lawrocket

That would be taking away my son's rights. If he wants to do it for free, he is, and should be, able to do it for free. ***from asking for some lawyer's fees from the other side If they defend them pro bono, there would not be 'some lawyer's fees.' Jerry Baumchen PS) Not directed at you; but there are a whole bunch of people who post on here who would be VERY uncomfortable living in Portland, OR. Im chilling in Mendocino right now. Digging it. No neighbors. Woods. Peace. People doing their own thing. Reminds me of Portland. I love it there. Mainly people who mind their own business. Then there are the kayakers... My wife is hotter than your wife.

I got to thinking about this. Seems like cops are killing more people than skydiving is. And it seems that there are plenty of people who would never think of skydiving who will fuck around with cops. Even more so, a person can do nothing wrong and still get killed by either a cop or a skydive. My issue is what is says about all involved. One side playing with fire. The other side being a bit too explosive. My wife is hotter than your wife.

My son is an attorney with a corporate law firm in Portland; they have 40-45 lawyers on staff. He is going to ask the managing partners if he can defend some of these people pro bono. He has 6 yrs experience as a prosecutor / criminal defense attorney. There are a number of other lawyers at his firm wanting to also do a pro bono defense; but since they have no courtroom experience, they are asking him if he will brief/assist them if & when they go to court. I did raise him to think for himself. Jerry Baumchen Sorry Jerry, but I hope he loses spectacularly and they either go to jail or are fined into bankruptcy. Sorry Clint.... but I see you are just not a fan of the OTHER parts of the constitution.... funny about how many compassionate conservatives seem to have a severe hypocrisy built into what it is they have that they are calling patriotism. The constitution has a few more components than just the 2nd amendment..... I have always take to heart that oath I once took to support it.... ALL OF IT. I may not agree with the actions of those who protest but I certainly love their right to voice their opposition to corporatism.... I do believe that is our right as Americans. I get the right to free speech, and the right to association, etc. but they don't have the right to block legal commerce, as far as my reading goes. And I would have them charged individually and as a group for it. The have the right to protest. And they have the responsibility to pay for whatever it cost for them to protest. If it's $10k per hour, then so be it. My wife is hotter than your wife.

My son is an attorney with a corporate law firm in Portland; they have 40-45 lawyers on staff. He is going to ask the managing partners if he can defend some of these people pro bono. He has 6 yrs experience as a prosecutor / criminal defense attorney. There are a number of other lawyers at his firm wanting to also do a pro bono defense; but since they have no courtroom experience, they are asking him if he will brief/assist them if & when they go to court. I did raise him to think for himself. Jerry Baumchen Sorry Jerry, but I hope he loses spectacularly and they either go to jail or are fined into bankruptcy. Sorry Clint.... but I see you are just not a fan of the OTHER parts of the constitution.... funny about how many compassionate conservatives seem to have a severe hypocrisy built into what it is they have that they are calling patriotism. The constitution has a few more components than just the 2nd amendment..... I have always take to heart that oath I once took to support it.... ALL OF IT. I may not agree with the actions of those who protest but I certainly love their right to voice their opposition to corporatism.... I do believe that is our right as Americans. That's funny, you condemn Christy for a partial bridge closing, but applaud this. Your bias is showing. I don't remember anywhere in the constitution where it says we must defend illegal activities. I get the whole "civil disobedience" thing, but that doesn't relenquish them from following the law. If they choose to break the law, they choose to accept the consequences of breaking those laws. I still wonder if they are aware of just how much petroleum that was used for them to accomplish this act of defiance? Or if they had the intelligence to even comprehend the irony. Might seem of, but I see a huge difference between what the oil slicks (that's what I call groups of kayakers, considering what their equipment is made out of) did and what Christie did. The difference is that one of them is using state police powers as a government to interfere with commerce just because he and/or his people wanted to be an asshole. The other are private citizens out to interfere with commerce because they want to be assholes. When one brings the force of government I do have a much larger issue with it. My wife is hotter than your wife.

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2014/jul/08/california-ranks-worlds-8th-largest-economy-overta/ California is the 8th largest economy on earth(bigger than Russia and Italy), I think you can afford a small tribute towards the climate. It's exactly what it is. A tribute. But not toward the climate. Toward the politicians. This was supposed to help avert global warming (back when warming was the problem. Yes. The whole idea was to keep the earth cooler) and it was admitted that, at best, it would prevent global warming by a few ten thousandths of a degree over the next century. Even the best of science would find whatever benefit was provided to be, as a matter of science, undetectable! The whole thing is the political/climatalogic example of homeopathy. And costing billions in Cali, and disproportionately affecting the poor. But that's okay. Fuck the poor, right? Fuck the poor. Fuck the rich. And screw anybody except Elon Musk and others who have the money and the power to make a whole lot more off the poor while making sure the poor cannot afford their products. Yes, even I am paying money so that the rich can more easily afford a Tesla. I can't afford one. But it's now easier for a millionaire to afford one. My wife is hotter than your wife.

It's an excellent thought. And a great way to get some publicity and some experience for the others. Despite how I personally feel, they do deserve a defense. My wife is hotter than your wife.

the problem I have with this, is the individuals should be fined as well. Not some anonymous organization, but the people carrying it out as well. The individuals aren't named on the order. So cannot be held in contempt for violating the order. But they can be sued later on. My wife is hotter than your wife.

I feel the same way 100%!! A couple of years ago, the 9th Circuit held that the Sea Shepherd Foundation practices outright piracy. "When you ram ships; hurl glass containers of acid; drag metal-reinforced ropes in the water to damage propellers and rudders; launch smoke bombs and flares with hooks; and point high-powered lasers at other ships, you are, without a doubt, a pirate, no matter how high-minded you believe your purpose to be." I think the very start part points out my biggest issue. It's the high minded attitude. The holier than thou. It being sanctimonious. There is a good reason to ignore the laws. The rules. So you want to get to the hospital because your son was just injured by a drunk driver? No. The bridge is closed because nothing is more important than hanging off this bridge to stop a ship. Throwing glass bottles of acid at people? Well, for the right reason ND by any means necessary. What does it require to get in a plastic kayak and get in the way of a large vessel to prevent it from leaving a port? The ability to justify all the petroleum that you use as being for a good reason. And the knowledge and comfort that the ship will follow the rules and not run right through you. No, by no means will you put yourself in that position if you think that the other guy will not follow rules. My wife is hotter than your wife.

I followed you up to that point. Did your autocorrect change 'phosphate'? Yes it did. My wife is hotter than your wife.

The ship is through the bridge. Some of the people hanging off of nylon ropes in nylon tents and slings and people in their petroleum based kayaks, that were taken there by SUVS and carbureted engines were removed and pushed out of the way by police boats. So the net effect was a ship was idling for a day before it set sail. Putting more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. And tonight they'll load their kayaks back on to the gas guzzling, go to their air conditioned flats, put am animal carcass on the barbecue, and chow down on prostate washed plates with smug satisfaction over the circle jerk in which they just participated. And then one of them, in thirty years, can share some legal cannabis with one of his 24 grandchildren from six children in the name of population control about the time he helped delay and icebreaker for a couple of hours and bragged about it on Twitter. My wife is hotter than your wife.

[url] Being totally serious. Not a vegan for some ethical reason but for dietary and health reasons. Nor do I proselytize that everyone should do it. It's not for everybody. But, yes, vegans are delicious, too. My wife is hotter than your wife.

Wife vegan. And I'm about 98% vegan. My wife is hotter than your wife.

Okay. I'll call it out. Both of the extreme sides on this issue look at whatever fits their narrative. Period. Both sides of this issue would rather attack the person bringing up valid points than address the points. Both sides rely on hyperbole. Both sides rely on logical fallacy. Both sides call opinions facts. Both sides are so full of shit that working through it is becoming an insufferable task. And it is because both sides have much to gain or lose from what political reaction will be. Just in the last few days, retired GISS head James Hansen wrote that the reason why the Antarctic sea ice is increasing is because of the freshwater melt from Antarctica. I personally think that Kallend should be credited for this because he mentioned it long ago as a theory and Hansen ripped him off. My problem is that Hansen doesn't explain why the alleged massive melt in Greenland and elsewhere in the Northern hemisphere isn't having the same effect. But why is Hansen predciting that 3/4 of the world's major cities will be underwater by 2100? TO make money, that's why. For speaking honoraria. It's like running for president. The job is crappy, but the job of "ex president" is pretty damned nice. This is what is going on. People doing what they are doing and saying what they are saying NOT for altruistic reasons but to stoke their own damned egos. Which is why there is no middle ground that is acceptable. Reason dies. And ad hominem, as well as the whole gamut of logical fallacy, becomes the rule. Because such things are brilliant political tools that are proven to work. My wife is hotter than your wife.

I thought that was fairly obvious....... Follow the money captain. Okay. I followed it. Now, what do you think of what he said? Or are you one of those pro-sciencey science types that blinds yourself to contrary information? Perfect example of what I am talking about when I say politics has become the adjunct for science. Just like here. Facts don't mean shit. Opinion and interpretation doesn't mean shit. Because oooohh! He must be a bad man. My wife is hotter than your wife.

So basically, this is the old Dateline NBC stuff. So fetuses are aborted. The tissues are being sold to research facilities. Isn't that awful? It's illegal. No, probably isn't. It's gruesome. Yeah, probably is. Much like many medical procedures. It's being treated as a commercial transaction. Yeah. Because it's a business. Well, let's call them baby parts. Okay. So long as we call organ donations "corpse parts" This is making more of it than it is. In the long term, this will end up blowing back. It's how it always happens. Eventually, a story will come out about REALLY engaging in black market fetal organs. But the outrage from it will be lost because this already happened. Kinda like calling Obama a Socialist or a Marxist. Yeah, sounds great until a real one like Sanders comes along. And in the long run, maybe the shouldn't have been saying that about Obama. Because he looks pretty moderate now, doesn't he? My wife is hotter than your wife.

And of course, there are others who have zero response to what Goddard wrote and instead decide to be GODDARD and attack the goddamned motivations instead of actually thinking in a cogent manner. Ad hominem. The most popular logical fallacy. See, Jeanne, you've just tacitly admitted that everything he said was true because you have no argument against it. My wife is hotter than your wife.

Okay. Goddard has me interested. SeeYa. I actually like a lot of Goddard's work. I think it's instructive and useful. Problem with him is that he engages in this sort of hyperbole. Seriously. Breathtaking fraud? He feels compelled to use terms like this. His graphs on the difference between recorded and adjusted temperatures are handy. And while there is a valid explanation, he's right that the data is to a large extent conjured. But he takes it too far and overplays his hand. This makes him easy to dismiss. Why? Because, like the alarmists, he attacks the MOTIVATIONS. Meaning that he tosses in his own red herring because it's not about the data he has. Again, there are reasons for this smothing and gap filling. It has pluses and minuses. But Goddard is much like Dawkins - he could be far more effective if he wasn't such a goddamned troll. MEaning all he ever preaches to is the choir. My wife is hotter than your wife.

I also find it interesting that risky activities are viewed almost as zero sum. Which is riskier? Doing five jumps on a Saturday or riding the motorcycle an hour each way to get there? Turns out that the risks don't cancel each other out. They just stack up. It's an interesting philosophical question, but the more risky activities one does the greater the opportunity of encountering an event. My wife is hotter than your wife.

If she does (though I'd caution everyone not to underestimate her resilience), I think there are those who would quickly step in and offer themselves as the "normal" alternative to Sanders. Andrew Cuomo comes to mind, for one example. For part of the potential pool, here are lists of Current Democratic Governors, and Current Democratic Senators I really don't see it as being either Trump or Sanders. "Weird" tends to fly early on, when it's still fun, kind of like looking through the beer goggles; but when the hangovers wear off, "normal(ish)" tends to rise to the top. I'd like to say I agree with you. But the Internet is proving to be a game changer, in my mind. I'm seeing evrry day a new Bernie Sanders soundbite. It's not about the television soundbite. It's about the Internet meme. Back in the day, we had kooky candidates whose early supporters didn't get heat much support themselves. Now there is an Internet, where a person with any weird or kooky thought of idea can find a community of like minded people. Rather than seekkng out different ideas or, as in the past, be exposed by osmosis to different thought processes, all one needs now is to find whatever site one agrees with to feel validated and participate in a political circle jerk. Example? Until about a decade ago I had no idea there were so many other libertarians out there. Now I can find whatever I want to support my thought process. Are you a flat earther? A moon hoaxer? You can find others who agree with you. Thus making reason much more difficult to accomplish. I'm seeing this one happening. People I consider friends and intelligent and reasonable who are just getting more hateful. And all of them linking to stuff they see that encourages their beliefs. (Like those folks who link to alternet. Or when one links to wattsupwiththat in response to skepticalscience. Both have agendas that color their information). This is why I can absolutely see Trump and Sanders. Both sides doubling down on the Fuck You. Not about reason but voting for whomever will piss off the other side more. My wife is hotter than your wife.

This may well turn into Trump versus Sanders. Hillary is imploding. She just seems disinterested. Her unwillingness to answer questions just means more are being asked. Anyone but Hillary also means Sanders. And I haven't seen a candidate in my lifetime that has me so scared. I find him to be scarier than Rick Perry or Santorum ever were. And he is a very legitimate here at to get the Democratic nomination. Trump V Sanders? Two giant windbags. My wife is hotter than your wife.

Get rid of NRA. First and most important step. I'm impressed with your lack of support of freedom of assembly. It must be tough to be that caring voice that speaks so loudly against all that is bad. Freedom of assembly and association are bad. I hadn't understood that before but since you so obviously care more than anyone else and loudly denounce all bad things, I reckon that the First Amendment to the US Constitution is as bad as the Second. (Understanding that neither right is protected in Germany, which is why white supremacists are completely absent over there). I understand that over there are outlawed organizations. Because Germany has freedom of non-censored speech. My wife is hotter than your wife.

There are a few issues. On one hand, white guys have had a decent monopoly on mass casualty shootings in the US (Virginia Tech being an exception). And when white guys do a mass shooting there is usually the initial assumption that they are crazy. And are often correct. But Muslims are coming on strong. Are they crazy? This becomes an interesting topic. Because we can fairly easily presume a motive. Their beliefs (not all of them. But all it takes is a few bad apples to spoil the perception) are pretty contrary to the secular or even religious beliefs of the US or other western democracies. Is a Muslim mass shooter crazy? It's not an easy question to answer. My wife is hotter than your wife.

Not only that, the NAACP wants the confederate flag removed from state police vehicle insignia and uniform patches. Where do you draw the line? Yep. It's now moved to iconoclasm. In 2001 (before 9/11) there was a worldwide uproar as the Taliban destroyed the two Bamiyan Buddhas. On the basis that they were offensive. Back then, it was thought that iconoclasm was a bad thing because the act of destroying heritage, even if inconsistent with present mores, was extremist and intolerant in nature. I've seen posters on here talk about the right wing Sharia. The American Taliban. Well, right now I'm seeing a suggestion that is EXACTLY what the Taliban did. When some group starts to talk about burning books, stomping out albums (I'm dating myself), destroying art or otherwise destroying relics of heritage, it has moved onto something more despicable. If any of you ever get the chance to watch the "Rape of Europa" you can get an idea what I'm talking about. A group is destroyed by destroying its heritage. Its culture. Its art. The Taliban know it. ISIS knows it. The Germans knew it. It's a shame that some asshole who wanted to start a race war is actually being successful in it. Some racist white guy burns an Ameeican flag and kills a bunch of black people in a church? Time for war against Southern heritage. It's scary to me how few people are willing to speak out against it. Yes, I find the whole thing offensive. Which is exactly why it needs to exist. I want to see it myself sometime. I want to tour Auschwitz. Because we MUST be allowed to experience history Multiculturalism. Tolerance. They are all just words used by the antimulticultural and anti tolerant. My wife is hotter than your wife.

As long as it can be timely verified. Can it? Sure it can. Just ask them. My wife is hotter than your wife.

True. It's a deal for which there is no confirmation plan. Which means it isn't a deal. My wife is hotter than your wife.