KaskadskyjKozak

I am that old... although I'd have been a toddler.

Is this the testing really (reference please)? Or are you making an assumption? follow the link I posted and read: He went on to say that although he hoped everyone was equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true".

The last (and only) time I saw Ozzy live was on the "Ultimate Sin" tour. I'm so old.

This "repudiation letter" is a disgrace, reminiscent of Stalinist Russia where a citizen is singled out by the government formally. WTF? I'm surprised they didn't call him an "enemy of the state". Of course our liberal friends aren't worried about this at all. I'm glad the letter will go to a good end. You seem to forget about bipatisan condemnation of the comment by MOVE ON about General Petraus? Both "condemnations" dealing with MOVE ON and Limbucket were a colossaol waste of fucking time. I completely agree they need to stay away from speech issues. Makes for good media play though. I dont know if you slam the ACLU as many on the right do, but please remember the Limbaugh med records case if you do. The ACLU is one of the few groups remaining that focus on the constituton and not partisonship. 1) MOVE ON is not an individual; so it's not the same 2) I agree that that condemnation was also a waste of time.

isn't that the goal of your left-wing propaganda machine? you should be thankful that you have succeeded.

Holy cow….if you think he is mediocre…..I would hate to see what you think is really bad….. you.

dude, it's completely idiotic to say an entire race is genetically inferior. you could make cultural arguments, sure (and those would be very politically incorrect), but to say a whole race is inferior. dumb.

they don't teach shit in history class. I used to be a big military history buff as a kid, and couldn't believe how little of WWI and WWII were actually covered in the history books (high school). The whole war effort was summarized in each case in about two paragraphs. It's no wonder people have no idea what war involves.

no, i wouldn't have sympathy with the second quote. the 'testing'? this guy is judging intelligence based on his "empirical observations" of those minorities he has worked with, and deemed, w/o any scientific study that they are tautologically of inferior intelligence than he. he's socially retarded and an elitist racist pig. a typical academic.

Zakk cracks me up. How was the show, otherwise? Did they play anything of the beaten path (Hole in the Sky? Supernaut?)

Lewinsky invented it; that's enough to make anyone go flaccid What? You don’t like fat chicks? I'll leave them to you.

In the first quote above, are you familiar with the "testing" that he speaks of? And in the second quote, would you have any intellectual sympathy with such a statement? Would you not be inclined to believe that organisms evolving in differing environs might evolve with differing characteristics? I believe that if you took n individuals (where n consisted of a large enough sample to be statistically significant) of African origin, and n of any other race, and gave them equivalent upbringings - education, economic benefits, support, family life, etc. and then administered a standardized intelligence test to both groups, the results would be bell curves that were statistically indistinguishable from one another.

Who is pretending? I know I am not…..nor is his approval rating….. I suppose you can pretend that he is a good president…… pay attention, Boner, he is MEDIOCRE. Like you. Actually you're a few sigma's below the mean on any bell-curve. carry-on

Eat crow

You claimed the problem was torture by proxy, and that we reopened camps. That means we had these camps previously, and SANCTIONED the torture that took place there. Make up your mind already - is this new (sanctioned torture by proxy) or not?

Lewinsky invented it; that's enough to make anyone go flaccid

follow my link, read the statements quoted. they are indefensible. there's nothing to say. if YOU want to defend them, however, somehow, well, we can have a discussion

No, Bush invented torture. Prior to this presidency it was never undertaken on this scale and severity. Like everything else he does.

What is the exact problem you have with what he said? don't be obtuse

So, we did this before, then. Nothing new - as in Bush didn't create it? And when were they "shut down"? 4 years in the Clinton presidency? Let's here the whole story, and quit pretending Bush is the worsest, evilist president ever, and has committed all these unprecedented acts.

what word is that?

Where would you start? Who would lead the oversight committee? Who would be the one to tell the President his “executive privilege” is bullshit? Don’t you get it? The current president is above the law. This is a monarchy…….self appointed. How do you have oversight on president who tells the committee to fuck off? If that's true, then let the next president take care of the issue, roll back these "abuses" - clearly and decisively as a part of their agenda. Somehow, I don't see this happening - I don't hear it coming from the Dems, that's for sure. So, I must conclude that this matter is more politically-motivated than fact-based, or that the Dems want to torture too.

So your problem wasn't with what the "scientist" said, it was with peoples' propensity for being hagiographic towards "scientists"? Am I getting this right? No, you aren't. Obviously the story - and the issue- is what he said, and his profession is secondary. However, I'll be sure to file his name in my mental file cabinet for the next debate where someone claims scientists have no personal agendas and are pure, self-sacrificing, noble souls pursuing science and basing all their judgements on scientific evidence alone

Assuming this is actually going on as you claim, he should stop it. If he doesn't then I favor oversight on the matter - special investigation, whatever. But all I ever hear about in a serious context is the waterboarding claim. It seems there is evidence we actually do that, it is "sanctioned", and they have something there. The other examples cited don't seem to carry much weight as legitimate, otherwise they'd be what's referenced all the time, not waterboarding.

I'm interested in how everyone jumps up in arms, but doesn't address a single actual issue regarding this. Why is this? Because it's an incredibly sensitive subject (obviously). And since you capitalize "scientist" above, I assume you are attacking his inability to fathom some sort of "scientific" concept or process? Maybe you could explain what you mean? There is a propensity by certain people to put scientists on some pedestal as noble beings, self-sacrificing, and, yes, morally superior. Especially compared to ignorant, uneducated, simple folks of faith.