Comments Posted By busboy33
Displaying 551 To 560 Of 657 Comments
Yeah, the salamander is most likely going to die a slow and tortured death. My furry Machiavellis were alley cats before deciding to allow me the grace of feeding them, so they never got over the "killing things is fun" attitude. My pre-condolences to Mrs. NutHouse.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 25.10.2007 @ 05:31
On the plus side, this will probably be the most fun your house cats have had this year, so at least the lizard gave its life for the greater good.
KILL THE MESSENGER! OR IS THE MESSAGE ALREADY DEAD?
Good to see the doors open again here.
Both the parties have lost their way -- the right to the paranoid moralists and the left to I-have-no-idea-what. IMHO, it's not the parties or ideologies that are adrift, its the politicians.
None of them DO anything anymore. Remember when Senate hearing actually had an effect beyond just getting soundbites recorded? When natinal disasters were responded to, rather than photographed in front of? When wars were taken seriously? When politicians had beliefs and fought for them? Now its doing the bare minimum to get re-elected, and God forbid a politician actually try to accomplish a goal. Much easier to just talk about them on the Sunday talk show circuit.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 25.10.2007 @ 05:09
Congratulations!
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 23.09.2007 @ 14:25
@Zbigniew Mazurak :
"Actually, the authorities of Poland have forbidden him, and all other Holocaust deniers, to come to Poland – and rightly so."
I've learned something new today -- thank you. I know that deniers have visited, but perhaps they wern't identified as deniers before their visit.
I can understand the logic of banning them. No doubt a denier will only see what they want to see. My way of looking at it was there's absolutely no chance of making them re-assess their views if they can't see it for themselves, but I guess the government is taking the safer approach.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 23.09.2007 @ 18:44
So, since he's denied the Holocaust, if he wanted to visit Auschweitz, he should be banned? Wouldn't it make more sense to want him to go there, see it with his own eyes, stick the stink of it right in his face?
I wqould think him going to GZ would help the Iranian situation. Make him stand there, surrounded by probably a few thousand extremely pissed off Americans, all united, all staring him straight in the eye. Let him look around and realize if he says one stupid thing about us deserving this or the hijackers were brave heroes, he's not going to make it back to the car, let alone the UN.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 21.09.2007 @ 23:23
PRESIDENT ASSAD SPEAKS TO LEBANON - SYRIAN STYLE
So, Iran, then Syria, then Pakistan? Or Pakistan before Syria?
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 19.09.2007 @ 12:46
We better get a move on . . . we're running out of time to start the wars.
DEMOCRATS CAN'T FIND ANYONE TO HELP THEM SURRENDER
@MarkJ:
"Oh, and please explain to the rest of the class how Iraq is a “debacle.†Compared to what? Saddam with nukes? Iraq morphed into “Al Qaedastan?†Well?"
since neither of those two things existed, how about comparing it to reality?
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 19.09.2007 @ 12:52
IS WAR WITH IRAN NOW JUST A MATTER OF TIME?
@Steve:
True enough, the "war" was great, and a real morale booster.My problem with the position is it feeds itself. If you are Iran, you have a country (us) that we know for sure has WMDs, is openly hostile to Iran (repeated in speeches by our leaders), and won't confirm or deny whether they are planning to attack. By the "justified in taking their comments and actions at face value and responding to the threat" posiition, Iran should attack us. After all, they gotta do what they gotta do.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 18.09.2007 @ 20:53
There is a fine line between "pre-emptive self defense" and "are you giving me the stinkeye?!?" Certainly, if there is going to be a fight, hit first, hit hard, and end it before it begins. But, given this Administration's demonstrated propensity to attack imaginary threats, personally I think an extra dose of caution would be prudent, especially considering how badly they are at running a fight thru to the endgame.
You all may be missing what I think is Drongo's point.
We've got circumstantial evidence of attempting to develop WMDs, and a leader who is known to be hositle to our interests and would no doubt like a WMD.
The last time we had this scenario, and went with the "shoot first, ask questions later" approach. It has not played out so well.
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 18.09.2007 @ 13:23
you guys (and girls) are right; Iran is a threat/may be becoming a threat/ smells funny. I guess we have to invade. Heck, if we get three wars going we've got to win at least one of them, right?
Comment Posted By busboy33 On 18.09.2007 @ 01:58
Of course, N. Korea does have the nukes, and he is definitely crazy enough to use them. So I guess we go there too. And if Pakistan gets any more unstable, well, what's one more war, right?
After all, the American military is the greatest ever, and can fight an unlimited number of conflicts forever with nothing more than a ball of twine and some duct tape.
. . . sorry, my crazy pills just wore off. What were we talking about?
