aftermid

Is it possible that you could be open 8/22-8/25? I'm going to be in your town for work and would love to get in the tunnel.

Any estimated opening date?

Not exactly anthem's but... Good Times Bad Times - Led Zepplin Smells Like Teen Spirit - Nirvana Loving Cup - Rolling Stones St. Stephen - Grateful Dead Welcome to the Jungle - Guns and Roses

It IS ironic that a conservative Republican administration would promote governmental control over a private activity instead of letting the marketplace decide. But of course it's only about the Flag, not about any of the other (former) rights. Feels so good. Remember, it's an election year. Unfortunatly it isn't ironic with this adminstration. Other than the Religous Right and Megabussiness, its hard to find many ways that this administration has advanced any classic conservative platforms: -smaller government -less spending -domestic investment -less government intrussion At some point this adiminstration crossed the line from Republicans to Fascists. Again, do you support the burning of the flag? If so, shouldn't you support someone wanting to fly one? I don't advocate burning the flag, but I DEFINITLY don't support criminalizing that expression. I'm sure home owners associations have guidelines against burning flags as well. Guidelines agreeded to when the home is purchased. If you don't like the rules you agreed to then move. Let the government worry about other things: -war -skyrocketing fuel costs -Poor performance of the US dollar -Struggling education system

It IS ironic that a conservative Republican administration would promote governmental control over a private activity instead of letting the marketplace decide. But of course it's only about the Flag, not about any of the other (former) rights. Feels so good. Remember, it's an election year. Unfortunatly it isn't ironic with this adminstration. Other than the Religous Right and Megabussiness, its hard to find many ways that this administration has advanced any classic conservative platforms: -smaller government -less spending -domestic investment -less government intrussion At some point this adiminstration crossed the line from Republicans to Fascists.

Part of paying the Homeowner Association fees is micromanaging your neighbors. If you want to live in such a place then you should be able to. Let the market not the government decide what is appropriate.

I call Bullshit. "people in general dying" and "brownish people" does not jibe with that in the least. If you sit around and chear for war, then you get excited about "people in general dying". The "brownish people" part was more of an emotional response to what is a pretty sad state of affairs. you know, it really IS a sad state of affairs. but what really is the solution over there? will any nation really be the first to lay down their guns? should Israel be the first, only to let her enemies use that as the chance they've been waiting for to storm in and anhilate her? will there ever be peace in the middle east? I don't know what the answer is but this clearly isn't it. Maybe there could be a single democratic state in Isreal (including the West Bank and Gaza) where Muslims and Jews have equal access to social, political, and economic resourses. but how will that work when they, muslims and jews, hate each other so much and each think that the other's fundamental religious identity is flawed? Probably not really well. There would probably be a lot of political assasinations and violent protests, I'm sure a fair amount of terrorism on both sides. But maybe after generations there would be some comprimise and eventually cooperation. Maybe each side would move a little bit more to the middle over time. Almost definitly wouldn't work, but something has got to be better than the alternative, somewhat inevitable Armageddon: then the only winners are the Fundementalist Christians.

I call Bullshit. "people in general dying" and "brownish people" does not jibe with that in the least. If you sit around and chear for war, then you get excited about "people in general dying". The "brownish people" part was more of an emotional response to what is a pretty sad state of affairs. you know, it really IS a sad state of affairs. but what really is the solution over there? will any nation really be the first to lay down their guns? should Israel be the first, only to let her enemies use that as the chance they've been waiting for to storm in and anhilate her? will there ever be peace in the middle east? I don't know what the answer is but this clearly isn't it. Maybe there could be a single democratic state in Isreal (including the West Bank and Gaza) where Muslims and Jews have equal access to social, political, and economic resourses.

I call Bullshit. "people in general dying" and "brownish people" does not jibe with that in the least. If you sit around and chear for war, then you get excited about "people in general dying". The "brownish people" part was more of an emotional response to what is a pretty sad state of affairs.

Does the idea of WWIII excite you, or is it just the people dying in general, or just brownish people dying? Once again another person has shown that they know absoultely nothing about me, and in this instance like many others, they are completely wrong. I wonder, is it that people can't read anymore, or is that that have to add verbage to a statement in order to feel justified in disliking the author, or the message? I inferred that it is your contention that Israel unleashing its Armor and Infantry on Lebonon is a good thing. Am I wrong? If I'm wrong and you were just merely making a statement than I apologize.

Does the idea of WWIII excite you, or is it just the people dying in general, or just brownish people dying?

Correct. It listens for words, it does not listen to the conversation which is a complilation of words to form an idea or express a thought. Glad you finally agree. So what you're saying as long as I don't use certain words it will not flag/listen to my conversation. So, basicly if I'm not doing anything wrong I have nothing to worry about. That seems reasonable enough to me. If we can't trust George and company who can we trust? I'm sure it's a matter of national security. Christ I feel more secure already. Thanks, big bro He's saying that it listens to EVERY word you say, and if you say a bad word it listens even harder. The founding fathers must be spinning in their graves. The founding father's would have indicted most members of this administration as traitors. Give me liberty or give me death is now: Give me liberty or give me security. If you want to maximum security go live in prison.

Correct. It listens for words, it does not listen to the conversation which is a complilation of words to form an idea or express a thought. Glad you finally agree. So what you're saying as long as I don't use certain words it will not flag/listen to my conversation. So, basicly if I'm not doing anything wrong I have nothing to worry about. That seems reasonable enough to me. If we can't trust George and company who can we trust? I'm sure it's a matter of national security. Christ I feel more secure already. Thanks, big bro

'In the case of the stem cell bill, Bush left no room for compromise. Using federal money for research on new stem cell lines - even those derived from embryos created for fertility treatments and otherwise slated for disposal, as specified in the measure - would mean sanctioning the destruction of human life, the president says.' How does he explain killing 50,000+ Iraqi civillians? I'd say he doesn't have much of a problem sanctioning the destruction of human life. I guess it all depends on how you define life. I think it is quite scary that in 21st century the most powerful country on earth could elect such a backwoods leader. Just remember this is the same guy when asked about evolution his response was: "the jury's still out on that one"

Here are the flaws I found in thier analysis. The statements in bold are quoted from your link. The Jewish people base their claim to the Land of Israel on at least four premises: 1) the Jewish people settled and developed the land Prior to 1948 there were approx 10,000 Jews living in the land that is now Israel, while there were over 1,000,000 Arabs inhabiting the land. Sorry it’s hard to claim squatters rights after 2,000 years. 2) the international community granted political sovereignty in Palestine to the Jewish people I’m not disputing that. I’m merely raising the question (which you did not answer) what your reaction would be if similar sovereignty was granted to Native Americans and Africans in the current territory that encompasses the United States? 3) the territory was captured in defensive wars What defensive wars were these? The Six Day War? 4) God promised the land to the patriarch Abraham. It’s rather hard to argue with God. Maybe he changed his mind. Maybe somebody misinterpreted the revelation: When asked is the good good because the Gods says its good or do the Gods say its good because its good. Socrates responded that the Gods say its good because its good, because man can always misinterpret the revelation.