 | | Re: Israel is Losing
|
|
(...) Neither can I. I don't think it is 'western' culture thing either, after all if you've already got a culture why would you need to adopt someone else's. If you go back in history then all the 'great civilisations' were either created through (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
Recall - Oh heck YES Replace with - The govenator Prop 53 - Yes Prop 54 - Yes as I type this post Davis is conceding this election, score one for the good guys! and shame on you LA Times, your slime campaign failed. I just wanted to post on prop 54, (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Gee, that's a fairly pathetic rationale in my view. Is that the way you keep track of your bank account -- instinct? Arnold is worse than business as usual. He is a puppet backed all the way from D.C. to Enron. Didn't you know? Always follow (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. God knows why!
|
|
The point to the slight subject change is that one minute into the counting, the networks are already declaring that everything is decided. God, I despise network news: Don't touch that dial - we are gonna skip the story and tell you the (projected, (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Instinct. It's worked many times for me before. Ok, before you hit me with a "Get real!" remark I was just plain sick of the usual politicians. I just wanted to try someone else. (...) I was shown the blank side and so was the guy who asked me (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Me too. Recall: Yes Replacement: McClintock -- this election is all about the state economy and he's the only one who has had direct answers to every question about the economy. 53: No. Dumb idea. This would just further tie the hands of any (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Israel is Losing
|
|
(...) I don't mean to be flip about this very serious issue, but such is the nature of conquest. People of other cultures may not automatically see the advantages of another way of life -- in fact those supposed advantages may be mitigated by (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) What does voting "no" have to do with it? What are you trying to say - only those who vote "yes" get to vote for the replacement, or do you really like to see another $40 million spent on a second election to resolve the recall if it is a (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Israel is Losing
|
|
I found this interesting... (URL) not sure I agree with this, viscerally... "The only places where a Western culture has successfully transplanted itself are those where great population pressure and genocidal methods were used to extirpate the (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) I guess Kermit was correct after all-- it's not easy being green! And somebody should forward that data to UPS;-) JOHN (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) This strikes me as weird. It's as if one is able to physically hedge their vote. If one votes for "no" recall, how is it that one is able to cast a hypothetical vote? (...) Hmmm... It has intringe, sex, betrayal, sex, gambling, sex, sex, (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Green Bionicle is "underloved" (1), I hear, so yaay for Peter I guess. 1 - There are always 6 different figures in each of the waves, and each one is a different color... Supposedly Red always sells out first (across all the lines so far, (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) 53 - NO 54 - NO Recall - NO Replacement - Peter Camejo, that Green Bionicle lover Hanging chads - NO, first time I ever bothered to check "I Voted" sticker - NO I had headed out to the polls feeling kinda disenfranchised-- no one ever pleaded (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Recall: no. Misuse of the recall procedure. Replace with: Peter Camejo (Green Party, No. 65 on the ballot) 53: No 54: No (...) No substance, all style. Doubt me? Look at how you refer to Arnold. :-) Here's my summation of Things to Come: (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) "you've seen one stolen election, you've seen them all" ??? I dunno, that was just a guess (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Wishful thinking--only 1 year with Dubya instead of 3... Dave K (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Whoops! That should be 2000, instead of 2002. What the heck was I thinking? Dave! (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
(...) Out of curiosity, what led you to conclude that Arnold was the best qualified candidate to head the world's fifth-largest economy? (...) One reason is that this is a potential violation of voter privacy. Another reason was that this courteous (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | "Fair and balanced" and, well, they never claimed to be accurate...
|
|
(URL) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | This Californian Has Voted. Have You?
|
|
I just got my "I Voted" sticker. Well, my vote has been made and I'll pass them along. I would like to hear from the rest of LUGNET's Californians. Recall- YES. Replace with- "The Terminator" Prop 53- YES Prop 54- NO Prop 53 and 54 didn't get all (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) No we are talking about legal marriages. That is very much the jurisdiction of the first amendment. (...) The silly notion that Christianity is somehow superior to our government and other religions. (...) Well you were talking about legal (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Have you EVER EVEN READ the HOLY BIBLE, John? I'm just going to cut and paste biblical cites from previous posts in this forum. I mean, why waste too much time on the usual John Neal foolishness? (URL) Sadly, many faiths do suborn the use of (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) The ACLU agrees ideologically with Oliver North? -->Bruce<-- (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The partisian trap in California
|
|
(...) I would add to that the observation that his apology was also an oddly flaccid non-denial denial. He didn't say "I apologize for grabbing these 15+ women, which was wrong of me to do." Instead, he said, "I apologize if I offended anyone," (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
(...) Not applicable, Mike. We are talking about civil unions here. (...) Really? How so? (...) But don't you see? This is what I am talking about! I am talking about social mores, culture, values. (...) I think you are confused in this assessment. (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The partisian trap in California
|
|
(...) As for the threat of terror (imminent or otherwise), this is what I genuinely believe: I have no doubt that if SH had biological, chemical or nuclear WMDs at his disposal, he eventually would have made them available to terrorists such as OBL (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The partisian trap in California
|
|
(...) Arnold claims in one breath that he does not deny all the stories about grabbing and immediately continues that "this is not (him)." Well, if he admits he did it, then it is him. What is this fairy tale that it isn't. He wants to imply that (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The partisian trap in California
|
|
(...) Let it, and let him address each one. I have a feeling that after tomorrow, the issue will become mute (sic), because most of the allegations are beyond the statute of limitations (so at best they would get an apologize which he has already (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The partisian trap in California
|
|
(...) A cute answer (heck, you got me to laugh with you!), but it doesn't deal with the substance of the claims. I think we are up to 15 accusers, a number that will no doubt grow. (...) Of course the timing is suspect. Then again, sometimes it (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
Go Mike, go!!! A very reasonable and very american approach to the issues raised by John Neal. This is what it should all be about, all of us defending each other's right to liberty in the manner we choose to express it. I bow low to your greater (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The partisian trap in California
|
|
(...) This kind of nonsense is precisely why its not worth discussing anything with you. I can't even call it a debate if your replies are going to be this moronic. You don't have any logic behind your position, you just keep asking the same (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The partisian trap in California
|
|
(...) If Democrats has sufficient sway in Congress, there would certainly be an independent counsel investigating the run-up to the war (a la Ken Starr/Whitewater), but Republican lock-steppers have resisted any efforts in this regard. Likewise, the (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Holy crap! (was Re: The partisian trap in California)
|
|
snip (...) The first phrase of the first amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,..." (...) I consider myself a Christian and I am sick of hearing this nonsense. (...) (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The partisian trap in California
|
|
(...) You can link until the cows come home, but it really proves nothing. Nada. The best you can hope for is that Bush believed intelligence that suggested that WMD still existed (assuming that they indeed don't) and he was wrong. Nobody can prove (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Speaking of the recall...
|
|
(...) Should I be impressed that this candidate likes LEGO, afraid that he likes the wrong kind, or annoyed that this reference is pandering to the audience or ?? (21 years ago, 6-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| |
| | Speaking of the recall...
|
|
..the Sacramento NBC affiliate did short profiles of the major California gubernatorial candidates tonight. The Peter Camejo (Green Party) profile began with Mr. Camejo holding his grandson and saying to him, "You want to talk about Bionicles?" Hmm, (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, lugnet.mediawatch, FTX)
|
| |
| | Can't (was Re: LET IT DIE)
|
|
(...) See? That's precisely the wrong attitude to take. Speaking for myself, I would very much like to see your future creations and CAD renders. I looked at all the renders in the current thread and enjoyed them very much -- I also happen to be (...) (21 years ago, 5-Oct-03, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | this belongs in ".trains" (was "LET IT DIE")
|
|
(Setting "follow-up"...) (21 years ago, 5-Oct-03, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.cad, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | this belongs in ".trains" (was "Moving without context")
|
|
(Setting "follow-up"...) (21 years ago, 5-Oct-03, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.cad, lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Moving without context
|
|
(...) Were we reading the same post? I didn't see that in Larry's response at all. We've had "fantasy trains" in .trains before and they were well received. It is very easy to get the wrong impression from one line of text. (...) Yes, and that goes (...) (21 years ago, 5-Oct-03, to lugnet.trains, lugnet.cad, lugnet.space, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
