sirwoofalot

no, no, ban me instead!

no way man.... follow the money.

I suspect there are two reasons for this. 1) The reporters following the candidates have already reported on the positions of the candidates. Therefore reporting AGAIN on their positions is NOT NEW news. The reporters know so much about each candidate there is nothing NEW. 2) The candidates are doing so many things, they cannot devote enough time every day to every news outlet. Therefore the news outlets you are consuming cannot say anything about the positions, becuase they have not had time with the candidates. 3.) or reporting sound bites and half truths is what sells and bings the media money.

Oh, I give up! You don't want to hear anything other than his right wing point of view or their left wing point of view, when both of you are WRONG about the media. MONEY, money, money. THAT'S IT! But you want to hold you ideas so you can continue to spray each other! Well spary away Nearo, spray away.

OUCH! Can you say pucker?

The more you say media bias, the more he says your Interpretation, the more they say our reporting is fair and balanced, all add up to more of the same. SELLING ADVERTISING! It is called the New Reporting Entertainment Industry for a reason. Fist it is entertainment. Secondly they are profit maximization companies. Their collective jobs are to maximize profit for their investors. NOT REPORTING THE NEWS! It is not about the news. It is about getting you and me arguing these points as we are, and THAT drives this media mass miss information machine which is our so called free press.

Details? And, if this is true, would you argue that the press coverage of the scandals of the Bush Administration has been unfairly scathing in a way that they were not toward the Clinton Administration? Is there a liberal bias at work here? NO! there is a financial bias here. Look how the left gobels up slandering the right! Look how hot the right gets and calls the media bias! IT SELLS! Yeah there is a bias, and that bias is to what can sell.

“New Worthiness” is based solely on the ability to sell advertising. Our media looks at news as selling advertising mixed in with a few stories; the more outrageous the story the more expensive advertising. Yes, it is just that simple. The next time you are watching the tube do this, during the commercials turn off the sound and count how many scenes there are in every 60 second or 30 second spot. ADD? You bet! Who’s fault? Look in the mirror. We all need to look in the mirror. Want to change it? As my Mother always said, “If you want to change anything first start with the person you see in the mirror.

I think the true crux of the real issue was briefly mentioned, contradicted, and the brushed aside. IT IS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. All of it; NYT, CNN, Fox News, you name it. I am sure most if not all of the rank and file reporters truly believe they are reporting the news in a fair and balanced way. But the rank and file reporters are not pulling the strings. The man is. And the man says report it so we make money; the truth, the details, the facts DO NOT MATTER, and the only this that matters is the money It is all a bunch of over sensationalized poopy diapers

Dude, stop Bogarting....

I heard there was an avalanche at Big White inside their sky boundaries; one person missing. If I go BC then I should be willing to take a certain amount of avalanche risk. So my question is, “Should I, or do I, accept a certain amount of avalanche risk while skiing in bounds?

I saw this on the news last night, and saw the sign for the Lake 22 TH.

I was training by climbing Mt Si with 2 x 2.5 gallon of water. I would cut open the container so they could drain. I went with a PhD candidate in Physics. As the first container was draining he asked me if I needed the second container. I said no. So he said here allow me to apply physics to your method of empting these water containers. I said sure, and how? He then took the full container, held it way over his head, and said “Energy is equal to the mass times the velocity squared”. Then he slammed the container against a rock; the plastic split open and all of the water was gone in a second. The container I had cut open was still draining. Physics is cool.

Implant, not card.

sorry, but I can not find omnigaited at dictionary.com. whatsit mean?

Not to mention he was an open critic of the war.

I do agree that it has a near zero probability; however, Powell would be our best choice.

Dude, Gore was a total moron - at every debate and every appearance and speech. But hey, if you want to sniff two pieces of shit and claim one smells better, all the power to you. What do you mean by saying Gore was a total moron? did he not declear he was the inventor of the internet or some such nonsence? That should make him a god considering how he most have been what 2 years old or there about? Now a 2 year old inventing the internet is no moron.

The first black president is going to be a republican. Colin Powell. Where are you when your country needs you the most? We need a leader. We don’t need a politician with catchy campaign slogans about change.

There are two ways to look at this important theological issue; either from a religious, or from a secular point of view. First of all we need to establish that fact that Jesus was a person who really did walk the earth. I am not going to go into details about this. Instead I am going to assume Jesus was a real person. Now, from a religious point of view; Judaism, Islam, and Christianity all agree that Jesus did exist and walked the earth. Judaism, and Islam look at Jesus as a prophet of God; a human who walked on the earth. So let’s look at this from a Christian point of view. God and humans are separated by human’s sin. God needed to reconcile this separation. God could not bring humans into his realm as God is perfect and with out fault. So God needed to come into the human realm. That is God needed to become human in order to reconcile humans to God. God was manifested as a human in the form of Jesus. So, following our logic class from collage, Philosophy 120, we can make the reasonable argument. All humans fart. Jesus was a human. Therefore Jesus farted. So from a secular point of view; either Jesus existed or Jesus did not exist. If we assume the point of view that Jesus actually did exist then we can assume that he did actually fart. (Please note the above argument) At this point please allow me to digress. Based on the argument; all humans fart, Jesus was a human, therefore Jesus farted, the only way we can assume that Jesus did not fart is if he were not human. But even then it is a logical fallacy. All humans fart, Jesus was not a human, therefore Jesus did not farted. So allow me to make the provisional assumption that Jesus was God, and only God and never human. Then we can make the logical argument that God does not fart. Jesus is God. Therefore Jesus did not fart. Now, if we assume that Jesus never did exist then we can not assume he was only a god, and therefore must assume that he was a fictitious human. Therefore he must have had a fictitious fart. And from the smell of this post I would guess that is the best possible result. I hope I have shed some fresh air on this ponderous subject.

YTD 0 But I have a week planned for at Crystal in late January and we will do at least 2 days befor that and 2 to 4 times after. Realistically we can be looking at 9 to 11 days this year. WOOOOOOOOF! WE = Wife, Son, and Daughter

I guessed right! that was War and Peace. Now back to this thread, "DIE YOUR GRAVY SUCKING PIG"!

That web sight I put up earlier in this thread agrees about the eggs, but the grease should be taken before you start drinking.

Ah yes, another cop-bashing thread by the ignorant. You know, yesterday I went out to eat, and the waiter was rude to me. So now I hate all waiters. This one deputy was making a very bad judgement call. Please direct anger towards him, not towards law enforcement in general. Being in law enforcement, I am going to give you real advice on what to do, not this "I saw it on TV" advice that so many people want to give. What he was doing was technically legal, but very bad judgement and common sense. At the scene his name should have been taken. (It will be on the tow paperwork if you got it.) You should have asked for his supervisor to respond to the scene and that you want to make a complaint at that time. Being that this is a day later, and you may or may not have his name: do this. Call the snohomish county sheriff office that patrols that area. Ask for a sergeant or lieutenant. Now here is the hard part; calmly, truthfully and respectfully explain what happened and why towing the cars was a bad idea. To stop anyone from responding stating "I pay their salary, I should be able to be rude and crass and they still listen to me," I will cut that off now. Being human, if you start lying (easy to spot) or being rude or use comments like "i pay your salary," You will simply make the supervisor you are talking to tune you out, thinking you are blowing things way out of proportion. By talking calmly and respectfully, you sound like a sane average citizen and will be listened to. After talking to a supervisor, write a letter and call the actual Sheriff's office. You won't speak to the Sheriff, but your communication will get to him. After that, call and write to the Snohomish Executive (the equivalent of Ron Sims.) All this will get the message across that towing the cars is not right. Yes, it is a lot of work, but bitching will not change anything, while taking the effort to do these things will. Hope this will help. Dear Cop, I have had many encounters with police officers in my life. All of them but one was pleasant. Even the unpleasant one I was able to defuse the situation but calmly taking to the officer and remembering that he too is a human being. I would say about 1 out of 10 or more times the officers have been fair, reasonable and even friendly and helpful. Your advice is well noted, and I will remember it. Thank you very much for your continued service in a very difficult but yet needed aspect to your society.

Never. firstly I started drinking when I was 38. and secondly I never had the energy to carry the extra weight. In my gut feelings, I just can't see how the Mountains and Alcohol can mix. Well not exactly. When our family goes on our yearly ski vacation drinks at the Condo are manditory. but that is not packing in a flask of hooch.