God damn. I have never heard a bunch vague mumbo jumbo in all my life. Poor guy. The kicker was when they played that "tape" of those officers talking about "nerve agents" over the phone? Yeah. Right. Thats like presenting us a tape of Tony Montana talking about "cocaine" on his mothers phone line. Puhhhhleeeeeeze. Who is buying this shit?

yo' mama

i only caught the last part, missed the taped calls. i didn't think it was vague mumbo jumbo. admit it: you were expecting it to be bullshit?

the points he made about al qaida ties we're vague and inconclusive, as they have always been. the taped phone calls we're not believable. otherwise there was nothing new in this presentation.

i thought the points he made about al qaida were fairly comprehensive. so do you think there is still a case against iraq being in material breach of 1441?

I found it pretty convincing... It all should be verified and scrutinized, and I'd like to see the reactions of skeptical nations, but their objections should be against the specific facts and not of a "this is all bullshit" nature. The al Quaeda stuff isn't enough to go to war over, because the man they talked about was not connected with 9/11, but the additional evidence about nerve agents and mobile biological weapons production was compelling. The communications about "forbidden ammo" and whatnot needs to be put in context, i.e. the full tapes need to be released and the times of the transmissions should be clear, but on the face of it they seem good evidence of noncompliance. More intercepted transmissions, if they exist, should be released to back these ones up. Anyway, this has swayed be a bit towards war.

in breach? yes. they are in breach of 1441. it does not authorize war though does it? it threatens but does not authorize. though, like tiggy, id be a reluctant supporter of issuing a stern, black and white deadline, say 15 days, as a part of a new resolution promising automatic force if certain items are not accounted for...this way, the world, with one-voice can say, they absolutely, without a doubt, exhausted every single channel for diplomacy. when you are dealing with potentially hundreds of thousands of dead civilians, its an obligation. in regards to n.korea i will actually take a more aggressive stance towards those fuckwads. they not only are in direct violation, but they are bluntly thumbing their nose at the world. again, id support a stern 30-day deadline authorizing direct force against their nuclear facilities. if they dont comply, send a salo of cruise missles and take their shit out.

it authorizes war, patty. you should read it. n. korea is not in direct violation of anything. there are no resolutions against n. korea.

Yeah? Well, JESUS HATES THEM!

of course he does. jesus hates all of our enemies.

Nothing anyone says that supports bush in any agenda is going to jive with the liberals or the liberally minded. A picture of saddam himself holding a nuke would be called a fake. or they would say "how do we know he intends to use it? We need to not meddle in other nation's affairs without every country's consent, including Iraq". Of course, when someone (al qaida, hezbolla, etc etc etc) uses this shit to wipe out an entire city, then the same liberals will be screaming "Bush knew he had the weapons, he had evidence, why did he not stop them?" You cannot win. Why? The core problem is this: They hate Bush.

oh stop it already. that kind of rhetoric is part of the problem. same reason you mention clinton whenever you can. you don't give tiggy, myself, sem or any other "liberal" on sorabji enough credit that we can be pretty darn smart and know enough to not simply follow party platform. Bush IS an asshole. period. you can never change my mind on that, but that doesnt prevent me from advocating what i think is best for the country.im goign to advocate what i think is right regardless of who is saying it. it may seem, to you, that that is impossible and i realize that fits into your us vs. them, liberal vs. conservative scheme of things... all nice and neat, but thats not the way it always is trace. try using the heavily charged words "liberal" and "conservative" less trace. my cynicsm and skeptism of the US government was ever present before Bush took office, he just amplifies them for me.

you are liberal, patrick. offended?

Oh, and you give me credit? No. Never. You think I am some damn mindless robot who follows party line. Never mind the fact that I completely think his "faith based initiative" on sending tax money to religious groups is against seperation of church and state. Never mind the fact that I think hussien is a mass murderer who has signed a non-agression treaty with al-quaida along with Saudi Arabia and has in fact paid al-quaida so they would leave him alone back in 1993. And has been allowing them to live in northern iraq and receive poison gas training from the republican guard. never mind the fact that Pres Bush said in his state of the union address back in feb 02 that any country that aids or harbors terrorists who helped on sept 11 would be treated the same as the terrorists. Never mind the fact that this is very much protection of the United States.

President Johnson flat out lied to this country about Tonkin Gulf and used that as an excuse to push us to escalate the Vietnam conflict. Its been documented FDR, 'lied', through inaction, to allow the Japanese to bomb the US. Yeah, Colin Powell's "evidence" is compelling if you believe it word for word, but history demands that you shouldnt the American government has lied through its teeth countless times trace. wake up.

the fact of the matter is that in '96 clinton told the nation that he and the british were sending in bombers to take out chemical and biological weapons plants in iraq. there was no massive outcry. now, bush has a lot more proof, he has congressional support, he has a violated UN resolution that represents saddam's 17th chance to comply, and there is outcry. trace is right, this is more about bush hating than anything else.

Powell's presentation has convinced me that immediate military action is necessary at this point. saddam will not comply willingly. He will continue to violate each and every time he is given chance after chance after chance. The longer we delay, the more weapons saddam will produce which creates greater danger every day. Powell laid it out plain and clear yesterday...saddam must be stopped.

trace: "Oh, and you give me credit? No. Never. You think I am some damn mindless robot who follows party line." As long as you say stuff like, "Nothing anyone says that supports bush in any agenda is going to jive with the liberals or the liberally minded," then, yes, you are mindless robot. You may not be following the party line, but it takes a lot of ignorance to see an entire class of people in that way. It's a sign of weakness that you paint all liberals as Bush haters who can't respond to reason. It makes it easy for you to write them off and not try to understand them. Don't take the easy way. Try to not be so weak. nate: "the fact of the matter is that in '96 clinton told the nation that he and the british were sending in bombers to take out chemical and biological weapons plants in iraq. there was no massive outcry." Are you saying you can't see the difference between sending in bombers and invading a country with 250,000 troops and occupying it for an extended period of time? I expect better arguments from you, Nate, and you haven't been providing them.

i retract my statement: "id be a reluctant supporter of issuing a stern, black and white deadline, say 15 days, as a part of a new resolution promising automatic force if certain items are not accounted for..." from yesterday. i almost bought it. those doublespeak, thoughcrime guys......why i oughta........ i almost bought that crap powell dumped on the UN in academy award dramatic fashion. Regardless if everything Powell demonstrated was true, which history teaches us its probably half-truths if not flat out lies(the US doctors photos like motherfuckers for this very purpose!! doubt that the next time you are looking at a photo of the White House, President or anything of the like that you are seeing the image as it was), that is STILL not justification for pre-emptive war. There is NO philosophical, moral or political (short of imperial) justification for a *pre-emptive* war even if he is breaking UN resolutions. Lets not forget this would be a preemptive war people. Saddam hasnt attacked anyone. Hastn threatened to attack anyone and has only made pledges of self defense. The reason Bush is a pinnacle more so than Clinton, in addition to the difference tiggy points out, Clinton had just won re-election in 96. He wasn't proposing war, taking note from daddy Bush, that war against a 3rd world country, a war we are guaranteed to win does amazing shit for your ratings if you time it right. Bush is lifting the page right out of Daddy Bush's term. There are tyrrants all over the world that must be stopped. We arent going to war over them. There are nations violating UN resolutions all the time. We arent going to war over them Im still waiting for justification for a pre-emptive war that ....lets face it....will NOT stop Saddam, will only foster more hatred for the US and increase the terrorist threat against the US, and will only kill 100s of thousands of Iraqi civilians. When will we ditch this idea that we can "liberate" nation by bombing the fuck out of them. Fucking war mongers. There. thats better.

though i believe N.Korea to be a petulant little shit in its rhetoric, see the potential danger a pre-emptive war can set a precedent for? Next thing you know, everyone is attacking their neighbors under the pre-text of pre-emption. how short sided of you war mongers not to see the long term implications of what we do in Iraq now.

how short SIGHTED of you peaceniks not to see the long term implications of not taking care of Iraq now. "Are you saying you can't see the difference between sending in bombers and invading a country with 250,000 troops and occupying it for an extended period of time? I expect better arguments from you, Nate, and you haven't been providing them." adults have to make difficult choices, tiggy. the problem is the same, the solution is more difficult now. iraq is not preemptive, patty. get that out of your head, it's a liberal falsehood. iraq invaded kuwait- we went in and short of taking out saddam we signed a cease fire. the cease fire agreement stipulated that saddam had to provide proof of having disarmed. saddam has not, and therefore violated the terms of the cease fire. what happens when you violate the terms of a cease fire? the cease fire is made void. if a cease fire is void, you're back in the war you were in. do you follow? iraq attempted to assasinate a US president. wouldn't that be a cause for action? do you really believe that iraq wouldn't be trying to hide its weapons programs? do you really believe that iraq wouldn't be working with terrorist enemies of the US? north korea is exactly why we need to act now with iraq. if saddam got to the position that kimmy boy has found himself, it would take a hell of a lot more resources to solve the problem.

Adults have to make difficult choices, ya. They also have to make decent arguments. Comparing objection to a simple bombing and objection to a land war will not cut it. I'm actually for going into Iraq. We have to do it right, though. We'll have to take the responsibility for it, like a good adult nation, and rebuild the country afterwards. We did that for Japan and Germany and it did wonders. Neither Japan nor Germany is a terrorist harboring rogue state. After invading Iraq we need to occupy it for several years and give them hundreds of billions of dollars in reconstruction aid. Nate and Trace, are you willing to pay for that reconstruction? Are you willing to have your taxes increased to pay for peace in the middle east? Because, if you're not, and you continue bitching about how high your taxes are and how much of a burden you bear, then you'll have to shut the fuck up about wanting war.

there are no long term implications (threats) if Iraq is aggressively contained, as they are now with vigorous and militant inspections. it can be argued that Japan violated their cease fire from WW2 by sending a war ship to Afghanistan last year. It can be argued that we are still at war with N.korea. So the fuck what. its pre-emptive because we are launching a war to dissolve an arguably unsubstantiated threat. Iraq has made no threat towards the US. Only defensive threats. Sure, they are on our shit list, but they havent made threats to invade, they havent been linked to any terrorist acts against the US, so what exactly have the y done to the US that requires war? THATS how its pre emptive. we have made attempts to assisnate world leaders. so the fuck what. You know damn well this isnt about weapons. What about Pakistani weapons? Indian weapons? Give me a fucking break already with dog and pony show of weapons. Isnt there substanstial proof that Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt and others have worked with enemy terrorist organizations? So then you would say N.Korea is a situation worthy of out attention more so than Iraq? Who poses the greater threat? If we go to war with Iraq, we MAKE the threat greater in the Islamic world, meanwhile the REAL threat, the REAL military threat is only getting stronger.

We are not going to pay for reconstruction. The revenue from oil sales that is currently being used to make the weapons and build palaces while the citizens starve will pay for that. Are you willing to see millions die in Isreal AND Palestine? He's going to hit Isreal regardless of what we do. And that shit is not just going to hang over Isreal. After that, or at the same time he's going to hit Kuwait. By this time we are going to be facing a fully nuclear armed iraq. N Korea and China and Hezbolla will no longer hide the ties. There is cause for Pre-Emptive. But this is not pre-emptive. This is retaliation for breaking his cease fire agreement for 12 consecutive years. There is NO DOUBT within the NSA, DIA, CIA, AIA, or anywhere else that this man has wmd, and has used them, and will not hesitate to do so. So the question is, what are you going to tell yourself if Bush listens to do-nothings like yourselves and you have not thousands but MILLIONS are dead because we were afraid to stop him BEFORE he did anything. Mr Padillia, that you all were defending. Did you hear what happened? A Pre-emptive move really does work. Oh yeah, and I do not want to hear another damn word about bush not doing anything about the terrorists before 9/11. If he had, and those men were arrested before they did anything, You all would be screaming for bush's head for arresting them without cause.

i'm absolutely for reconstruction. it is definitely necessary. and i think it can be done with little impact to personal income taxes. i can't argue with you patty. you're in your own world.

Riiiight. The Iraqi oil revenues will pay for their reconstruction. Riiiiight. Pussy.

"There is NO DOUBT within the NSA, DIA, CIA, AIA, or anywhere else that this man has wmd, and has used them, and will not hesitate to do so." There is also no doubt within those same organizations that the US possesses and has used WMDs and will not hesitate to do so. so what. Thats actually the chatter that ive heard tiggy, using oil revenuses to pay for reconstruction. Of course you can expect a commission on top for US oil execs for the management they will assume of oil production in coming months, but yes, there has been talk of using such money to rebuild iraq. trace "Bush listens to do-nothings like yourselves" who here has advocated doing nothing? who? "I do not want to hear another damn word about bush not doing anything about the terrorists before 9/11." who here as said anything about Bush doign nothign prior to 9/11? what does that have to do with this current conversation? See, this is why some of us chide you for your blathering, obssesive politicking trace because you insert these no good for nothing rants, insert statements that NO ONE has advocated, such as this "do nothing" shit. such as your statements accusing us of "supporting Saddam" when no one has said anything of the sort.

I think it's interesting that the original Axis o' E-veel was supposed to be North Korea, Iran and Pakistan...Suddenly Pakistan was all good! Amazing turn of heart, apparently. It's also mighty interesting that Saddam notified US ambassodor April Glassie of his invasion plans before the gulf war. That pre-emptive move the Japanese did on us at Pearl Harbor really worked for them, didn't it, Trace? I reckon there probably is a doubt Saddam would hit Israel without a war going on, but it seems to me that the smartest thing he could do WITH a war going on is to hit them, and spark off a world war, which might take a bit of heat of his ass, or at least guarntee him safe harbor in on e of those other muslim countries. The way Israel is acting, they are just looking for an excuse to invade all their neighbors, and their neighbors are looking for an excuse to shoot missles at them, and then Israel may just drop the BOMB on some poor fool's capital, and voila, Muslim countries suddenly aren't all that cooperative in the war on terror. Fact is, they might think it's a good thing having folks blowing up our fellow Americans, teach us a lesson or too. Seems like Antigone's the only with a reasonable thought in his head, they rest of you are too busy hating each other for being a bush-lover or a goddamn commie liberal. Hell, i'm probably just as full of shit as the rest of ya, but at least I'm willing to ENTERTAIN that possibility....

"who here has advocated doing nothing? who? " What do you advocate? I have asked this several times and you have not given any answer. Except that the US should not do anything, which to me is "do nothing".

then you havent read what I've wrote. i have repeatedly said what i would advocate in the short term with Iraq. I have never been opposed to using force, in the long term. i just don't believe its the answer right now. I have repeatedly said to continue the rigourous, militant inspections, with the world watching for the next 6 months. is it a game of cat and mouse? yes. so what. the 100s of thousands of dead iraqi civilians who will die at our hands is worth the game. saddam cannot possibly continue to build while there is such a vigilant inspection regime on his soil. the US could actually cooperate more too by providing intelligence. the goal is disarmament trace. the potential for the large amount dead innocent civilians is too great to consider war at this stage. i have never advocated "do nothing". I have only advocate not dropping bombs trace. if thats how you intepret my argument, well, what the fuck.

"Of course you can expect a commission on top for US oil execs for the management they will assume of oil production in coming months, but yes, there has been talk of using such money to rebuild iraq" no, dumbass. you expect the oil deals to go to US companies. which makes sense, since the US is the biggest consumer of oil. jesus christ. are inspections working? how can they be? you cannot prove a negative. you cannot prove that iraq has no WMDs. that is simple logic and reasoning. it is impossible. the mission of the inspectors is to verify that iraq has disarmed. iraq providing the information, the inspectors verifying. is iraq cooperating? no. the inspections have failed. hans blix is going to come out on feb. 14th and say "we're done, it's over." will you support the war then?

No, the goal is not disarming. That is a goal, but not THE goal. Ousting him. That is the goal. And the US will be using oil revenue to rebuild and build new hospitals and schools and infrastructure. The endgame may be Iraq selling oil to the US (via exxon or some other oil mongol). But the result will also be the money going to take care of the citizens. Not line the pockets of any us exec. And Bush has stated nothing else... Patrick, what do you mean advocate in the short term? PS It is far more dangerous to provoke NK then it is Iraq

Here's your sign

"no, dumbass. you expect the oil deals to go to US companies. which makes sense, since the US is the biggest consumer of oil." im sorry what about this isn't imperialism? taking control militarily and then justifying handing over control to US companies by citing the fact that since we use the most we should control it? jesus fuck nate you are starting to scare me. lats i checked Iraq is still sovereign nation. "Ousting him. That is the goal." thats bullshit. thats nation-building something Bush vowed not to do. Tyrrant or not, this is no justification for an unprovoked war. ask me about hans blix on the 14th nate. trace "But the result will also be the money going to take care of the citizens. Not line the pockets of any us exec." don't be so naive man. who do you think led the rebuilding of the oil infrastructure after the first war? Haliburton led by whom? Good ole Cheney. Line pockets? Nooooooooooo never!!!! god damn. um, by saying "advocate in the short term" it means this is my idea of how to manage the situation in the near future. ???? It IS far more dangerous to "provoke" N. Korea, but they have arms, violated proliferation treaties and we are technically still at war with them. your spelling out the hypocrisy for me trace.

trace what do you actually know about socialism?

forget it. Nate was right, you are in your own world with your own realities.

patrick, you need to understand the difference between treaties and UN resolutions. treaties can be withdrawn from. "taking control militarily and then justifying handing over control to US companies by citing the fact that since we use the most we should control it?" the plan is to install a new government which would then be responsible for signing oil deals with companies. capitalism, not imperialism. we don't rape the oil fields, we buy the oil from the iraqis. you're confused, man.

"we buy the oil from the iraqis" by using force.

see. alternate universe

theres absolutely nothing "alernative universe" about my opinion. its just you guys have these wonderful euphamisms and illusions about what is going on. justifying installing a new regime in Iraq, upon invasion, resuming control of their resources....all under a pretext of WMDs is a farce. how the FUCK is that NOT imperialism trace? the difference is you buy the threat that they say Iraq is, I don't. You are comfortable with the aquisition of Iraqi resources upon invasion, as some sort of by product of good ole healthy capitalism. i don't.

see. painting the other as irrational

trace, are you purposely being naive? Of course the US has imperialist aspirations. We do because we're the only superpower left and we want to dominate the world over the next century and not pass the big stick to China. Do you really think this isn't the case?

most all the world agrees, and hans blix has stated, that the saddam regime is assisting terrorist organizations. this is reason to take him down.

i don't know why that didn't work, but boy am i pissed.

jesus christ. fuckitall

What has happend to Osama? . . . wot has happened to osama? ever since Sept. 11, 2002 (two thousand and TWO) the shrub has started stirred up bullsheet about Mr Hussein. oh . . . . "he tried to kill my dod" wot about all the American dods that might be killed while Living out WhirlWar3, . . . oh ok. i forget. oy vel thus spake colon, then the shrub in the same day . . . it is not heppy here.. the Dow has dropped into the seven thousands, thisat is not a good thing. not again please sir . . . .

Uh-huh.

Can we go into how easy it is to churn out bullshit these days? Look at the bogus Gulf of Tonkin Attack. Look at the bullshit report about Iraqi soldiers throwing babies out of their incubators by a relative of the Kuwaiti Royal Family. Look at fake photos of an alleged "Holocaust" in the Balkans. Look at Colin Powell's ties to the My Lai massacre cover-up. Look at what one can accomplish with Photoshop. Our "Leaders" have proven themselves for years to be unworthy of our trust---and they use lies to get us to support their wars. You wanna believe them NOW?

HI, GUYS!!!!!!!!!

like . . . 'patrick' mention, the 'nerve gas ' "conversation!" oh no, the NERVE! wot a joke, and not a funny one. who were those two ugly men behind him looking down at the floor while the colon spoke. where is my flash point!?

Bananas.

We have no bananas. I now think I will only post on political arguments to simply add bits of information ( and make light of everything). It's a waste of time to try and convince anyone of anything. Here's a bit for today: In WWI, one piece of propaganda was that the German soldiers in Belgium were spitting babies on the tips of their bayonets. I was reminded of this by the mention of the Iraqis and the incubators. The NEW baby propaganda may be that Kim Jong Il gives babies to Michael Jackson. I say, Bomb Neverland!

i was a bit surprised at you sem, you seemed to take some recent conversations really to heart. not that i care what you post or dont post, but you kinda stormed off a few weeks ago and it caught me off guard. carry on.

This Bud's for you!

that camera got a focus ring?

did you like that beer, trace?

whats even more notable....unless trace went to the liquor store to snap that image, someone else must have given it to him. ayyyyy thats slightly amusing.

i used to buy those for myself all the time. good stuff.

looks like the kind of shit people give as smartypants gifts. the kind people put on the trophy case, along with collector cans of college championship sodas and the like.

naw. it's a high quality ale. rather complex, though, which is why i asked trace if he liked it. he carries an air of 'american lager'.

Coors man all the way.

ABA is good shit.

but not exactly "suckin suds" kind of beer.

i liked it. It was a little heavy...

Man, beer ain't beer unless you can't pour it through a sieve.

busch takes like rotten milk or horse piss, coors is ok, bud is fine, my favorite is Michelobe

hey, I have had a total of what, 4 drinks in the last 12 months... I drank Mike's Hard Lemonade last night and it gave me a horrid headache

"my favorite is Michelobe" there is no excuse for that buddy. michelob, coors, bud, mgd, its all the same shit to me. the hard lemonade and other gimmicky shit is just that....gimmicky chick drinks. though i suspect, if i had to guess, something like Skyy would be good mixed with the actual vodka. real cider though ultra sweet, is top shit mixed with half Harp lager. They call that a snake bite.

Patrick, I was actually considering buying some of that as a joke before Spunky put the picture up. Too late. Believe it or not he actually bought it himself, and got it as a gift for me?

snake bite. shit patty, first with water and ice in your bourbon, now with the snake bites. you like a shandie? maybe a wine spritzer? on christmas day i ended up in a bar in SF with, among others, this guy who was laid off from our company about six months prior. i order a jameson, neat. apparently he's in his own world, trying to figure out what he wants to drink. he tells me 'you know, if you order something "neat" it means straight liquor.' uh huh. the bartender hands me my whisky, i go find a seat with the ladies. a few minutes later he sits down with this foot tall, pink and orange and white drink with a collection of fruits and sticks and umbrellas sticking out of the top. even the chicks are drinking rum and coke or beer or something respectable. 'dude, where's your penis?' 'i didn't know it would look like this!' then, 'ooo! there's strawberry puree in here!' michelob is a solid american lager. i like it. i like coors and bud, too. and i'm always amazed with the consitency of product they can achieve across batches. i always find it funny that people will rip coors and then order a sierra nevada or a corona. just because it is more heavily hopped or made in mexico doesn't necessarily make it a better beer. and skyy is vodka, though i'm guessing that was a typo.

"michelob is a solid american lager" BAHAHAHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA ohhh man. Skyy makes a new malt beverage similar Smirnoff Ice. Its really sweet...im betting if you tossed a shot in it, you might have a semi-respectable, asskicking drink. I dunno, i saw some gruff mugs slugging snake bites in the UK, though they preferred 1/2 Guiness and 1/2 cider. Since i think Guiness tastes like cardboard, i opt for the Harp. sierra usually gives me a headache as well as similar "microbrewed" beers. if im going for pisswater, i'll take a tecate or corona anyday over a bud or coors. my aversion to coors may have something to do with the fact that my dad drank that shit and natural light and i would get drunk-till-i-puked as a teen discovering the envelope of alcohol. all this talk of beer has me hankerin for a bass or newcastle off the tap. either one of those are in my top 3. last nights arena beer bloat has worn off so im ready for tonights. mmmmmmi have a couple of Bohemia's in the fridge. thats a good one too.

though, now that ive been thinking about it, i've been meaning to act on a friends suggestion of taking grey goose (his preference, though im good with skyy or kettle 1) vodka, plucking a few oranges from my tree in my yard, squeeze a bit of juice in a gladd of vodka, chilled, with a few snippets of 'zest'. i bet that would be good. the oranges in my yard are surprisingly juicy.

are you of the opinion that michelob isn't a solid ameican lager? i'd go coors, corona, bud, tecate. bohemia is a fine beer. good stuff. i think newcastle is better out of the bottle.

it's not a gladd until you've had a few. i could go for a jigger of grey goose (fuck the french) straight from the freezer, in a glass also straight from the freezer, with a little orange zest. skyy for the screwdriver. but really, vodka is so nice by itself. belvedere is great vodka. my favorite, and not just because i'm a polack. stoli, kettle 1, absolut. oh god. it's going to be one of those nights.

you're killing me on the michelob matter but im with ya on the newcastle in the bottle. there is indeed something a little different ..like its a tad more crisp. bottle or tap, i can put them away. i actually dont think ive had belvedere though. one of those nights? maybe i'll call a bud over for ping pong. nico's isnt much of a competitor anymore.

i bet someone here likes Tequiza.

i have tanq, jack and belvedere. good night sweet prince. if anyone likes tequiza, i bet it's dougie. heh.

he's definitely one candidate. i second (or third if we count trace) the michelob = solid american lager thing. corona sucks. i can understand drinking it if somebody buys a round or something, but liking it is something else. chick beer. bad beer. good marketing, though. tecate's ok.

why not count me???? I get migrains from alchohol. It sucks, makes everyone think I am a prude, but I end up in the ER. Work dinners suck, when everyone else is having wine, martini's, whatever I am sitting there with a tea or coke... I sometimes joke and order a rum and coke, hold the rum. Now that is my favorite "hard" liquor. Dark Rum. Nothing like going to the er for a migrain, you get treated like a drug seeker. So, I have learned to drink about an hour before I go to bed, then I might be OK, if I sleep through it. And speaking of aversions to certain drinks, mine would have to be Peppermint Schnaups.

the best dark rum for rum and cokes i've found is whaler's. i used to only find it at trader joe's, but it seems to be more places now.

i wasn't sure you actually cast a vote on that, trace. ok, three votes for michelob as a solid american lager. i wouldn't necessarily think someone drinking tea at dinner was a prude. i think not drinking is just fine. drinking isn't for everyone. i think peppermint schnapps is disgusting. but somebody out there likes it.

OK I vote for Michelob as a solid American lager as well. One of my favorites. You should be at these silly dinners for Trace's office. Not only are you judged by whether or not you drink, but you are judged by what you drink. It's insane. God forbid I order a glass of Pinot Grigio instead of Chardonnay. Ugh. Though fortunately I have mostly the same tastes in wines and mixed drinks as his boss's wife. I also have similar tastes in the arts as she does so that works well at these "business" functions. It's funny, the women try to be pretentious, while the men sit back and chug cheap beer. At least we can have normal conversations when they start to get drunk.

I use to drink mucho pitchers of beer,now I can only drink one and it's a corona or a red stipe and then I hit the hard stuff.

Not even a pitcher,one bottle.

I'm going to pass out soon,I do this on purpose,so I can sleep.Hi Pug!!! Where you going to,where you been?

i think the funniest part is using "Michelob" and and "lager" in the same sentence.

I'll grant you that one.

that's because you're a dumbass, patty. what do you think michelob is?

would you call Boone's Farm wine?

what does that matter? michelob is, in fact, a textbook example of an american lager.

In my book of American beers, Leinenkugel's Original is tops.

mass produced pilsners goddamnit. i can't drink beer, why i am looking at beeradvocate?

because you are a retard, hell-bent on semantics.

ok.

This is a huge blow to the case for war. Why has this story been ignored? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-570248,00.html http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2003/02/08/MN200631.DTL http://www.accuracy.org/new.htm http://www.channel4.com/news/home/z/stories/20030206/dossier.html http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/02/07/1044579934827.html http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/02/07/sprj.irq.uk.dossier/index.html

how come you pronounce Colin's name Colon? whyfor do you do this????

This makes me laugh!!! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/02/09/wrums09.xml&sSheet=/portal/2003/02/09/ixportal.html&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=130272

"Why has this story been ignored?" Having an article on the CNN website doesn't say "ignored" to me...

yet its not on any other network sites, only in a few newspapers, and its not being spoken about on any TV except for the McLaughlin group. its been buried.

Give it time.

Colin's mommy said to.

Is that how you say all Colinses names?? as Colon's?

who bought the dossier to begin with? i dont see this as a big issue, because people should have been skeptical from the get go. Just because a gov't says something to support its drive for war, doesnt mean its true. In fact, more times than not, its false or stretched

As far as I know, Mr. Powell is the only Colin I am aware of who pronounces it that way.

I bet he thinks he's real cool.(on)

"if anyone likes tequiza, i bet it's dougie." -Nate "he's definitely one candidate." -jack I don't mind that coming from Nate, but from jack, I don't know who the hell you are, so you got some 'splainin' to do.

ooh ooh ooh ooh!

tequiza: yes or no? pick one. what's to explain?

the new Osama bin Laden tape: Powell claims Al Jazeera has a new tape, proving 'partnership with Iraq'. Al Jazeera denies they have a tape. Powell says when confronted? "No comment." Sounds like someones wagging the dog. More specifically, that a tape has been manufactured and didn't arrive to Al Jazeera before Powell opened his mouth. I may sound nuts, but you can't tell me this isn't suspicious timing, especially now that reports of the UK's plagiarized, out of date dossier that Powell has claimed as a basis for war are starting to hit more North American papers... http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1348.htm http://www.canada.com/news/story.asp?id=4F96E985-D42E-4A82-AF21-E6DEC045879B

Even if it hasn't been manufactured, this message has been reported by Reuters as telling the Iraqi people that Saddam's government is their enemy... MSNBC reported on TV that their translation says to 'rise up' against Saddam.. something is very fishy... http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=2210085ee