John Adams

If you're two blocks from a school, you're near it but it has nothing to do with the story...except that it made for a more titillating writeup. You really jumped right into this story didn't you? Hitting close to home is it? Jesus man. There are lots stranger masturbation techniques going on, and most of them are probably normal people. Everyone who jerks off looks like a dumbass. That's why we all feel disgusted during the cleanup phase. This guy was just a little wierder than others. No proof ANYWHERE that it was leading to anything else except maybe the next step was the porch swing.

No. In fact, if I were planning a heinous crime that would result in capital punishment, I'd prefer the capital punishment to lifetime incarceration. If it was just a crime of passion (as most are), the death penalty would never even enter my mind.

Full Inernet access for violent criminals? Yet another miss by you.

It's not out of control. It just makes headlines and pushes your buttons for some reason.

You want to kill a guy for jerking his gherkin in an odd way? People like you are utterly frightening.

This doesn't seem that controversial. Guess I'd have to see the text of the bill (if I cared more).

As to constructive criticism, I can't construct a working brain out of a turd. I gave reasons before for why you're wrong.

The "excited" peeing is hard to break. It takes a lot of (for lack of a better descriptor) calmness training. You won't be able to break it in a week.

No penalty changes the horror for the victim.

Killing the attacker doesn't change the victim's horror.

Yeah. I am not a fan of the death penalty because there are enough cases where juries get it wrong, but I'd much rather see it enforced for child rape cases than murders.

His point, I believe, is that children shouldn't be forced to be witnesses. He makes the argument by pointing out what he *C*ould do to a child witness--his example reads poorly because it makes it sound as if he would do this unequivocally. I don't think he's advocating attacking children on the stand so they later throw up and have nightmares.

Countdown to merging this thread with the Lynch thread.

Yeah. I edited that--out of line. As to your other point, I am impressed with your optimism.

Here's how you learn to not be a stupid 23yo. You STFU when someone slaps you down because you're acting like a stupid ass. And I don't give a crap where his heart is. His head is up his ass and his irrational thinking "The wealthy don't share the wealth by choice, so the government must intervene" is not born of any reflective thought.

Those wealthy folks who don't share their wealth by choice--rotten SOBs that they are--gave 300,000,000,000+ dollars to charity in 2007...even AFTER they paid their taxes. You. Dumb. Ignorant. Spoiled. Child. That's about half as much as the 600 billion in their income tax dollars that goes to the government run social programs that seem to work so well and about 25% of the total the government spends on social programs in general. So those selfish pricks even feel the need to give to charity AFTER they've taken it up the ass. Sounds like they need more government intervention? I'm not sure there's ever been as dumb of a statement as your post above. Did you get a degree from Keane U? Please tell us another tale of woe from your childhood or how you learned so "much" growing up. You're obviously staggeringly intelligent.

You're not saying they have to--the government just takes the money regardless. Imagine a world where people actually chose the charities they gave to instead of being forced to give at gunpoint. I bet you'd see a lot more efficient charities than you do now (look at how much better the private charities operate than the govt programs already).

I agree but don't see why it's right to enforce that platitude at gunpoint.

My favorite tax is a consumption tax (a national sales tax). Don't tax food, clothing, and a few other essentials. Tax everything else. People (including the poor) can thus avoid tax by avoiding purchasing non-essentials. It would have problems to enact because it would discourage spending but to me, it's the fairest tax there is.

Thank you for doing that. I didn't have the patience. One of the 100K/year rich people gets to handle his next retort.

Obama is anti-free trade, and thus wants to remove one of the ties that helps mitigate risks in the US economy. Sadly, McCain is at best reluctantly free trade. The free trade issue is one of the few where McCain and Obama differ and a reason I lean to McCain.

Will they drink the Kool Aid at the deadline? If so, I'm a supporter--those people are the real environmentalists. If we could get rid of a billion or so of the right people, our energy and food woes would be over for a while.

And it's not like AM/FM radio is doing so well that they can be pumped for money.

What a change from the days when the labels would pay radio stations to play their music (for free) on the air. I understand their argument but the recording industry will have a hard time overcoming a laches defense (the defense that the record cos. did not sue radio stations for the last 70 years). http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/06/r...ding-indus.html

Between you and your wife, you make over 100K. Teachers are rich and have it easy.