MrRain422

Contempt of Congress. And probably many other things that we won't know about until (er, if) he's actually hauled in to testify.

From about 1944-2002. Some parts of the world still do think very highly of us, just not like before.

The "right person" would never make it through the primary season. I think Obama is probably the best we can hope for, and I feel pretty confident that he's the best major party candidate of my lifetime thus far.

Palin said in the Charlie Gibson interview that it would be alright to invade Pakistan too, though I guess she doesn't necessarily speak for McCain. Pakistan better get in line. We have wars to fight with Iran and Russia first.

That's an awful lot of foul balls and outs.

One of these days I'll find a better way of putting it into a more user friendly format.

Pedroia wins by default with Kinsler and Quentin getting injured. Hamilton could still get it too, though with his drop off and crappy team, maybe not.

Especially since we all know who it is anyway.

Except that he played in the AL for 2/3rds of the season.

Gibson is one of the easiest, most complacent, most deferent interviewers on TV, which is exactly why he got the interview.

:/

Have you ever seen her debate, or even say anything unscripted?

I'm really looking forward to Tim Fite, Neko, Plastic People of the Universe and Black Mountain.

Sorry.

Here's me doing John Cale's "Fear (Is a Man's Best Friend)": http://www.sendspace.com/file/7vieeh My old college band, Prison Rodeo, doing Elvis Costello's "Radio Radio" at the Blind Pig in 2004: http://www.sendspace.com/file/f52fnj

I'd say that Richard Dawkins is the real intellectual leader of that movement. Hitchens is sometimes funny but not often very insightful.

They're really going to go with "insurgent" as a descriptive word that they want to push to the media?

Either way, it should be pretty obvious that when someone says that one side is right on the issues, they usually mean in their opinion, so it's not necessary to snap at someone every time they make that assertion. But also, sometimes one side is just wrong, such as when they present their case using distorted facts or outright lies, or refuse to acknowledge opposing evidence. Also, even without a universal morality, we still have morality that is agreed upon by society, and even by those standards the current administration has acted immorally (not to mention illegally) countless times, a

Sometimes I am. I can admit it.

There's a lot of grey area in a lot of matters, but sometimes one side is just wrong.

Sure, I define it as meeting the stated goals of the policy proposal. Can you answer my question about lies?

So both sides policy positions are always equally likely to be successful? And perhaps there's no such thing as "universal truth" but is there such a thing as a flat out lie?

And they equally balance each other. Each side is equally crazy, equally dishonest, equally dangerous. It is impossible for one side to ever be more right than the other, or for one side to become more corrupt or dishonest than the other. Both sides are always, always have been, and always will be, exactly as credible as the other.

I don't think that McCain's family is native to Arizona though, and relatively speaking, Illinois isn't much closer to the fertile crescent than Arizona is. Panama is closer to it than Hawaii is though. What were we talking about again?

McCain also said that the sold it on ebay and made a profit, which sort of removes the ambiguity.