tvashtarkatena

I'm still waiting to discover how this tabloid sideshow somehow illuminates whatever fundamental trends in our society I should really be concerned about. Sleepy.....very sleepy............

OMG, let's convert 'em. All of 'em! Furor over Cervical Cancer Vaccine What the fuck is your point, exactly, if you have one? For once in your life, just cut to the chase.

I jis wanna git me sum tail...

I'n nodding off over here, non white boy.

"homiedaclown"? This debate predates the Pleistocene. It's been around this block so many times the curbs are worn down. No one really gives a shit about gun control. Crime has declined over the past decade. It's just not one of society's most pressing issues anymore. Who Fucking Cares? Having said that, the solution to mitigating criminal use of guns has been obvious for decades: a) Require federally licensed gun dealers to have an actual storefront and keep accurate records and b) perform backround checks and have waiting periods for gun purchasers. Pretty fucking simple. Got something more interesting, timely, and imaginative you'd like to discuss with us liberal mobsters? Otherwise, you're helping us fix our sleep apnia issues.

Here we see the amazing dexterity of Sheaf Stout's logic. Two quotes, minutes apart; the first, comingling drug offenses with a mass murderer, the next, a furtive plea to CC's liberal sophists to keep gun control and drugs separate. Given the revolutionary statistics he's graced our cadre of liberal ignorami with recently regarding the tsunami of homocidal illegal aliens currently invading our nation right under our noses, this latest sunburst of light upon the dark shadows of latte sucking groupthink should come as no surprise. The milspeak "no excuses" only adds to the planetary weight of his argument.

See how much easier it would be if you were an illegal alien?

La Madre de Dios, protéjanos.

Extra I-pods. Those things take a beating during laser gunfights.

This statement fails to tie the 4.1 million crimes (or are they just arrests?) to the 325,000 (???) illegal aliens that will supposedly be incarcerated in a single year. Even better, the 325,000 itself is an interesting number, when you compare it to the far less number of 272,000 TOTAL prisoners, regardless of race of citizenship, which are RELEASED every year in the USA. So, we're incarcerating more illegals per year than we're releasing total prisoners? Riiiiiiight. Just whose ass are these statistics being pulled from? Just to make things even spicier, a statistic from from another article Sheaf Stout cites in the VERY SAME POST seems to disagree with these numbers (and why not? They're made up.): "The 55,322 (incarcerated) illegal aliens studied represented a total of 459,614 arrests – some eight arrests per (incarcerated) illegal alien; " That would be a recitivism rate of about 9 arrests per incarcerated illegal alien. Now let's compare illegals with incarcerated criminals in general: From the DOJ's website (not some conservative pundit or politician): • "The 272,111 offenders discharged in 1994 accounted for nearly 4,877,000 arrest charges over their recorded careers." That's 18 arrests per incarcerated offender, or twice the number for illegal aliens. Anyone would conclude from these numbers that that illegal aliens who've been incarcerated are half as likely to be arrested again as compared to the average incarcerated criminal. Thanks for clearing this up, Sheaf Stout. Note to self: In the future, at least when I'm around, get your statistics from an original, not laundered, source.

The main problem with Veganism is, well, just look what kind of mates you wind up with. Perhaps that's why it's a relatively new phenomenon from an evolutionary standpoint, available only in population sizes gargantuan enough to support such nonsense.

I'm reminded of a three day trip I made out to Brewster, Washington, for some traffic free cycling. Brewster is a small ag town on the Columbia, so it's no surprise that most of the population is hispanic. The stereotypes are all there: the starch white shirts, perfectly white teeth, polished boots and belt buckles, crisp new Resistols, ready smiles. We cycled into town nervously, feeling at any moment that a gang of these overly polite threats to national security might screetch their F150 with the Virgin de Guadalupe sticker to a hault, drag us into their brightly painted, overcrowded house, and force feed us homemade tamales until we choked to death. What a frightening contrast to the minority white population, which consisted of gender questionable meth heads with more than a few ready "FUs" available for anyone who dared to glance at their drunk driver smashed picket fence dentition for longer than a psychzoids microsecond. Build the fence! Protect our white trash from the Invasion of the Mole Hordes!

I felt the same way when I moved to Tokyo to make a fresh start....

Religious Marketing Jingles: Christianity: "Eternal life will be yours. From the looks of it, you're gonna need at least that long to get laid." Islam: "73 virgins eagerly await your martyrdom...along with the rest of humanity." Buddhism: "Let go of desire. It wasn't going to get you laid anyway." Scientology: "Look what we did for Tom." Raelianism: "Better living through cloning. But in your case, we'll make an exception."

Those that haven't fallen victim to tauntaun on tauntaun violence, that is.

From the clip: "These radicals represent only a tiny fraction of Britain's 1.6 million muslims..." Point well taken; Every group has a kooky minority.

Illegal tauntauns are responsible for over 9,000 accidental deaths on Mt. Hood every year.

Al Qaeda Chiefs Seen to Regain Control Can one of you 'non-armchair warriors' explain how this happened to me?

There's nothing I like better than an un-referenced citation of outrageously unbelievable statistics. I'll just deal with a couple of numbers here. That's all that's needed to nuke the credibility of the rest. Ready, kiddies? Illegals kill 12 people a day? That's 4380 a year. From theFBI website: "National Volume, Trends, and Rates The UCR Program’s homicide data for 2004 showed that for the first time in 4 years, the estimated number of murders in the United States decreased. An estimated 16,137 persons were murdered nationwide," That would mean that illegals committed 4380/16,137, or 27% of all homocides in the US in 2004. Again, from the FBI website: "Offenders In homicides where the race of the offender was known, 50.0 percent were black, 47.6 percent were white, and 2.4 percent were other races. (Based on Table 2.5.) Data from single victim/single offender incidents showed that 92.2 percent of black victims were murdered by black offenders, and 84.8 percent of white victims were murdered by white offenders. (Based on Table 2.7.)" So 97.6% of offenders where either black or white (not hispanic, and yes, the FBI treats that as a separate racial category), which means less than 2.4% of homocides, or roughly 387 per year, could have been committed by hispanics, legal or illegal. You're citation is off by at least a factor of 12, and probably much more, but hey, that's within the realm of 'creative' license, no? We see similar 'irregularities' in your drunk driving statistics. 13 deaths a day = 4745 per year. From the Alcohol Alert Website: "There were 16,694 alcohol-related fatalities in 2004 – 39 percent of the total traffic fatalities for the year." Again, we see illegals as being responsible for a whopping 28% of all drunk driving related traffic fatalities. There are an estimated 12 million illegals in the USA, or 4% of the population. 4% of the population is responsible for 28% of the drunk driving fatalities? Illegals are 7 times more likely to kill someone while drunk driving? Riiiiiiighhht. Next time you quote statistics, I'd recommend steering clear of politicians as your source.

Yes, the Maginot Line, the Great Wall, Hadrian's Wall, this strategy has produced, throughout history...oh, wait a minute. Guarding borders is a classical formula for expending the most amount of resources for the least amount of results; it addresses the problem not at its source, but at its end point, where it is most disperse, widespread, and difficult to control. The source of the problem is the demand for illegal labor. That involves the fewest number of most easily tracked people with the most to loose. I realize this is a difficult concept for some die hard literalists to grasp. After all, it does require one step of logic. Why shoot at the enemy behind the berm when you can shoot at the leadership that ordered them there in the first place? There are a lot fewer of them, and they're a lot easier to find.

The last estimate for building the as yet unfunded wall was $ 9 billion. Like most mega boondoggles, that cost would probably go up substantially if executed.

Correction. If it wasn't for Mexican cooks what would Americans eat? No Mexicans, no restaurants...of any kind. Take a peek into the kitchen of your favorite fu fu eatery some time.

Eat me, DC. Da way I look at it is this: things eat each other. That's nature's way. Humans invented domesticated animals and plants for consumption using the brain that we evolved for whatever reasons. Fine. As long as those animals and plants are raised sustainably and responsibly, Let's eat, beyotch!

Hate speech laws in the United States draw the line at direct intimidation or intent to threaten. For example, the Supreme Court has ruled that burning a cross at a KKK rally is protected speech, but burning a cross across the street from a black family is an intended threat and therefore not protected. Other countries, such as Germany, have stronger hate speech laws that do not require such specific intimidation or intent. A nazi tattoo that would be legal in the US would not fly in Germany. Similarly, public speech, such as denying the holocaust, that would be allowed in the US would not be allowed in Germany. This is consistent the history of 1st amendment protections (speech, press, religion, assembly), which have typically been stronger in the US than other countries.

You know better than to indulge in this kind of logic. By the same thinking, both Tim McVeigh and myself are of Irish descent, so all Irishmen must be terrorists. McVeigh was also raised Christian. Ditto. And on and on. Other flip side, several of the 911 team were not even all that religious. Most terrorist attacks occur to move a political, not religious, agenda forward. Statistically, if you look at the majority of suicide bombings to date, they've been carried out by Palestinians (strong political agenda), Tamil Tigers (completely political agenda), and various insurgent factions in Iraq (primarily political agenda). The majority of sectarian violence in Iraq, for example, is Sunni verses Shiite (or rival factions within those groups fighting each other), to settle old political scores from Saddam's time and secure the lion's share of oil riches for the future. It has little to do with the religious doctrine of Sunniism vs Shiism. To broadbrush the various conflicts in the Middle East and surroundings as primarily religiously motivated is to miss the main causes of these conflicts by a wide margin. Yes, in some instances, Islam is used as a tool for radicalization, but it is not the primary motivator in getting actual individuals to pick up a gun or a bomb and act. There is no hope of coming up with any real solutions as long as this thinking prevails.