EvilMonkey

QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Aug 19, 2006 -> 12:52 AM) You have to love the irony in that because it's LCRs poor, helpless Muslims who want to massacre and liquidate the Jews. welcome back!

Happy Birthday Nuke! I will hoist a beer in your honor this Saturday at my own birthday party. hell, I'll hoist two! No wait, three! Oh hell, it will be at least a dozen, or more! Enjoy!

In old Comisky, I got a Greg Luzinski homerun ball in the upper tank, left field. It was also a rebound, but off of someone's head! This guy in the row in front of us jumped up to get it, and went backwards, taking out 3 or 4 people in the row next to me. The ball hit the guy in head, and bounced about 2 feet into the air, where it became mine! We taunted the guy with it all night, especially since he was wearing a Yankees jersey.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14323311/page/7/ Could this be a case where torture saved lives? I thought that torture never worked?

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 14, 2006 -> 01:12 PM) So far, so good for cease fire. What's the over/under?

QUOTE(mr_genius @ Aug 14, 2006 -> 02:33 AM) i don't think you fully understand how the whole thing 'goodwins law' works, yo. What? Balta doesn't understand something? I feel a disturbance in the force!

QUOTE(jackie hayes @ Aug 14, 2006 -> 01:52 AM) No, not at all. The way you're using the phrase "acting like Nazis", it would apply if the US mimics Panzer or Luftwaffe battlefield tactics. There's nothing wrong in learning a strategy used effectively by an army fighting an immoral war. Likening Israel to the Nazis is obviously supposed to imply that one of Israel's main purposes is to massacre and liquidate Muslims, Arabs, Palestinians, or some group. That's something that I don't believe one bit, and the IDF quote doesn't support it in the least. Jackie Hayes, you pinned it. The throwing around of the phrase 'acting like Nazis' is insinuating that they are out to eradicate Muslims from the earth ror something. PLus, has nothing to do but distract you from the wackos present at the SF rally.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Aug 13, 2006 -> 07:40 PM) Ah, the usage of a few selected photos as a means of dismissing those who are knowledgeable about the topic and have logical, cogent reasons for being against it. No, the showing of these photos is to show that as is usually the case, whichever side or protest it may be, the loudest ones tend to be the wackiest ones. Especially since this took place in san francisco. While a majority of people who are against Israel may be 'normal' people, I don't think you can claim that the signs and people pictured there were in a minority at that particular rally.

http://www.zombietime.com/stop_the_us_israeli_war_8_12_2006/ What a lovely bunch of people we have displayed here. Enjoy.

I wasn't looking for it, but I found Star Trek ones, too. http://www.echosphere.net/star_trek_insp/star_trek_insp.html

For the Lebowski fan(s)....

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 10, 2006 -> 04:10 AM) Yeah, I can't stand Lamont's kids either. NEW friends. Unless he has been an absent father or just discovered that the kid is his, you know the two I am talking about.

http://www.cruisegazing.com/RPG_Motivational/page_01.htm I like this one

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 9, 2006 -> 10:15 PM) There's also the wild card of course of any charges coming out of the alleged "Website hacking", whether they wind up being directed at someone in Lieberman's campaign, Lamont's campaign, or someone outside of both. Supposedly there are outfits on the ground right now doing polling on the general, once a few of those hit we'll at least have a better idea of where the starting gate is. Another wild card will be whether his new 'friends' help or hurt his chances. There are many voters instantly turned off by these two.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Aug 9, 2006 -> 05:01 AM) The turnout was amazingly high for a summer primary - so the excuse that it wasn't the people of Connecticut speaking for the party is kinda squelched. Like 400,000 votes or something. Senators Bayh and Clinton, who both supported Joementum in the Primary, both have come out in support of Ned Lamont in the general. It is also close enough that Ned shouldn't take it as some sort of mandate, since almost half the primary voters wanted his opponent. Minors, when a candidate gets the party nomination, the leaders of that party have an obligation to support that person. In the big picture, the side with the most seats, regardless of who is sitting in them, gets the power.

It just figures that my birthday would have some apocolypitc submeaning. Glad my party is the Saturday before!

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Aug 8, 2006 -> 02:02 AM) Hezbollah isn't Palestinian. It's shia. Geeze, enough with the nitpicking already. Do you get the point, or just feel like being a nitpicking ass? Why no outrage over the latest UN position to be hit?

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L06845878.htm C'mon Kofi, why the silence? Hell, for that matter, why doesn't China speak up too! Oh wait, it wasn't the JOOOOOOOOZ that did it, it was the poor Palastinian terrosists freedom fighters.

From Coxandforkum.com

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 04:32 AM) He said "I'm not responsible for independent blogs." And somehow that becomes "I don't know that person. Not at all." He refused to comment on independent blogs and that becomes disavowing meeting someone? That's a bit of a stretch. Does that mean the next time he doesn't comment on a story in the newspaper, that he clearly disavows the existence of that newspaper? This is a big stretch for a campaign that's looking at a hard defeat in less than 48 hours. Wake up, Rex. The 'independent blogger' directed his campaign commercials, AND travels with his campaign exclusively. HEr having that level of access to him generate a slight bit of responsibility, at least to the point of distancing himself from her. He took her with him to his taping of the Colbert Report. No connection between the two? Open your eyes a bit. http://www.courant.com/news/local/hc-lamon...headlines-local He may very well win, I am just pointing out that he is already a seasoned politician, skilled at the many levels of creative lying and selective memory.

QUOTE(Rex Kickass @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 01:25 AM) So candidates are suddenly responsible for what their supporters put on the internet? Well, Ned's manager tried to make Joe responsible for Ann Coulter, of all people. I don't think Joe has ever met her, much less had an ad created by her, or had her travel with his campaign. There is some sort of responsibility you assume when you have people work with you or for you, so yes, to a degree, he is. If she didn't have such close ties to him, then no, he wouldn't. If Rush started calling the next Democratic Presidential candidate a , you know it would only take nanoseconds for the loony-left to start screaming for the Republican candidate to 'disavow' and distance himself from Rush, even if he had never even met Rush before. But you completely skipped over the most important part, about how he lied to cover his ass, just like a seasoned politician when he claims no knowledge of blogs and their doings. Meet Ned, not just your average Joe, but also your average politician! QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 7, 2006 -> 04:12 AM) Man, some of the stuff Bush-supporters have posted... Apples vs Oranges when talking 'supporters' vs 'staffers/volunteers'. The level of hate by the Bush supporters pales in comparison to almost anything you can find on DailyKos and HufPo. Now, if you have campaign volunteers stooping to the level of Hamsher, let me know.

I wonder if Ned will remember blogs after he wins (?) the primary? He seems to have gotten amnesia about them for the moment, thanks to the blackface-thing. http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp?S=5233567&nav=3YeX Hmm. His first tv campaign ad featured him sitting next to the biggest left-wing blogger around, Markos Moulitsas. Plus, his campaign has its own blog. And Hamsher, she of the blackface article, is a major contributer to Hufpo, as well as worked on his internet ads (there are numerous photos from the ad shoot available with them together). Lamont's campaign manager "asked if Lieberman would distance himself from some controversial supporters, such as conservative commentators Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity or Michelle Malkin." But when it comes to distancing himself from his controversial bloggers, he has no idea who they are? No knowledge of blogs? He HIMSELF blogged on DailyKos! http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/5/31/19054/8664 Ethics, at its finest. Welcome to the club, Ned, you will fit right in.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3286966,00.html This from the same company that has employees sending death threats to blogs that support Israel. http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3256534,00.html Maybe it is time for a little house cleaning at Reauters, along with a fat lawsuit by the person who got the threat.

If the lovely Cleveland bullpen keeps handing games over to them, the Tigers will just walk right into the playoffs. MAn, they suck.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Aug 5, 2006 -> 08:40 PM) Oh, the Democrats don't have any principles, they're pushing out the principled people from the race because all they want is to win elections. Yup. Principled people that bring hypocricy to the expected levels when raising charges about accepting a Walmart donation against Joe, while holding, and profiting, from stock of the very same company. From disavowing any knowledge of bloggers and their activity, when the prominent one who did the blackface of Joe worked on an internet ad for his campaign and follows the campaign around exclusively. Yup, principles, alright. Seems like he fits right in with the rest of them. I remember a common cry from the liberals that dissent is patriotic. If 'dissent is patriotic' then why are you guys being so brutal to Joe Lieberman for dissenting from you on Iraq? Or on other issues? He is just being a true patriot!