Jason (his real name) is an unfortunate vulgarian who is stricken with digital Tourette’s syndrome. He has the inability to “argue” unless he is particularly crude. TP generously allows him an outlet for his angst….and most people wisely ignore him.

Yes a friend of mine is married to a Japanese woman. They worship their ancestors (Shintoism)…sort of… but the center of Zen study in the world is in Japan. Zen comes from Buddhism.

Hillary has always been driven (why else stay in a marriage of convenience with the old hound dog?) and ruthless – she has turned into Rove in an ugly pantsuit – her campaign for Senate in NY was vicious, nasty, and out -swiftboated the swiftys. She has turned into a premier vote whore – she’ll say anything except “I was wrong”

I hope the first female president is someone I will be proud to vote for for more than her chromosomes.

Comment by Gerald Gibson Jr — March 8, 2007 @ 7:27 pm

Actually, the most predominant religion in Japan is shintoism, an animist one. The components of State Shintoism (the ones that organized religion around a self-proclaimed godly Emperor) have been stripped out from religion, thus giving it a more familiar character, more like the shintoism previous to the XIX century…

http://static.crooksandliars.com/2007/03/mj-attackgraph.jpg

You sicko terrorist types are just murdering nuts.

You sound a little jealous, Turtle. Probably the closest you ever got to a tank or a cockpit is your shell. (No, I wasn’t dashing….but the buff Prince Valiant is.)

How do you propose we handle animals like *you* that are inside our country and want us dead?

Then again, you might look really great in tie-dye and good at putting daisies in rifles. (That is one thing about the anti-war crowd that amuses me….all the old, paunchy hippies trying to re-capture their wasted youth.) Comment by valiant venus — March 8, 2007 @ 9:29 pm

Yeah, because the world just goes around murdering the Amish. While we’re on wasting youth, why have you wasted yours sounding like a constipated old st*pid fcuk?

Hillary loathed the military when her husband was in office – and service members knew it. Comment by valiant venus — March 8, 2007 @ 9:29 pm

What they *knew* and what is *reality* are two different things, when someone is a st*pid c*nt like yourself.

She is trying desperately to grow a set so as to come across as a Democrat Margaret Thatcher or Gold Meir. Psssst….Hillary, most of us know you have more stomach for the fight than Bill, but that’s not what your Party wants. Comment by valiant venus — March 8, 2007 @ 9:29 pm

Most of us know that you have a big pile of cow sh*t in your stomach, you grazing bovine. fcuk off, and join the army in Iraq or Israel, or STFU you st*pid c*w.

- Allows military commissions to try any offense committed by an “unlawful enemy combatant,” which is defined as a non-US citizen who “purposefully and materially supported hostilities against the U.S. or its co-belligerents who is not a lawful enemy combatant (including a person who is part of the Taliban, al Qaeda, or associated forces)” and is not affiliated with any legal army, militia, or government organization (Sec 948a, 948d)

- Includes the following crimes committed by unlawful enemy combatants as “triable” by the military commissions: terrorism, attacking civilians or protected property, rape, intentionally mistreating a dead body, sexual assault or abuse, taking hostages, torture, murder in violation of the law of war, spying, and wrongfully aiding the enemy (Sec 950v(b))

- Prohibits an enemy combatent from invoking the Geneva Convention (including the writ of habeas corpus) as a source of their rights (Sec 5(a))

- States that no court has jurisdiction to consider an application of habeas corpus from any alien detainee (Sec 950j(b)), (Sec 7)

- Prohibits the use of statements obtained through torture in trial, except when the statement was received prior to the enactment of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005 and a judge deems it admissible, or the confession was received using methods not defined as torture under the Detainee Treatment Act (Sec 948r)

- States that the President has the right to interpret and apply the Geneva Convention (Sec 6(a)(3))

- Allows classified information to be used as evidence and prohibits the disclosure of classified information in the trials if it would be detrimental to national security (Sec 949(d)(f)(1))

- Allows evidence seized without a search warrant or other authorization to be used during the trial (Sec 949(a)(b)(2)(b))

- Allows hearsay evidence as long as the adverse party is informed of it with sufficient time to produce evidence (Sec 949(a)(b)(2)(E))

http://votesmart.org/ ( a nice resource )

That’s not what you said. You stated an opinion and didn’t offer any substantiation. It’s that kind of third grade ad hominem commentary that makes your side look irrational and emotional – even when, on occasion, we happen to agree with you.

You then had a seizure and said something totally out of left field about going to court or something.

You have seizures (e.g. this post), I debate and debunk. I don’t have to have tantrums, because, unlike you, I possess a triple digit IQ and critical thinking skills…

I was criticizing your approach, but as usual, you read something more into it – which is rather desperate considering I said one sentence about your debating skills and nothing about Hillary…

Ms. Clinton’s voting record does not appeal to me. I can cite multiple cases not the least of which are her votes on the patriot act and the Iraq atrocity.

I don’t think Clinton is the best person for the job. I have no idea why you are trying to sell me on that concept. I’ve never stated otherwise. I’m a Gore fan. Then, if he doesn’t run, Obama.

Please cite, with specific references, where you disagree on her voting record and I’ll gladly debate that with you. However, it seems to me that you irrationally jumped all over me and are supporting Ms. Clinton just because she is a woman, a democrat, and has the last name of Clinton.

You seriously have me confused with someone else… I commented about your lack of the ability to make a valid argument. That was it.

I would love to be proven wrong, of course, because otherwise your post at #93 is just hypocritical hyperbole.
Comment by Tuber — March 8, 2007 @ 7:13 pm

No, my post is valid. Your debating skills are atrocious. It has nothing to do with Clinton’s viablity. In this case, it is all about you… And why you embarrass thinking Americans that you live here.

Take a deep breath… And unclench.

…we’ll all be on plantations…

NP

It’s all good, man
Actually It was nice to debate someone with brains for a change ;)

The trolls are sorely lacking double digit IQs these days. heh