It is a bold stain on the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, and the Bill of Rights - and our nation. OBL succeeded beyond his wildest dreams in this respect; he simply got us to tear at the very foundation of this country for him. Just to be clear up front--I am not a fan of anyone forcing anyone to do anything and using violence to accomplish their goal. Also, I don't think adopting torture as an official policy is good either. I don't think torture affects our Declaration of Independence--this has nothing to do with not being under Britain's rule. It has little to do with the Constitution--that document doesn't outline the activities not allowed during war. Nor does it have anything to do with the Bill of Rights--those apply to Americans, not to what we do to foreigners whom we are at war with. But what I do think it at stake is our believability. If we say we aren't doing something, then dammit, don't do it. If we are doing something unsavory as torture, then fess up and figure out what the hell we do from here.

You'd think people would slow down. WTF is up with drivers?

I didn't get to go, I just got the down-low (that's my hip phrase for today)

We'd also have to stop teaching history classes if that were the litmus test.

The crows are sitting around right now saying, "Admit it, there was no Gary."

No one can get the bottle out long enough to tell.

Yes, last night with Rob Zombie. Zakk was so drunk he fell over

Any other vermin this is acceptable for? You mean like squirrels and such? I think vermin are pretty much open game. And you are also allowed to shoot anything that is threatening your life or is creating a "deleterious effect" on your property (I think this was written for farmers and whatnot)

I think that throughout history, men in war have embraced and santioned torture in its many forms. That is what war is in essence--torture. So to act all shocked like we are so above it all (professional was your word I think) is bemusing to me.

That means Clinton invented the blow job. Wonder why he's not more popular?