EvilMonkey

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...ticle_id=483487

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jOl6L85...4k_28ojhYLcuLGg It's a long story, but just a few points it brought up: _

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 25, 2007 -> 12:26 PM) Probably the single biggest reason I bought a Honda was that I owned an American made car in High school. And I've driven American made cars as field vehicles. My experience with both has been less than positive...particularly with GM. So you owned an American car when you were in high school, when you probably don't care for it as well as you do your current foreign car, and you drive field cars that are American, driven by people who couldn't give two s***s because the car isn't theirs. Comparing those to the car you currently have and probably baby with loving care is not quite apples to apples. I had a Japanese made SUV for a delivery vehicle in my business that lasted all of 60,000 miles before HUGE repair bills set in. I have had 2 American vehicles that lasted longer, the first one over 100,000 miles, the current one on 65,000 (a GM product, btw). All were driven by the same people, the same way, in the same territory. For my personal car, i currently have a Galant, which has turned out to be pretty bad. the car it replaced was a 95 Thunderbird with 115,000 miles on it, that had an alternator replacement as its only major repair, not caused by an accident.

Does it take $30+ an hour plus pension plus paid health care to screw on a f***ing bolt or push a button?

QUOTE(Texsox @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 07:51 AM) Linked More. much more than this, at the link. What I find interesting about this is the old slippery slope. By the time someone woke up and said enough is enough, many mistakes had been made. Now that department is seemingly stuck with those mistakes. There has to be room to say, we're not going to take this anymore. Have sex on your own time, in your own car. Any more here will result in firing. They would have probably been fine if they had issued that as a policy BEFORE he got caught. They need to issue a written statement to that fact now, so that the next one caught should have no excuses.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Sep 24, 2007 -> 12:04 AM) No. I believe that they are also allowing students to question him as well. It's my understanding that his speaking engagement at Columbia will not just be a speech from a bully pulpit. In fact, the President of the University himself plans on challenging the Iranian president over the following: I don't understand why people are pissed that we are allowing the ruler of a despotic country the freedom to make an ass of himself. This is America. We don't restrict the movement of our citizens or our visitors, by and large - and we shouldn't do that to a head of state because we disagree with his policies. And if making an embarrassment of yourself is good enough for Britney Spears, its definitely adequate for this douchebag. If they are NOT paying him, and are allowed to ask actual tough questions (NOT "boxers or briefs"), then I don't have a problem with him speaking there. Just make sure the cameras are rolling! However, he should not be allowed anywhere near ground zero.

I talked with my neighbor's son a few hours ago (he has been busted for drugs once already, and will be leaving here and living with his dad after Christmas, thankfully), and he confirmed to me FlasoxxJim's assessment. Good luck again.

Are they paying him to speak?

yeah, i took kitna anyway, just because ny scares me, between plaxico and mannings shoulder. thanks.

Kitna or Elim Manning? Both o lines suck, but manning going against washington d, harder than Kitna against eagles d.

I thougth it was makmood adinnerjacket

If the metal rods are about the diameter of a rolled cig, he could also be using them to tamp the tobacco in the ends once rolled. Even though my college days are long gone, I knew several people who also rolled their own. However, they also did pot, too. Good luck.

In my best Homer Simpson voice, with mouth open and drool coming out of the side of my mouth,"Mmmmmmmmm......Mary Annnnnnn"

Greg got mom, Marsha got Jan, and yet, Middle Buffalo got nothing!

If schools can be sued by the ACLU for 'endorsing' religion by allowing a graduation speaker to say a prayer, then I think structuring your class schedule around a religious prayer schedule could easliy be construed as the same sort of endorsement.

Campus security, not cops. BIG difference.

'Culture of Corruption' still alive and kicking under our Democrat overlords. Maybe he is trying to match Hillary? http://www.rollcall.com/issues/53_29/vested/20056-1.html

I agree that the kids that hung the nooses should be in alot more trouble than what they did. But they DIDN'T kick someone or beat them up and put them in the hospital. YES, they intimidated them, and there HAS to be something that they could have done to them. But they didn't. Apparently the principal tried to do the right thing, telling them they can sit there, and trying to expell the kids, but got overruled by some crackers on the board. That inflamed the racial tensions in the area, as you might expect. I am NOT saying what the white kids did was right, because it wasn't. but what the black kids did was wrong, and the fact that some nooses were hung on a tree and some racist board members gave them a slap on the wrist doesn't make it ok to gang up on someone and put them in the hospital. I think the attempted murder rap is probably harsh, but assult and battery sure wouldn't be.

QUOTE(GoSox05 @ Sep 19, 2007 -> 03:54 PM) I don't see any similarties in this case and terrorism. I think it's about people standing up for themselves and being fed up. I see kids who grew up in the south and have heard stories about how their familes were hung from tree's. Than to see nooses haning from a tree. I don't know what its like to be black in the south, but i'm guessing I would have reacted too. Oh that and Jesse Jackson is great for pissing off uptight closet racists. Jessie is mad at Obama for not acting black enough anbd defending these kids. So, is Jessie saying Obama should defend them because they are balck? Sure sounds like it. My reference to the terrorists is that you see alot of supposedly moderate Muslims defending Muslims accused of terrosist or terrorist-like activities (like the 2 guys casing the airport), simply because they are Muslim. or cops defending other cops simply because they are cops.

He wants Obama to defend them because they are black and he is black. That is the same narrowminded bulls*** that has the radical Muslims up in arms, defending terrorists, because the are fellow Muslims. Flassox, those nooses were bad. very bad. but what they did wasn't any better. Catch the guys who hung the nooses and try them for the hate crimes the left loves so much. The black kids got caught. Kinda like in football, the one who retaliates always gets the penalty.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Sep 18, 2007 -> 03:37 PM) That's all Mr Craig was looking for in the first place.... a little support in his briefs Bad................just bad.

I am SOOOOOO oglad i got out of cook county.

Kinda wierd how Kerry made mention that he didn't know the kid was tasered until AFTER he left. He couldn't see or hear him screaming "don't taser me! Don't taser me! ", and then his screams when he finally got what he deserved?

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Sep 18, 2007 -> 05:07 PM) You mean you're not Fred Thompson? I have more hair. For now.

QUOTE(StrangeSox @ Sep 18, 2007 -> 03:02 PM) Now, instead of cutting costs by $1 trillion dollars in taxes, that $1 trillion is passed on to the consumer in the form of increased prices, decreased quality, less investment in R&D, etc. Corporation make their money from the people. If you make them pay more money, the people must pay more money. And I'll agree completely with what NSS posted above. Often times, the definition of "wealthy" used by Democrats in cases like this is really "a little above average but not even upper-middle class." I don't have a link, but I do recall that Charlie Rangle, while talking about the huge tax increase he wants to pass once the Dems take a veto-proof majority , set the number at those over $200,000 per year as beeing 'rich'. That is waaaaay too low.