Crap Throwing Monkey

Or they could always do like Speed and Die Hard and just take it in another direction... Snakes on a Plane 2: Snakes At An Airport. Snakes on a Plane 3: Snakes On A Bus. Snakes on a Plane 4: Snakes On a Ship...

But they're getting better. They spent an extra two weeks this year keeping the !@#$ing sand !@#$s out of our ports.

No, Kerry said he had a plan. He said he had several plans, in fact. Given that he was the heir apparrent to the Clinton legacy in the Democratic Party, I have no doubt he had several different and competing plans for each issue, as a matter of fact.

Careful, there. Since the Misourri government is banning all "safe sex" programs, Mickey might not know that he has the option of NOT blowing you...

Actually, "Abstinence programs do not work, period." is pretty much a fact.

Let's make it simple: A.Poor KRC doesn't want to go to the store, wants beer + fermenter = beer B.Poor KRC doesn't want to go to the store, wants beer - fermenter = no beer Mickey chooses option "B". Because apparently you don't have a say in the matter.

You choose?

I'll have to stop over at the Land Of Misfit Toys and say hi, then.

...and dream that were the other way around.

So you're saying, in effect, that the open-ended commitment in Iraq is evidence of the lack of a plan and poor leadership, but in Bosnia it's evidence of a good plan and good leadership. So you're saying, in effect, that the up-front admission of an open-ended commitment in Iraq is evidence of the lack of a plan and poor leadership, but committing to a "limited" deployment in Bosnia that's gone on eight years longer than planned is evidence of a good plan and good leadership.

Yeah. It's called marriage. Actually, it's about everyone pushing an agenda. For some people, it's religious. For some, it's "personal responsibility". For some, it's "public health". For some, it's insulating the individual from the consequences of their own actions. Count me in the "personal responsibility" crowd. I don't think contraception causes promiscuity, I don't care whether people are promiscuous or not, I tend to doubt that God's so obssessed with it as some of his followers seem to believe. But I don't think it's the government's responsibility to protect people from their own actions.

Soprano, so far my source is more accurate than yours.

It's called "self-medicating". Though crack is a little atypical; for the majority I think alcohol is the drug of choice.

But...but...but...Clinton put a hard time-limit of one year on that deployment! How can there still be troops there? Sorry...not germane to the topic, but I had to do it, for the "We need a hard-and-fast schedule for pulling troops out of Iraq" crowd.

But we're a representative democracy. Which means the people elect those that most closely represent them and their interests. In which context, voting problem creators in and problem solvers out makes perfect sense.

I'm reasonably sure he doesn't jam hurricanes into a big-ass NMR. What does one discover when one does an NMR test on a stem cell? I'm a physicist, so to me an NMR is something you do on hyrdogen so you can say "Ooooh, look...fine structure!"

Good job, Merovingian. You can program the Matrix, but can't even copy a damned link properly.

I sit around all day and play with my own feces. No, actually I'm a government contractor. So I sit around all day and play with other people's.

I'm just quoting this to mess with the display on Lori's phone.

Right here. Us right-wing Nazis banned him, remember?

Uhhhh...because they keep trying to get him out of office? You're not actually saying the Democrats should try to regain the executive branch without intending to solve the problems they inherit? They better have a !@#$ing plan, if they want the job.

Little known fact: at the start of the invasion of Iraq, the border defenses ("the berm") on the Iraq/Kuwait border weren't breached by the US Army...or ANY army, for that matter. They were breached by Kuwaiti civil engineers. Just thought it was interesting. Maybe even relevant.

No...maybe. Maybe just a little one, since Congress has the ability quibble over line items, but the executive has to accept or reject it as a whole, so when Congress spends a few billion dollars on a de facto jobs program by ordering six new ships that the Navy doesn't even want (which actually happened in the FY06 budget), the president's choice is to accept the extra billions Congress tacks on, or shut down the entire government (as I recall Clinton did...which I supported.) And although it would provide an effective check to Congressional budgetary stupidity, don't think for a minute I'm advocating the line-item veto. I'm not. The solution isn't to give the executive power to quibble over line items with Congress, the solution is for Congress to stop adding stupid sh-- to the budget. As long as Congress can keep padding the budget line-item by line-item but the executive has to address it as a whole, Congress has to take the lion's share of the blame. Except that in practical terms, the budget the White House sends over is little more than a set of suggestions compiled into a wish-list. It has about the same authority as one. The budget isn't a budget until Congress gets done with it. That has nothing to do with partisanship, that's simply how things work.

Like the name says, Touchdown Tommy.

I've heard more senseless strategies. I mean, I'm not advocating it...but I've heard stupider.