The babyjesuschristsuperstar on Board: filling the moral void of Clinton’s legacy

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Spanky
Good question. I think this article is helping America's enemies and there should be a huge outcry over this article. I am sure that Tax Wonk things that this article is a good thing because the more information out there (McCain's giving into torture) the better.

He's going to run for President in 2008. Don't you want to know whether he will blab the football codes if he is ever kidnapped and threatened with a wedgie?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Sexual Harassment Panda
He's going to run for President in 2008. Don't you want to know whether he will blab the football codes if he is ever kidnapped and threatened with a wedgie?

I think that most politicians would talk with a threat of a wedgie, with McCain it would have to be an atomic wedgie.

I can't wait until 2008. This board is going to be really fun then. I would just like to see one presidential primary race not decided until the convention.

[Spanky]

Was this guy (Pinyan) punished because he broke Gods law, or was this simply a matter of the weak minded being disposed of through natural selection: You decide.

SEATTLE


A man has pleaded guilty to trespassing in connection with a fatal horse-sex case.

James Michael Tait, 54, of Enumclaw, was accused of entering a barn without the owner's permission. Tait admitted to officers that he entered a neighboring barn last July with friend Kenneth Pinyan to have sex with a horse, charging papers said. Tait was videotaping the episode when Pinyan suffered internal injuries that led to his death.

Tait pleaded guilty Tuesday and was given a one-year suspended sentence, a $300 fine, and ordered to perform eight hours of community service and have no contact with the neighbors.

The prosecutor's office said no animal cruelty charges were filed because there was no evidence of injury to the horses.

[Captain]

Originally posted by Spanky
Was this guy (Pinyan) punished because he broke Gods law, or was this simply a matter of the weak minded being disposed of through natural selection: You decide.

SEATTLE


A man has pleaded guilty to trespassing in connection with a fatal horse-sex case.

James Michael Tait, 54, of Enumclaw, was accused of entering a barn without the owner's permission. Tait admitted to officers that he entered a neighboring barn last July with friend Kenneth Pinyan to have sex with a horse, charging papers said. Tait was videotaping the episode when Pinyan suffered internal injuries that led to his death.

Tait pleaded guilty Tuesday and was given a one-year suspended sentence, a $300 fine, and ordered to perform eight hours of community service and have no contact with the neighbors.

The prosecutor's office said no animal cruelty charges were filed because there was no evidence of injury to the horses.

Both. This is proof that God endorses Darwin.

[Sexual Harassment Panda]

Originally posted by Spanky
Was this guy (Pinyan) punished because he broke Gods law, or was this simply a matter of the weak minded being disposed of through natural selection: You decide.

SEATTLE


A man has pleaded guilty to trespassing in connection with a fatal horse-sex case.

James Michael Tait, 54, of Enumclaw, was accused of entering a barn without the owner's permission. Tait admitted to officers that he entered a neighboring barn last July with friend Kenneth Pinyan to have sex with a horse, charging papers said. Tait was videotaping the episode when Pinyan suffered internal injuries that led to his death.

Tait pleaded guilty Tuesday and was given a one-year suspended sentence, a $300 fine, and ordered to perform eight hours of community service and have no contact with the neighbors.

The prosecutor's office said no animal cruelty charges were filed because there was no evidence of injury to the horses.

Depends - how did he incur the internal injuries?

The guy was ordered to have no contact with the neighbors. I'll bet that the neighbors were not eager to have contact with him.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Ty- we need some posts deleted. Coltrane has been posting just to harass people.

Gambling?!?! In this casino?!?!

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
This plan is a good plan as long as it doesn't leak. Now that it has leaked the opposition will claim that every pro US article the newspapers was paid for by the US government. It was a good plan only if it stayed a secret.

I thought we were trying to install a democracy in Iraq, not a Potemkin village.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
Gambling?!?! In this casino?!?!

Yeah, but it was the Priest who was picketing that gambling was wrong just last week.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Spanky
Good question. I think this article is helping America's enemies and there should be a huge outcry over this article. I am sure that Tax Wonk things that this article is a good thing because the more information out there (McCain's giving into torture) the better.

Well, but for the fact that McCain published in his autobiography, I would consider it personal information, of the sort that the press shouldn't freely publish.

But it's nice to know that you're thinking about my posts.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Spanky
Was this guy (Pinyan) punished because he broke Gods law, or was this simply a matter of the weak minded being disposed of through natural selection: You decide.

SEATTLE


A man has pleaded guilty to trespassing in connection with a fatal horse-sex case.

James Michael Tait, 54, of Enumclaw, was accused of entering a barn without the owner's permission. Tait admitted to officers that he entered a neighboring barn last July with friend Kenneth Pinyan to have sex with a horse, charging papers said. Tait was videotaping the episode when Pinyan suffered internal injuries that led to his death.

Tait pleaded guilty Tuesday and was given a one-year suspended sentence, a $300 fine, and ordered to perform eight hours of community service and have no contact with the neighbors.

The prosecutor's office said no animal cruelty charges were filed because there was no evidence of injury to the horses.

I don't think God is that much of a micromanager. My vote is for thinning the herd.

[Replaced_Texan]

So a public bus in Denver goes through a Federal Center. At some point on the bus ride, guards get on the bus and ask everyone for ID. As I understand it, the bus route goes through this particular complex of Federal buildings, and some people get off there while others move on. The ID policy apparently was implemented after the McVeigh/Nichols bombings in 1995.

A woman, commuting to work, says "No, I don't have to show you my ID." Feds haul her off the bus, throw her into a cop car, and charge her with some unspecified petty offense. She says that the guards just glanced at the IDs and didn't compare them to any lists.

The incident has caused quite a stir in Denver. (And incidently, today is the anniversary of Rosa Parks's refusal to give up her seat on the bus, so a lot of comparisons are being made there. Woman lost her job after being 3 hours late to work, and she has a son serving in Iraq.)

Should we have to show ID on demand to Federal officers? Seems to me on Federal property, even if it's just passing through, that the Feds can do whatever they want to to ensure security. I don't have a problem with the x-ray machines and checkpoints when walking into a federal building, and this doesn't seem that burdensome. On the other hand, from the article I linked to, it appears that the public really doesn't have warning on when the IDs are going to be checked. It's sort of a random thing based on whether or not the federal property is on high alert. It was unclear if there were other routes that went to the same places that didn't go through that property.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
So a public bus in Denver goes through a Federal Center. At some point on the bus ride, guards get on the bus and ask everyone for ID. As I understand it, the bus route goes through this particular complex of Federal buildings, and some people get off there while others move on. The ID policy apparently was implemented after the McVeigh/Nichols bombings in 1995.

A woman, commuting to work, says "No, I don't have to show you my ID." Feds haul her off the bus, throw her into a cop car, and charge her with some unspecified petty offense. She says that the guards just glanced at the IDs and didn't compare them to any lists.

The incident has caused quite a stir in Denver. (And incidently, today is the anniversary of Rosa Parks's refusal to give up her seat on the bus, so a lot of comparisons are being made there. Woman lost her job after being 3 hours late to work, and she has a son serving in Iraq.)

Should we have to show ID on demand to Federal officers? Seems to me on Federal property, even if it's just passing through, that the Feds can do whatever they want to to ensure security. I don't have a problem with the x-ray machines and checkpoints when walking into a federal building, and this doesn't seem that burdensome. On the other hand, from the article I linked to, it appears that the public really doesn't have warning on when the IDs are going to be checked. It's sort of a random thing based on whether or not the federal property is on high alert. It was unclear if there were other routes that went to the same places that didn't go through that property.

I think it is time for a national ID card with retina scan, DNA and Fingerprints. It would clear up all sorts of Social Security, Welfare and voting fraud - help with illegal immigration and improve security. Many western countrys including Spain and Italy have done this and it is not like they have turned into police states.

I know that didn't really answer the question but I thought I would throw it out there.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
So a public bus in Denver goes through a Federal Center. At some point on the bus ride, guards get on the bus and ask everyone for ID. As I understand it, the bus route goes through this particular complex of Federal buildings, and some people get off there while others move on. The ID policy apparently was implemented after the McVeigh/Nichols bombings in 1995.

A woman, commuting to work, says "No, I don't have to show you my ID." Feds haul her off the bus, throw her into a cop car, and charge her with some unspecified petty offense. She says that the guards just glanced at the IDs and didn't compare them to any lists.

The incident has caused quite a stir in Denver. (And incidently, today is the anniversary of Rosa Parks's refusal to give up her seat on the bus, so a lot of comparisons are being made there. Woman lost her job after being 3 hours late to work, and she has a son serving in Iraq.)

Should we have to show ID on demand to Federal officers? Seems to me on Federal property, even if it's just passing through, that the Feds can do whatever they want to to ensure security. I don't have a problem with the x-ray machines and checkpoints when walking into a federal building, and this doesn't seem that burdensome. On the other hand, from the article I linked to, it appears that the public really doesn't have warning on when the IDs are going to be checked. It's sort of a random thing based on whether or not the federal property is on high alert. It was unclear if there were other routes that went to the same places that didn't go through that property.

It seems like it would make more sense to check only the IDs of people who are getting off at that location, and like it's kind of useless if they aren't comparing the IDs to a list or anything, but it doesn't seem like a problem. Though, it seems unfair that a regular public bus route has to go THROUGH the fed property. Drop the damn fed employees at the gate and let 'em walk, or let the feds have a shuttle from the gate to the workplace.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Spanky
I think it is time for a national ID card with retina scan, DNA and Fingerprints. It would clear up all sorts of Social Security, Welfare and voting fraud - help with illegal immigration and improve security. Many western countrys including Spain and Italy have done this and it is not like they have turned into police states.

I know that didn't really answer the question but I thought I would throw it out there.

How much do retina scanners cost? Hand-held versions.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Spanky
I think it is time for a national ID card with retina scan, DNA and Fingerprints. It would clear up all sorts of Social Security, Welfare and voting fraud - help with illegal immigration and improve security. Many western countrys including Spain and Italy have done this and it is not like they have turned into police states.

I know that didn't really answer the question but I thought I would throw it out there.

Biometrics are a major, major problem because once the data is stolen, it can't be changed. The computer translates the image into digital information, which is compared to whatever is in the database. If someone gets a hold my password, I can change it. If someone gets a hold of the digital version of my retna, it's not like I can go out and get new eyes.

Do you think that the woman in Denver should have been forced to show her ID?