Azalin

I'm sorry.....I don't do impressions.

"They're doing what we need to do to stand up to ourselves. These are our streets and we have the right to take them." brilliant.

personally, I think DC is the perfect place for penis snakes, and I'll bet national geographic would agree.

spiritual rape? really? I know a few assault victims who would likely enjoy a few minutes alone with Mr Weinstein.

maybe the showers will be really, really cold.

let what play out.....legislation and policy intended to restrict our use of fossil fuels by making them so expensive as to be impractical to use, in order to force us to adopt more expensive alternatives when the science behind the movement is either flawed or incomplete? if it was simply a matter of waiting for science to gain a more complete understanding before we reacted by adapting a national energy policy based on that science, then people might be more content to 'let it play out'.

the gun market is booming?

like that's ever stopped them before.

hmmmmmm.....I was wondering if my old pal was still around....

I think this is a fascinating question. on the surface, my immediate answer would be an emphatic 'no', but as I thought about it more, I began to wonder just how much of myself is really a 'good' person, and how much has been programmed to be that way because of a fear of consequence or retribution for doing things that are 'bad'. I've always believed in a clearly delineated 'right and wrong', and I've always tried to do what I thought was 'right', but I realize that a significant number of those decisions were made, at least in part, because of the possibility of being arrested, getting my butt kicked, etc if I chose poorly. I think 'purge' legislation would be a terrible thing to support, but this topic has inspired a little rare introspection.

and thus my lexicon has been expanded.

yep, especially since the feds were good enough to hire an additional sixteen-thousand new IRS employees to help us keep it simple.

I said that you were treating the NRA AS IF they were an activist branch of the republican party. look at all of your arguements....that's exactly what you've been doing. and as far as the NRA leadership is concerned, if their actions do not reflect the desire of a majority of the membership, then they will be replaced. you keep treating the NRA as if they were some type of loose cannon bent of thwarting any and all attempts by washington to successfully attain a society free of gun violence. if that's not your position, then consider restating your point. ultimately, it's the bill of rights, not the NRA that is stopping the administration from implementing gun control.

indeed. it's much easier to criticize something when you are able to define it the way you want.

since you feel my post was so stupid, allow me to try to clarify.....NRA membership is made up of (pay close attention here) republicans, democrats, liberatarians, independents, and anyone else who decides that they wish to join. you continually refer to the NRA as if they are some agressive, activist branch of the republican party. they are not. are you going to try to tell us all that all those gun-totin' country boys throughout the deep south that happen to also be democrats shun the NRA as some kind of republicans-only club? do you not recognize that their political power comes their ability to rally the vote and not nearly so much from what kind of cash contributions they make to representitives? at this particular point in time, republicans and liberatarians are the ones championing gun ownership rights & the 2nd ammendment, and the democrats are the ones trying to push legislation to control ownership and limit 2nd ammendment freedoms. the political left & right are clearly on different sides of the issue, but membership within the NRA is diverse.

people don't kill people......gun ownership advocates kill people!

I never said it was one of the biggest lobbies. I said it has bipartisan membership. besides, since it's an organization devoted to defending one of the original constitutional ammendments, they represent EVERYBODY in the united states, not just their own membership. if a constitutional ammendment is ever changed, it effects everyone, while helping to set a precedent for further modification of other constitutionally guaranteed rights at some other point in time.

that's because an awful lot of democrats are gun owners and members of the NRA. in fact, the NRA might be one of the most bipartisan lobbies out there.

thanks. that added a lot to the conversation.

sounds pretty liberal to me.

how could Sebelius have possibly anticipated any difficulties at all? I mean, we had to pass Obamacare before anyone could learn what was in the legislation, right?

that's the baste idea yet. I wanted you to know before someone else panned your idea.

that was one of the most retarded things I've ever seen in print. too bad people like this have readers.

I'm sure they will, and I will consider that to be classless too.

while driving home from work today, I heard on the local radio talk station that 'ding dong the witch is dead' is quickly rising in the UK charts, already somewhere in the top 200. I could understand if this was happening in some country where the people were instantly liberated by the death of some brutal, maniacal tyrant, but knowing that it's British citizens cheering the death of a former prime minister has me genuinely surprised. how utterly classless.