Tex -USMC-

Max can try all he wants, it won't ever work Thanks bud. Felt a little silly to be a 2003 VIP in 2005

wow that one sucked. maybe this one will turn out a little better edit: can I go back to member status now please

She went to the other high school, though.

In a country like ours, I feel the best possible course of action for the government to take is to allow the greatest possible latitude of individual action for the greatest number of people, and the only way to achieve that in this particular case is legalizing gay marriage. That way heterosexuals can choose to get married, heterosexuals can choose not to get married, homosexuals can choose to get married, and homosexuals can choose not to get married. No one's rights are infringed upon, and the concept of individual liberty, core to our nation, is upheld. Theoretically, conservatives would cleave to this reasoning, as it presents the road of least government intervention. edit: contrary to popular belief, marriage existed as formalization of a relationship (and transfer of property) prior to religion getting its hooks into it. Concordantly, like any other formalization of a relationship by law, at its root is a somewhat arbitrary distinction (i.e. we choose to have this formalized term be applied to this particular relationship/contract). From that initial definition, marriage has evolved to encompass other characteristics and qualities, and there is no reason, other than theism-motivated bigotry, to prevent it from continuing to do so.

Heh, sorry about that. I did my part, but the old people over at Sun City tend to trump my youthful idealism Good to see you back. Hows Sothwestern? I'll be driving up there tomorrow to pick up my wife's painting that was in the Alumni art show. SU's great, thanks. Certainly beats Midland by a fair sight, heh. Actually I was wrong as Georgetown isn't in Travis county.... Round Rock on the other hand heh, fuck Round Rock just that much further I have to drive to get to Austin.

Heh, sorry about that. I did my part, but the old people over at Sun City tend to trump my youthful idealism Good to see you back. Hows Sothwestern? I'll be driving up there tomorrow to pick up my wife's painting that was in the Alumni art show. SU's great, thanks. Certainly beats Midland by a fair sight, heh.

I'm not talking about the projected surplusses- those were never more than just that: projections, and projections based on bubble-influenced data, no less. I'm talking about the solid period of time in which the government actually ran surplusses. The fact that you're trying to make apologies for something that no one is upset about demonstrates how out of touch you are with the actual arguments people are making against Bush, as opposed to the weak-ass strawmen GOP shills flog mercilessly. Now repeat it with me: the IT bubble had nothing to do with the actual surplusses that Bush and a Republican Congress demolished, and even less to do with the subsequent record-setting deficits they went on to create. Also: Bush did not veto a single spending bill that crossed his deask in four years.

I'm calling bullshit on you right now, because you quite clearly have no actual knowledge on this issue. The tech bubble had nothing to do with the federal budget surplus, because there is no mathematical correlation (at all) between the GDP and what the federal government spends. The budget surplus was never illusory; it was produced through nearly a decade of fiscal discipline in the US Congress (thanks to actual conservatives) and near-gridlock in between the Legislative and Executive branches of the government. The fact that the surplus was spent is not a bad thing, so you don't have to go grasping at specious reasoning to apologize for it. In the face of a recession, budget surpluses stimulate saving, which by extension reduces economic growth due to the smaller amount of currency in circulation. Now on to the economy itself. Bush's handling of the shallow recession in 2000-2001 is not the problem here; tax cuts and stimulus were exactly the right perscription. However, economics is a science free from ideological shackles, and when conditions change, so should policies. Bush's push to make the tax cuts permanent while dramatically increasing government spending in the discretionary and deficit categories is reckless at best; when it is viewed in the context of our current position within the world economy it is downright masochistic.

I feel for the Black Watch... they've been part of such a commendable effort in the south, and their political leadership refuses to stand up and hold the US accountable for its failures in holding up its end of the bargain.

Heh, sorry about that. I did my part, but the old people over at Sun City tend to trump my youthful idealism

Bush used massive tax cuts and government stimulus to bootstrap the country out of a fairly mild recession. This is not bad in and of itself, but his desire to make the tax cuts permanent beyond their usefulness indicates his fascination with tax cuts is ideologically motivated rather than being based in any kind of economic reality. In addition to this, the unprecedented increase of federal deficit levels, though encouraging growth, have caused the value of the US dollar to sink precipitously; this in conjunction with the mainly foreign financing of our economic recovery, and our already weak position vis-a-vis the trade balance (especially in the current accounts deficit) raises the possibility of the dollar crashing and serious inflation in the future. Not an especially good record for a self-proclaimed fiscal conservative. Which begs the question, how does Bush plan to pay for increases in government spending? Keynesian theory of government injections works, but only when you plan on paying for it eventually. Not to mention that none of these are genuine conservative positions to hold- so far Bush's unprecedented increases of government program activity suggests he's a bit of a crypto-socialist. To be sure, the Bush administration's handling of the economy was never my main grievance. I am far more concerned that Bush is the defacto champion of a cultural movement in Red America that seems bent on constitutionalizing discrimination against an effectively helpless minority. That sort of thing is anathema to America's founding ideals.

http://www.tnr.com/etc.mhtml

In lieu of something interesting, I humbly present my dorm room:

Especially when you live in Orlando

I think you just broke a law.... No, she broke a law. I assure you that the proper authorities will be contacted if she doesn't pay up.

I had no idea you were dual-citizenship. Calero is straight socialist, as is the presidential candidate running on the Socialist Party ticket. Badnarik is a crazy-ass libertarian who, well, wants his guns, drugs, and money. Think old-school, George Will-type Republican without the puritannical hangups. As for myself, I managed to get my best friend to pay me a dollar to write her in, so no matter who loses, I win.

Doom 3. The damn thing gave me a heart condition, and that's what I'd call immersive. edit: Thief 3 is also up there.

Well, at least the pattern seems to be holding up. Also: uni kicks ass. I made it this far, and then it was all just white noise.

Well Max, I was looking at this one F-150, and then I realized that if I got it, I'd have worse gas mileage, less room, higher insurance premiums, and pay more for all of these advantages right out of the gate. And since I'll be living in one of the largest urban centers in Texas, I think by the grace of God I'll get by without full-featured 4WD. Nice. Tell you what, as soon as I've got a job that earns me more than 10 thousand dollars a year, I'll be sure to get an over-large, expensive, and inneficient vehicle also Used cars sell with their existing license plates. So just lucky, I guess. edit: anyhoo, this will be my last post before I pack up my computer- the next time you hear from me I'll be at college in central Texas.

Here are some pictures of my new(ish) wheels- 1998 Honda CRV-EX

If you weren't already convinced that this election will be one of the most retarded in history (see also the 1856 election), this one's for you: http://www.abqjournal.com/elex/204620elex07-30-04.htm Also: http://drudgereport.com/ufd.htm (sorry for link to Drudge) So in case you were wondering when it would get *really* vicious and stupid, well- here you go.

You didn't expect that? It's an almost exact reennactment of every first mountain climb he won in every tour the last 6 years.And the time is about the same to ,even the place where he left the maingroup.it's typical ,every first mounatin climb Lance takes 1 or 2 minutes ,after that he usually makes a go on one mountain more just to secure his spot with the help of some others ,then he usually is secure and happily awaits the mountain time trial. 2 minutes is a nice gap for Armstrong ,but i think he will go for something like a 3 to 4 minutes gap before he starts on the time trial ,so i think hell show he's mussle's in the mountains once more before crawling in his secure spot helped by his workers. (he got to push Voeclair of the yellow jersey anyway ,not to hard i think) It's not surprise, it's smug satisfaction.

With that said, off to play a little System Shock 2 to recondition myself to the screaming heebie jeebies.

Oh snap: Did Iraqi PM Summarily Execute 6 Insurgents In Custody At A Police Station?

Oh man, Armstrong just kicked some major ass in the first Pyrenees stage. Ended up second place on the stage and shaved over two minutes off the lead. He's now in second place in the GC after stage 12