Free Republic 4th Quarter Fundraising Target: $85,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $69,900
82%  
Woo hoo!! And now less than $15.1k to go!! We can do this. Thank you all very much!!

Posts by Hank All-American

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • If hydrocarbons are renewable- then is "Peak Oil" a fraud?

    12/05/2006 1:56:08 AM PST · 11 of 160
    Hank All-American to beyond the sea

    I first read about this in 1991. The geologist who pioneered the theory was far more accurate in picking where oil deposits would be based upon his assumptions than fossil-fuel experts were.

    Back then I thought for sure it would only be a matter of a few years before we started looking at the fuel situation differently. Unfortunately, we didn't then, we won't now. The idea of a dwindling resource is too vital to modern angst and the deep running anti-capitalism sentiment that has permeated our popular culture and academic institutions.

  • Latinos' (sic) petition drive targets FB (Farmers Branch) rental rules

    12/01/2006 7:30:35 AM PST · 2 of 10
    Hank All-American to I_Publius

    Be careful what you ask for.

  • PC and the Crisis of Liberalism

    11/23/2006 7:48:55 PM PST · 12 of 28
    Hank All-American to Doctor Raoul

    Don't worry. Radical Islam will kill it. Along with all other aspects of western civilization.

  • Penguins, dog vomit and human sexuality (Do Gay Animals mean that homosexuality is natural ?)

    11/22/2006 9:30:34 AM PST · 9 of 52
    Hank All-American to All

    I've heard this argument since I was a little kid. The flaw in it, which should be readily apparent, is that animals are sexually indiscriminate. If you accept that argument for "normality," then you likely have to accept inter-species sex as "normal," as well.

  • Gingrich '08: The stealth candidate

    11/20/2006 9:34:43 PM PST · 153 of 154
    Hank All-American to Pikachu_Dad

    Definitely the latter.

  • Gingrich '08: The stealth candidate

    11/20/2006 5:09:35 PM PST · 138 of 154
    Hank All-American to All

    Just to be clear, I love Newt. I think he's great. But the guys I talked to in D.C. during the days of the Republican Revolution--at least one of whom everyone on here has probably heard of--were scared to death of his ... proclivities becoming an issue. I personally couldn't care less. I'm just saying.

  • Gingrich '08: The stealth candidate

    11/20/2006 12:06:46 PM PST · 2 of 154
    Hank All-American to do the dhue

    Newt's got a few skirt-chasing issues, I'm afraid.

  • Hospital Accused Of 'Dumping' Homeless

    11/16/2006 9:16:26 PM PST · 58 of 60
    Hank All-American to kinoxi
  • Hospital Accused Of 'Dumping' Homeless

    11/16/2006 7:11:34 PM PST · 19 of 60
    Hank All-American to CindyDawg

    I saw the video stills. It was a taxi. She was in socks and a hospital robe, clearly disoriented.

  • Just Married (32 Years Ago) - (Arkansas Pubbie acting like a Clinton alert)

    11/14/2006 9:49:00 PM PST · 4 of 10
    Hank All-American to AVNevis

    I'm sorry, but that that is more funny than anything else. Too funny for me to even condemn it.

  • O.J. Simpson to promote "If I Did It" on Fox

    11/14/2006 9:09:18 PM PST · 25 of 88
    Hank All-American to All

    I remember Bundy gave an interview where he did the same thing. The interviewer would ask a question about how one of his victim's died, for example, and Bundy would say "I wouldn't know anything about that." Then the interviewer would ask how he imagined it may have happened, and Bundy would go into a long, detailed explanation of how he "imagined" the kidnapping and murder took place.

  • Private Citizens Launch "Eyes On The Border"

    11/14/2006 8:26:14 PM PST · 3 of 12
    Hank All-American to All

    I guess if they fly low enough, they'll get to see the crossing hordes wave at them. I admire the desire to do something, but what the heck does this kind of thing accomplish? Without the ability to STOP people from crossing, I can't see it being much help.

  • Iraqi Forces Surround Hostages Takers

    11/14/2006 11:54:59 AM PST · 10 of 19
    Hank All-American to exit82

    I'm not sure all those uniforms were fake.

  • Democrats' wins hinged on Muslims

    11/14/2006 9:59:49 AM PST · 74 of 164
    Hank All-American to AmishDude

    Wouldn't that lend himself to being more of a problem for them than for us?

  • Justices reject Skakel appeal

    11/14/2006 9:53:41 AM PST · 2 of 11
    Hank All-American to Graybeard58

    Fuhrman's revenge, one might say.

  • Democrats' wins hinged on Muslims

    11/14/2006 9:50:28 AM PST · 71 of 164
    Hank All-American to AmishDude

    He was out on his butt because he resigned rather than submit to reductions in the fleet.

    I didn't say I'd have voted for him. I said we should probably keep an open mind, because I think he's going to be more of a problem for them than for us.

  • (Vanity) Changing my mind on Mel Martinez as RNC Chair

    11/14/2006 9:31:46 AM PST · 18 of 48
    Hank All-American to bray

    "Can you explain the difference between Guest Worker and Citizenship?"

    One can vote. The other can only vote when Democrats control the polling station.

    And a Senator in the minority party has virtually nothing to do 90% of the time. I'm not worried about him being a part-time chairman.

  • Giuliani Leads McCain For GOP Nomination (New Rasmussen Poll)

    11/14/2006 8:56:40 AM PST · 79 of 261
    Hank All-American to wmfights

    "One thing about Rudy, I think he would kick serious arse when it comes to terrorism."
    _________________

    Why?

    _________________

    Because of the way he handled crime as mayor of NYC, almost being solely responsible for a huge drop in the NATIONAl crime rate. He did that by refusing to coddle criminals like his predecessors. He was there for 9/11. He returned that Sheikh's check because he blamed Israel. I think he'd be a bare-knuckle brawler when it comes to the war on terror.

    Can I prove it? No. I'm just telling you what I think.

  • Democrats' wins hinged on Muslims

    11/14/2006 8:41:11 AM PST · 19 of 164
    Hank All-American to popdonnelly

    Do you really think they are going to be happy with that vote a couple of years from now? Voting in a former Secretary of the Navy under Reagan? Who served honorably in Vietnam? Who's first speech highlighted the birthday of the Marine Corps?

    I would have voted for Allen, but if there's one Democrat out there we should keep an open mind about, it's Webb. I think he will be far more problematic for them than he is for us.

  • Dallas suburb cracks down on illegal immigrants

    11/14/2006 8:34:25 AM PST · 19 of 22
    Hank All-American to Xenalyte

    Yes. Not because hiring illegal aliens is great, but because it is simply a way the government pretends to be doing something when really they are just passing the buck. And it's not a proposal. It's been the law for twenty years. If we had come out and strongly opposed employer-fines in the eighties on the grounds that illegal immigration needs to be stopped at the border by the government, maybe we'd have a fence by now. It's one of those bromides politicans and bureacrats love, because it not only increases governmental authority, it removes or dilutes governmental responsibility.

    And this is not "privatizing enforcement." Don't fall into that trap. See how far an employer or landowner gets in trying to actually enforce immigration laws. And see how fast they get thrown in jail if they take some illegal and drive him down to the border to push him back. This is simply burdening citizens with the problem under the pretense of "cracking down," but not giving them any real authority to deal with it. To show how absurd this is, who should be considered more responsible? The government who refuses to seal off the border? Or the employer who gives some guy a low-paying job? The apartment owner who leases out a vacant unit? Or the government that requires public schools provide taxpayer funded eductions to illegal alien children?

    The government should be deporting illegal aliens. Instead, for political reasons, it would rather criminalize employers and property owners.

  • Dallas suburb cracks down on illegal immigrants

    11/14/2006 8:34:21 AM PST · 18 of 22
    Hank All-American to Xenalyte

    Yes. Not because hiring illegal aliens is great, but because it is simply a way the government pretends to be doing something when really they are just passing the buck. And it's not a proposal. It's been the law for twenty years. If we had come out and strongly opposed employer-fines in the eighties on the grounds that illegal immigration needs to be stopped at the border by the government, maybe we'd have a fence by now. It's one of those bromides politicans and bureacrats love, because it not only increases governmental authority, it removes or dilutes governmental responsibility.

    And this is not "privatizing enforcement." Don't fall into that trap. See how far an employer or landowner gets in trying to actually enforce immigration laws. And see how fast they get thrown in jail if they take some illegal and drive him down to the border to push him back. This is simply burdening citizens with the problem under the pretense of "cracking down," but not giving them any real authority to deal with it. To show how absurd this is, who should be considered more responsible? The government who refuses to seal off the border? Or the employer who gives some guy a low-paying job? The apartment owner who leases out a vacant unit? Or the government that requires public schools provide taxpayer funded eductions to illegal alien children?

    The government should be deporting illegal aliens. Instead, for political reasons, it would rather criminalize employers and property owners.

  • Dallas suburb cracks down on illegal immigrants

    11/14/2006 8:34:01 AM PST · 17 of 22
    Hank All-American to Xenalyte

    Yes. Not because hiring illegal aliens is great, but because it is simply a way the government pretends to be doing something when really they are just passing the buck. And it's not a proposal. It's been the law for twenty years. If we had come out and strongly opposed employer-fines in the eighties on the grounds that illegal immigration needs to be stopped at the border by the government, maybe we'd have a fence by now. It's one of those bromides politicans and bureacrats love, because it not only increases governmental authority, it removes or dilutes governmental responsibility.

    And this is not "privatizing enforcement." Don't fall into that trap. See how far an employer or landowner gets in trying to actually enforce immigration laws. And see how fast they get thrown in jail if they take some illegal and drive him down to the border to push him back. This is simply burdening citizens with the problem under the pretense of "cracking down," but not giving them any real authority to deal with it. To show how absurd this is, who should be considered more responsible? The government who refuses to seal off the border? Or the employer who gives some guy a low-paying job? The apartment owner who leases out a vacant unit? Or the government that requires public schools provide taxpayer funded eductions to illegal alien children?

    The government should be deporting illegal aliens. Instead, for political reasons, it would rather criminalize employers and property owners.

  • Giuliani Leads McCain For GOP Nomination (New Rasmussen Poll)

    11/14/2006 8:24:23 AM PST · 10 of 261
    Hank All-American to areafiftyone

    One thing about Rudy, I think he would kick serious arse when it comes to terrorism.

  • Dallas suburb cracks down on illegal immigrants

    11/14/2006 8:20:19 AM PST · 13 of 22
    Hank All-American to Colonel Kangaroo

    You're exactly right. Before we pop the champagne corks, we should take pause at the more insidious trend this reflects: the pushing off of governmental responsibilities onto private citizens. This is happening more and more, mostly to property owners. Whether it's requiring apartment complex owners to hire private security guards, or to screen for illegal aliens, or to improve property appearances beyond what the economics of an area normally provide for, it is a disturbing phenomenon. Don't like a situation? Just make it illegal! This is not a good thing. You are basically criminalizing property ownership. How, exactly, does an apartment owner screen for illegals? By asking hispanic people to show proof of citizenship? Is the city council going to pay for their attorneys fees when they're sued in federal court for housing discrimination? Just because a city council declares somthing mandatory, doesn't mean that has any binding force on any greater jurisdictional authority. Property owners--who conservatives should be protecting--are being victimized here. Build the fence. Deport illegals. But don't criminalize the conduct of private citizens in a free society because of the failure of or lack of any policy to control the problem at its source.

  • A Liberal's Pledge to Disheartened Conservatives

    11/14/2006 7:18:44 AM PST · 71 of 98
    Hank All-American to All

    1. We will always respect you for your conservative beliefs. We will never, ever, call you "unpatriotic" simply because you disagree with us. In fact, we encourage you to dissent and disagree with us.

    WE DON'T CALL YOU UNPATRIOTIC BECAUSE YOU DISAGREE WITH US. WE CALL YOU UNPATRIOTIC BECAUSE YOU HATE THIS COUNTRY.

    2. We will let you marry whomever you want, even when some of us consider your behavior to be "different" or "immoral." Who you marry is none of our business. Love and be in love -- it's a wonderful gift.

    WHOMEVER? SO NOW INCEST WILL BE ALLOWED? POLYGAMY? COOL!

    3. We will not spend your grandchildren's money on our personal whims or to enrich our friends. It's your checkbook, too, and we will balance it for you.

    AND, OF COURSE, ALL OF YOUR CHECKBOOKS ARE TO BE CONSIDERED OURS, AS WELL.

    4. When we soon bring our sons and daughters home from Iraq, we will bring your sons and daughters home, too. They deserve to live. We promise never to send your kids off to war based on either a mistake or a lie.

    NO, WE'LL JUST MAKE SURE YOUR GRANDKIDS HAVE TO FIGHT THEM, INSTEAD. BUT THEY WON'T BE SENT OFF. THEY'LL BE DOING IT HERE.

    5. When we make America the last Western democracy to have universal health coverage, and all Americans are able to get help when they fall ill, we promise that you, too, will be able to see a doctor, regardless of your ability to pay. And when stem cell research delivers treatments and cures for diseases that affect you and your loved ones, we'll make sure those advances are available to you and your family, too.

    AND ALL IT WILL MEAN ARE WAITING LISTS AND A PROHIBITION AGAINST CHOOSING YOUR OWN DOCTOR.

    6. Even though you have opposed environmental regulation, when we clean up our air and water, we, the Democratic majority, will let you, too, breathe the cleaner air and drink the purer water.

    WHICH WILL BE ALL YOU'LL BE ABLE TO AFFORD TO DO, ONCE THE REGULATIONS WE IMPOSE STRANGLE THE ECONOMY.

    7. Should a mass murderer ever kill 3,000 people on our soil, we will devote every single resource to tracking him down and bringing him to justice. Immediately. We will protect you.

    WOW! THE THOUGHT OF HAVING TO FACE OUR CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM MUST HAVE WOULD-BE TERRORISTS QUAKING IN THEIR BOOTS! I FEEL SAFER ALREADY! AND I MUST HAVE MISSED WHERE CONGRESS HAS NOW TAKEN OVER EXECUTIVE BRANCH RESPONSIBILITIES.

    8. We will never stick our nose in your bedroom or your womb. What you do there as consenting adults is your business. We will continue to count your age from the moment you were born, not the moment you were conceived.

    HOW CONVENIENT. AND JUST HOW DO YOU COUNT THE FETUSES THAT ARE PARTIALLY BORN BEFORE THEIR BRAINS ARE SCRAMBLED?

    9. We will not take away your hunting guns. If you need an automatic weapon or a handgun to kill a bird or a deer, then you really aren't much of a hunter and you should, perhaps, pick up another sport. We will make our streets and schools as free as we can from these weapons and we will protect your children just as we would protect ours.

    I'LL FEEL SO MUCH BETTER KNOWING THAT MY HUNTING GUNS WEREN'T TAKEN AWAY WHEN I'M WITHOUT MY PISTOL TO DEFEND MYSELF.

    10. When we raise the minimum wage, we will pay you -- and your employees -- that new wage, too. When women are finally paid what men make, we will pay conservative women that wage, too.

    THAT'S GREAT! NOW I CAN LOOK FORWARD TO EARNING MINIMUM WAGE!

    11. We will respect your religious beliefs, even when you don't put those beliefs into practice. In fact, we will actively seek to promote your most radical religious beliefs ("Blessed are the poor," "Blessed are the peacemakers," "Love your enemies," "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God," and "Whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me."). We will let people in other countries know that God doesn't just bless America, he blesses everyone. We will discourage religious intolerance and fanaticism -- starting with the fanaticism here at home, thus setting a good example for the rest of the world.

    DID I SAY "EVEN WHEN YOU DON'T PUT THOSE BELIEFS INTO PRACTICE"? I MEANT ONLY WHEN YOU DON'T PUT THOSE BELIEFS INTO PRACTICE.

    12. We will not tolerate politicians who are corrupt and who are bought and paid for by the rich. We will go after any elected leader who puts him or herself ahead of the people. And we promise you we will go after the corrupt politicians on our side FIRST. If we fail to do this, we need you to call us on it. Simply because we are in power does not give us the right to turn our heads the other way when our party goes astray. Please perform this important duty as the loyal opposition.

    AND BY "CORRUPT," I MEAN, OF COURSE, CONSERVATIVE. DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH WAITING FOR US TO GO AFTER HARRY REID OR WILLIAM JEFFERSON OR ANYONE NAMED KENNEDY.

  • Immigration bust

    11/14/2006 6:35:27 AM PST · 11 of 153
    Hank All-American to ConservativeMind

    "Mr. Hayworth called for a three-year ban on legal immigration from Mexico"

    Since we can't seem to ban illegal immigration, banning the dozen or so legal immigrants who come in every year seems like a fair trade.

  • Wal-Mart Demands Diversity in Law Firms

    12/03/2005 7:44:03 AM PST · 26 of 78
    Hank All-American to All

    "Firm managers need to become 'more cognizant that they have people coming into their environment who are not aspiring to assimilate but to contribute as they are,' she said."

    That is the most pernicious notion presented by the article, by far.

  • What Next for Conservatives (Creationism and spending are destroying the Republican Party)

    12/01/2005 10:19:03 PM PST · 225 of 340
    Hank All-American to js1138

    So much for Occam's razor. I will admit that the ability to imagine is certainly important for those willing to grasp at anything to avoid admitting anyone else has a point. If a simple, basic thing like that had to go through what is hypothetically described in that piece to achieve its current state, how the heck much time did it take for something a bit more advanced than a single-celled organism to evolve?

    I think it's humorous that an indepth evolutionary model like that is necessary to come up with a possible scenario in which an ID argument is wrong, yet ID is still not considered worthy of debate. If ID is not worthy of being debated, why does the opposition have to resort to use of the imagination, rather than simply the evidence, to rebut one of its arguments? This is one of the reasons I find myself sympathetic to ID proponents. It's not that I'm ready to believe they are correct on the science, as much as I think their arguments are dismissed in a way that seems contradictory. On the one hand, no one on the other side will admit their arguments are worthy of debate, on the other, they furiously work to disprove them in a manner that seems to prove they must have a point. Seems inconsistent to me. If science, rather than a belief structure, were more of a driving force behind so many evolutionists, I'd think they'd be thankful for having their discipline be subjected to scrutiny.

  • What Next for Conservatives (Creationism and spending are destroying the Republican Party)

    12/01/2005 3:19:14 PM PST · 160 of 340
    Hank All-American to tortoise

    What do you think is the cause of this genomic drift? Is its function perhaps one of varying the gene pool to ensure survival through diversity? If so, doesn't that sound like something that would take an awfully long time to develop, shall we say, in a materialistic way? I'm just trying to understand.

  • What Next for Conservatives (Creationism and spending are destroying the Republican Party)

    12/01/2005 3:12:32 PM PST · 158 of 340
    Hank All-American to highball

    Well, I don't know that Behe's testimony constitutes that kind of an expres admission. I read excerpts of it being bandied about, and there were a whole lot of inferential leaps that seemed to be taking place, along with some syllogisms, by those arriving at conclusions like that based on what he said. That sounds like the gloss put on his testimony by others. Can you point me to where Behe testified that bacterial flagellum have been shown not to be irreducibly complex? I know many were mocking his testimony, but it seemed to be a lot of spin by people with an interest in doing so, not hard quotes that amounted to simple admissions. I'm not saying he didn't, I just didn't see that in his testimony. Of course, I didn't read the whole transcript, just portions posted on the internet.

    Like I said, I don't consider myself an ID proponent, but I do think they get a bum rap, being caricatured as wild-eyed creationists when they seem to make valid points. What gets me is the way so many evolutionists refuse to even consider the possibility that something other than random mutation and natural selection could possibly be at work when reviewing or discussing evidence or theory, and act as if anyone who does is an idiot or a heretic. I certainly consider the possibility that random mutation and selection is at work, and I'm a Christian. Why does it seem easier for me to do that than it does for those on the naturalist/materialist side to treat opposing views with some respect? Even if they can be deconstructed and disproved? Heck, Alan Sokal's hoax article was treated seriously, or at least did not subject him to derision, until he later revealed he just threw a bunch of politically correct pseudo-science together because he knew the editors would like it. He said he just wanted to prove that you could get something published and accepted if the political slant was "correct."

    I'm pretty well educated, open to arguments, and really couldn't care less if rock-solid proof of evolution, or rock-solid proof disproving evolution, turned up. I don't pretend to know what mechanism God chose to establish life, so it would have no effect on my faith. All I want is the inquiry to be an honest, dispassionate search for the truth. The tone of the argument I get from evolutionists often smacks, however, of that old "mustn't-allow-a-divine-foot-in-the-door" intransigence.

    I have no reason to believe you're unwilling to engage in civil discourse on the subject, but I do sense you don't think the subject is worthy of a debate at all. Don't you think that a vigorous, substantive debate with ID proponents would be a good thing? A way to educate people about the evidence, and to hone and strengthen the discipline by addressing arguments in opposition? Perhaps, even (gasp) acknowledging an occasional flaw or inconsistency (even as you were thrashing your opponents' arguments the rest of the time) for the good of science and the integrity of the inquiry? I think it would be good for everyone. It would prove that the quest for knowledge, as opposed to the quest to impose knowledge, is still very much alive.

  • What Next for Conservatives (Creationism and spending are destroying the Republican Party)

    12/01/2005 2:07:00 PM PST · 143 of 340
    Hank All-American to highball

    “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.” Charles Darwin, On the Origin of Species, 1958, p. 171.

    I think that's a pretty big hole. There is no way a bacterial flagellum, which has some forty odd proteins necessary for it's function, could be the result of "numerous, successive, slight modifications." Only about ten of those proteins have been shown to have any other potential functionality. How did the other thirty accumulate? This is an very simple organism we're talking about. The theories I've read trying to explain it away simply aren't persuasive, because they always seem to miss the point.

    Look, I'm not saying there's no room for argument here, and I'm not trying to start one. I just have never met any group of people quite as dogmatic as evolutionists. I have yet to be involved in a discussion with one that didn't descend into name-calling and condescension. And I don't even consider myself an ID proponent. I'm just what you might call an evolution sceptic, that's all.

  • What Next for Conservatives (Creationism and spending are destroying the Republican Party)

    12/01/2005 1:43:42 PM PST · 131 of 340
    Hank All-American to tortoise

    What other mechanisms? That sounds interesting. If it isn't random, doesn't Darwinian evolution go out the window? I know many evolutionists retort that "Darwinism" has long been replaced, but they continue to use the term in all kind of contexts and only seem to suggest that when holes in Darwinistic theories are pointed out. Still, I'm always intrigued by theories of non-random mutation.

    Perhaps I was using the term "genome" in too broad a sense. But my point is, the complexity of the human organism is highly unlikely to have evolved (I won't say couldn't have, because though the statistical argument is compelling, I don't know that that kind of proof can be considered conclusive)as the result of random mutation followed by natural selection. I think the current state of life is the result of evolution, I just don't think it is or was random. I think life has been programmed to evolve.

  • What Next for Conservatives (Creationism and spending are destroying the Republican Party)

    12/01/2005 11:41:00 AM PST · 55 of 340
    Hank All-American to Tester10

    The problem is not evolution per se, but the mechanism behind it. It would take BILLIONS, not mere millions, of years for the complexity of the human genome to have evolved based upon random mutation and subsequent selection. The problem is one of irreducible complexity. You can't select a more complex organism from a simpler one unless each successive generation of mutation has been selected as providing a competitive advantage. In an irreducibly complex organism, removal of any constituent part renders the whole useless. These organisms are extremely hard to explain using evolutionary theory. If mutations are random, that takes far too long to account for the diversity of life on earth and the complexity of the human genome. Intelligent design is not the same thing as creationism, it is just more consistent with some of creationism's ultimate presumptions. Most adherents of ID tend to accept the theory of common descent (anathema to creationists). What ID proponents point to are flaws in evolutionary theory that cannot account for irreducibly complex organisms, where many, many mutations had to have occurred to produce a complicated physical manifestation, yet one cannot simply remove one aspect and still have functionality. As a simple analogy, think of a pencil evolving into a pen (I know, I know, I'm just trying to explain). From one generation to another, mutations in the pencil would have to occur which would provide some benefit to the pencil for that mutation to be "selected" by nature as more fit. But having a spring, or ink, or thumb-press would have no use except in the final product (ink would need the tube, for example). Many organisms show these kind of traits, traits that could not have evolved by the result of random mutation, or that under the most generous of scenarios would take a hundred times longer to have evolved than evolutionary theory provides. The alternative, according to ID, is that the process is the product of design. Every attempt by evolutionists to claim they've "debunked" the irreducible-complexity argument that I've read is loaded with flaws and tends to prove the argument more than disprove it, on careful reading, despite the authors' stated conclusions.

  • POLL: More Than Half of Popular Liberal Activists are either Gay, Bi-sexual or Aren't Sure

    11/28/2005 1:05:42 PM PST · 6 of 39
    Hank All-American to rface

    What kind of math are you using? If 64% claim they're straight, how can more than %50 be gay/bi/not sure?

  • Native Americans Mourn Loss of Land With "Unthanksgiving" Rite

    11/24/2005 5:45:41 PM PST · 49 of 321
    Hank All-American to Ruy Dias de Bivar

    I agree. The Indians wouldn't have "lost" their land if they understood the concept of property rights to begin with. They didn't, and a paleolithic people simply weren't going to retain their hunter/gatherer nascent agrarian lifestyle in the face of societies that had engaged in global circumnavigation and could predict planetary movements with mathematical formulas.

  • Dictionary of Republicanisms

    11/23/2005 9:31:41 PM PST · 14 of 54
    Hank All-American to All

    Anytime you hear a liberal use the term "Orwellian," you know what follows is going to be the polar opposite of anything reflecting reality.

  • Man kills boy, 16, after robbery try (Ohio)

    11/23/2005 9:29:07 PM PST · 3 of 51
    Hank All-American to DaveLoneRanger

    "Mandopoulos said the case will be turned over to the Trumbull County Prosecutor's Office to determine if Madill will be charged."

    I can't even believe anyone would even consider the possibility of charging him. Anyone that would should be beaten, stripped, and tossed out of a car across the border in Juarez.

  • Tenn. Office Linked to CIA Renditions

    11/23/2005 10:20:03 AM PST · 3 of 5
    Hank All-American to Brilliant

    You're right about how meaningless it is to be a registered agent. It is not necessarily meaningless, though, that he was also listed as an officer (assistant secretary) and had his business office as the business address for the company. It's not a smoking gun, but he probably had to at least agree to those things.

    Of course, there's nothing wrong with a lawyer helping the Agency maintain a front company. I would.

  • Political Animal (Dems are all giddy about this)

    11/23/2005 7:01:16 AM PST · 1 of 11
    Hank All-American
    If you read the comments after the article, you can see the libs are salivating over the prospect. But if you read the piece carefully, the "bribes" sound more like the kind of normal lobbyist stuff you expect, and there doesn't seem to be any allegation of votes being purchased. Don't lobbyists always pay for junkets and meals? Seems like another attempt by the Left to use the court system--specifically, their newest favorite tool, prosecutors--to change the political landscape in ways the electoral process won't let them.
  • Minorities have little hope when vacancies open

    11/15/2005 8:10:22 AM PST · 8 of 14
    Hank All-American to sassbox

    Why would people be calling for his head this soon? For not winning the SEC? Florida was one game away from going back to the title game, but were upset on the road. If they beat FSU next week and win their bowl, it will be a 9 win season. That's back in Spurrier territory.

    A number of people may be understandably disappointed, but he did not inherit quite the team many presumed and the Gators, who seriously lacked depth before the season, have been beset by costly injuries (lost a top defensive lineman and best wideout in the third game, and a few games ago lost their best corner, just to mention a few). Word is Meyer's on the verge of an awesome recruiting class (way better than what the public committment list shows right now), and most alums are cautiously optimistic that once he gets the right personnel for his kind of football, the team will be contending for a number of championships.

  • Former Iraqi Detainees Allege Torture by U.S. Troops (ABC Exclusive)

    11/14/2005 5:08:06 PM PST · 4 of 52
    Hank All-American to goarmy

    This sounds a lot like Winter Soldier.

  • Bill Mandates Youngsters Learn Spanish

    11/10/2005 5:05:51 PM PST · 31 of 57
    Hank All-American to All

    You guys are looking at this all wrong. This is a major breakthrough. Somewhere, there is a Democrat who actually wants public school children to learn something.

  • Bill Mandates Youngsters Learn Spanish

    11/10/2005 4:43:09 PM PST · 3 of 57
    Hank All-American to Brad's Gramma

    I say, Speak American. Dammit.

  • Principal Ridicules Innocent Child, Parades Her Around School

    11/10/2005 2:00:31 PM PST · 7 of 110
    Hank All-American to Abathar

    What the hell kind of approach to discipline is that for an eight-year old, anyway? How is that supposed to get the child to distinguish between right and wrong, as opposed merely between getting caught or not caught? Add to that the fact the kid was innocent, well maybe the principal should be paraded around from class to class and called a liar and a moron.

    Fire her.

  • France must act to prevent anti-Moslem backlash, says Euro MP

    11/10/2005 11:53:24 AM PST · 13 of 40
    Hank All-American to LibWhacker

    A backlash. Yeah, that's the first thing I'd be concerned about watching thousands of cars being torched in nightly rioting.

  • Proposition 2 Wins Approval

    11/08/2005 5:57:14 PM PST · 1 of 56
    Hank All-American
    So much for the "horse race."
  • Paramedic killed by immigrant driver

    09/07/2005 7:20:03 AM PDT · 13 of 51
    Hank All-American to george76

    Of course, there's no mention that he was driving without a license, probably because he had one.

  • New York Times smears Houston

    09/07/2005 7:17:12 AM PDT · 8 of 146
    Hank All-American to AmericanMade1776

    And, of course, the crime rate around the Astrodome has already spiked.

  • Kyoto Protocol

    09/06/2005 3:00:24 PM PDT · 5 of 9
    Hank All-American to brbethke

    You're right, and my understanding is Bush asked the Governor to ask him for it, and she told him she wanted to wait 24 hours to decide.

  • Kyoto Protocol

    09/06/2005 2:52:31 PM PDT · 2 of 9
    Hank All-American to Hank All-American

    Forgive the typo. there = their