Results 281 – 300 of about 1900.
|
Search took 0.01 CPU seconds.
|
|
| |
|  
bruce
(score: 0.509)
|
|
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.508)
|
|
 | | Re: Xenophobia
|
| (...) My son is already not Aryan Pure, so it matters not to me. The school he goes to is heavily Chinese and Korean, anyway, so I figure if he learned those languages along with Spanish it would just make him that more adaptable. -->Bruce<-- (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.508)
|
|
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.508)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) For the most part, yes, but at the same time, less so than we thought. For a very few species, I start to suspect that David Brin is right about "uplift" being just around the corner. I'm kind of amazed that scientists have dragged their heels (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.507)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) Yup, that's always been a good one. :-) But as if on cue to back me up: (URL) "Research Finds Dogs Understand Language" I didn't need research to have figured this out. My dog brings the right toy when I ask for it (tug-of-war, squeeky, ball), (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.507)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) That really depends on the animal - the smarter they are the more they can move away from "instinct". My bird can put words, individuals, and activities together without me attempting to teach him in the slightest. The dog can do the same, if (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.507)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) I keep looking for something like marshal/marshall/martial....oh wait, there should be a comma after "valid". You sneaky devil - I almost missed it! Do I win a cookie? (Flakey Flix, fudge, no substituting Jack Stone macrofigs) Oooo...ooops, (...) (20 years ago, 4-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan.
|
| (...) I think it's fair to say that Europe ignored our advice at the end of WWI, so I'm not sure where the U.S. should accumulate any blame: "We told ya so!" :-) (...) The campaign in Italy wasn't working - the man who came up with the WWI Gallipoli (...) (20 years ago, 4-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) It's clear? Did he mean Marshal Law the comic? Martial law? I'm so confused... ;-) (...) I think Dave!'s scenario implies a longer term than "a few days", otherwise there isn't a lot of point to the question. Basically John is restating the (...) (20 years ago, 3-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) Actually, I understood you better than you did, I think. :-) (...) But you wanted to plant the notion that such an attack would be to aid Kerry, regardless of what Kerry would want. It was just the spin you had to put on it when it really (...) (20 years ago, 3-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) Ummm, I take it that you aren't going to answer the question... Let's see: you basically blamed Kerry for any attack (and ignored that Americans traditionally rally around the incumbent if attacked, which means any attack is actually an aid to (...) (20 years ago, 3-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) I'm confused. It seems that John's answer was very clear from the snipped quotes above. 1. "A delay for logistical reasons would be valid." Expanding on John's point, I would suggest that something such as Dave's hypothetical about a power (...) (20 years ago, 3-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan.
|
| (...) It was meant to hide his real identity, and thus disguise the fate of Captain Miller. Not all flashbacks are necessarily that of the character in question, though it may be regarded as a sneaky bit of story-telling subtrafuge and implied (...) (20 years ago, 1-Jun-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan.
|
| (...) Flung about willy-nilly? Snafu was the order of the day, and it was up the skill, intelligence, and daring of those involved to make order out of chaos. (...) I can't say that I recall one way or the other, but I presume that they would be (...) (20 years ago, 31-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan.
|
| (...) You were complaining about D-Day. As I said, the D-Day sequence is all of 20 minutes of the film. The rest is a squad searching for an american paratrooper which were generally dropped behind the american beaches. (...) Were they with the (...) (20 years ago, 30-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| | Re: Not Saving Private Ryan.
|
| (...) I've never quite understood this criticism. How is a movie that covers the action of little more than a squad supposed to cover Juno, Gold, and Sword? D-Day is all of 20 minutes of the film. Doesn't Britain have it's own film industry? Can't (...) (20 years ago, 29-May-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.506)
|
|
| | Re: Question for the Conservatives out there
|
| (...) K, so Dave K's Prez.. SecState would be... I'd say Larry (or John, I'm still debating that) SecDef would be Bruce (cause I like his style about dealing with foreign peeps) Who else... Who knows anything about agriculture? Dave K (20 years ago, 14-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| |
|
bruce
(score: 0.502)
|
More: Next Page >>
|
