My all time favorite potato chips were the Eagle brand hawaiian kettle variety, but they don't make those any more. Kay's has a good selection of kettle style chips including a sweet Hawaiian and a cracked black pepper and sea salt. Kettle chips hold up well to firm dips like cottage cheese or guacamole.

I used to like Jolt cola but now that I'm diabetic Pepsi Max does it for me.

Why should AICN ignore anything Political on the small or large screen ? Out of, what... Deference, Squeamishness ? There's plenty of stories that aren't directly or overtly political. Click on them.

And wasn't part of the overall fallout from this that the UN wanted to keep an eye on the US during the last Presidental election to ensure there were no more irrigularities (or facisit bullshit orchastrated by the GOP if you really want to get down to it) which of course Bush et all took great umbrage to?

This constant beating of the drum for war against Iran, which is no direct threat to us, only confirms that Bush's foreign policy is controlled by Israel, just like his energy policy is controlled by the oil industy, his health care policy by the Pharma industry, his fiscal policy controlled by the banks ... you get the picture. Where the welfare of our country and our citizenry comes into the picture, that's non-existent.

Take it away, Morbid.

Maybe you can help Morbid out and tell us how many nuclear weapons Iran has, how another preemptive war, this time against Iran, will solve the problem instead of diplomacy and monitoring?

But lemme ask ya this... if Hollywood isn't all controlled by democrats and/or liberals (many like to see that's not true), how come there aren't many or any conservative/Republican opinion movies made? And don't give me the "because Republicans have no real basis for that" crap...

Democrat? Republican? @#$% 'em both.

* New Republicans (far-right plutocrats and theocrats with fascist undertones; What we call "neoconservatives" these days.)

* Old Republicans (middle of the road, conservative-leaning moderates who treasured less government. True conservatives.)

* Libertarians (Far left socially, far right economically, dead center when it comes to foreign policy, and never electable anyway).

The far-left liberals aren't even represented by a political party. There are some people (Dennis Kucinich, for example) but no parties that will embrace them. There is no party that will embrace a purely atheist point of view for government (as it should be), and no party who will seriously look at social programs without being afraid of being called socialist or commies. There is no party on the left that goes as extreme as the current right-wing Republican party.

Of course, the old Republicans are sort of melded into the New Republican party, and their voices aren't being heard--- But at least they are included and somewhat considered when matters of party policy are brought up.

The Republicans need to get the fascists who took over their party out of the picture. I had respect for Republicans when they valued fiscal responsibility, freedom, liberty, and smaller government-- But the current batch are just the opposite on EVERY count.

Take back your damned party, Republicans! Stop letting the talking heads tell you what you've always stood for (even when you didn't) and tell THEM what matters to you!

Meanwhile, I'll be over here dreaming of a day when a guy like Kucinich will be taken seriously in an election, and we can have a true separation of church & state, legalized prostitution, legalized marijuana, legalized marriage benefits for people of all genders and orientations, and decent health care for ALL Americans. I'll be waiting for an America where someone else's gods don't dictate my personal restrictions.

Never saw "Sexy the City" or "the Superanus" or any of that critically acclaimed "it ain't TV, it's Hobo" stuff. They ain't selling me no more monkey movies.

Let's just hope the people ain't buying no more monkey presidents, either, seven and a half years with a chimp in the oval office have done enough harm.

But Clinton cannot even beat Obama...

So if Obama cannot beat McCain, and Clinton cannot beat Obama.... Hmmm

"Okay, I am losing by every objective measurement, so what should I do? I know, I will claim that I can win a hypothetical future election, since I cannot win the real, current one. And I will try to have the Rules changed AFTER the fact, so that I get delegates that are not allowed by the Rules I agreed to BEFOREHAND. I have no shame, and will do ANYTHING so long as it helps ME."

So Surreal, Sir! Well done.

And Deadwood was class. Carnivale were purdy damn good too. Sopranos ? meh. it had it's moments I spose.

I'm definitely lookin forward to Generation Kill since there is no more Wire anymore.

I'm not surprised, and certainly can't blame you after our Plame Affair.

So if you please, do give us your rationale for waging a preemptive war against Iran. Is it "reforming the Arab world"? I'll even ignore the fact that Iranians are Persian and not Arab. Does that help, just a little?

In 2000, Gore won the popular vote by 540,000 people nationwide. That's over a half million people/votes. To anyone holding Bush's 531 vote lead in Florida (which is a suspect number anyway) ... suck on that.

That is all :|

"Shoot them. Shoot them BOTH!"

U.S. ambassador to Iraq said on Saturday Al Qaeda in Iraq has never been closer to defeat then they are now. Though he is not ready to say Al Qaeda is defeated, he is willing to say the troop surge has dealt the terrorist organization an astonsihing blow.

http://tinyurl.com/6p4jdl

So now he thinks he's owed some response to his questioning? I think I'll wait for his answers first, though I don't see any forthcoming. As usual.

Do you even try to break that pattern of pointlessness, Morbid? Even your mentor on the subject of Nazis, Brane, is able to concoct a point.

And was it me who brought up the issue of Iran and nukes? Nope. It was Groothewarrior. Learn to read much?

Can you imagine the implications? An objective documentary that tackles not only one of the most controversial moments in recent political history, but a moment that was arguably part of the reason we're living in the butt-crack of this schism now?

I haven't seen it yet, but if it's true, the most interesting thing about it will be the reactions to it. I consider myself a conservative, for lack of a better term, but something tells me that even if this film is fair, conservatives will still crucify it. Force of habit. Have at it, bitches! :)

I don't want you, Morbid. You're a loser. Get away from me. *Makes L sign with fingers*

On the topic of subversion of democracy, let's not forget the US Attorney scandal (pursue this groundless case against a Democrat or you're fired) or the bogus prosecution of Alabama Gov. Don Siegelman; also addressed in this book. It's on Amazon in paperback, and I'd like to check it out if I think I can make it through it without having an aneurism.

Mind deconstructing the book for us and show us how it amounts to "Leftist Alarmist Content"?

One thing though: You say "I used to believe that Bush-hate was just a backlash to the Clinton-hate of the 90s. Now I'm more likely to believe it's still bitterness from 2000."

You can't think of any other reasons, perhaps some extremely justifiable ones, that people might despise Bush? Bush is not the Republican party. Many, many Republicans hate what he stands for, and it has nothing to do with any 'backlash' or recount bitterness. Bush has done a great job- of giving people reasons to want to see him gone.

Is that about right?

Maybe you'd prefer to change your name to MullahObesity, since you're so fond of censorship.

If I recall correctly, one of the Republicans' (and possibly Diebold's) arguments against a paper receipt for voting machines was it was cost prohibitive. Can you believe that? I don't see supermarkets going bankrupt printing out those 2-foot long receipts. I think each citizen is entitled to a 2-inch piece of paper in turn for exercising their most important of Constitutional rights.

Republicans aren't "wholly responsible" for the crisis. The thing about a two-party system is that each party is supposed to be the checks and balances for the other; essentially the conscience of the government as a whole, a stop-gap preventing absolute power from corrupting absolutely. The process has never completely worked perfectly, but I believed in it. I still do, but the past 8 years have severely tested my faith. As far as I'm concerned, the Bush administration represent a radical group of right-wing extremists that have always been a component of the party, albeit a minor one. In 2000 they effectively performed a coup and took over the party, and the country. This sounds like an extremist, alarmist view of what happened, but it isn't. These kinds of things happen all the time in Washington, double-dealing, secret agendas, alliances forged and betrayed, intrigue is the lifeblood of American politics. The Necons have been carefully arranging themselves to take power for more than a generation, some people trace it back to Nixon's presidency. Whatever, assuming things can be defined in such primary colors, the profile of the Republican party has changed radically since I was a kid.

...Where were the Democrats while all this was going on? The Dems have consistently dropped the ball, been ineffectual, rolled over when they should have stood strong. The Democrats have been a strong party in the past, but if the last 8 years have seen the Republican personality shift, it's only been a mirror image of what's happened to the Democrats. The Dems can't just 'look the other way' and blame everything on Bush. Bush took power-and held it, on their watch. They are as complicit as the traditional Republicans when it comes to what's happened to America, and not only that, but have never once showed any real will to resist the neocon agenda.

As for the Diebold fiasco, I consider it a non-partisan issue. If the democrats take over in November and we see 12 years of iron-clad Democratic rule (which I doubt, but still) Do you really think they'll resist the temptation to use the precedent set by the Bush Republicans? Of course not. Diebold and it's promoters have argued that paper ballots are unreliable, expensive, and wasteful. Well, ATM machines seem to work just fine for millions of transactions every single day dispensing paper receipts, which are exactly the same thing. Fuck Diebold. Electronic ballots aren't pro-republican or anti-democrat, they're fucking un-American. Say it loud.

http://tinyurl.com/4tvt9z

Mark Twain (a loyal patriot) said:

"Loyalty to your country always, loyalty to your government when they deserve it."

It's Republicans like you that make this country a target. You've been so brainwashed by the ruling ideology of the neocon agenda that you can't even tell the difference between what America actually is and the Brand America(tm) that's being sold off to the highest bidders in your name. Do you really think that Democrats 'hate' America? You're a fool, Brane. You've been recruited into a class of mindless drones that don't serve America or her principles, but serve the interests of a few opportunistic, corporatist oligarchs who rely on idiots like you to decry and silence rational dissent and true patriotic voices. You make it easy for them to exploit America for their own ends. All they have to do is wrap themselves in the flag and chant a few slogans, and you're out there in front clearing a path, like a good little doggie. Fuck you.

hehe!

For the record, I never said I thought Bush should be tried in a world court. on that point, we are in agreement. Not that America would ever or could ever concede to something so ridiculous, unless the entire rest of the planet gangs up on us and opens a new Nuremberg Trial. Even then, we'd probably win anyway. I digress.

It doesn't take a lot of courage, in this day and age, to proclaim Bush a bastard, or to support abortion and gay rights for that matter. What other evidence that you possess a human soul would you like to put on display? Do you also think racism 'sucks'?

What I take issue with is your absolute dementia, your bi-polar, binary, 3-D Glasses view of our country. And Brane, yes, you do seek to squash dissent. Your rabid, frothing indictment of anyone you (in your infinite wisdom) deem to be a "Liberal" (only you really know what that means, apparently I'm one now, too) amounts to silencing dissent. What exactly do you have a problem with? Americans burning flags? Ok, yes, that's disgraceful. I agree, people who do that should have their lights knocked out. Is that, in your opinion, a much more pressing, more relevant, more important topic than, say, possibly trying to turn this ship around before we smash into a fucking iceberg? You're re-arranging the deck chairs, bud. If you spent a fraction of the energy you waste looking for bolsheviks under your pillow for actually supporting what you do have in common with fellow Americans who don't think exactly as you do, I think you might be surprised.

I might have been wrong about the finer details of your politics, man, but I'm not wrong about how much of a dick you are. You're an attack dog, a thug, and people like you are a gift to the most extreme aspects of any ideology. Why not give up your irrational hatred of the "liberal" boogyman and look around, you might find there are others who actually deserve your wrath.

Or I could call it a night and go get a little drunk.

I could say you're on a roll tonight, Morbid, but you're far off what little game you have. Nitpicking LibWarrior's spelling? Is that what you do in lieu of making a point now? Is that what you've been reduced to? Desperate much?

Maybe you can just continue to bring LOLs into Brane's otherwise joyless existence. Your blooming friendship is endearing, and amusing.

Applause, please. Everyone.

Just a little tip - from me to you.

What a strange turn of events we have just witnessed. And only minutes ago, Morbid was making Brane LOL.

This is not just a love story, it's a tragic love story.

Pointless, and now senseless, too.

Though remind me, when you spoke of "Camel Jockey's" "Brown people" and "their funny ways of dress" spoke fondly of "Slobo" while trying to excuse ethnic cleansing and Genocide as well as making excuses for the K.K.K. why do suppose people might think you are one of the Lunatic fringe ?

BTW good luck in trying to scuttle away in shame & embarrasment from your previous statement, which was let me remind you "Do you own property? No? NO VOTE!" Such obvious wriggling is amusing to watch yes, but nobody will buy it. Man up Brane, you said it take responsibility for it, Batshit insane though it may well be.

Because the last time anything like what this Lunatic wants was inserted into the Voting Act was 1776 when White men with property had the right to vote but Catholics, Jews, Quakers and others were barred from voting.

So is that your dream scenario Brane ? Or is Disqualifying everyone from Voting who doesn't own property just the first step in your "masterplan" ?

Wasn't perfect by any means the musical scoring I thought was a bit cheesy and we never quite had the passage of time from beginning to end of the entire debacle underlined clearly enough as the deadlines kept changing due to the events portrayed. But it definitely wasn't a lazy pastiche of accumulated TV News footage by any means. If anything the archive footage was used very sparingly to keep the actors the main focus.

Wilkinson, Dern and Leary were excellent. Hurt was good but maybe not forcefull enough. Spacey & Ed Begley were a bit too bland & one-note for me though spacey did improve that towards end.

A review is fairly irrelevant anyway as some will never be able to see past the subject matter.

If there ARE any glaring untruths I'm sure FOX and Friends won't be slow to trumpet them and write this off as an attack piece or propaganda even if they can't find any regardless.

But it WAS a TV Movie not a crude student polemic. It had plenty of attention to the central characters without neglecting the actual subject or the living outside world it took place in.

It was certainly a cut above most TV Movies if not quite a fully fledged Cinematic release.

Sydney Pollack was goin to direct but for his passing but I have no idea how different it would have ben under his attentions. All I can say is I still found it a very watchable film.

Oh and James Baker & Benjamin Ginsberg have largely given the film good reviews. Baker even had his own screening of the Movie. Ironically Baker has been quietly distancing himself from Dubya particularly on Iraq for a couple of years now which might have made an amusing postscript considering how the film ends.

But in truth a bit more of the Dern and Wilkinson characters would have been pretty good too but it was probably as long as it could be.

Need ammunition to use on him? Just talk to him and he'll provide you with all the rope and intellectual bullets you need to railroad his ass.

He is the single most radioactive talkbacker on AICN, and he still thinks everyone is marching out of step except for him. I'm sure he thinks the uneasy looks he gets at the water cooler at work are because his co-workers envy him so. I'm sure he's just "waiting for the right woman", too.

All the usual suspects.

Brane, as always says dumb, offensive shit, then tries to justify - backpedal, and or revise.

I thought you were making progress Brane.

And Morbid, haha, poor Morbid. You do not have a clue do you?

I think "Pathetic Morbid" is the new catchphrase.

Brane and Morbid, seem to distance themselves from one another, then Brane, tried to make up.

Stevie does seem to be showing his true colors, and they aint pretty.

BSB, funny as always.

G100, keep up the good fight.

Samsquanch, as always you provide balance and reason.

I was disappointed in the Libwarrior though, I wanted some more ha-ha out of him. Motarded, as always, is funny, and the takes Mule and coyote shit were funny, but were was the passion man? Not one 'diseased, purple pus dripping, armadillo twat' to be found.

But you were right, Morbid provided his own smackdown.

Give an idiot enough rope, and they will indeed hang themselves.

Your doing it again son.

You made a complete ass out of yourself with the Libwarrior.

You said he was proclaiming his 'grand intellect', I read all his posts, and not one of them said anything about being smarter than you. Not one. But you just assumed by the way he was smacking you down, that he was smarter than you, and he is.

You cannot even see how dumb it made you look to say something like that.

Truly pathetic morbie.

But funny as hell!

I mean, do they take the Supremes to task for making a one time only ruling?

I did understand what you meant though. The Supremes own dithering cause the missed recount date- which they could have simply resolved by telling the Florida court to waive the safe harbor in this case. But the fact that they did not, was so appallingly political, it boggles the mind.

Who wouldn't want the former, if the latter was the only option?

Wishful thinking on my part.

I would not ever try and dissuade you from holding conservative views, because in fact I think it is very necessary that people hold differing points of view. It keeps us honest, and provides balance - to a certain extent.

It would also be a damn dull world if we all agreed on everything.

But when those views are as objectionable and heinous as yours, there is no middle ground.

Own property to vote? That is truly disgusting Brane.

Do you even realize why that is so reprehensible? How you would be disenfranchising tens of millions of people?

And what would classify as 'ownership'? Having a mortgage, or owning it outright? Because if just a mortgage, you have flushed even more tens of millions out of the voting ranks.

And if the property is in one spouses name, but not both, who would vote?

But the most heinous of all is that the ownership of property in order to vote was one of the ways blacks were denied the vote after reconstruction. You would bring that back?

You reveal yourself to be the monster everyone has always said you were.

I read one of Stevie Grants posts werein he says - and I am paraphrasing, we should be happy that at least you respond because it makes the politically charged TB's more entertaining.

I agreed with him - up to a point.

It does make a TB more entertaining when a clash of ideas are presented. But there are other conservative leaning posters here who are not as monstrous as you.

If you no longer appeared on this site, the vitriol would die down, but the exchange of ideas, and perhaps even the agreement on some, would continue.

Last thing Brane: Do you have any friends on this site? I mean, people that you just send a hello to, and they respond in kind. People that you look forward to seeing pop up on the TB's, asking how there kids are, how the day is going. Asking if they liked the latest Indy movie?

Just BS'ing and laughing sometimes? Do you enjoy these TB's for the communal feeling they can engender?

If not, then why are you here?

Yes, you have every right to be here - as long as you do not get banned again, but why are you here Brane?

I feel sorry for you Brane, but I guess you would say that is because I am 'liberal'.

I do not have to support Libwarrior, he did that on his own, and by your stupidity in inventing his supposed mental superiority, and threats of physical violence, you have shown just how pathetic you are.

I have read all his posts - I always do, because they are usually hysterical. I found not one threat of physical violence, not one proclaimation of mental superiority.

You made those both up.

Here is a deal for you: Show me or anyone ANY proof that Libwarrior threatened you or proclaimed his 'grand intellect' and I promise you I will not insult you again for an entire month. Two months.

In fact, I will not address you at all for two entire months, regardless of what you say.

Show the proof of the physical threat!

Moron.

If all I wanted to do was post an opinion, I would pop in and do that and disappear.

But finding like minded, or even those with differing points of view -who can be civil, is what brings me back.

I enjoy a good debate, but I enjoy just hanging on an old TB with some online friends and shooting the breeze.

Belated congrats on the birth of the bizarro Chrth.

You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one ...

He never did threaten you physically or otherwise. But you somehow jumped to the conclusion that he was going to.

"I simply pointed out that LiberalWarrior is so pathetic that he could only look worse if he was claiming physical superiority."

Which he never did.

But that did not stop you from thinking he would.

Now, prove that he claimed 'grand intellect'.

The Dems didn't "throw out military ballots", they questioned military ballots without a witness signature or dates listed and did not want those counted. A valid reason of practicality and not for any colorful reason you might dream up in a paranoid tizzy.

Likewise, the republicans did not "fix" the vote or otherwise "steal" the Florida election. Just because some local bumpkin election official morons screw up their locals, doesn't mean it's a Machiavellian plot by Bush and his brother. Hell, just because certain machines all had similar results doesn't mean it was a conspiracy. I've seen real video footage of touchscreen machines screwing up in both parties favor!

You can look at any event with "clear" hindsight and come to practically any conclusion you want. The truth is voting is a problem in this country. Both parties have tried to stack the deck but neither has gone over the deep end at this point. Voter fraud is not as rampant as believed but yet every city, state, and federal election are still counted and functionally maintained by private companies.

If Recount was "liberal propaganda" out to smear the Republicans then what about the great moment when Baker is speaking of his becoming a Republican due to the help and support of his friend, George HW Bush, during his wife's death. I thought that was a great moment bereft of partisan schlepery.

All the left vs right bullshit aside...I think we can all agree that this is a Democratic Republic and, as such, one of the most important things we have is our vote. Making sure that vote is protected, valid, and counted is paramount to our functioning democracy. Both sides of the political fence have been less than honorable in the past when it comes to voting and rigging the system in ways that give favorable outcomes. No one has the grand prize for assholery or integrity. No one has the 'market cornered' on dickheadedness or decency. No one is the 'perpetrator' always; and no one is the 'victim' always. You know this already, of course, even if you occasionally ignore it to prove a point.

Now...would you please pass the JELLY?!?!!?!!?!?!?

Morbid, as others have described him, is harmless, if stupid.

The best explaination is that he is a cipher. I could not agree more.

Brane, on the other hand, is a differnt sort. He is monstrous.

I have tried being civil towards him, and in fact we had a long exchange in another TB, where after I logically laid out why his definition of genocide was not only racist but preposterous, he finally conceeded -which he had never done before. It led me to believe that you could reason with him. But, he once again is back to his old race baiting hatred.

There are some people on here that will argue simply to argue - whether they beleive in what they are arguing or not. Then there are others who like Brane, simply are monsters.

Always remember: never argue with an idiot, they'll bring you down to your level and then beat you with experience.

"Don't you know it's going to be all right?"

these three characters

<

p

>

on the same line.

Learn it. Love it. Live it.

I and others have defied you to prove that. And you can not. Hence you are an idiot.

Moron.

Got it

Thanks, I'd been wondering how to do that for ages.

Will this latest destructive blow go unanswered? Can Brane withstand the devastating effect of LiberalWarrior's uppercut? We'll see how the fighter answer's the call in the next round. Now a word from our sponsor....

Would you please pass the JELLY?!?!?!?!!?!!?!!?!

Seriously, LW, you've got the multiple adjective/noun laced insult thing down bro. Creatively twisted and hilarious, I laugh every time!

Republicans can justifiably point out some election irregularities in the past, that cost them seats.

I don't beleive Florida was 'fixed' in the classical sense, I do believe that the political interests were put ahead of electorate though - when the opportunity arose.

And Katherine Harris is a prime example of doing just that.

I have asked you a direct question, and you respond with another question.

Once again: Show where he is "pontificating so grandly about his great intellect".

Because if you really think that saying 'smackdown' equates with pontificating grandly about intellect, there is no hope for you.

I have encountered your type before, when confronted with a losing proposition, you go into repeating over and over again a mindless point. In this case, the word smackdown, suddenly equates with 'pontificating so grandly about intellect'

You are so sad - but funny! I am really cracking up while typing this!

That is a pure politcial hack - regardless of what the election outcome would be.

The Gore team created their own mess by not requesting a state wide recount, but by cherry picking.

However, the United States supreme court, by entering the fray, and making an unprecedented one time only ruling - that had never been done before, and not allowing the recount to occur - because they had in fact dithered away the time, but who still could have ordered the Florida courts to do so, they are truly the shame of the election.

Bush very well may have won the recount vote, but partisanship at the highest levels of our democracy, will always hang over that election.

Brane: Believe it or not, BSB is not a troll. I've actually had some good arguments (and the occasional agreement) with him. He just slips into this 'troll mode' sometimes (for lack of a better phrase). But if you actually ignore it and try to discuss things with him rationally, he will respond in kind. He's actually who I was thinking of earlier when I talked about "responding to them with graciousness may make them gracious as well"

By the way, this TB is hilarious. As pissed off as I was in 200 over the election results, I think we, as a nation, got what we deserved. Too many people in this country have no foresight when it comes to politics, consumerism, the environment and their health. We need to hit rock bottom before we can finally make some real progress. Sadly, we're no where close to rock bottom yet.

As for the 5-4 vote, yes, I know there are issues there. But the votes weren't completely on party lines (2 had been appointed by Republican presidents, 2 by Democratic presidents).

The election had to end at some point people. All Gore had to do was win West Virginia or Tennessee and Florida becomes a footnote.

Personally, I hate North Carolina voting. The whole "straight party ticket" choice makes me vomit in my mouth every time I see mention of it.

See, I just vomited in my mouth now.

Come on man...part of my bullshit on these political tb's is that most of us have all kinds of shades of red and blue and black and white and ultimately gray. I'm more conservative than you on some things and more liberal on others. Only Siths deal in absolutes!

And a running commentary is obviously best spoken and not written...I speak very fast so that wouldn't work either! Altho I can do a pretty good 'Macho Man' Randy Savage impersonation but that's not the same thing as commentating now is it?

Now, does that sound like someone who is conceeding merely for the 'sake of argument'?

Here is the entire post.

"Let's say I cede your point about genocide for argument's sake okay? Now what? I still have the view that America has no business intervening in those affairs that have no direct correlation to American security. You're arguing semantics. Even if you weren't wrong about what genocide is, it still doesn't mean a thing as to what American foreign policy should be. Again, indifference is not advocacy! You seem to have a poor understanding of such terms."

But it was done in the sake of fairness - allowing the recounts to be certified, when Harris - a Bush operative, had denied the counties the right to a manual recount, and only given one day for all recounts.

Had the Supremes stayed out, or at least balanced the decision by allowing the recount to unfold, and lets not forget they are the ones who dragged their feet and delayed the recount, if they had shown the fairnes, none of this would be an issue.

Bush may have won and it would not be tainted. The supremes would have maintained their air of impartiality.

The 7-2 vote was probably correct. But it was ultimately the supremes issuing a warning to lower courts not to do what the supremes themselves had just done - interjecting themselves in a partisan way into a political fight.

I will admit it, I was wrong when I thought that you would not 'fight to the death' over a lost point.

See how easy that is?

That was the passion missing from you posts of yesterday!

"You are nothing but a scared, quivering piece of radioactive coyote shit brought to life by Morbid beating off on top of you while dreaming of a crack addicts toilet seat"

To quote Forrest Gump: and that's all I have to say about that

Was this ever answered for you? If not, do you recall AnimalStructure? ThunderBalls?

I'll say no more.

(I may be gracious, but I can be sarcastic, too) ;)

I'm actually surprised we haven't discussed the electoral college more. My position: support the electorial college, but electors should be delegated proportionate to the vote, with the winner of the state getting the 'extra' two electors.

Then I said for the sake of our argument - See Brane, that is how that phase is supposed to be used, I do agree that our debate is finshed on this topic.

BTW - there is someone who has posted in the INDY4 Talkback who I believe to be one of the most nefarious Talkbackers in AICN's history. I'm hesitant to call him out because I don't want to drive him away before we have him cornered.

Just let it be known that we have TARGET ACQUISITION!!!

...the signs of one who wrecks homes.

That's a clue. Heh.

And Chrth, even though we agreed to disgree on some things, it was done in a civil manner, I congratulate you as well.

MNG - and this will realy drive Morbid into spasms, good to see you here!

And the Talkbacker that I'm refering to appears to be our first candidate for the return of zfisk/homewrecker. It's still pending review...

The forces and goodness and rightness (not to be confused with the far right) and all the 'nessess' that are good and positive, have once again defeated the forces of baddies and branebots and moron Morbies!

Did somebody remember to bring the t-shirts? Cause this whole thing is gonna be totally screwed up if we don't have any t-shirts. Either that or some glossy battle action shots. Notice the four panel giant LCD display? Yeah, dat's right! Spared no expense! Spared no expense!

Morbidbrane are the generals, who always lose.

But they come back the next day.

"bacci40 - save that self-righteous bullshit! Your party SPIT on those very same Vietnam vets you now claim to hold in high regard when they came home. The Democrats have always been anti-troop. You think they are bloodthirsty pigs who rape children and kill indiscriminately."

good enough?

Also, you never cease to make these connections:

"A lot of Democrats are good upstanding Americans, but their party has been hijacked by far Left wackos like bacci40 who think we need to submit to a World Court. He cares nothing for our nation being sovereign. He is a Leftist shitpig who deserves no respect. He spits on the troops, the flag, the Supreme Court, etc. I bet he supports buring the American flag yet protests at a Koran being flushed down a toilet."

So I think I may be forgiven for having trouble believing that you can differentiate between what you consider a "vile leftist" and a member of the Democratic party.

Anything else you'd like me to back up while I'm at it? A bit of advice, man- don't pull that shit on me.

Yeah. That's what I thought.

If I had to guess, it would've been several more weeks of legal wrangling, followed by GWB still winning.

Once the details had been ironed out, a statewide recount would have taken place.

None of that would have been illegal if the Supremes had mandated it, it just would have taken time. How much? No one knows.

As to the ultimate winner, that is pure supposition.

"Here's another clue for you all -- the Walrus is Paul"

Dude, if you're really so desperate to defend yourself against these completely understandable impressions you leave with people, maybe our impressions aren't the fucking problem.

You're so offended that I was left with the impression that you believe that Democrats hate America, even though it took no effort for me to find two examples of your writing that say essentially that. You get upset that your good name has been smeared, and demand evidence (based on your own strict guidelines, after the fact) even though anyone who'd read anything you've written would be more than sympathetic to my impression. You cry foul, and yet you and I both know you're guilty as sin.

What are you really after? Do you want (need?) me to admit I'm wrong on this one, trivial point? Sorry man, no dice. Any one who knows me on this board knows I'm pretty fair, but that I don't suffer fools. Your last few posts have made you look like a fool, at least to me. I'm willing to respect almost anyone's opinion, as long as they show some basic respect; for the truth at least, if not for me personally.

And as for the 'little shit' comment, that is a perfect cap for your stream of simpering bullshit. See you around, loser.

So The Strangers is "surprisingly strong"? Thanks for that insightful critique. Don't ever hesitate to share your movie reviews. What gems must await.

In a nutshell, the Dec 5, 2007 ruling nullified the earlier Fla. court extension of safe harbor, and awarded the election to Bush, temporarily at the time, because the supremes suspected that the Fla. court violated article II of the U.S. constitution.

That article says that a State legislature trumps an act of the people. At least in the particular case of electors. Meaning the Fla. constitution is considered an act of the people, and if the Fla. court used it to trump the lege, they violated the U.S. constitution.

However the supremes worded the unanimous reversal so that the fla. court, with just a little tweaking, and removal of the Fla. constitution from the decision, could indeed extend safe harbor.

Ok, here is a link.

http://tinyurl.com/3m3qhh

But you can slow down with the cozying up to me bit, okay? With Brane now gone 4ever, you must feel desperate to find another special friend but you and I don't have the foundation for that. Just come to grips with that, okay snookums?

Okay, not really sorry.

The rest of us, who aren't afraid of real life interaction, go out on weekends. Good thing you're "well-connected".

That's what it was. The Florida Supreme Court refused to listen to SCOTUS. That's what I meant when I said they were legislating from the bench. The 5-4 'stop counting' decision was motivated in part by the frustation of the FSC basically ignoring SCOTUS.

Is that an oversimplification of what happened? Yes. Is it everything involved? No. But the FSC was recalcitrant and SCOTUS basically said ENOUGH.

And further, four justices wrote opinions offereing remedies for the recount.

The 5-4 decision, was exactly what the article I posted feared would happen, if the court broke along party lines - which it did.

That decision issued a stay to stop the recount.

Once again, had the court not split along party lines the second time, then safe harbor would not have come into play. Nor did it really come into play at all.

Pity us, Morbid. Pity us.

Get used to it - at least until he returns in another guise. But inhale deeply now, and savor the smell free of vileness and hatred.

As for attending the screening for the "surprisingly strong" The Strangers, only Morbid would think he's special for

(1) sitting in a theater full of "cretins who got their passes from some radio station"

(2) having time on a Tuesday afternoon to watch a movie.

I guess being an unemployed anti-social recluse has its advantages. From his perspective.

But mine is a lonely burden to bear. Embrace your humility. It's the only thing that keeps you tethered to these fragile bonds which we call human society.

That said, like most people I'm sure, I also believe in a fair, honest election and in the basic democratic ideal that all votes should count. Well, assuming you voted the right way...

My Mom -- God rest her soul -- was an election official in my hometown. And the stories she could tell about "how" people voted wrong or "how" they got things wrong always made me laugh because it just went to show that people will still be people and no matter how hard you try, you'll still ALWAYS have boneheads that get things wrong. For example, one of the most COMMON mistakes that people always make is they'll go into a voting booth and they'll pull the overhead lever to close the curtain -- at which point the voting switches are now active. So you're SUPPOSED to simply push them down and THEN pull the overhead lever to re-open the curtain, at which point they go up and your vote is registered. We've all done that, right?

But my Mom would always talk about how many people would stupidly push the levers down and then push them back up...thinking THAT registered their vote...and THEN they'd open the curtain, not realizing that they had now NOT voted AT ALL. And later in the night, as they'd tally the votes, she and the other women would always roll their eyes at the number of people who had signed in versus the number of actual registered vote -- all because people stupidly had negated their OWN freakin' vote. And no matter how hard she and the other women working there tried to explain it to people...no matter how much they asked people "Do you need help? Do you want us to show you on the sample machine how it works?"...the moron contingent would still get it wrong. And when they tried paper punch cards, the same thing. No matter how much the poor ladies working there tried to explain things, you still had a moron contigent that simply couldn't grasp the idea of fucking marking a card the right way or punching a hole correct.

But as I said, I believe in a fair election...in counting things right...and back in 2000 I had no problem waiting for a full and proper recount to be done. Hey, the will of the people be done, right?

But then it just got nasty...BOTH sides were guilty of pulling tricks, truth be told...but then Gore lost me when he ONLY wanted to recount 4 heavily Democratic districts. And that's when I said "Fuck you. Either recount it ALL or don't count ANY of it at all. You have to live with whatever the system did produce." But I thought it was utter bullshit when the Gore people trotted out two old ladies (or whatever it was) and they tried to hang their whole argument on the notion that they got confused...they thought they had accidentally voted for the wrong person...and thus were entitled to a do-over. Fuck that shit, too. If you're too stupid to punch the card right, that's YOUR mistake and YOUR problem. If you're voting and looking at your watch and saying "I want to get home to watch TV" and in your rush you mark the wrong thing, that's YOUR mistake and YOUR problem. And for the Gore people to even say AFTER the fact "well, the ballots were confusing", let the record show that a Democrat designed the infamous Florida ballot...the DNC signed off on it's design...and so did the Gore campaign people, too. So don't tell me that everyone SAW the ballot in advance...thought it was okay...and THEN come to me on election night, when you've lost, and say "Gee, I think we should have a do-over because the ballot confused people." Uh-uh, you don't get to play that game either.

So I agree with Shan above. Gore should've bet the farm on a FULL recount of the WHOLE state. But to be in a tight race where you're ONLY looking to pick up a few hundred votes so you ONLY want to recount 4 districts that you already KNOW heavily favor you, is where I said "Oh, fuck you, Al. Now you're just being a fucking baby" and I thought Bush deserved to be declared the winner...

Despite our understandable skepticism that Morbid knows anything about blowjobs, it's safe to say that after a weeknight date with, well, himself, he goes home and engages in a bit of auto-fellatio. But don't feel bad for the man, because for lonely anti-social recluses, it is paradise. Just be glad he hasn't broken his neck.

As for Brane, well, he knows all about lies, you see. Because to this day he hasn't given proof of ever going to NYU and having a "Non-Liberal Creative Writing Instructor". And of course we know that NYU students never, ever go out on weekends.

But hey, maybe he and Morbid can hook up every Wednesday. They have so much in common, and Morbid will finally know what it feels like to have a mouth on his dick other than his own.

Stevie, I'm sure Morbid will be able to provide an expert opinion on that question.

Between Equinas, Morbid, and Brane The Dude Sniffer, you really do come across the most colorful characters to abuse.

Superdelegates = "Gee, we in the Democratic Party want the public to pick a candidate, but just in case we think the general pubilc is a bunch of morons, we'll override THEIR vote for ours!" Not even the Rebublicans, in their infinite wisdom, have Superdelegates.

Obama protests because he voluntarily withdrew his name in Michigan to apease the DNC's request that Michican doesn't count. He calls for another vote.

Hillary Clinton protests, saying, "Hey, the voters have spoken! Follow the rules!"

Obama protests! "Hey, I followed the request of the DNC! My name wasn't on the Michigan ballot!" RECOUNT!!!!

Recount 2: Election Bogaloo! Coming Soon to a DNC Convention near you!

SOLD!!!

Harry then posts his choice for the candidate that SHOULD have won, and here's why...

Um, every vote is supposed to count. The FULL recount should have been allowed vs. just, what was it, four counties that Gore requested (heavily Democratic counties), not to mention the suggestion that absentee ballots from the military be thrown out.

"and (2) there wasn't time enough for a full recount. Gore won the popular vote anyway, so who gives a shit what you and others believe was cheating on his part. The man won fair and square."

Um, because he won the popular vote doesn't mean he won the election. The election goes by the ELECTORAL COLLEGE, NOT the popular vote. That's why both Gore and Bush campaigned hard in big states like CA and TX. You didn't see them going nuts in RI or DE, did you...so like a Liberal, let's change the rules of the game after the game has been played? Bush won. Even when the networks did recounts of votes months after the election, Bush still won. Hey, want to change the rules of the game and go just with the popular vote? FINE. I agree with that concept. But you can't change the rules of a game after it's been played.

"And had he been rightly given that title,"

Why should he have rightfully been GIVEN the title?

there may have been no 9/11 (no matter how much you bastards try to blame it on Clinton)

Um...not true. The terrorists were already here. No matter who was President, 9/11 was going to happen. And you can blame Bush 2, Clinton, Bush 1, Reagan, and Carter for all of this, not just Clinton. From the Iran hostage crisis, to Beiruit, to the first Gulf War, to 1993 WTC to the USS Cole, EVERY one of the previously mentioned Presidents handled the situation wrong.

and there definitely would not be a war in Iraq.

Now that we agree on. Gore is too much of a woosie to do anything over anything drastic. I can see President Gore now, apologizing to the terrorists on 9/11 that those two buildings in NYC were in their flight path, and that was be America's fault.

Also there would not be a recession and $4 a gallon gasoline.

I remember hearing before the 2000 election the media acknowleding that whoever becomes President, Gore or Bush, that they would be inherating a recession from Clinton. $4 gas? Worldwide demand is much higher now, especially with China and India, both countries with over a billion people, industrializing like crazy. If we were drilling more in the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska like we could have been in the 1990's, we wouldn't be in the fuel mess we're in. Think of it, Bush had to go to Saudia Arabia to ask them to drill more, but WE WON'T. Hey, China and Cuba are drilling not far outside of Florida, but WE CAN'T?

Also, Gore would have signed the Kyoto treaty. You conservatives make me sick.

Kyoto is a failure. China signed it. Guess what...all China's obligation with Kyoto is is to, wait for it....tell other nations they should sign on. China is classified as an industrialzing nation, therefore, Kyoto environmental rules don't apply to them. And they are now the worlds biggest polluter. That would be why new environmental rules are being attemtped in the world so that every nation is on board, without exception.

You liberals make me sick.

And before you try to rebut me on some political basis, I'm a fervent environmentalist. Gore's a poser.

I'll make my response simple. What Bush did in Iraq is absolutely NO DIFFERENT from what CLINTON said he WOULD do in 1998. Only Bush actually went in.

Clinton didn't.

Fact.

"Saddam Hussein is a threat and must be stopped" came from both Presidents. Only Bush acted.

Oh, and Bush put up with how many months of going through the UN? Meanwhile, Clinton went into Kosovo WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE UN! It was strictly a NATO operation. So...can we now start busting on Clinton for going after Milosovic and bombing a 'sovereign nation'? AND he didn't go through the UN. He just attacked.

Hey, we attacked the wrong country!

Milosovic was a mass murder. So was Hussein. Um...I'll let you elaborate on this one.

Oh, and Obama being a 'muslim'? Kinda hard to believe with his CHRISTIAN pastor being in the news all the time...oh, wait, didn't the CLINTONS reveal all of this pastor stuff? Maybe you should be attacking THEM instead.

Speaking of Muslim, amazing how NOBODY is "allowed" to say Obama's middle name, "Hussein". But if, say, McCain or Bush's middle name was "Stalin", we'd never hear the end of it.

Speaking of Stalin, that's what libs like. Stalinistic tactics. Shut people up.

Node, in all likelihood, a Gore Presidency would not have stopped 9/11 from happening. The planning was years in the making, and the warning signs were ignored.

The F.B.I. ignored warnings from a field agent who had come across suspicious flight simulation training.

There is very little reason to believe that a Gore presidency would have made the F.B.I. more cognizant of the warning signs.

The Fla. court acted to allow the recount deadline to be extended. Bush later on appealed to the U.S. supreme court, who in a unanimous decision, told the Fla. court that they applied the wrong logic to the case - the article II provision that I mentioned in a previous post. Here is a link that explains it all in detail.

http://tinyurl.com/3m3qhh

In short, the U.S. supreme court in its first ruling, did not prevent the Fla. court from extednding safe harbor because it was inherently illegal, or unfair, but because the underpining (the Fla. Constitution they relied on) was trumped by article II.

All the Fla. court had to do was remove the Florida constitution from it's argument.

Now, had the Supremes stayed out of it after that, then all would be well, but what happned next was pure partisanship by the SCOTUS.

In the first unanimous ruling, Scalia came up with the article II argument because he knew that the court would split 5-4 along party lines if it came to an outright rejection of the Fla. Court extending the deadline, and no one wanted that. The compromise article II, was exactly what was needed.

But when the issue came back to the Supremes a second time, they did indeed split along party lines.

There were two votes. the 7-2 decision, and the 5-4 ruling. The 7-2 ruling only dealt with equal protection under the constitution clause, in that the method of the manual recount might deny a fair accounting. But, in fact, four justices wrote on how that could be corrected.

It was the 5-4 ruling, that stopped the recount process dead.

There were actually two 5-4 rulings. The first stopped the recount on Dec. 9. The second, on Dec 12 - which is when the 7-2 ruling occured, concerned remedies that would have allowed the recount to continue. That was the partisan split that the court avoided the first time around.

And whether you believe Bush or Gore would have ultimately won the recount, it is severe blemish on the SCOTUS, because not only the blatant partisanship, but because it was a one time only ruling. Here is a more concise recap of the Dec. 12 decisions.

"Tuesday, Dec. 12—The U.S. Supreme Court rules in Bush v. Gore 7–2 to reverse the Florida Supreme Court, which had ordered manual recounts in certain counties. The Court contends that the recount was not treating all ballots equally, and was thus a violation of the Constitution's equal protection and due process guarantees. The Supreme Court of Florida would be required to set up new voting standards and carry them out in a recount. The justices, however, split 5–4 along partisan lines about implementing a remedy. Five justices maintain that this process and the recount must adhere to the official deadline for certifying electoral college votes: midnight, Dec. 12; other justices question the importance of this date. Since the Court makes its ruling just hours before the deadline, it in effect ensures that it is too late for a recount. The decision generates enormous controversy. Those objecting to the ruling assert that the Supreme Court, and not the electorate, has effectively determined the outcome of the presidential election. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg writes in a scathing dissent, “the Court’s conclusion that a constitutionally adequate recount is impractical is a prophecy the Court’s own judgment will not allow to be tested. Such an untested prophecy should not decide the Presidency of the United States.”

Harris's compromised position - being a Bush operative, and the deciding voice in an extension, should not have been a factor. The Fla. court acted - in a partisan way no doubt, to allow the will of the people, to be heard.

People can argue until the cows come home over whether the will of the people, in the form of ballots cast, should trump a legislative deadline, but what is not in dispute is that once the recount got underway, pure partisan politics all the way up to and including the SCOTUS, tarnished the results.

Bush may have won, but the way it sullied the SCOTUS, has left a permanent stain on our Democracy.

Consider how we would react if we saw this scenario played out in the third world: A highly contested election that comes down to one province controlled by the son, of a former leader of the Country, whose other son is now running to be elected leader.

Questions of voter fraud, and deception run amuck. An operative of both sons, decides whether to allow a recount to proceed past a deadline that could be easliy extended, but is thwarted by an opposition loaded court, who then are trumped by a higher court loaded with members of the former leaders party.

Bush won the election, but the reputation of the highest court in the land took a hit that will stain it for a very long time.

And that is without a doubt, period.

Criticizing our foreign policy and recognizing that there is in fact a track of events that lead to terrorism, including building military bases on holy sites in the Middle East, as well as our support for Israel, not to mention a brutal continuing occupation, is not tantamount to "hating America". You have to understand this. By allowing yourself to understand the events that led up to 9-11 is not unpatriotic, it is, in fact your duty as an American to know how and why it happened, as much as we can ever understand the motives of murderous terrorists. None of this implies complicity, much less sympathy, for their motives, it is simply understanding. Anyone with half a brain knows that Al Qaeda didn't attack us because "they hate our freedom", there have been decades of cause and effect at work, and most people in Washington knew that a direct attack on the U.S. mainland was probably an inevitability. I imagine that a lot of those folks breathed a sigh of relief on 9-11, and said "well, at least it wasn't a nuke."

All this to say, pick your battles. To understand the terrorists is not to excuse what they did. Hopefully, it will lead to more rigorous vigilance and more effective prevention. You can't see what's coming if you've got your head shoved up your own arse.

can't say it enough.

America is more than it's current leadership. I personally can't trust any politician who does his best to blur the lines between himself (or by extension, his party) and the nation. That's some sneaky, underhanded shit. The soviets did that shit. I don't blame 9/11 on Bush, but I'm against the war in Iraq, totally. I believe it was a wrong turn for this country, and yes, I do believe it will cause more terrorism that it prevents. You're right when you say that it is a president's job to do what he feels is in our nation's best interests, but it is also our job to call him out when he does something that could harm this nation.

Again, I have to stress, it isn't about laying blame, but that said, you can't give our own policies a free pass, and you also can't just pass off the terrorists by waving your hand and saying they're crazy. Of course they're fucking crazy. But why? If we can at least try to figure it out, maybe we can prevent it in the future. The war in Iraq and the larger war on terrorism is the wrong way to go about it. You don't prevent terrorism by attempting to shoot all the terrorists one at a time. You discredit them, strip them of their base, their motivation, isolate them, seed discontent within their ranks... etc. Sneaky shit. But sneaky shit that works for us, rather than agaisnt us.

One last point- you may disagree, you may disagree strongly, but it's never about evil. Bin Laden did not fly planes into buildings because of some abstract concept of human evil. The result was certainly an evil thing, but there were actual, real intellectual motives. There was reason and rationale behind what he did, as twisted and perverse as they were, but they were there. To call it evil is to ignore his responsibility in the act.

Also, dude, I have to say this again, I guess, but no one is asking you to justify anything. You "refuse to justify what he did and plans to do." Well, good for you. I refuse to justify what he did and plans to do to. The difference is, I'm actually thinking about it. I don't mean to sound like a dick, but you seem like a pretty smart guy, and I'm just trying to get you to think about it too.

You're right, he did declare war on us. So we fight that war. We meet him on the battlefield. But what battlefield? Where? Who is the enemy? Civilian Iraqis? Sunnis? Shiites? Saudi Arabians? The entire Muslim world? We have to be smart, we have to be civilized, especially when our enemies are savage, because we're America, not some backwater. We win by being better than our enemies, not by meeting them on their shitty level.

And who gives a shit if Bin Laden thinks we're weak? You want to show him we're not weak? Beat him. Use your brain.

Long time, no see. Where've you been, sunshine?

Though I'm not saying they're entirely without fault, Ari and Scott jumped the ship when they realized the Captain was a drunken buffoon steering the USS US towards the iceberg. Tony Snow got out due to cancer, not conscience. Who's the current mouthpiece? Expect another revelation from her in '09.

And for someone who thinks it's sad to "launch into smalltalk", did you not find it ironic that that's precisely what you were doing with Stevie? Are you looking for a friend, Morbid? This really isn't the place for it. In fact, it's not really a "place" at all. Just thought you should know.

Looking forward to seeing what you'll be doing tonight. Big plans? Maybe download some emo songs for your MySpace page?

I never called you or Morbid "gay". Your obsession for smelling strange men, and Morbid's sucking his own penis - both are not inherently gay traits, just really deviant behavior by socially maladjusted freaks. Please don't align yourselves with the gay community; they have enough problems with the Republicans.

As for my bride, it's not fair for you to bring her up. It's not like you and Morbid have any women I can attack.

"Maybe it was the difference in how to go about "stopping Saddam" Clinton took a containment approach, which basically meant that he would never let Saddam develop any type of nukes or chemical weapons, and used inspectors to verify this. Saddam was contained. Bush on the other hand felt a full scale invasion of Iraq was the only way to prevent Saddam whatever he felt he was doing, but the fact that no WMDs have been found to this point, kind of reflect that the containment strategy was working."

I'm afraid you need to take a look back at 1998. Clinton wanted to go into Iraq, and had the support of Congress. Sen. Tom Dashle through his full support behind Clinton. Nothing happened. All words, no action. Spineless. Was it to divert from the Lewinski scandal? HMMM?

Containment? Yeah, let's send the UN in to make sure there's containment. Gee, if you look at history, the UN withdrew. So much for 'containment.'

Hmmm...I seem to remember the 9/11 hijackers coming into the country DURING the Clinton administration? Where was Clinton during all of this???!!!

Why apollo80 LOVES America:

Because you can say what you just said, Node 32774, without getting your head cut off. Thanks to our men and women in uniform protecting us from nutjobs.

As for the notion that Bush has no resonsibility or power & he is completely at the mercy of Terrorists and other countries decisions as well as having no control over the U.S. Economy... well the all time record 71% disapproval rating tells us that the American public aren't buying that particular buacket of horseshit.

McCains hilarious banning of the cameras from a joint Bush/McCain Fundraiser tell us all we need to know about how the McCain campaign views Bush and the past 8 years and they will be desperately distancing from now till November while pretending McCain isn't a Republican.

Goldman Sachs prediction of the $200 a Barrel Oil Price is what most of the candidates are currently losing sleep over not the failed Iraq policy.

Good to know Brane (and his BFF Morbid) have an answer for everything. Even if that answer is wrong.

Also, too bad I don't have a job that puts me in uncomfortable proximity to stinky men. Good thing for Brane he does.

Sowell is a great intellect, who has carved his own unique place in the world. But I find it ironic that he would use the word 'mascot' to describe how liberals have treated blacks, when he most certainly is the token mascot Black trotted out by conservatives (See Brane) whenever they want a black face to support or front an argument.

I do not doubt for one second that Sowell believes everything he says, and is brilliant enough to be suasive.

But just because he is black, and criticizes blacks, that does not make him correct.

He does make some outstanding points, that deserve discussion, but he also makes generalizations that only serve the point he is arguing -his viewpoint that is.

Since Brane posted a long article of Sowell's, I wiil counter with an article that shows how someone as smart as Sowell can still blinded by his devotion to one point of view. A conservative point view that ignores reality for the sake of ideology.

In his May 12 syndicated column, Thomas Sowell criticized those urging higher wages for employees of the discount retailer Wal-Mart. Sowell referenced a May 4 New York Times article that contained a quote from a Wal-Mart employee who said he was not earning a living wage. Sowell asked: "How is he living, if he is not making a living wage?" Several studies show that he might in fact be getting help through government assistance programs. Sowell argued that Wal-Mart stockholders should not have to subsidize higher wages for Wal-Mart workers "through lower earnings," but he apparently failed to recognize that taxpayers are subsidizing Wal-Mart stockholders and executives through the high levels of public assistance that are used by its employees compared with other retail workers. A number of studies and analyses have shown that taxpayer-funded government programs are picking up the tab resulting from Wal-Mart's low wages and insufficient health insurance coverage. An August 2004 University of California, Berkeley Labor Center study found that many Wal-Mart workers in California rely on government safety net programs such as food stamps, Medi-Cal (California's version of Medicaid) and subsidized housing at an estimated cost to taxpayers of $86 million annually-- $32 million for health-related expenses and $54 million for other assistance. Further, families of Wal-Mart employees utilize these services considerably more than the average for families with employees of all large retail companies. In fact, if other large retailers in California were to provide wages and benefits at Wal-Mart's level it would cost California taxpayers an additional $410 million in increased public assistance costs. According to the study: The families of Wal-Mart employees in California utilize an estimated 40 percent more in taxpayer-funded health care than the average for families of all large retail employees. The families of Wal-Mart employees use an estimated 38 percent more in other (non-health care) public assistance programs (such as food stamps, Earned Income Tax Credit, subsidized school lunches, and subsidized housing) than the average for families of all large retail employees. A 2002 internal memo from the Georgia Department of Community Health that focused on the state's Children's Health Insurance program PeachCare showed that the children of Wal-Mart employees accounted for 10,261 of the 166,000 children enrolled, about 14 times that of the second-highest employer, the supermarket chain Publix, which had 734. Wal-Mart, with 42,000 workers in the state in 2002, had about one child in the health care program for every four employees; the ratio for Publix was one child in PeachCare for every 22 employees [The Atlanta Journal Constitution, 2/27/04 (registration required)]. The state of Connecticut discovered in January 2005 that it pays an estimated $43 million annually to cover health costs for workers at the state's 25 largest employers; Wal-Mart was at the top of the list with 824 employees or employees' adult dependents on state public assistance programs. Beyond Connecticut, Wal-Mart had the most employees on Medicaid in a total of 11 states: Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Tennessee, Texas, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin, according to examinations in those states [Employee Benefit News, 5/01/05]. A 2004 study conducted by the Democratic staff of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce looked at Wal-Mart employees' eligibility for a wide range of public assistance programs and estimated that one 200-employee Wal-Mart store may cost federal taxpayers $420,750 annually, or about $2,103 per employee. This includes $36,000 for free and reduced-price school lunches, $42,000 for Section 8 housing assistance, $125,000 for federal tax credits and deductions for low-income families, and $108,000 for federal costs relating to health care assistance.

Good to see you changed your mind (yet again) about scuttling off and hiding under a new alias because of your hilarious Brainfart on the Mori Hulk thread.

Though lets face it it doesn't matter how many times you try to hide under a new alias your Batshit Lunacy will always shine through in mere minutes.

BTW Why try to pretend you have the slightest interest in Civil rights when you would "Purge all Muslims" and turn the clock back to the 1700's when voting was almost completely limited to those who owned Property ?

Oh, and Dunkin Donuts.

WTF?!?!?!?!?!

Let us not forget there are a great many former Loyal Bushies who have now fell by the wayside since 2000 leaving the sad figure of Cheney almost alone to prop up the remaining lame duck months of Bush.

Will a great deal of this have to do with score settling, and attributing the blame ? Yep. Does that mean they won't have extremely revealing details and truths "accumulated" in their time in the inner circle ? Nope. The dirt will out.

They are already questioning his sanity, his authorship, his loyalty ( to Bush which trumps loyalty to the truth and the state), and you can bet they will start questioning his morals, and his sexual inclination (not kidding) in the next few days.

And though I too say he is gutless and cashing in while he can, that will not detract from his story if it is the truth.

But is it correct?

Which trust is paramount?

If everyone who writes a memoir that is critical of their bosses - well after the have left the job, is villified for doing so, we would have a lot less truth telling.

Yes, he did not have the spine of Richard Clarke, but perhaps he did not have the resources either to be able to out his former friends.

You have to be able to pay the bills and make a living before you go after folks who can wreck that while they are still in power.

I have no idea what his financial resources were then or are today, but before we make too hasty a judgement about his motives, it is perhaps wise to consider he may have had to earlier alternatives.

I also doubt McLellan would be foolish enough to make claims he can't back up with some certainty. So there IS going to be some unpleasant reading for the WhiteHouse in the days to come.

He can be a disloyal money grabber and still tell the truth. Just calling McLellan names won't work for Bush if some specific and damaging facts are put out there that they can't knock down.

We also don't know what went on behind the scenes and just how much he was forced to peddle laughably obvious Bullshit to the press core over his objections.

Do I personally think he was complicit ? Yes. But do I also think the Upper Echelons of the White House may have treated the guy like shit ? Also, yes.

As you sow so shall you reap baby.

He may have known about wrongdoing, and should've come clean at the time, but was he a party to the crimes being committed? Probably not. That falls into the hands of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc.

He's definitely more of a rat than a whistleblower, but man, if there was ever an administration that deserved to have one of their former inner-circle roundly punish-fuck them in public, it's definitely this one.

Nobody gives a fuck what you say anymore and to be frank, very VERY few ever did.

Take your Bugshit crazy ass somewhere where people appreciate K.K.K. excusers and War Criminal excusers and ethnic cleansing & Genocide excusers and find some insane Ron Paul conspiracy talkback on the net that might think "No Property? No Vote!" wasn't a sign of someone who needs to take a good long lie down in a dark room or that "Purge all Muslims" isn't pathetic hate speech from a babbling fool.

If you were so sure you had won why did you throw a hissy fit and threaten to leave the site and grab a new Alias ?

Was that because you had "Triumphed" ? Or because you wanted to throw the toys out of the pram but then didn't follow through and ended up looking like a Prize Twat ?

Go and find someone who actually gives a fuck what you think as you have proved your contempt for the site, those who run it, those who frequent it and made yourself a MASSIVE laughing stock in the process.

If you actually had any Balls Brane, instead of the constant crying and bitching and whining you do about the site and those in it, you would actually have the fucking minimal commonsense to go somewhere else if you really hated it and everything else that much.

But as you yourself said and as I will be happy to post each and every time you keep infecting these boards with your Batshit crazy babbling...

"Please keep paying attention to me, I love it!"

YOU SAID THAT BRANE. IT'S IN BLACK AND WHITE. And anyone in any doubt WHY you are still here despite making a complete fool of himself will now know it too. EVERY TIME.

We already had our PR whore's "memoirs", and ours was a big one- it was that complete and utter cunt Alastair Campbell (the man DIRECTLY responsible for "sexing up" the dossier that went to Bush- including the "45 minute" claim) publish his diaries. He could have revealed the rotten core of "leftist scumbag" ((c)BraneRobot) New Labour, but instead just wrote complete inanities.

The book will be neutered. You can bet on it and they will use "official secrets" or whatever the US equivalent is as their justification.

What I'm saying, if you want to read what you already know then buy it. But don't expect revalations.

That post was for Brane's benefit- seeing as he keeps telling me that I hate America and that this is a bad thing. (For the record, I like America- I just hate your government and a lot of your blimp-esque tourists. Not that our exports are any better)

Man, Woman or androgynous she-male I'm still going to have to apologise for being rude about Indy. I can, however, take solace in the fact that I'm right about Alien.

I've handed out the obligatory kicking, but it hardly seems worth it as it would take a legion of plants to generate interest in that film here.

Here is what Sowell said regarding liberal politicians making use of blacks. "Politicians who use blacks as mascots" and here is what I said regarding the politicians on the right who do the same thing. "I find it ironic that he would use the word 'mascot' to describe how liberals have treated blacks, when he most certainly is the token mascot Black trotted out by conservatives (See Brane) whenever they want a black face to support or front an argument."

I do not think Sowell was being racist when he used the word 'mascot' to describe what white liberals were doing, he was simply trying to use a word that would inflame his readership, to describe what he feels is how liberals use blacks.

But what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

If liberals use black mascots, conservatives most certainly use them as well.

There just are not as many!

I went and saw Al Gore talk in person in Sydney last year (2007). My opinion was that this Al Gore would have demolished GW Bush of 2000.

Al Gore was clearly free of all of those Democratic Party Election Advisers who had micromanaged numerous campiagns to an inch of their life and well down the path into failure. The best thing the Democrat Party could do is toss all of those people on the scrapheap. Al Gore was finally able to be himself which he should have been during the election of 2000. If he had, I think he would have won easily.

As for the talk itself, the feeling I got was that even if you didn't agree with a word of what he said, here was a man who really enthusiastically believed what he was talking about. We don't see enough of that these days.

I guess that was one of the stupid things I remember from the elections of 2000. Supposedly people were staying Al Gore was stiff and robotic (Had any of these people looked in a mirror lately). Anyway, they're trying to elect a world leader, not a talk show host.

It still boggles the mind that the voters chose (in such numbers) a candidate with no national government experience and 1 term as a state governor over another who'd been a senator and vice president for 8 years. I'd still say that if the candidates party affiliations had been reversed too.

I mean, honestly - chosing the candidate you'd most want to have a beer with. Once again, you're chosing a leader of a nation, not a drinking buddy.

So, how's the hangover 8 years later?

Why on earth does every time I write something here my spelling goes out the window!

Brane had said he doesn't care if the Israelis and Palestinians kill each other.

Talk about mistreating one's mascot.

And the name is DARTH! Short for Darthemius if you must know.

Time to - once again, expose you for the utter moron you really are. But before I do that, lets play: Connect the dots.

Follow along Brane, maybe you will learn something.

During slavery (in this country) and disregarding all political affiliations, would slave holders be

A) More apt to be liberal?

B) More apt to be conservative?

I say B. And once again, the party affiliation means nothing, they could have been conservative Dems, and liberal Republicans (which held true quite a bit back then) Next question: During slavery were slaveholders:

A) more apt to respect the black slaves?

B) More apt not to respect black slaves?

I say B. Hmmm, it seems that the liberals(regardless of party) would be showing more compassion and respect for blacks than conservatives. Is it possible that the liberals of the 20th century, you know, the ones that pushed for inclusion and equality (with some help from Republicans)were actually showing less respect for blacks than the conservatives (which also included some Dems) that wanted to keep Jim Crow? Hmmm?

Now, to your post. Once again you revel in inanities and generalities. You wrote: "Libs DO NOT RESPECT blacks, therefore they are mascots to be paraded around. Conservatives RESPECT Sowell, and as such, he is no mascot." So, all libs show a lack of respect for blacks, and all conservatives respect Sowell? Really?

Putting aside your new found ability to read the minds of every single liberal and conservative on earth, and putting aside that quite a few liberals are not white, are infact black, that means even the black liberals do not respect themselves and treat themselves as mascots to themselves. Quaint theory you have there Brane. Well, if that is the argument you want to make, so be it.

Now about the conservative side, all conservatives respect Sowell. Really? Are conservatives that monolithic, and is your psychotic, er I mean, psychic ability that great that you can say with utmost certainty that all conservatives respect Sowell?

I mean, does every conservative like and respect one another, just because they are conservative? Yes or no? And if no, then that means that all conservatives -as you say, like Sowell, but not because he is conservative, because by answering 'no' that means not all conservatives like or respect one another, but it means they like him because he is black. Hmmm.

Sowell himself denies being conservative, he says he is more libertarian. And all conservatives respect libertarians, right?

Ok, that was just food for thougt, now to the actual meat an potatoes.

You posted "Liberal PC bullshit has served to deaden discourse. Only blacks can talk about blacks, only Jews can talk about Jews. It's the world YOU AND YOURS have created. And calling a respected scholar like Sowell a mascot is racist!"

So, in your view of the world, the libs have made calling someone a mascot racist unless you are members of the same race? Ok. Brane, are you a liberal? Yes, no? If no, then you are free from Lib PC rules, so you can call anyone of any race a mascot. Guess what Brane, I am not a liberal either!

Back to Dr. Sowell. Two questions for you: Can blacks discriminate against blacks?

Can blacks be self hating? (and I am not accusing Sowell of being either, but you can find many, many, many blacks who do think he is one or the other or both - just google him).

Yes, blacks just like any and ALL races can be racist and can discriminate against their own race, for a variety of reasons. Is Sowell doing this? I have no idea. But many within his own race seem to believe he is.

And if so, then calling other blacks mascots, is, in your view-(because he would be a racist) wait for it, racism.

Last thing. You said: "he is not criticizing blacks in this article either as you claim".

Well if someone said that I was being treated as a mascot, I damn sure would take that as a criticism, and be highly offended, but I am sure he meant no offense, because he is black. Right Brane?

Oh yeah, I forgot to add, you dipshit.

BATTLE ROYALE!!!!!!

Someone where I work said "Obama is just like Hitler you know." and I went full-on Battle Royale on them. It was a kick-ass rockin' good time. We had cake and dumplings afterwards. Somebody wanted to sing a song but we threw that fucker out the window and then pissed on and threw nerf footballs at his body thousands of feet below.

BOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

-slams door.

You quit and call ME a racist? Please.

Just show me where I cherry picked ANYTHING! Those are direct and FULL quotes from you.

You racist, coward.

You can not squirm away this time:

You wrote: "Libs DO NOT RESPECT blacks, therefore they are mascots to be paraded around. Conservatives RESPECT Sowell, and as such, he is no mascot." So, all libs show a lack of respect for blacks, and all conservatives respect Sowell? Really? Putting aside your new found ability to read the minds of every single liberal and conservative on earth, and putting aside that quite a few liberals are not white, are infact black, that means even the black liberals do not respect themselves and treat themselves as mascots to themselves. Quaint theory you have there Brane. Well, if that is the argument you want to make, so be it. Now about the conservative side, all conservatives respect Sowell. Really? Are conservatives that monolithic, and is your psychotic, er I mean, psychic ability that great that you can say with utmost certainty that all conservatives respect Sowell? I mean, does every conservative like and respect one another, just because they are conservative? Yes or no? And if no, then that means that all conservatives -as you say, like Sowell, but not because he is conservative, because by answering 'no' that means not all conservatives like or respect one another, but it means they like him because he is black. Hmmm. Sowell himself denies being conservative, he says he is more libertarian. And all conservatives respect libertarians, right? Ok, that was just food for thougt, now to the actual meat an potatoes. You posted "Liberal PC bullshit has served to deaden discourse. Only blacks can talk about blacks, only Jews can talk about Jews. It's the world YOU AND YOURS have created. And calling a respected scholar like Sowell a mascot is racist!" So, in your view of the world, the libs have made calling someone a mascot racist unless you are members of the same race? Ok. Brane, are you a liberal? Yes, no? If no, then you are free from Lib PC rules, so you can call anyone of any race a mascot. Guess what Brane, I am not a liberal either! Back to Dr. Sowell. Two questions for you: Can blacks discriminate against blacks? Can blacks be self hating? (and I am not accusing Sowell of being either, but you can find many, many, many blacks who do think he is one or the other or both - just google him). Yes, blacks just like any and ALL races can be racist and can discriminate against their own race, for a variety of reasons. Is Sowell doing this? I have no idea. But many within his own race seem to believe he is. And if so, then calling other blacks mascots, is, in your view-(because he would be a racist) wait for it, racism. Last thing. You said: "he is not criticizing blacks in this article either as you claim". Well if someone said that I was being treated as a mascot, I damn sure would take that as a criticism, and be highly offended, but I am sure he meant no offense, because he is black. Right Brane? Oh yeah, I forgot to add, you dipshit.

I never had respect for you Brane, but at least you seem to stand up and take a beating like a man.

Now it seems, after the Mori smackdown, whenever you get get whupped, you just scream 'uncle' and run away. Only to come back later, with your tail betwen your legs, like the whipped dog you are (no offense to the pooches intended).

It is almost a waste of energy trying to debate someone as inflexible, unbalanced, and spineless as Brane.

When he loses, and I mean clearly loses an argument to the point he has no comeback at all, he resorts to name calling.

Ooh, that hurts. Great debate tactic - for kindergartners.

Now it seems, after the Mori smackdown, whenever you get get whupped, you just scream 'uncle' and run away. Only to come back later, with your tail betwen your legs, like the whipped dog you are (no offense to the pooches intended).

It's heartening to see so many others view him for what he truly is. Each time he mouths off he becomes even more pathetic and ludicrous. He has literally zero credibility left, and his faux high ground posturing is ALWAYS his very last gambit. When he runs out of his horseshit, he claims to have beaten everyone and closes shop.

Hilarious and sad.

Thanks for the kind words.

You are almost like Van Helsing (the 'real' one not the Jackman version) tracking down Dracula! Only Brane is far more, stupid and evil.

In the Mori TB, after he knew he was being 'banned' and he ranted like a two year old needing a bottle, an image came to mind.

Do you remember the serial killer in Star trek, the episode where Scotty is thought to be the killer? It turned out to be the little weasely, mealy-mouthed, milquetoast guy who when cornered, had a meltdown, and starts screaming, 'Rejek' Rejek' Rejek'? That is who Brane reminds me of.

"If I respond to Mori, I will get banned. My political views never got me banned, but AS and Thunderballs were banned only when I dared to take on Mr. Sensitivity who fancies himself a Hollywood player.

Fact is he is an awful writer, and Carpenter has not made a good film in decades. But Mori seems to think his "success" is masturbation worthy, and the 15 year old geeks here desperate for a film career suck up to him. Mori, you're nothing but an anonymous screenwriter, no different than a thousand hacks out in L.A. who lucked into a crappy career churning out shit like "Amusements."

And you're nothing without AICN. Film Threat called you guys out for the charlatans you are. And your only defense is to call the author of the article unemployed and a homosexual cruiser. Tell you what, when you actually write something that is more entertaining than Mansquito, then you can brag. But until then you're just another pale, fat, Internet site writer.

BraneRobot is now retired. Look for me in my new guise in the coming weeks where I will continue to "pwn" the deluded geeks and vile Leftist scum that inhabit this site. Why do I come back? What can I say, I am a glutton. And I like the layout. And it's fun to know Mori knows me in real life but has no idea who I am on this site. That's the real treat. To stand next to the man, is to smell the man. That's all I'll say about that. Harry stinks like piss too, but he is actually cool. Not full of himself like Mr. Sensitivity. Now, commence with the comments about how I just had a meltdown. You're all nothing if not predictable."

Now look at ya. You're flailing.

File it, print it copy it.

Unlike you Brane, I do not run away from an argument, win or lose.

It was you and me, mano-a-dipshit. I answered, and destroyed, every point you tried to make. And your only response was to say, I cheery picked and so you would not answer me. I posted my responses again, even condensed it, and pointed out that I used FULL quotes and asked you to point to ANYTHING that was cherry picked. Once again, you whined, and bitched and moaned, but would not answer, no rebuttal other than to to say, I was being unfair because I do not hold the left to the same standard, or some such shit. Ok, let me get the exact quote from you so you can ignore that as well, and say I am cherry picking again. "Does this describe anyone on the Left here? Has any Leftist on this site ever lost an argument to a conservative, in your opinion? See, you make out like you're some paragon of fairness, but in actuality, only take the right to task for their percevied misgivings, and continually praise those on the Left like LibWarrior who ONLY spout invective."

I said it before, it is a waste of time to try and engage you in any meaningful debate, because when you lose you start the insults, then take your ball and go home - only to come back later. But let me answer this for you, yes, other posters on this site, some of them liberal, some of the conservative, do the same thing when they lose.

And the only reason I do not call 'them' on it, is because I was 'debating' - all one side of it, you at the time.

How could I have ever doubted you going to NYU with that superior intellect?

I also find it laughable that you can accuse him of recycling shite like moveon (which he hasn't), when you will recycle verbatim from the hugely discredited Liberal Fascism. As I've said before, you only deem a source worth using when it supports your point. Anything contradictory is to be ignored.

Stevie- FYI the NYU thing was BraneRobot lying about his alma mater. That's what BSB is getting at.

We used to joke about how easy it was to get a 2:1

The reason no-one is slaughtering Node for that post is that is is very, very obviously sarcastic. It also follows at the end of a long period of abuse from Brane and Coughlins trying to get him to say he hated America.

His response was irrelevant, and if you notice he had many attempts at getting rid of them, because to be accused by them is, in their minds, proof.

It's a dirty, low, shitty rhetorical trick and should not be tolerated. It's pure Lowest Common Denominator sophistry and they should be fucking ashamed. Their argument should be strong enough to defeat him without resorting to this sort of shit. But this is BraneRobot's MO to a fucking tee. When he gets thrashed (usually due to his wilfull ignorance- and I think he has been absolutely creamed by every participant here at one time or another) he resorts to puerile insults, base rhetoric and eventually the Mugabe-esque stunt of declaring himself the winner and fucking off.

It's pathetic

It's a very, very sad reality for many people in urban areas and solely down to government incompetence. Basically the way it works is that a lot of British families are in this situation where by taking work they see a net fall in their household income. Many of them want to work, but to do so will put them in serious danger. For example, in London, a temp will earn (after tax) between £200 and £300 per week. This sounds like a lot, but rent on average in a flatshare is between £100 and £200 per week. Travel is also another £30 per week. So before you've even bought food you are left with about £50 per week. The dole works out at £42 ish, but you get housing benefits etc.

Urban poverty is very real, and no fucker has a clue what to do about it- conservative or liberal (here comes branecell with SPONGERS- FUCK THEM LET THEM STARVE MWAHAHAHAHAHA)

I don't know if you've been following the political TBs but this one is just part of a long lineage of discourse on such matters. Brane has been vocal and no one has or could shut him up. This continues to be a battle of opinions and facts, with lots of hyperbole thrown around. It's fun, and mostly educational too. Name one other site that has this kind of massive, uncensored discourse between both sides of the political aisle. And in a great format too.

I hope you stick around these TBs, Braffed. They may not change the world, but they sure are more valuable than limitless pickle-sniffing rants, although there's room for that too.

However, the nature of London is such that where I live (and I have a nice place) has a fucking slum behind it. I know people in my local pub that work cash in hand because if they actually declared what they earn then they would put them and their family below the poverty line. However, by working in the Black Economy they can afford to feed their families- and have enough left over for a few beers. Basically, when they have to pay rent, lose chid benefits and (worst of all) have to pay council tax (which I forgot on that list but me and the wife pay something like £150 per month) they literally cannot afford to live.

To make matters worse, the education system in this country is in fucking tatters- so realistically they have no means of self improvement.

We are the most taxed generation in history and I am very, very far from happy about it- but the whole problem is insurmountable.

We need a revolution- but the weather's too shit.

When my missus worked in Social Services she saw legions of teenage women having child after child after child. They knew the risks, but thought that they would either get the guy to stay or they would get housed/ cared for by the state. This in turn leads to another stupid generation with the same attitude following- except there is about 5 kids per family.

I would operate a 2 strikes and you're out rule. If you have 2 children by different fathers before you are 20 then tough shit- you're sterilised. Accidents happen, but not 3 times- and especially not with the range of precautions available before and after. FYI there is a woman in the North of England that became a grandmother at 26 (true). Fucking state of the world.

Don't fall for it. BraneRobot is the only universally despised participant here. He is a fucking monster that believes some truly appaling things and never, ever side with him.

That s not to say that only Obama can help correct this, because many, many people, of all races, will be needed. Obama, or whoever, will need to do this on a national scale. But it has already been done on the local scale in neighborhoods. An example.

In Atlanta, a white busnessman, who was an avid golfer, bought an old country club that bordered a dilapidated housing project. In just ten years time, he not only transformed the country club and the housing project, but the entite community. He provided, new, safe housing, jobs, a future, and not coincidentally, restored a grand golf club, that at one time excluded blacks, but now teaches them the game. Change can be made, we just need the will, and unique perspective to do so. Here are Obama's words to describe the condition.

"We do not need to recite here the history of racial injustice in this country. But we do need to remind ourselves that so many of the disparities that exist in the African-American community today can be directly traced to inequalities passed on from an earlier generation that suffered under the brutal legacy of slavery and Jim Crow. Segregated schools were, and are, inferior schools; we still haven't fixed them, fifty years after Brown v. Board of Education, and the inferior education they provided, then and now, helps explain the pervasive achievement gap between today's black and white students. Legalized discrimination - where blacks were prevented, often through violence, from owning property, or loans were not granted to African-American business owners, or black homeowners could not access FHA mortgages, or blacks were excluded from unions, or the police force, or fire departments - meant that black families could not amass any meaningful wealth to bequeath to future generations. That history helps explain the wealth and income gap between black and white, and the concentrated pockets of poverty that persists in so many of today's urban and rural communities. A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families - a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods - parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement - all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us."

You never mattered to me before except for the beatdown LibWar put on you. You started with the insults on him, then he nuked your ass, and you ran away screaming how you had won. "Really?". Guess what bunky? I have whole lot more than insults to throw if you really want to start down that road with me.

And I was deployed in Iraq and Kuwait as well - missed out on the Kingdom though.

Soldier or Marine?

And though LibWar does not need me to fight his 'battles' I will say this about the beatdown, you started it with an insult, he nuked you back and kept on dropping heavy arty on you, so then you tried to change the ROE, and accused him of just using vulgarity, when in fact you did no better. You lost the insult fight - very badly, and then tried to take 'high ground', and declared yourself the winner, and disappeared. The exact same bullshit method that Morbid and Brane use when they lose.

All of you are cowards.

And I was and will always be, a Marine.

Ooh-Rah!

Regardless of what I think of you today.

Brane, like I said, only you know why you chose NYU as the basis of your fabrications. Why the fuck are you asking me? To make some sense of what you say? That's impossible. And even if you didn't choose NYU to lie about, I'd call your bullshit on any college you would've named. Because judging from your writing, you were clearly homeschooled by a retard.

I have told you before, I am not a liberal. I have told you before that regardless of being allied with anyone on a particular argument, if I find what they say offensive, I will tell them so. Here is quote from you: "See, you make out like you're some paragon of fairness, but in actuality, only take the right to task for their percevied misgivings, and continually praise those on the Left like LibWarrior who ONLY spout invective."

And here is what I said to Jarv just today: "Jarv, I respect you, and find myself agreeing with you a great deal of the time, but the sterilising comment is beyond the pale, and you know it. That is Brane territory, and the same goes for you glovedone, with the aptitude test to vote. Why not just adopt Branes 'No property, no vote' mentality?".

You never learn Brane. But you continue to disgust me.

Now, on to another nutcase. glovedone. Are you drunk or just stupid? As I pointed out earlier, it was Node you called you 'glovedunce' though now I wish I had, and it was Node who said he marched on DC.

I gave you the benefit of the doubt about serving, and I see no reason to rescind that. The moment Brane (Brane?) questioned my service, you fell into step like a whipped puppy. MP? I will hold off any disparaging remarks about what I think of real MP's, and the Army in general, but suffice to say whether you were one or not, it aint good.

And the equally retarded - no, Motarded, remark about no Marines marching on washington, is just so laughable, and frankly so stupid it is hard to fathom. Service members - from all branches, have been marching, or riding (Every hear of Roliing Thunder?) on Washington for over a hundred years, and they damn sure are still doing so. And I am not a liberal, or conservative, I am an independant. A moderate.

And finally, learn how to read and write before you attempt to start an argument that you have neither the brains or the background to finish.

A pathetic, cry-baby, gets called on his shit, and whines, coward.

Can not even acknowledge that you confused the posts - and hence fucked up your own argument about me, so instead, you try and make a joke about it, without addressing the fact.

Were you there?

Must be a culture shock going from Army to Marines.

Sill indeed sucked ass, we had a small (relatively speaking) detachment, and since you know Sill, it was nothing but Army assholes. They had us near the training battalions, so it was always some funny shit when we would cross paths with the army drills conducting morning PT for the newbies.

Lawton was an interesting town, as small as it is, it had the most diverse ethnic background I have ever seen in such a concentrated area. German, Korean, Japanese, Italian. Any place in the world that an army base is, you will find people of the nationality at Sill. Some damn good restaurants though!

I hated that place.

I started out as a cannoneer. I thought being a drill was cool. I got wise. Ended as an E-7.

Once again, stay strong, stay safe.

Ooh-Rah!

Now, I'm really gone.

You can't, because I have not.

Have a good weekend all.

BTW Xi, yes the Battery is the name we in artillery used.

As usual, interesting, funny, and just plain strange experience.

As usual, the folks I've come to expect rational, if not shared opinions from represented.

But very, very NOT usual, one poster seemed to take up all the air in the room, and didn't really accomplish anything except make himself look like a sociopath, even compared to some fairly toxic, vulgar characters. He rose above, out of the muck of obscurity, as it were, to stand alone, one talkbacker amongst many who was able to take on all comers, to ceaselessly reach new lows with every post, seemingly invulnerable to shame, clearly unable to take the many, many hints offered, even from his brethren. I think we all know who we're talking about here. LiberalWarrior.... no, just kidding....

Brane, take a bow, you fucking freak. You've succeeded in being the most memorable, if also the most miserable character I've dealt with in awhile. You remind me that no matter how good my life might seem, no matter how little time I ever actually have to spend with real jerks in my actual, real life, that there are BraneRobots out there. Thankfully, not in any great number, or the world would look very differently. Thank Fuck for that.

I know it's too much to expect, but I hope you move on to greener pastures, I hope that a critical mass is reached sooner, rather than later, and you quietly leave town. Even the villiage idiot can be banished, man.

Congratulations for making me, the consummate diplomat, the moderate, the centrist, the guy who tries really hard to listen to all sides, the guy who prides himself on never taking anything too personally on a fucking geek talkback forum too seriously, absolutely despise a complete stranger. Congratulations, you absolute fucking loser.

Man sniffing? Lying about your education? Falsely accusing TKD? You truly are the love child of Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter.

Samsquanch has you pegged - you are seemingly invulnerable to shame, the only benefit being the continuing amusement you provide. Here's to many weeks more of free entertainment - thanks, douche!

Could. You. Be. More. Pathetic???

And Brane? Man up and say something other than "They're ALL leftist filth!" because apart from being patently untrue, it's also old and tiresome as fuck.

Oh, and in case you've forgotten or hoped that we'd forgotten it -- you got pwned by a couple of U.S. Marines.

Shit, I just can't stay away from this TB.

Brane calling me a "cunt faced fake Republican" is the nicest thing anyone has said to me in a long time. Seriously, coming from him, it's a high compliment. Not kidding.

Besides that who actually DID say "It's a Lion" Is that now lost to Legend as it IS one of the more amusing episodes of late. (apart from Brane)

But Ta anyways Xiphos still very informative as I was certain ZZzzzzzzz was TomBodets ONLY utterance. Ye learn summat new every day.

As for the film, sorry Liberwarrior I liked it and I don't apologise for that. Xiphos is right though the internet Hype saddled it with an importance that a B Movie (and lets face it apart from the clever conciet of the Videofootage it WAS a B Movie) deserved. I think the Gargantuan Bug in The Mist was more Cthulu like personally. Wish we'd seen more of that.

To mangle David Bowies Joe the Lion lyrics. ;)

But again I can still enjoy those movies without giving in to the hyperbole that always surrounds em.

As for BAD Movies if there is a better Movie than Turkish Star Wars then I have yet to see it.

It tears up the whole foolish human concept of Good/Bad and delivers a raw injection of insanity fueled hilarity directly to the Brainstem leaving one staggered but a better person for it.

I don't think all Lunatics are Monsters but I do think anyone who has said "Please keep paying attention to me, I love it!" and keeps coming back for Public Humiliation needs treatment and adult supervision at the very least.

As for your writing, excuse me but what are you talking about? Just because Brane has access to thesaurus.com doesn't make him a better writer. It's all about content and subject matter, and that single post of yours alone puts every word Brane ever vomited here to shame.

I know you don't like to get involved in the politcal TBs, but your insight from time to time has always been invaluble precisely because of your real world background. Look at Branedead - going on and on about supporting the troops, yet never hesitating to denigrate them (like ToadKiller) for their personal views. You can't reason with a lunatic like that. And you shouldn't - you just let them implode on their own.

To everyone but Brane, there was never a doubt about TKD's truthfulness. Even Glovedone didn't push the issue when the truth became evident. As always, Brane stands alone in his Malkin/Coulter-like lunatic condemnation of anyone Liberal - including servicemen. Fuck him, and let him stew in his own bile.

Once again, great post Xi. Thank you for that. I guarantee you no one is laughing, especially Branedead.

People are People. Soldiers are People. People not Political props or statistics. Mortal, fallable, capable of greatness and as mistake prone as the rest of us.

Those who post in these talkbacks should be primarily motivated by Love of Films and TV.

I know that's why I'm here.

The Politics appear because of the obviously more blatantly Political films and TV but also because most people have views on Politics if you scratch the surface.

Knowing your background gives you a unique perspective on things Xiphos I for example would be intrigued to see what you will make of the coming "Generation Kill" mini-series. I come to it having been frankly amazed by the depth and quality of The Wire and cannot wait to see what David Simon can do next. But I fear that Simon's warts and all portrayals of life may draw the wrath of those who would prefer a far simpler less complicated view about things "over there".

Anyways enough about that it's not even on yet but I can assure you as someone who has a sketchy command of prose at best and has no illusions about my limits you should have no worries on the intelligence or clarity of your posts as they always seem a cut above.

You clearly didn't listen to a fucking word Xiphos said Brane.

Soldiers are People. Not political fucking talking points you Lunatic Douchebag.

And when you try and reduce them to a Demographic percentage for your own nefarious purposes and babble ignorantly that someone who you don't personally know, but disagrees with you and holds you in the same contempt almost everyone here does, can't possibly be a "real" Marine (What exactly Qualifies you to judge "real" Marines ? shit for brains) All you do is mark yourself ever more clearly as someone who is in dire need of some rather extensive Therapy.

I take some shit on this site for being what I refer to as a 'traditional conservative' or an 'old fashioned republican", not just from fools like Brane, but from lots of so-called 'intelligent' posters from both sides of the political spectrum. I consider it my lot in my e-life, to seek to interject sense between rival ideologies that from my perspective have more in common than they do differences. Basically, to folks on the far right, I look like a moonbat lefty, and to the far left, I look like a fascist tyrant. I don't get no respect (from the idiots).

One of the things that absolutely burns my cock is how both sides shamelessly trot out 'the troops' as mascot avatars for their causes. Most often, when someone starts mouthing off about the troops, I'm forced to wonder what an actual serviceman (or woman) might think of how they're being represented. Until you came along, I was left to wonder, abstract academic thinker that I am.

You might think that you're not bright, or that you're a bad writer, but take it from someone who is respected in those fields, (not on AICN necessarily) you do just fine, buddy. You consistently say what needs to be said, and heard, more importantly, by the very people who employ flowery and incendiary language in your name.

I keep my real identity pretty closely guarded. I don't reveal much about my real life on these boards, partly because it's no one's fucking business, but also because I find it a liberating forum in it's anonymity. That said, I respect your forthrightness and honesty, and more than anything your generosity in offering what you have offered this forum. We can argue all day long about how Brett Ratner fucked the X-Men franchise and how the new phrase du jour should or shouldn't be "Nuked the Fridge" over "jumped the Shark", but when it matters, when people reveal themselves to care about things that matter, you're one of the few anonymous strangers on this board, in this forum, on the internet that I respect whithout reservation. Who gives a fuck if you can't spell, buddy, your words mean more than most of the trash spoken here, including my own.

Cheers, and good luck, my anonymous brother.

-Dan

Then of course it would merely be a matter of filming the preview trailer with a cry of "It's STILL a LION!" and cutting to said statue or Zoo Lion.

Job done.

For some odd reason they're always landing on the Upper East Side.

I can only say: Wow!

A few weeks ago, back in the Greengrass TB, you paid me an enormous compliment regarding what I had posted about how the Marine or Soldier really feels in a war, and how they(we) do not care about politics when bullets are whizzing by, but how the men and women fighting next to us are the most important things and people in the world, because they and they alone will determine if we get home safe -not someone sitting on a couch thousands of miles away who only 'knows' what it means to be in the service by watching a John Wayne movie.

I did not know until after you responded, that we were brothers, but when you revealed your service, I was proud.

That feeling pales in comparison with how I feel about you now and what you wrote tonight.

I felt myself swelling with pride reading your words and feeling the passion behind them. And I never want to hear again you saying that you can not write!

And as far as intelligence goes, you take a backseat to no one in these parts.

The reasons for service is not monolithic, and too often those who have never worn the uniform, or even contemplated doing so, form opinions based upon completely inaccurate knowledge and personal bias.

It is not necessary to wear the uniform to feel the pride in what it represents, and I was always proud and honored to wear it.

A long as people who have never worn the uniform do what you said, and look at us as people, not martinets, then a mutual understanding can take place.

I say this truly, your opinion of me in this TB is the only one that matters.

You proved beyond a shdow of a doubt the meaning of : Semper Fi. And my mere words can not express the depth of my feeling in knowing that the Corps will always be great as long as men like you are in it.

Semper Fi.

Can you really land on a one foot target from 30,000 feet?

And when he’s contradicted or corrected, unable to concede any error. Like Monty Python’s Black Knight, limbs amputated, immobilized in his own gore, still issuing dire threats and impotent challenges.

Does medical science shed any light on this sick puppy? Probably.

DSM_IV - the American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition - provides the following glaring illumination:

301.0 Paranoid Personality Disorder:

They exhibit pervasive distrust and suspiciousness of others. They persistently bear grudges and are unwilling to forgive the insults, injuries, or slights they think that they have received. Minor slights arouse major, persistent, hostility. Often feel that their character or reputation has been attacked or that they have been slighted in some way – quick to counter-attack and react with anger to perceived insults. Generally difficult to get along with. Hypervigilant for potential threats. Their excessive suspiciousness and hostility may be expressed in overt argumentativeness, recurrent complaining or hostile aloofness. Although they may appear to be rational, they display labile affect with hostile, stubborn and sarcastic expressions predominating.

Their combative and suspicious nature may elicit a hostile response in others, confirming their original expectations. Rigid, critical of others, but unable to accept criticism. Attribute malevolent motivations to others, tend to develop negative stereotypes by simplistic formulations of the world, may be perceived as “fanatics” and form tightly knit groups with others who share their paranoid belief systems.

Does that sound startlingly familiar?

Then stir in a dash of 301.81 Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

Which all suggests that debating him is a waste of time. And Xiphos, thanks for those candid posts.

So if you're in town, be vigilant and always look above you. If you hear loud creaking noises, do as if Clovercrab is attacking and run like hell.

I know all about the bugs colon, but I could wipe out the entire nest!

HALO? Much respect. I was just a static line jumper.

Now, back to geekdom. The mention of Spiderman and lions -although not in the same breath, reminded me of Kraven. Didn't he wear Lion skin?

TomBodet, what does that mean?

Well, I am out of here soon, it is a great day here in the East, and I am going to ride!

And fellow bikers around here? I have an '06 Heritage.

I hope you are wrong about Obama's electability though.

Now, it is time to ride!

Since someone brought up Obama- slkboxrman, are you honestly trying to use that argument? Do you honestly still believe that? After what we've seen in the last 6 months or so, you still think Obama doesn't have a chance? take off the blindfold, buddy. I think you might be in for a shock.

About the comments made by his pastor, wife, sherpa, whathaveyou, no one makes anything of those things but the right-wing media. No one was really able to gain any traction in their Bush-bashing when Billy Graham was sticking his foot in this mouth on a daily basis. That kind of agit-prop shit never really convinces anyone who isn't already convinced.

Obama's only real blunder was the one of his own making- the 'bitter' comments about Pennsylvanians. Ironic that now, 5 minutes later, after repeating it ad nauseum for anyone that will listen and trotting it out as proof of Obama's elitism (which it is, but so what) Hillary is essentially making the same statement, by telling people that a Black man can't defeat McCain.

Why not? Is it because Americans are racist? Maybe even...bitter, you might say? Claiming your race as your pedigree in politics is something we haven't seen for a long time. Kennedy was persecuted for being an Irish Catholic, but even back then it was considered in bad taste for his political opponents to roll it out against him. The American people have already voted for Obama. how do you think he's gotten this far?

To think that all of a sudden, Joe and Jane public are going to slap their foreheads and declare... "DANG! Whut am ah thankin' voting for a negro? That wuz a close one!" ...is naive, to put it fucking mildly.

All this to say, I'm not actually voting for Obama in November. I think Hillary is about as good or bad a candidate as Obama is for the Dems, it don't matter much to me. It's silly though, really, really, silly, to listen to Hillary's last-ditch, desperate campaign strategy and think it's divine truth.

BWAAHHAHAHAHHAAHAHHAHAHAHAH!!!

The professor answered
- Capitalism is the exploitation of humans by humans

The Student:
- And socialism?

The professor:
- It's the inverse of course.

The consequences of such a move would be truly, truly dreadful, but I'm not surprised that you think it is a plan with some merit.

It would probably do him good. And who wants to bet that he has never been outside of 'merica...

I'm glad to see you support it though.

Now, lets make this a Changian TB!

Just about every male in my family was in the service at one time or another. It was a no-brainer for me.

And yes, I took advantage of every benefit possible, and proudly so.

WHo's lying now?

"9/11 had been in the planning stages for years, and regardless of the missed signals and ignored intelligence, it is highly unlikely that a Gore administration would have been fundamentally more alert than Bush was - one of the biggest problems was within the FBI, and at a level that would not have been affected by Presidential appointment"

But I guess slkboxrman is a right winger.

Nitwit.

The quote was from your response to TKD when he castigated me for that very, very illiberal policy.

and as for "Only a conservative can make a conservative argument" complete horseshit. Just admit you fucked up. We all do.

BTW- in the London election I voted CONSERVATIVE.

Quote: "these guys are such sub-moronic abortions of human beings, that they need to be shot down at every chance, and I am only too glad to do so."

Uh, when and where did this happen? Because all I've seen since May 25th is you getting your ass kicked at every possible exchange. Seeing as how you're a "c"onservative who prefers to live in a world of shit, that doesn't surprise me.

You keep saying/repeating that no one reads your posts...or that they folks can't seem to "comprehend" them. -- Not to mention your penchant for calling people "liars" (i.e. me) or "Liberal scum" (i.e. everyone else) --.

Brane, have you ever stopped to consider what it is you post on these boards that causes so many Talkbackers to take offense? I mean, have you ever truly considered it? Maybe if you were to examine your own rhetoric, you would find that maybe you're not explaining yourself or your views in a crystal clear, concise manner. Or, you may find (and this is the more likely discovery) that you are simply a lunatic who trolls these boards out of frustration and contempt. And when confronted by well-informed talent, you panic and sink further into denial and bullshit.

I find it hilarious that you have dodged numerous questions thrown your way while opting for spiteful posts loaded with outright falsehoods. I guess it's just easier for you to paint everyone with that same "Liberal scumbag/sub-moronic" brush of yours instead of taking into account critical assessments of your statements. Sucks to be you, eh?

I'm glad to see my fellow Talkbackers have continued to hold you to account and have kept this TB alive for all to see. Kudos.

Fuck me, I apologised for Diggers for slating him over Indy. It isn't a crime to be wrong occasionally.

"We used to smarter"

slkboxrman said"something u should all contemplate about bush/gore 2000 is that if the american voting process wasnt hijacked by the republicans and the supreme court, which just handed bush the presidency without counting the votes of harworking, taxpaying americans there would have been alot of differences...no 9/11, which means no 3000 lives lost in nyc"

I responded "9/11 had been in the planning stages for years, and regardless of the missed signals and ignored intelligence, it is highly unlikely that a Gore administration would have been fundamentally more alert than Bush was - one of the biggest problems was within the FBI, and at a level that would not have been affected by Presidential appointment"

Brane, if you would just stop and think for ONE minute, and not try and lump people into categories that only serves your narrow purpose, then perhaps you would make a more persuasive argument instead of being the AICN equivalent of the town joke. And that is exactly what you are the town joke.

I have always said that I value debate from all sides, and i still do, even yours. But when you go off on these lunatic ad hominem attacks that do nothing but expose your own very, very precarious hold reality, it accomplishes nothing, it advances no argument, it convinces no one of any point you are struggling to make.

Look Brane, this is a geek website, we aint solving the worlds problems here, so fine continue to act moronic, and beg for attention then contradict yourself. I came across this posted by LibWar on your very words "It's not that I actually want the attention" then a few sentences later."But again, please keep it up. I love the attention"

I drive a much smaller car, and my bike when possible though.

Chill dude.

Toad, don't forget it's used to run over shitheels and infidels as well.

Masculinity and guns right now. As you already pointed out Brane, that bit of psychology is a generalization. This entire last week I was in the Colorado wilds throwing axes at a target every day but I can assure you it was not to prove how manly I was. It was simply fun. Like throwing a ball around or watching a flick. People have different hobbies. My friend loves racing cars but he isn't particularly vain or deficient in testosterone.

But like you said, it was a generalization. And there are some fellows who are compensating for something. Just not all. And I include Xiphos in this category.

I'll go to a few more, probably next one will be vs. the Yanks.

I just smited shitheels! I was in a meeting that turned into a finger pointing session, so I pulled out my butane powered cigar torch, dumped some fuel on a handy No. 2, lit that puppy on fire, and launched it onto the infidels!

The screams of outrage made the noble sacrifice of the No. 2 worthwhile.

With little to no natural predators, they are starting to get as obnoxious as Brane!

In other depressing news: I'm back on Quota time. Curse my poxy IT department.

This isn't some liberal thing, but a cultural difference.

Venison is delicious.

No need for chrism to populate these boards. Really.

And did you know that there is no such thing as an American Buffalo. We have bison. Africa has buffalo. So in effect, Buffalo Bill never killed any buffalo at all.

"What you LIEberal's don't understand is that I'm an educated Black Man and I'm voting for MCCAIN/ CONDI 2008. What? Nobody mentioned race? well I am, and what you LIBTARDS don't understand is that an INTELLIGENT BLACK MAN can despise BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA the one-term serving no-experience America hating racist."

ad fucking nauseum.