Am I the only one . . .

[smeagol]

Am I the only one who is pro life but against guns . . .

Who hates terrorism but does not believe invading every country with loose ties to terrorism is the way to solve the problem . . .

Who believes communism is evil but also believes the embargo against Cuba is plain stupid (and so are the laws that prohibit Americans to fly to Cuba from the US) . . .

Who thinks the ACLU goes overboard when trying to make a point over separation between Church and State . . .

Who finds himself watching Bill O'Reilly and Bill Maher for the entertainment, but agrees with maybe 25% (tops) of what they say . . .

Who goes to Church every Sunday and thinks of himself as a Religious person but hearing people such as Jerry Falwell makes him cringe . . .

Who is against gay marriage (not against gay civil unions) . . .

Who firmly believes the US (and Europe) does not do much to help the Third World develop . . .

Yes, probably I'm the only one who feels this way.

[exstatic]

Who hates terrorism but does not believe invading every country with loose ties to terrorism is the way to solve the problem . . .

Who believes communism is evil but also believes the embargo against Cuba is plain stupid (and so are the laws that prohibit Americans to fly to Cuba from the US) . . .

Who firmly believes the US (and Europe) does not do much to help the Third World develop . . .

I'm with ya on all of the above, and parts of others. Falwell makes me cringe, but that's no surprise; so does the Pope. I think a pro-gun/pro-life position is inconsistant, but then most of the pro-life crowd is also pro-death penalty, which I also find inconsistant. If life is so ing sacred, you should be against ANYTHING that would end it by non-natural means. I'm pro-handgun\rifle\shotgun/pro-death penalty/pro-choice. I think assault rifles need to be completely outlawed in the private sector.

[JoeChalupa]

Well I'm anti-abortion but pro-choice so I'm as inconsistent as they come.

I agree with some of what you posted.

I watch Bill O'Reilley and Bill Maher because I think they are both funny.

[Hook Dem]

[smeagol]

With regards to the death penalty, I have mixed feelings. I believe only God has the right to decide who goes and who stays but . . . when I read stories about that girl that got killed and her 8 month baby ripped out of het womb . . . what can I say, that killer-lady deserves to die

[smeagol]

Hook Dem, is that you on the pic?

[Yonivore]

Am I the only one who is pro life but against guns . . .

Probably not but, what do you have against guns that you don't have against knives, dynamite, rocks, and car bumpers?

Who hates terrorism but does not believe invading every country with loose ties to terrorism is the way to solve the problem . . .

Are you suggesting that Afghanistan's Taliban and Iraq's Ba'athists had only "loose" ties to terrorism? On that, we'd disagree. Other than that, I agree with your premise.

Who believes communism is evil but also believes the embargo against Cuba is plain stupid (and so are the laws that prohibit Americans to fly to Cuba from the US) . . .

75. And, proximity is dangerous...

Who thinks the ACLU goes overboard when trying to make a point over separation between Church and State . . .

Understatement. They're the most dangerous organization in the country, at the moment.

Who finds himself watching Bill O'Reilly and Bill Maher for the entertainment, but agrees with maybe 25% (tops) of what they say . . .

Never watched either of them.

Who goes to Church every Sunday and thinks of himself as a Religious person but hearing people such as Jerry Falwell makes him cringe . . .

I don't attend Falwell's church...and, I don't attend Jesse Jackson's or Al Sharpton's church either but, they make me cringe more.

Who is against gay marriage (not against gay civil unions) . . .

Not me.

Who firmly believes the US (and Europe) does not do much to help the Third World develop . . .

Who firmly believes the third world does not do much to help themselves develop?

Yes, probably I'm the only one who feels this way.

Chin up.

[Yonivore]

"Well I'm anti-abortion but pro-choice..."

Dude, Kerry lost. You can drop the Kerry-speak.

"...so I'm as inconsistent as they come."

Nothing of which to be proud, Joe.

[JoeChalupa]

Dude, Kerry lost. You can drop the Kerry-speak.

Nothing of which to be proud, Joe.

I'm proud of my support for Kerry! Thank ya, thank ya very much.


You take some things too seriously Yonivore. I'm sure you have some inconsistencies in your own life. Like your saying your are libertarian when you are really a conservative.

Nothing to be proud of?

[Hook Dem]

Hook Dem, is that you on the pic?

Nah! I think it's Rosie O'Donnel's brother.

[Yonivore]

I'm proud of my support for Kerry! Thank ya, thank ya very much.

Yeah, we've noticed.

You take some things too seriously Yonivore.

Like what?

I'm sure you have some inconsistencies in your own life. Like your saying your are libertarian when you are really a conservative.

I am a Libertarian.

Nothing to be proud of?

Being inconsistent? Nope, nothing to be proud of.

[smeagol]

Probably not but, what do you have against guns that you don't have against knives, dynamite, rocks, and car bumpers?

The way guns are sold in this country is a joke. Any 13 yr. old kid can buy them at any store or by mail. I'm not saying guns shold be banned. All I'm saying is that gun commercialization should be controlled.

Regarding knives, dynamite, etc, what's your point? That cars and rocks kill as many people as guns do?

Are you suggesting that Afghanistan's Taliban and Iraq's Ba'athists had only "loose" ties to terrorism? On that, we'd disagree. Other than that, I agree with your premise.

In the case of Afghanistan, the link was pretty clear. In the case of Irak, it's not. Even Republicans implicitly admitted the lack of a link between AQ and the Saddam Regime and the non-existance of WMDs in Iraq.

75. And, proximity is dangerous...

Do not follow you train of though on this one. Are you suggesting that due to Cuba's proximity to the US, the embargo is justified? And what does 75 mean?

Understatement. They're the most dangerous organization in the country, at the moment.

You might be right.

Never watched either of them.

You are missing out on some funny stuff.

I don't attend Falwell's church...and, I don't attend Jesse Jackson's or Al Sharpton's church either but, they make me cringe more.

We have different POV. Anybody who says that the US deserved 9/11 because of their sins (Falwell) is the scariest of the three in my book.

Who firmly believes the third world does not do much to help themselves develop?

That too.

But it does not contradict my statement.

And tell me what is easier: A homeless learning a trade all by himself to overcome poverty, or that same homeless, recieving help (economic and other types of aid) from Bill Gates, to learn a trade to overcome poverty.

Obviously, that homless will never overcome poverty if he is not willing to learn a trade. But it is much easier if Bill Gates is your mentor.

Chin up.

No problem.

[JoeChalupa]

YEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! !!!

[Yonivore]

The way guns are sold in this country is a joke. Any 13 yr. old kid can buy them at any store or by mail.

That's an oversimplification and probably and exaggeration. Making guns illegal won't keep them out of the hands of 13 year-old gangstas...just their 40-year-old-going-to-the-corner-store-for-formula victims.

I'm not saying guns shold be banned. All I'm saying is that gun commercialization should be controlled.

You know, I can't recall the last time I saw an Uzi commercial...

Regarding knives, dynamite, etc, what's your point? That cars and rocks kill as many people as guns do?

Can't speak for rocks...but, cars definitely do.

In the case of Afghanistan, the link was pretty clear. In the case of Irak, it's not.

We disagree on this.

Even Republicans implicitly admitted the lack of a link between AQ and the Saddam Regime and the non-existance of WMDs in Iraq.

Actually, it's been this administration's detractors that have "implicitly" put those words into the mouths of Republicans. Many, me included, still believe there were WMD's in Iraq...the question is, what happened to them.

And, considering the speed with which the "insurgency" got off the ground, and the sophistication with which they were able to sustain themselves; many, me included, believe there was more than a casual relationship between the Ba'athists, Sunnis, and global terrorism.

I think the more pertinent question is why were the UN Secretary General, France, Russia, and Germany so opposed to an invasion of Iraq? That's becoming more obvious every day.

Do not follow you train of though on this one. Are you suggesting that due to Cuba's proximity to the US, the embargo is justified?

Yes, tolerating a despotic regime just 90 miles from Florida would send a bad message to everyone.

And what does 75 mean?

Ask Castro, he's been all in a wad over the number being displayed around Havana and Guantanamo.

You might be right.

Yep.

You are missing out on some funny stuff.

Nah, I doubt it.

We have different POV. Anybody who says that the US deserved 9/11 because of their sins (Falwell) is the scariest of the three in my book.

I don't follow Falwell, however, I believe alot of what he says has been taken out of context and caricatured for maximum satirical effect.

Sharpton and Jackson, on the other hand, have been shaking down companies -- in the name of racial equality -- for over a decade now; costing business billions to avoid bogus boycotts and lawsuits.

That too.

But it does not contradict my statement.

Sure it does. Who's responsible for your well-being first? You are. When the third world starts acting like they want to be something other than the third world, I'm all for sending resources. Until then, it's just money down a bottomless pit.

And tell me what is easier: A homeless learning a trade all by himself to overcome poverty, or that same homeless, recieving help (economic and other types of aid) from Bill Gates, to learn a trade to overcome poverty.

I'm saying it's not Bill Gates job to teach them a trade and forcing him to do it isn't going to ensure success. Now, if Bill Gates wants to do mission work in the third world, mentoring...I'm all for it.

Obviously, that homless will never overcome poverty if he is not willing to learn a trade. But it is much easier if Bill Gates is your mentor.

The only words missing from that statement are "...a willing...," right after "if" and before "Bill."

No problem.

Boblem.

[Yonivore]

YEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! !!!

You, sir, are no Howard Dean.

[smeagol]

That's an oversimplification and probably and exaggeration. Making guns illegal won't keep them out of the hands of 13 year-old gangstas...just their 40-year-old-going-to-the-corner-store-for-formula victims.

I did not say make them illegal. I specifically said they should not be banned. Commercialization has to be controlled.

You know, I can't recall the last time I saw an Uzi commercial...

Your point?

Can't speak for rocks...but, cars definitely do.

Again, your point? Cars serve a purpose far more important than guns. Cars/trucks are manufactured to transport people and goods, to keep the economy running. Guns, on the other hand, are manufactured to . . . kill basically.

Actually, it's been this administration's detractors that have "implicitly" put those words into the mouths of Republicans. Many, me included, still believe there were WMD's in Iraq...the question is, what happened to them.

Why didn't Bush use these arguments in the campaign, when the election was anybody's guess. To me that's pretty much conceding the WMDs were not found and the AQ link was weak.

And, considering the speed with which the "insurgency" got off the ground, and the sophistication with which they were able to sustain themselves; many, me included, believe there was more than a casual relationship between the Ba'athists, Sunnis, and global terrorism.

Don't underestimate the hatred that the invasion of a sovereign country produces, especially in the Muslim world, especially when the invading country is the US. People outside the US view the invasion of Iraq as something that was not justified. Portions of the Iraq population (and neighboring countries) reacted against that invasion.

I think the more pertinent question is why were the UN Secretary General, France, Russia, and Germany so opposed to an invasion of Iraq? That's becoming more obvious every day.

Again, a large percantage of the World was opposed to the Iraq invasion.

Yes, tolerating a despotic regime just 90 miles from Florida would send a bad message to everyone.

Then let's try to starve them to death. Perfect solution.

Ask Castro, he's been all in a wad over the number being displayed around Havana and Guantanamo.

Don't know the Bearded One, don't want to know him either. i will celebrate when he is headed to the next world. But that doesn't mean I agree with punishing to entire Cuban population.

Nah, I doubt it.

I'm telling you, its funny stuff. When Anne Coul and Jeanine Garafolo discuss politics, with Maher mediating, you are in for a good time!

Sure it does. Who's responsible for your well-being first? You are.

In the extremely complex globalized world of to-day, your statement does not have a leg to stand on. Mark my words: the third World will never develop until the Developed world lends them a hand. I'm not talking only about economic aid.

When the third world starts acting like they want to be something other than the third world, I'm all for sending resources. Until then, it's just money down a bottomless pit.

People who live in Third World countries have responsibility for the state of their countries is, I am not denying that. But Developed countries do not help the cause. Ever hear about agricultural subsidies? Trade barriers?

I'm saying it's not Bill Gates job to teach them a trade and forcing him to do it isn't going to ensure success. Now, if Bill Gates wants to do mission work in the third world, mentoring...I'm all for it.

Are you a Christian? I'm not talking about forcing.

[scott]

If you are talking about all those things as a whole, then yeah- you are probably the only one.

[ducks]

yes guns kill people they pull the trigger they put the bullet in they go to the store and buy the bullet and gun

banning guns will just keep the good guys from having them

[ALVAREZ6]

The way guns are sold in this country is a joke. Any 13 yr. old kid can buy them at any store or by mail. I'm not saying guns shold be banned. All I'm saying is that gun commercialization should be controlled.

I agree.
How the do all them "gangsters" get their heat? in big cities, theres always shoot outs and drive-bys and gang wars. It happens a lot, and there are too many connections to weed.
I know like 10 people my age that smoke weed, no idea why, or how they get it.

Back to the guns, how do all the gangsters get this crap, because if they say the ygot it off the streets, it all goes back to someone who sold them, to a person without a hunting liscence.
For example, what are you going to hunt with a Mac-10?

[ALVAREZ6]

yes guns kill people they pull the trigger they put the bullet in they go to the store and buy the bullet and gun

banning guns will just keep the good guys from having them

That's true, the "bad guys" wont do if they banned guns, no difference to them, unless they are complete jackasses.

[Yonivore]

I did not say make them illegal. I specifically said they should not be banned. Commercialization has to be controlled.

Your point?

Where are guns being "commercialized?"

Again, your point? Cars serve a purpose far more important than guns.

Really? Tell that to a Marine in Iraq...

Tell me this. If you were getting ready to go into close combat with a platoon of men, would you rather be standing next to a guy that can pick a gnat off the ass of a deer at 300 yards because he was raised hunting or the guy that consistently won the backstreet quarter mile in his tricked out Mazda?

Cars/trucks are manufactured to transport people and goods, to keep the economy running. Guns, on the other hand, are manufactured to . . . kill basically.

And, I would argue that guns are much better at achieving their intended purpose than are cars. And, further, I would submit that cars are much more abused and result in a greater number of deaths than do guns...except in a war zone.

Why didn't Bush use these arguments in the campaign, when the election was anybody's guess. To me that's pretty much conceding the WMDs were not found and the AQ link was weak.

He won. And, let me give you a reading suggestion. "Shadow War" by that Miniter guy from the Wall Street Journal. Talks about how we have been operating in and with the cooperation of over 100 countries in the war on terrorism, some who have requested their cooperation not be made public; from Northern Africa to the Asias and Phillipines... Also, let me suggest you go back and read the text of Bush's address to the joint session of Congress on September 21st (I believe), 2001. Particularly the part about things that would be secret...even in success.

Don't underestimate the hatred that the invasion of a sovereign country produces, especially in the Muslim world, especially when the invading country is the US. People outside the US view the invasion of Iraq as something that was not justified. Portions of the Iraq population (and neighboring countries) reacted against that invasion.

The majority of the population of Iraq is in favor of being liberated. The opposition is from Islamic extremists and people sympathetic to their position.

Again, a large percantage of the World was opposed to the Iraq invasion.

I disagree. Yes, there is a very vocal opposition, but, that doesn't mean they represent a large percentage of the World. The American Left thought the majority of Americans wanted a different president...and, they were wrong too.

Then let's try to starve them to death. Perfect solution.

Who's starving them? Cuba has a rich agricultural geography... And, need I remind you of "Oil For Food." That's how international aid generally is treated in totalitarian regimes. Particularly when you can find unethical outsiders such as Annan and Co. to assist.

Don't know the Bearded One, don't want to know him either. i will celebrate when he is headed to the next world. But that doesn't mean I agree with punishing to entire Cuban population.

The Cuban Population can decide their own fate. If Fidel could overthrow the government...then, well, they can mount their own revolution.

I'm telling you, its funny stuff. When Anne Coul and Jeanine Garafolo discuss politics, with Maher mediating, you are in for a good time!

Coulter is a major babe. Garafalo and Maher are just pathetic punks.

In the extremely complex globalized world of to-day, your statement does not have a leg to stand on. Mark my words: the third World will never develop until the Developed world lends them a hand. I'm not talking only about economic aid.

Then, go help them...by all means. I wouldn't dream of stopping you. Just quit asking my government to send my troops and my tax money there.

People who live in Third World countries have responsibility for the state of their countries is, I am not denying that. But Developed countries do not help the cause. Ever hear about agricultural subsidies? Trade barriers?

Ever heard of corruption and diversion of aid?

Are you a Christian?

Yes.

I'm not talking about forcing.

Sure seemed like it to me.

[ALVAREZ6]

Tell me this. If you were getting ready to go into close combat with a platoon of men, would you rather be standing next to a guy that can pick a gnat off the ass of a deer at 300 yards because he was raised hunting or the guy that consistently won the backstreet quarter mile in his tricked out Mazda?

And, I would argue that guns are much better at achieving their intended purpose than are cars. And, further, I would submit that cars are much more abused and result in a greater number of deaths than do guns...except in a war zone.

Rethink your thoughts.

you said that cars are involved in way more deaths than guns are besides in a war zone.
Well, gee, why do you think that is Yonivore?
CARS, are used by way way way more people than guns.
Take a poll, and see how many Americans own guns, and then how many own CARS.
I wonder why.
Deaths from cars aren't from murders, they are from accidents.

[smeagol]

banning guns will just keep the good guys from having them

How many times do I have to say I'm not for banning guns?

I'm for making it more difficult for the common man to purchase guns. Gun owners should prove, somehow, someway, that they are fit to own guns.

[Yonivore]

Rethink your thoughts.

Sure, why not.

you said that cars are involved in way more deaths than guns are besides in a war zone.

Well, gee, why do you think that is Yonivore?

CARS, are used by way way way more people than guns.

Take a poll, and see how many Americans own guns, and then how many own CARS.

I wonder why.

Deaths from cars aren't from murders, they are from accidents.

No such thing as a car accident. They are all preventable...

And I believe there are as many guns in America as there are cars.

[ALVAREZ6]

No such thing as a car accident. They are all preventable...

And I believe there are as many guns in America as there are cars.

I don't.
Every family owns at least 2 cars. If their even were more guns in America than cars, it is because we have an army, an air force, a navy, coast guard , etc.
And, because one gun holder may have hundreds himself.