How do I fool thee? Let me count the ways...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1j_GUvrysA&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Faligarians%2Ecom%2Fmehfil%2Finde x%2Ephp%3Ftopic%3D7866%2E0%3Btopicseen

This is too funny.

Deleted

I felt sorry for him. He forgot his lines and didn't even have the ear piece to prompt him.

Must have been getting too much radio interference on his backpack transmitter...?

I felt sorry for him. He forgot his lines and didn't even have the ear piece to prompt him.

Its a surgical implant...isnt it?

He should have been wearing his tinfoil hat.

I'm eagerly waiting for someone to defend this, lol.

- N

Great vid, I wonder how long it takes to wash away the old memories and wash in the new ones?

I remember one time, in Texas I think, a radio announcer, as joke, started telling people to send in money to the radio station. Donations, Checks etc… by the end of the week he had over $100,000 dollars. …?!?!? He didn’t do anything other than tell people to send in money, so people did.

It’s scary how sheep-like some people are.

I remember one time, in Texas I think, a radio announcer, as joke, started telling people to send in money to the radio station. Donations, Checks etc… by the end of the week he had over $100,000 dollars. …?!?!? He didn’t do anything other than tell people to send in money, so people did.

It’s scary how sheep-like some people are.

I heard another story about some college students in Australia who put up a billboard along a desert highway, with a picture of an attractive smiling women, and then the lines:

'Nothing...What you've been looking for!'

There was also a phone number, which soon started to ring with inquiries, as to where people could find some of this 'nothing'.

"paying suiciders, uh, to kill innocent life..."

Amazingly, though... this guy is not the worst public speaker we have had as president. Eisenhower will always hold that crown.

The continuing adventures of Dubya:

Bush Cites Progress in Pakistan, Afghanistan :confused:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/29/AR2006092901539.html
Progress?

Bush made his remarks as a resurgent Taliban is leading a spike in violence in southern Afghanistan, a development that has resulted in increasing friction between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Bush hails liberation of Afghanistan as a `great achievement' :eek:

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/15642585.htm


huh?

Afghanistan is reeling from its worst bloodshed since the 2001 U.S.-led intervention as the Taliban and allied warlords tie down 42,000 American and NATO-led troops and President Hamid Karzai struggles with colossal corruption, record opium production and nose-diving popularity.


America grateful to Pakistan, says Bush

http://www.dawn.com/2006/09/30/top4.htm

Addressing a gathering of the American Reserve Officers Association, Mr Bush said that the capture of key Al Qaeda figures by Pakistan had helped protect American people.

He said America was providing high-tech equipment to improve security surveillance capabilities of Pakistani forces so that they could establish stronger control in areas along the country’s western border.

“Were it not for the information gained from the terrorists captured with the help of Pakistan, our intelligence community believes…, Al Qaeda and its allies would have succeeded in launching another attack against the American homeland.

“Our close cooperation with the government of Pakistan has saved American lives — and America is grateful to have a strong and steadfast ally in the war against these terrorists,” he said.


:D

Musharraf blames US and the West for importing, breeding extremism into Pakistan

http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Musharraf_blames_U.S._West_for_extremism_0913.html

Constructive criticism???? :D

Al-Qaida to Bush: You're a liar and a failure

http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/story/0,,1884595,00.html


In a video message released yesterday, the Egyptian-born doctor Ayman al-Zawahiri asked: "Bush, oh failure and liar, why can't you be courageous for once and confront your people and tell them the truth about your losses in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Bush has praise for `free' Kazakhstan

President Bush took another step in his delicate foreign policy waltz with the authoritarian government of Kazakhstan on Friday, praising the oil-rich Central Asian country as "a free nation" while welcoming its president, Nursultan Nazarbayev, to the White House for lunch.

During a brief joint appearance in the Oval Office, Bush said the two presidents pledged to "support the forces of moderation throughout the world," while Nazarbayev, speaking through a translator, reiterated his commitment to ridding his country of nuclear weapons and said the two nations had "truly become close partners."


Hahahahaha! :D


Neither man mentioned the sore points in that partnership: the absence of free elections in Kazakhstan, which became an independent state in 1991; state restrictions on the news media and its recent decision to shut down two prominent American democracy organizations.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-0609300103sep30,1,6574243.story?coll=chi-newsnationworld-hed

How the fuck can anyone say Kazakhstan is free????

It’s scary how sheep-like some people are.

Indeed.

I just find it deplorable how only morons on the far-right are viewed as "sheep" and ignorant masses, while you have equally numerous and deranged individuals on the far-left who get free passes on these types of things.

"OMG!!! 9-11 was an inside job because some dude on the internet told me!!11!"

What's embarassing is ridicule of the accomplished by the less accomplished for being presumptively less accomplished than the less accomplished themselves are able to demonstrate to one another accomplishment-wise.

What's embarassing is ridicule of the accomplished by the less accomplished for being presumptively less accomplished than the less accomplished themselves are able to demonstrate to one another accomplishment-wise.

Enough with the tautological obfuscation! :mad:

What's embarassing is ridicule of the accomplished by the less accomplished for being presumptively less accomplished than the less accomplished themselves are able to demonstrate to one another accomplishment-wise.

Style (http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Style-Fourth-Roger-Angell/dp/020530902X), you should try it sometime.

Enough with the tautological obfuscation! :mad:
Okay.

He was elected -- thrice, at least. You were not -- never.

He's a playa. You're a spectator.

Sorry. You asked for better definition. ;)
Style (http://www.amazon.com/Elements-Style-Fourth-Roger-Angell/dp/020530902X)
My "style" is my own. Your's is someone else's.

Get back to me when you are your own man.

Okay.

He was elected -- thrice, at least. You were not -- never.

He's a playa. You're a spectator.

You already know my views on the herd.

Their selection or choice only confirms it, unfortunately.

Fortunately, it is not the herd that is contributing to the growth and progress in this society.

I shudder to think of the results otherwise.

You already know my views on the herd.

Their selection or choice only confirms it, unfortunately.

Fortunately, it is not the herd that is contributing to the growth and progress in this society.

I shudder to think of the results otherwise.
Fixate on the Herd and succumb to the Pack.

While the Pride watches from above. ;)

Fixate on the Herd and succumb to the Pack.

While the Pride watches from above. ;)

Pride goes before a Fall.

Do you believe President Ahmadinejad is the true power in Iran?

Then why Bush in America? ;)

Do you believe President Ahmadinejad is the true power in Iran?

Then why Bush in America? ;)

Its not the action, its the perception of it that validates the theory.

Pride goes before a Fall.
The Pride goes to intiate the Fall. ;)

Its not the action, its the perception of it that validates the theory.
In Science, it's experiment/test/falsification that validates the theory.

Not the fancy.

Ms. PhD-wannabe. http://www.sciforums.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

In Science, it's experiment/test/falsification that validates the theory.

Not the fancy.

Ms. PhD-wannabe. http://www.sciforums.com/images/smilies/tongue.gif

Everything begins with observation Mr. G.

You need a basis for a theory, even in science. ;)

Everything begins with observation Mr. G.
No. Observation begins with somethng to observe.
You need a basis for a theory, even in science. ;)
Perception, no doubt. ;)

No. Observation begins with somethng to observe.

Perception, no doubt. ;)

Semantics my dear.

Language did away with the discrete.

Do you believe President Ahmadinejad is the true power in Iran?

Then why Bush in America?

No, and no.

But I guess you fail to know the meaning behind those that represent our countries. We know they're not the power, but they're the ones everyone looks up to and they're both the ones making all these idiotic, lying comments. But I guess since Bush and he don't have the true power, we should just shut our trap and allow them to make our countries look like fools, eh? :rolleyes:

- N

Semantics my dear.

Language did away with the discrete.
No. Language defines the discrete for the imagination, my dear.

No. Language defines the discrete for the imagination, my dear.

No experience with the abstract, Mr. G? :)

You must have a Chinese soul; they never got past pictograms either.

No, and no.

But I guess you fail to know the meaning behind those that represent our countries. We know they're not the power, but they're the ones everyone looks up to and they're both the ones making all these idiotic, lying comments. But I guess since Bush and he don't have the true power, we should just shut our trap and allow them to make our countries look like fools, eh? :rolleyes:

- N
Guess again.

No experience with the abstract, Mr. G? :)

You must have a Chinese soul; they never got past pictograms either.
Yes, ample experience.

Abstract spatial conceptualization skills, coupled with spoken language skills, afforded me the opportunity to earn a decent living for a couple decades.

Still, there's no substitute for the concrete.

You should try it sometime.

Life is more than just the dance.

Yes, ample experience.

Abstract spatial conceptualization skills, coupled with spoken language skills, afforded me the opportunity to earn a decent living for a couple decades.

Still, there's no substitute for the concrete.

You should try it sometime.

Life is more than just the dance.

Been there, done that.

Been there, done that.
Cynic, eh?

Cynic, eh?

The reverse.

Too much concrete weighs me down. :)

Sounds fishy.

muahahahah a lot of retarded post

I have just checked out the opening youtube video again

i dunno you yanks should be well embarrased at that bumbling idiot...

I have just checked out the opening youtube video again

i dunno you yanks should be well embarrased at that bumbling idiot...
Oh, I don't know. A tool doesn't have to be a tool maker to be useful. ;)

According to a latest report on CNN today, It looks like Bush's Iraq war is killing more innocant Iraqi's (665,000) than Saddam ever did.

How do I fool thee? Let me count the ways...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1j_GUvrysA&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Faligarians%2Ecom%2Fmehfil%2Finde x%2Ephp%3Ftopic%3D7866%2E0%3Btopicseen

This is too funny.
This is nothing new.
This is Booshy EVERYTIME he opens his mouth.
Fortunately, for him, this is many Americans when they open their mouth.
Imagine a country full of mofos talking pure nonsensical insanity.
Well it's dominating the world.

According to a latest report on CNN today, It looks like Bush's Iraq war is killing more innocant Iraqi's (665,000) than Saddam ever did.

Where do you people come up with these numbers??? What report?

Who knows? Does it even matter anymore?
We are swimming in blood.
We might as well go to Iraq, and set up a vacation spot. Surfs up. Nothing better than a good bloodbath and some blood surfing.
It's great to be American.

There is nothing better than scuba diving in arab blood. Lots of underbloody sights to see. Snorkling is a great past time.

Life feeds on life.

Everyone kills something to survive.

Everyone/everything living dies by something else.

Nature is the biggest murderer of all!

Hell, even Bush can't hold a candle to Nature. http://www.sciforums.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif

Impeach Nature!!!

What are you talking about? We don't kill to survive. It's not about survival at all. It's about tyrrany and terror. We kill just to watch people die. It's fun because of the opportunity for a good swim.

What are you talking about? We don't kill to survive.
We don't kill animals and plants for food?

Let them eat rocks?
It's not about survival at all.
It's only about argument?
It's about tyrrany and terror.
Sounds more like it's all about fear.
We kill just to watch people die. It's fun ecause of the opportunity for a good swim.
Please tell us you live more than 1000 feet from a school. ;)

Ya we should just pull out of the Middle East completely and not worry about what is going on there because we are safe in America here. Ignorance will be bliss...until they fly another plane into a building.....or worse

Am i the only one who sees this...that they will attack again no matter what, and sitting back and watching it happen is idiotic and suicidal.

Where do you people come up with these numbers??? What report?

Check it out at: http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/iraq

wow...just watched the video.

That man scares me. he is clearly mental.

What scares me most is that people actualy BELIEVE this guy.

Check it out at: http://news.yahoo.com/fc/world/iraq

Still, that link shows me nothing....:bugeye:

Still, that link shows me nothing....:bugeye:

Same Report, same information, read and weep;

http://www.drudge.com/news/86376/study-war-killed-655000-iraqis

I have to make a comment here. The opening sentence says the report is controversial. I have to state here that the controversy is merely political. It is a peer reviewed paper in the Lancet and apparently the revisions have been minimal.

From a scientific viewpoint the report is not controversial in its methods. What's controversial are the reactions of the different groups within society to this report. And of course there are always scientists who disagree, however, that doesn't make the paper controversial as such in a scientific manner. Merely the outcome.

Same Report, same information, read and weep;

http://www.drudge.com/news/86376/study-war-killed-655000-iraqis


If you remember Les Roberts who did the previous Lancet study claiming 100,000 civilian deaths in 2004, then you will have an accurate comparison to this new bogus study.

Les Roberts is the same man who admitted his last study was "based on a small sample", yet he still released his findings. This is the same man who called his own congo studies shoddy....

http://healtoronto.com/african_numbers.html

"Extrapolating from 1.5 million to 20 million, it's shoddy, but it's the best we can do right now," Mr. Roberts said. "People correctly criticized us for that."

Now consider the fact that the two main authors, Ronald Waldman and Gilbert Burnham, both contributed large sums of money to both Les Roberts campaign and also to John Kerry.... Nothing political going on here hugh? The fact that the studies are also always released right before elections is not suspect at all either...... This study is crap, and everyone knows it. Respected studies put the real death toll at around 50K.

In order to achieve 655,000, 750 civilians a day would have to die in Iraq. Even Jihadunspun.com never quoted those ridiculous numbers.

If you remember Les Roberts who did the previous Lancet study claiming 100,000 civilian deaths in 2004, then you will have an accurate comparison to this new bogus study.

Les Roberts is the same man who admitted his last study was "based on a small sample", yet he still released his findings. This is the same man who called his own congo studies shoddy....

http://healtoronto.com/african_numbers.html



Now consider the fact that the two main authors, Ronald Waldman and Gilbert Burnham, both contributed large sums of money to both Les Roberts campaign and also to John Kerry.... Nothing political going on here hugh? The fact that the studies are also always released right before elections is not suspect at all either...... This study is crap, and everyone knows it. Respected studies put the real death toll at around 50K.

In order to achieve 655,000, 750 civilians a day would have to die in Iraq. Even Jihadunspun.com never quoted those ridiculous numbers.

calling the numbers ridiculous doesn't make it so.

Criticize the original paper in The Lancet. If you can.

calling the numbers ridiculous doesn't make it so.

Criticize the original paper in The Lancet. If you can.

Interesting. How many innocent iraqis are killed each day? 40?, 50? 60? 70? I guess if it were 100 a day, it wouldn't sound 'ridiculous' would it? Who do we have to thank for that? Who or what really started the iraqis to kill each other in the first place? That's the real question I think.

Who or what really started the iraqis to kill each other in the first place?

The US led coalition who insisted on UN sanctions?

The invaders of a sovereign nation who overthrew an existing government?

The radicalisation of the Muslim world by american foreign policy?

The presence of an foreign force in their country which could not install a regime to control the people? But hey, they did manage to pump oil so we can't really complain too much.

Was it a multiple choice question?

The US led coalition who insisted on UN sanctions?

The invaders of a sovereign nation who overthrew an existing government?

The radicalisation of the Muslim world by american foreign policy?

The presence of an foreign force in their country which could not install a regime to control the people? But hey, they did manage to pump oil so we can't really complain too much.

Was it a multiple choice question?

I think it just boils down to one answer and one answer only. Bush's passion to bomb and invade Iraq and capture Sadam using WMD (???) as the excuse is the only real answer.

calling the numbers ridiculous doesn't make it so.

Criticize the original paper in The Lancet. If you can.

Germany during WWII had a population of about 70 million. During the war, it is estimated that civilian casualties were around 1.7 million.

Iraq has a population of around 28 million. Civilian casualities listed by this report claim 655K. In other words, civilian casualties equal to that of Germany during WWII.

Entire cities in Germany were completely demolished, and an all out invasion of its territory took place from England and the United States from the West, and Russia from the east. Can you possibly conclude that Iraq would suffer comparible losses to that of Germany when the latter country was left in ruins?

If you believe that, than you have to be either dense, or so far leaning towards the left that you will convince yourself of the studies truth.

Secondly, I am not sure how they feel they can use a survey to get an accurate estimate of death toll from a population that is so strongly against American occupation. Death Certificates are being used as proof of deaths, but their is no strong central government to confirm these papers. While they are supposed to be distributed for violent deaths by the central government, local authorties have been issuing them for almost anything. There is no way to prove how that person died other than asking them, and they will be extremely biased in their answers.

I am not sure how you do not feel that such high numbers (compared to WWII) and the fact that its main authors donating more than substantial amounts of money to Democratic campaigns does not present a problem. The fact that its authors donated to both Kerry and to Les Roberts should dismiss teh study outright. I think you are blinded by your hatred of both Bush and that of the Iraq war.

Germany during WWII had a population of about 70 million. During the war, it is estimated that civilian casualties were around 1.7 million.

Iraq has a population of around 28 million. Civilian casualities listed by this report claim 655K. In other words, civilian casualties equal to that of Germany during WWII.

Entire cities in Germany were completely demolished, and an all out invasion of its territory took place from England and the United States from the West, and Russia from the east. Can you possibly conclude that Iraq would suffer comparible losses to that of Germany when the latter country was left in ruins?

Is that how you criticize the lancet paper?

I will indulge you though. I fear you are not very well in the know on German history during WW2. The German people were the least troubled by the war until almost the very end. Other countries were looted and food and other goods were send back to Germany. In fact the German people basically led a normal life for most of the war, unlike the occupied countries by the nazi regime. During the last winter of the war half of Holland was still occupied by the Germans. 16.000 died of hunger that winter. That was with most of the infrastrucure in place. You may see these pictures of demolished cities in germany, but ironically the country side was basically untouched. The industry was also hardly touched by the bombing campaign either. I can't remember the exact figure but I can look it up for you when I get home, but german industry only lost 15% or so of its capacity during the war. In fact when germany finally got the green light from the allied occupiers after the war the german industry was shooting forward again like a racehorse on steroids. On east german side things were a bit more bleak. That was because the russians took whole german factories and moved them into russia. They stripped east germany.

The german civilians actually came off light. Most of the war they actually did not suffer much. Merely in the last year they ran into shit.

In iraq the shit got bombed out of the infrastruture. In Iraq the country was still suffering from UN sanctions, which caused the demise of 500,000 children without bombs being dropped.

A invasion that destroyed the civilian infrastructure, no reserves were in place because the sanctions before the invasion already bled the people dry, and a subsequent civil war.

Well, I can easily believe 600,000 perished because of this. Especially since you still didn't refute the paper.

All you did was to say you didn't believe in the figure. Well, my son, you might be religious but I am not. I am not going to trust your believes on this.



If you believe that, than you have to be either dense, or so far leaning towards the left that you will convince yourself of the studies truth.
Ad hominem. Adress the issue.


Secondly, I am not sure how they feel they can use a survey to get an accurate estimate of death toll from a population that is so strongly against American occupation. Death Certificates are being used as proof of deaths, but their is no strong central government to confirm these papers. While they are supposed to be distributed for violent deaths by the central government, local authorties have been issuing them for almost anything. There is no way to prove how that person died other than asking them, and they will be extremely biased in their answers.

Read the paper if you are not sure. No need to speculate.


I am not sure how you do not feel that such high numbers (compared to WWII) and the fact that its main authors donating more than substantial amounts of money to Democratic campaigns does not present a problem. The fact that its authors donated to both Kerry and to Les Roberts should dismiss teh study outright. I think you are blinded by your hatred of both Bush and that of the Iraq war.

Adress the issues. Political views are not acceptable in the Lancet paper. It's a biomedical journal. Not a political rag. The impact factor of the lancet in 2004 was 21. You probably have no clue what that means so I will explain it to you. It is one of the better biomedical journals around. They don't let trash in. I've never even published anything this high. My best was development with an impact factor of 8.

Read the paper and criticise it. Nobody is going to be impressed by the argument that:

Spuriousmonkey is leftwing and hence there can't be 650,000 death iraqis.

or:

I can't believe there were so many dead iraqis because germany during WW2 had this amount of casualties.

Address the issues. You have a peer-reviewed paper in a high impact factor biomedical journal. There methods have been criticized by reviewers who are high profile scientists themselves. The paper has been checked by the editor who knows his stuff.

However, apparently you know better because you can't believe in the figure.

That's not an argument.

What is wrong with you guys?

It’s the Dutch who are famous for having what so called “the blame culture”.

I really would like to see someone blaming himself and/or the American nation for electing this guy, or at least for re-electing him which is even more and more ....... (you choose)

Currently I live in one of the Arab countries, and I have visited many of these countries already. I can see from here how bias the media in America is. I can feel the lies we all here all the time from the LEADERS of the UNITED STATES. This makes me ask myself different question than yours.

Originally posted by spuriousmonkey:

The german civilians actually came off light. Most of the war they actually did not suffer much. Merely in the last year they ran into shit.

1.8 million civilian casualties is coming off light? You do realize that the civilian casualties include the 200,000 that were efficiently sent to the ovens during the holocaust? Perhaps in comparison to Russia they got off light, but by any standards they were slaughtered by fire bombing.

The industry was also hardly touched by the bombing campaign either. I can't remember the exact figure but I can look it up for you when I get home, but german industry only lost 15% or so of its capacity during the war.


This was based on two reasons: One,the inefficiency and inaccuracy of allied bombing (they would miss) that would generally hit civilian targets. The second was the amazing ability of the Germans to recreate lost industry.
After the allies realized that strategic bombing no longer worked, they switched to what is referred to as area bombardment. This included destroying all of the housing that the idustry workers lived in. These people did not live out in the country, but instead their largely wooden structures would create fire storms.

Russia, as an example, actually had an increase in industry even after the destructive campaign of the Germans, so I am not sure were you are going with this.....


The German people were the least troubled by the war until almost the very end.

Well since you do not believe Germany, even with the holocaust suffered, lets try Japan. With a population of 72 million (Iraq has only 38% a population), they lost 55 thousand less civilians than what the Lancet study predicts in Iraq. This includes the fire bombing of Tokyo, and of course, Hiroshima and Nagasaki.... I guess they did not suffer much either......:rolleyes:

In Iraq the country was still suffering from UN sanctions, which caused the demise of 500,000 children without bombs being dropped.

A invasion that destroyed the civilian infrastructure, no reserves were in place because the sanctions before the invasion already bled the people dry, and a subsequent civil war.

Well, I can easily believe 600,000 perished because of this.

You do realize that 601 out of the 655 thousand were blaimed on violent deaths, not starvation?

Read the paper if you are not sure. No need to speculate.

I think the above proved your attention to detail and knowledge of the lancet study....

Political views are not acceptable in the Lancet paper. It's a biomedical journal. Not a political rag.

The cannot be ignored when the lead authors have been giving large contributions to politicians who were not only anti-war, but also politicians who took part in the last study.

Read the paper and criticise it.

My critique is that obvious fact that while usual scientific standards were followed with regards to previous studies, the situation in Iraq (severe bias by the populous) would prevent any accurate information that was the result of a glorified survey. It is that simple.

The impact factor of the lancet in 2004 was 21. You probably have no clue what that means so I will explain it to you. It is one of the better biomedical journals around.

You really need to get off your high horse. My wife is a fellow in reproductive endocrinology, and I have had a little insight into research, both medical and bio. If you know anything about work hours of physicians, you will know the contributions of their spouses to their research. Thanks for the lesson.....

However, apparently you know better because you can't believe in the figure.

Because it is ridiculous in comparison to civilian casualties from other conflicts. This one is mild compared to others in history; the number is irrational. Add a mix of politics in November, and the answer becomes clear. I think the your missing what is to most obvious.... must be all the time spent on biomedical journals.

One, two, cha-cha-cha.

One, two, cha-cha-cha.

I imagine you log onto the web in a room full of mahogany, sitting in a leather chair that costs as much as my food bill for a semester. You browse sciforums, slowly getting wasted on a liquor I've never heard of and has an unpronouncable name.

I imagine you log onto the web in a room full of mahogany, sitting in a leather chair that costs as much as my food bill for a semester.
No. I rent a 2BR/1B I've lived in for more than 10 years. I've not owned a car in 8 years because I can walk to work. I bicycle wherever I need to go locally.

I live below my means today so that tomorrow I may retire early and fly the world in my mahoghany-lined Leer jet. I can buy whatever I want today, but I choose to wait until later to do so.
You browse sciforums, slowly getting wasted on a liquor I've never heard of and has an unpronouncable name.
True, but pronouncable by the familiar. Laphraoig (http://www.laphroaig.com/). ;)

No. I rent a 2BR/1B I've lived in for more than 10 years. I've not owned a car in 8 years because I can walk to work. I bicycle wherever I need to go locally.

I live below my means today so that tomorrow I may retire early and fly the world in my mahoghany-lined Leer jet. I can buy whatever I want today, but I choose to wait until later when I may need to.

That's cool. I don't own a car, either. Biking is far cheaper. Better for the legs and lungs, too.

True, but pronouncable by the familiar. Laphraoig (http://www.laphroaig.com/). ;)

I suspected you were a whiskey drinker.

I suspected you were a whiskey drinker.
Because of your intuitive appreciation of my investment in quality economy.

An expensive single malt Scotch, imbibed to excess, is much more kindly metabolized -- with no attendent hangover effect -- then all the other cheaper, double carbon-chained dreck that other folks prefer and thereafter pay for a second time, or two. ;)

Indeed.

I just find it deplorable how only morons on the far-right are viewed as "sheep" and ignorant masses, while you have equally numerous and deranged individuals on the far-left who get free passes on these types of things.

"OMG!!! 9-11 was an inside job because some dude on the internet told me!!11!"

You are retorted, Bush is the leader of our country, what he and his administration say actually matters, and when people follow it actually damages our country.

Avery and his "Loose Change" documentary that's so popular with poorly educated high-school kids is a poorly produced documentary floating around google videos featuring fight-club music and monotone narration by a nobody. Not to mention Avery's claims are about as political as conspiracy theorists hung up on the moon landing, Kennedy assassination or whereabouts of the Lindbergh baby so I'm not sure how you can peg him as "far left", though admittedly the situation Avery proposes, as lacking in any basis in reality or fact as it may be is tempting to believe in even for moderates due to Bush and his administration's gross incompetence which, at times, seems very much like a devious concerted effort to do the American people harm.

In other words, you have no idea what you’re talking about, go sit down before you trip over your own unwarranted rage and hurt yourself. You right-wingers can't play the persecution card anymore, you're in charge of fucking everything.

...Bush and his administration's gross incompetence...You right-wingers ..., you're in charge of fucking everything.
Thus to the point: The Incompetents rule over the demonstrably even less competent.

Funny that the latter presume to be true Darwinists, and thereby give the rest of us a bad name by their own patent incompetence.

Democrats: What are they good for...?

Independants already know.