riddler 0 #176 December 17, 2008 QuoteThere are some who feel like the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is, bring 'em on." Remember what Ghandi said, "a shoe for a bomb will make the whole world dead and barefoot". Or something like that ...Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #177 December 17, 2008 "You got to admit, whatever you think of the guy, he's got good reflexes. Even Bill Clinton was impressed. You know, Clinton's an expert at ducking shoes, ashtrays, lamps. Everything." --Jay Leno I don't think Bush really has dodged anything like that, well, since the Vietnam War." --David Letterman "The man who threw his shoes at President Bush is being hailed as a hero in Iraq. In fact, when he dies, he'll be greeted in heaven by 72 podiatrists." --Conan O'Brien "When a journalist throws his shoes at the President, if you're a late night talk show host, you go, 'Aaahhh!' Good times. It's like when Cheney shot his lawyer. You go: 'Aaaahhhh! Well, that's tonight's show taken care of.'" --Craig Ferguson "Bush is 62 years old, but he still has the reflexes of a cat. Mind you, I think his head has been on a swivel ever since Cheney shot his lawyer." --Craig Ferguson "You know, the shoe-throwing incident has made Sarah Palin want to be president even more. 'Free shoes? You betcha!'" --Craig Ferguson "Anyway, the conspiracy theories have begun. Oliver Stone is already making a movie about the shoe-throwing incident. He thinks there was a second shoe-thrower, because that journalist threw two shoes in four seconds. That's impossible." --Craig Ferguson Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,399 #178 December 18, 2008 Quote "The man who threw his shoes at President Bush is being hailed as a hero in Iraq. In fact, when he dies, he'll be greeted in heaven by 72 podiatrists." --Conan O'Brien Looks like he may not need to wait until he gets to heaven for at least one (possible) virgin: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081217/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_iraq_bush_bride_odd_1"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akarunway 1 #179 December 18, 2008 QuoteQuote "The man who threw his shoes at President Bush is being hailed as a hero in Iraq. In fact, when he dies, he'll be greeted in heaven by 72 podiatrists." --Conan O'Brien Looks like he may not need to wait until he gets to heaven for at least one (possible) virgin: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20081217/od_uk_nm/oukoe_uk_iraq_bush_bride_odd_1"Zaidi's response to the proposal was not immediately clear." -------------------------------He's prolly having a hard time communicating right now."I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ryoder 1,399 #180 December 18, 2008 New security measures now implemented: http://www.news.com.au/common/imagedata/0,,6404759,00.jpg"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #181 December 19, 2008 QuoteThe irrelevance here is any comparison between throwing a shoe (or two) and ordering the invasion of a sovereign nation under false pretenses with the full knowledge that many innocent civilians will be killed in the process. I expect this kind of tripe from you. Bill, I expect to be more logical. QuoteYour love of Bush is so great that you will go to any lengths to defend his actions, no matter how egregious. Wrong....But you are too filled with hate of Bush to see it. I would think of this as a violent act no matter who the target was. YOU on the other hand once again prove that you have a double standard. You are OK with people throwing things at Bush since you hate him...But we all know you would be up in arms if the target was Obama. Once again you show your hypocrisy."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SpeedRacer 1 #182 December 19, 2008 I thought it was funny, and I am NO fan of Bush (as anyone knows who has read my posts here). But if I had been sitting next to the guy when he tried to throw his shoes, I would have stopped him. It's OK to make jokes about it, but really, this was not a justifiable act. Speed Racer -------------------------------------------------- Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
labrys 0 #183 December 19, 2008 QuoteYOU on the other hand once again prove that you have a double standard. You are OK with people throwing things at Bush since you hate him...But we all know you would be up in arms if the target was Obama. Once again you show your hypocrisy. Ron, ummm... you've just speculated about what someone might say and then accused them of hypocrisy for it. C'mon, man... at least quote something.Owned by Remi #? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #184 December 19, 2008 QuoteI thought it was funny, and I am NO fan of Bush (as anyone knows who has read my posts here). But if I had been sitting next to the guy when he tried to throw his shoes, I would have stopped him. It's OK to make jokes about it, but really, this was not a justifiable act. This is the kind of reasonable post I would expect to hear from adults. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,434 #185 December 19, 2008 >It's OK to make jokes about it, but really, this was not a justifiable act. Agreed. It was rude and disrespectful act, one journalists should be above. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #186 December 19, 2008 QuoteQuoteThe irrelevance here is any comparison between throwing a shoe (or two) and ordering the invasion of a sovereign nation under false pretenses with the full knowledge that many innocent civilians will be killed in the process. I expect this kind of tripe from you. Bill, I expect to be more logical. QuoteYour love of Bush is so great that you will go to any lengths to defend his actions, no matter how egregious. Wrong....But you are too filled with hate of Bush to see it. I would think of this as a violent act no matter who the target was. YOU on the other hand once again prove that you have a double standard. You are OK with people throwing things at Bush since you hate him...But we all know you would be up in arms if the target was Obama. Once again you show your hypocrisy. If Obama ordered the invasion of a sovereign nation under false pretenses with the full knowledge that many innocent civilians will be killed in the process, it would not surprise me at all if many people wanted to throw things at him too. Following Ronlogic, there's no discernable difference between Guantanamo and Auschwitz-Birkenau.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #187 December 19, 2008 Quote>It's OK to make jokes about it, but really, this was not a justifiable act. Agreed. It was rude and disrespectful act, one journalists should be above. I have the same expecations of courtesy from journalists that expect from real estate agents when they are driving ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #188 December 19, 2008 QuoteFollowing Ronlogic, there's no discernable difference between Guantanamo and Auschwitz-Birkenau. And following Kallend-logic, Auschwitz-Birkenau would have been fine if it was filled with Republicans or anyone else he disagrees with."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #189 December 19, 2008 QuoteQuoteFollowing Ronlogic, there's no discernable difference between Guantanamo and Auschwitz-Birkenau. And following Kallend-logic, Auschwitz-Birkenau would have been fine if it was filled with Republicans or anyone else he disagrees with. Fascists, nazis, and their modern day equivalents.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #190 December 19, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteFollowing Ronlogic, there's no discernable difference between Guantanamo and Auschwitz-Birkenau. And following Kallend-logic, Auschwitz-Birkenau would have been fine if it was filled with Republicans or anyone else he disagrees with. Fascists, nazis, and their modern day equivalents. Wow. You were pretty quick to prove his point. Sad really... -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #191 December 19, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteFollowing Ronlogic, there's no discernable difference between Guantanamo and Auschwitz-Birkenau. And following Kallend-logic, Auschwitz-Birkenau would have been fine if it was filled with Republicans or anyone else he disagrees with. Fascists, nazis, and their modern day equivalents. Wow. You were pretty quick to prove his point. Sad really... Well, we thought the world was rid of them in 1945, but we were wrong.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #192 December 20, 2008 QuoteRon, ummm... you've just speculated about what someone might say and then accused them of hypocrisy for it. C'mon, man... at least quote something. How about a quote from him AFTER I said he would do it? After I said, "And following Kallend-logic, Auschwitz-Birkenau would have been fine if it was filled with Republicans or anyone else he disagrees with." Quote Fascists, nazis, and their modern day equivalents. He makes no apology for having a double standard. He relishes it."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #193 December 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteRon, ummm... you've just speculated about what someone might say and then accused them of hypocrisy for it. C'mon, man... at least quote something. How about a quote from him AFTER I said he would do it? After I said, "And following Kallend-logic, Auschwitz-Birkenau would have been fine if it was filled with Republicans or anyone else he disagrees with." Quote Fascists, nazis, and their modern day equivalents. He makes no apology for having a double standard. He relishes it. Labrys is correct - YOU made a statement and then acted as if it were true. I did not agree with you.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #194 December 20, 2008 QuoteLabrys is correct - YOU made a statement and then acted as if it were true. I did not agree with you. Your own posts prove you incorrect. Really...Is this the best you can do? You keep claiming to be a Professor, but you are guilty of fallacy after fallacy. And you are MUCH more reasonable in person. In fact, the difference is so night and day that I can not help but wonder if your sole intent is to just push buttons and not have actual discussions on important topics."No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akarunway 1 #195 December 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteLabrys is correct - YOU made a statement and then acted as if it were true. I did not agree with you. Your own posts prove you incorrect. Really...Is this the best you can do? You keep claiming to be a Professor, but you are guilty of fallacy after fallacy. And you are MUCH more reasonable in person. In fact, the difference is so night and day that I can not help but wonder if your sole intent is to just push buttons and not have actual discussions on important topics.LOLI hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #196 December 20, 2008 Quote And you are MUCH more reasonable in person. In fact, the difference is so night and day that I can not help but wonder if your sole intent is to just push buttons and not have actual discussions on important topics. REASONABLE does not equate throwing a shoe with ordering the military invasion of another country. You have no idea what REASONABLE is.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
FallingOsh 0 #197 December 20, 2008 QuoteQuote And you are MUCH more reasonable in person. In fact, the difference is so night and day that I can not help but wonder if your sole intent is to just push buttons and not have actual discussions on important topics. REASONABLE does not equate throwing a shoe with ordering the military invasion of another country. You have no idea what REASONABLE is. I haven't seen a single post that equates the two. You brought up that comparison to try and justify a violent act towards the President. -------------------------------------------------- Stay positive and love your life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 7 #198 December 20, 2008 QuoteREASONABLE does not equate throwing a shoe with ordering the military invasion of another country. Reasonable is not justifying the act of a person only due to you not liking the target. Maybe YOU need to look up some definitions? QuoteYou have no idea what REASONABLE is. I know reasonable...You might want to look up hypocrisy. Your hypocrisy is so strong it just shows how your life is ruled by emotion. Really, is this the best a person as educated as you can do? Rely on emotional discharges?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #199 December 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteREASONABLE does not equate throwing a shoe with ordering the military invasion of another country. Reasonable is not justifying the act of a person only due to you not liking the target. Maybe YOU need to look up some definitions? QuoteYou have no idea what REASONABLE is. I know reasonable...You might want to look up hypocrisy. Your hypocrisy is so strong it just shows how your life is ruled by emotion. Really, is this the best a person as educated as you can do? Rely on emotional discharges? Lots of PAs, but still no explanation of why you consider throwing a shoe to be the equivalent of ordering the military invasion of a country, or why you think Guantanamo and Auschwitz are equivalent.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,647 #200 December 20, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote And you are MUCH more reasonable in person. In fact, the difference is so night and day that I can not help but wonder if your sole intent is to just push buttons and not have actual discussions on important topics. REASONABLE does not equate throwing a shoe with ordering the military invasion of another country. You have no idea what REASONABLE is. I haven't seen a single post that equates the two. I can't help it if you don't pay attention.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
