jenfly00

I voted 60% pro to help the bell shaped curve look prettier.

You don't find it funny that the party known to like taxing didn't pay their own takes? That kills me. Oh, BTW, they lost the last two elections. I think it's pretty amusing

Every time I see one, I can't believe they are still in business. But then, I think Mickey D's is just about as bad. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

You know, of all the ones I know, they're all liberals...hard-core liberals, fairly extreme in their beliefs. Is that a TX definition of liberal or a rest of the world definition of liberal? The thing I like most about texans is that they tend to stay in Texas. jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

I completely agree. Want it equal, make it equal. No special treatment atl all, PT scores, height/weight/anything. Don't forget to include females in the draft if it ever comes up again. I'd like to see a national poll on how women would feel about making things very equal. My hunch is that most women would balk at the possibility of being included in the draft, one PT standard, and height/weight standard PT scores, etc. Derek I agree, many (men and women) would balk. I'm with you, however. Eliminate double standards for true equality. jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

She rated Kennedy "ten out of ten" in bed, and said their session in a New York hotel was "pure lust," Simmons claims in her book. -------------------- I want to see the video!!!!! jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

I'm in complete agreement with you on this post!

First, at Remster's request, I've removed the sig: "America isn't easy. America is advanced citizenship. You've got to want it bad, because it's gonna put up a fight. It's gonna say, "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil who is standing center stage and advocating at the top of his lungs that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the 'land of the free'? Then the symbol of your country cannot just be a flag. The symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest. Now show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then you can stand up and sing about the 'land of the free.'" -President Andrew Shepherd in 'The American President' He sent me a link to the rules and, as the sig goes to all forums, I agree I am in violation of the rules. Second, I am most gratified to read responses from Americans who love this country and support free speech even when it is something they strongly disagree with. To read strong disagreement with my flag burning, yet support my right to do so ...well, that's what constitutionally protected speech is all about. Third, I learned the difference between public and private (or real) personnas when I read a reasonable, rational public disagreement with my post, then seconds later receive a PM from the same person, calling me names and ending with "Be Safe. Take Care." (No, it was neither Rhino or Lisa). Fourth, I realize a problem that those of us who support the Bill of Rights have. We accept and support those who would express their views in a manner of their choosing (with some limitations). Those who do not, will work hard to silence our voices. Kinda like the quote from Lisa, I'm against them, I just have no way of showing it. Well, I tried to show my disagreement with calls to violence against American citizens for a symbolic protest ...and look what happened. As I responded to Michelle, I considered my posts to be a form of protest with an ironic sense of humor, to help raise awareness that we cannot protect our great nation by defiling the freedoms it is founded upon. If that single message was understood, I'm satisified, despite all the attendant silliness. To each and every one of you who expressed yourself in SC, I disagree with some of you, am heartened by the responses of others and will support all of you in your right to express your beliefs. Peace (hopefully). jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

What exactly did you have for dessert again?? jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

You should have signed up for sex ed 201. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Stop the twinkie truck ...I'm getting off. Have a lovely ride. jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

If I am spitting on their grave, surely you are taking a dump with your call to 'drag them into an alley and beat them'. Why would you wish to harm me if, as you say, my actions accomplish nothing? Surely that is not the act of a rational person who claims to value this country. jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

I think it's covered under the American with Disabilities Act. Would you have Billy Vance arrested (or beaten?) for using sign language protesting the actions of our government? Seriously did you read any of this? http://www.law.duke.edu/...vocacy/decision.html It's a lot of big words, so perhaps this will help: http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/379/ Question Presented Is the desecration of an American flag, by burning or otherwise, a form of speech that is protected under the First Amendment? Conclusion In a 5-to-4 decision, the Court held that Johnson's burning of a flag was protected expression under the First Amendment. The Court found that Johnson's actions fell into the category of expressive conduct and had a distinctively political nature. The fact that an audience takes offense to certain ideas or expression, the Court found, does not justify prohibitions of speech. The Court also held that state officials did not have the authority to designate symbols to be used to communicate only limited sets of messages, noting that "f there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable." It's the Supreme Court's job to interpret the constitution. They did. It is the law of the land. If you don't like this, perhaps someplace in South America would make a good home for you. Perhaps even Iraq. They seem to hold the same political beliefs on free speech as you.

Sigh. Yes it has actually http://www.law.duke.edu/curriculum/appellateAdvocacy/decision.html The fact that you did not know this, pretty much supports opinions of your writings. What we do has no impact, so you want to beat us up? MY, my my. Where is that eye rolling icon? ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

If you dont mind me asking, when would war be appropriate in your world? That's a good question. In all sincerity, I can't honestly say that the Iraq war is 'inappropriate'. Perhaps there is some justification in showing the world that we are not going to sit idly by and be attacked with impunity. Will our efforts be successful in this ...I don't know. I do believe that if you are going to war, then, by god, go to war and get the job done! I can even understand the administrations need to claim WMD and ties to terrorism a necessary fiction, although it does amaze me that there are people stupid enouth to actually believe it. What I strongly object to is lying to American citizens and the massive govt invasions into freedoms and due process. I strongly object to the govt having free access to the library books I check out. Mention "terrorist' and the Bill of Rights goes up in smoke. Without any judicial process, you've got the govt jackboots so far up your ass, your breath smells like shoe polish. I also object to the stupid fucking idiots who buy into this and want to drag law biding citizens into alleys and beat them for exercising free speech. I fear the directions this country has taken and have decided to, at the very least, confront these people when they embarass this nation with their rhetoric. jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Best part of it all is its not multible choice YOU pay for the war everyday you go to work, by living in this country, YOU help kill all those people in this horrible horrible war. YOU should be ashamed of yourself for funding such a operation, maybe you should move... I hear south america is a great place to live Thanks for the thought. I, however, choose to stay and work to kick out the traitors. I hope to avoid being dragged into an alley and beaten, but I will continue to support this great country. BTW, I'm just curious. Are you employed? jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

And you can pay for all the B/S social programs that the US seems to always have money for no matter what the deficit is. If it were a either/or choice, I certainly would rather pay for the bullshit social programs. jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

and says, "ouch!" ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

I accept the sincerity of what you say and agree with the historical accuracy. However, (you knew that was coming, right?) that protection come with a price that women are increasingly unwilling to pay. jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Can you give other examples of this, Quade? As for the article, I don't think it values women over men. Rather, it talks about several of the men too, and uses the "headline" technique to get readership. The point it does bring up, however, about women being used more in the front lines, is interesting, and does cover a respect for women that this country (finally) shows. Ciels- Michele I certainly agree with your last statement. ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

Lisa, think about this. You want to drag citizens off in an alley and kick the shit out of them cause you don't like what they say. Does that sound very American to you? I don't see you as less of an American for your views and I certainly don't call for you being dragged in an alley and beaten for expressing yourself. I disagree with you strongly and fear you and the other "patriots" are harming our country. So, I'm burning these flags in protest of those who call for violence. Do you really have those beliefs? Would you really drag a cititen off the street and beat them for standing up for the freedoms this wonderful country was founded upon? jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

My belief system does not permit me to strike a female for any reason. But if you on the other hand burned a flag in front of me?? My belief system would not hold me back from expressing myself. I would simply throw a bucket of water on her, give her a little red wagon and a lollipop and send her on her way.. Rhino OK, writing "Rhino" on next flag and torching it in protest of his threat of violence on a lawbiding American. (I want to tell you, they sure don't make these thing out of fire retardant material). Flag killer! Three down, eight to go. jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".

I was thinking more of chicken nuggets.

I was thinking more of chicken nuggets.

Vindictive? Never met Rhino. I don't know a thing about him except what he posts here. What could I possibly be seeking revenge for? Why on earth would I be banned? Have I broken some rules ...oops, I forget, that not a prerequisite for the "patriots". Seriously dude, you guys scare me with your talk of doing violence to people who merely express beliefs you do not value. jen ----------------------- "O brave new world that has such people in it".