Debate : Search Results: bruce half irish


Off-Topic / Debate / Search Results: bruce half irish

Results 801 – 820 of about 1900.

Search took 0.01 CPU seconds.

Messages: Full | Brief | Compact

Sort: Prefer Newer | Prefer Older | Best Match

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) We put the Dot.Coms up against the wall! Telephone solicitors are next! Comrade Bruce Glorious Democratic Republic of Socialistic Libertarian Greens Where Everyone is Equal Except for Those of Us Who Drive Really Big German Cars and have T10 (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.411)

		Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace)
(...) If one has to start somewhere, Iraq is a pretty good place to start. Of course, one has to question Dubya's reasons (and complete lack of backing up his rhetoric with any thing like facts) for starting in the first place. (...) It's good for (...) (22 years ago, 21-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.411)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) Larry is absolutely right on this. The system is set up to make it difficult for marginal parties to grow. Essentially, if you wish to gain any power, you need to subvert one of the existing parties through infilteration. The question is (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.411)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) It should be noted that the 2nd amendment itself in no way addresses that its purpose is for the overthrow of the government or as a hedge against tyranny. (...) The "well-regulated militia" that opted to go its own way was the Confederate (...) (22 years ago, 20-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.411)

		Re: Those who cast the votes decide nothing.
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote: <snip> (...) And my point right back at you is that millions and millions of people, in your country as well as mine, and the countless millions from all over the world, protesting do not a 'few' make. (...) (21 years ago, 10-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

half
(score: 0.411)

		Re: Remember the Axis of Evil? [may offend]
(...) Ahem. Now listen, I do not watch television (1), and certainly not network news, much less Fox (I don't even have cable). But I'd say this about Fox: at least they admit that they are biased towards the right. The big three and CNN (...) (21 years ago, 9-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

half
(score: 0.411)

		Re: Bush fires Guantanamo defence team
(...) Thank you. If for no other reason than its old news, ploughed ground, and things of this nature. (...) I have a sneaky suspicion that this is a lot of irregularities around the country, but Florida just happened to receive the spotlight. (...) (...) (21 years ago, 5-Dec-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

half
(score: 0.410)

		Re: Averages and Capitalism (was Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!)
(...) I don't accept that as a given. Too often pure socialist countries started off way down the ladder anyway, and are further weighted down by being dictatorships. (...) I think it is easier for socialists to take over capitalist countries with (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.410)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) No. A car with a flat is going to eventually crash (not work). Governments with a "flat" would eventually fail. Better to use a clogged fuel injector analogy, where the performance is impaired, but leaving the car still working. (...) The next (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.410)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) I don't really have to: it's you that needs to prove that virtually every single country on the planet is a failure. _ :-O (Edvard Munch) - I said that every country practices socialism to some degree or another. You are stating that socialism (...) (22 years ago, 13-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.410)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) Counterfactual, as I said. (...) I'm sure FDR would have a bone to pick with you if he was alive. (...) I'm ashamed of you, Larry! Libertarians is the answer, of course. They stick to their guns - or dogma, depending on your viewpoint - better (...) (22 years ago, 12-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.410)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) Since I include any culture, it would seem not to be bigoted, beyond I am bigotted against bigotted people. And since the religious ethno-centricism is usally used to exploit/murder/steal from someone else not so "blessed", "wrong" and (...) (22 years ago, 12-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.410)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) Believing in God, and believing we are a country under God (a theocracy) are two vastly different things. Even if you are accurate in your claim, it would simply indicate that the vast majority of Americans are delusional (50 million Frenchmen (...) (22 years ago, 12-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.410)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) I suppose that depends on what level of socialism you are refering to. Virtually every nation on the planet practices some form of socialism, so I'd have to say that your claim that socialism working is counterfactual is...well, (...) (22 years ago, 12-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.410)

		Re: Vote against/for...
(...) See? Now this mentality of people, whether police or not, to automatically suspect people just 'cause they're black is the racist part. This is what makes me 'mad enuf to puke' Pointing out that DWB's happen is not racist--pointing out (...) (22 years ago, 8-Nov-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.410)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) "Reverse Discrimination": A politically correct term for the right wing meant to really say, "We done stole it fair and square, so no trying to redress the crime." ;-) Actually, I don't see how "reverse discrimination" applies here whatever (...) (22 years ago, 11-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.410)

		Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
(...) As long as you understand that "Young Hedonists for Satan" has the same rights of access and same protection under the law... Brucifer Devil's Advocate for the Day :-) (22 years ago, 10-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.410)

		Re: Why I support LEGO through thick and thin.
(...) Okaaaay.. that is your twist on it. (Cup is half empty?) Here's my twist: because LEGO/TLG/TLC is focussed on earning money, it now IS earning money again. And this in turn is a positive thing for the future of the company. And if the company (...) (21 years ago, 20-Nov-03, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

half
(score: 0.408)

		Information War (was Re: Bush is almost as much of an idiot as is John Neal)
(...) Yes, there is something very wrong here... How the Orwellian White House Continues to Keep the Saddam-9/11 Connection Alive, Even After Bush Debunked the Lie. They Are the Masters of "1984" Double Speak. (URL) In short, Feith is saying no (...) (21 years ago, 18-Nov-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

half
(score: 0.408)

		Re: Durned Telemarketers!
(...) Thinking hard - unless you count bubbles in the light sabre as defective, all the parts have been there, they were always the right color, and they always worked. Bruce (yes, I know, it's not off-topic...) Time for a poll? :-) (22 years ago, 28-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

bruce
(score: 0.408)

More: Next Page >>