strandedx02

Getting back to the original topic, Ron Paul and former CIA Bin Laden unit chief Michael Scheuer gave Rudy a reading assignment. :lol Candidate Paul assigns reading to Giuliani By Andy Sullivan Reuters Thursday, May 24, 2007; 2:24 PM WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Longshot Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul on Thursday gave front-runner Rudy Giuliani a list of foreign-policy books to back up his contention that attacks by Islamic militants are fueled by the U.S. presence in the Middle East. "I'm giving Mr. Giuliani a reading assignment," the nine-term Texas congressman said as he stood behind a stack of books that included the report by the commission that examined the attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001. Giuliani was mayor of New York when Islamic militants slammed two commercial airliners into the World Trade Center, a role that has vaulted him to the front of the Republican presidential pack despite his liberal social positions. "I don't think he's qualified to be president," Paul said of Giuliani. "If he was to read the book and report back to me and say, 'I've changed my mind,' I would reconsider." Paul advocates a limited U.S. foreign policy, including an end to the war in Iraq and a reduction in troop levels abroad. Paul said he was unfairly attacked during last week's debate by 10 Republican presidential hopefuls, when Giuliani dismissed his contention that U.S. policies in the Middle East had contributed to the attacks in New York and Washington. "I don't think I've ever heard that before, and I've heard some pretty absurd explanations for September 11th," Giuliani said to wild applause. A spokeswoman for Giuliani derided Paul's latest comments. "It is extraordinary and reckless to claim that the United States invited the attacks on September 11th," Maria Comella said in an e-mail. "And to further declare Rudy Giuliani needs to be educated on September 11th when millions of people around the world saw him dealing with these terrorist attacks firsthand is just as absurd." OUTSIDE THE MAINSTREAM Paul barely registers in opinion polls of Republicans hoping to win their party's nomination to contest the November 2008 presidential election. An obstetrician-gynecologist from the Houston area, Paul frequently strays far outside the Republican mainstream. He voted against the Iraq war resolution in 2002 and has proposed abolishing the Homeland Security Department and diminishing the Federal Reserve. His 1988 bid for president as the Libertarian candidate drew just slightly more than 400,000 votes nationwide. Paul said it was irresponsible of Giuliani and other leaders to not examine the motivations of al Qaeda and other radical Islamic groups. Among the books on Paul's reading list were: "Dying to Win," which argues that suicide bombers only mobilize against an occupying force; "Blowback," which examines the unintended consequences of U.S. foreign policy; and the 9/11 Commission Report, which says that al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden was angered by the presence of U.S. troops in Saudi Arabia. Another book on the list was "Imperial Hubris," whose author appeared at the press conference to offer support for Paul. "Foreign policy is about protecting America," said author Michael Scheuer, who used to head the CIA's bin Laden unit. "Our foreign policy is doing the opposite." A Giuliani campaign official could not confirm whether he had read any of the books on Paul's list. link

I think the main issue to think about here is not "YOU". The first question I'd ask is "Are there any children involved?" If so, you should consider your responsibility towards them, over-riding any thoughts about YOU. Are you talking to me (as the OP in this thread)? Um, I'm just a kid. No kids or anything. :thumbup I haven't even had any recent breakups, this is just something I've always kinda been curious about with other people's experiences, because mine have not been very good in this regard.

There will be people at my own wedding that I had sexual relationships with in the past. Alexis doesn't think that's weird? That seems like it'd make me uncomfortable but maybe that's why I'm not the one getting married, haha. No, she knows everything about my past and she is completely fine with it. There is nothing to me and any of those girls (note: it's only three total and all were on time non-passionate things) and Alexis is an extremely open-minded but strong woman. The past is the past and part of what has shaped me in our relationship and she wouldn't change that about me or try and have me erase things that I did before I even met her. That's great, and also funny because what you are saying is pretty much the exact opposite of what I am trying to do. I think that to the extent things in the (somewhat recent...last few years) past have shaped anything about me, it's been in a negative way. So as much as I can clear my head of that stuff, it's a huge improvement.

There will be people at my own wedding that I had sexual relationships with in the past. Alexis doesn't think that's weird? That seems like it'd make me uncomfortable but maybe that's why I'm not the one getting married, haha.

I was with you until you were a guy. :lol Welcome to the boards dude...and yeah Bills wtf :thumbdown Then again, I knew a kid from Buffalo who was a Dolphins fan just to be different than all his friends. Besides, we all hate the Jets so it's all good.

I don't think the difference is gonna be that noticeable, to be honest. The new college 3 will still be well shorter than the NBA 3 and most of the good college 3-point shooters don't stand right at the line anyway. It might have an effect on some of the guys with marginal range but any of the real shooters should have no problem adjusting.

it all depends on how the break-up was (mutual, messy, etc.) personally, it's not my thing to stay friends because once i've crossed that line i can't seem to just go back and act like nothing happened. it's too emotionally draining. maybe after a long time. Yeah that part sucks. I brought this up because like I said, I'm not friends with them...sometimes I feel kinda bad about that and sometimes I don't. Plus I handle that kinda stuff really badly so more than anything I was making it really hard to be friends, haha. Oh well, live and learn.

This is just one of those things that I've always been curious about, as far as if it works for other people. It's always been kind of a mess for me, but maybe I'm just different. So what do you guys think? Would you even want to be friends with your ex?

I've not been able to get into anything by Palahniuk but his book of essays that was released a few years back. I want to give Fight Club a chance, though. Fight Club is a nice, quick read. Some parts are tough to get through though because it literally made me nauseus. I loved Invisible Monsters but that's definitely one of those books that I feel wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea, just because of the way it jumps around...that's Palahniuk for you. Oddly enough, I haven't read Fight Club (yet).

Really looking forward to the new Harry Potter book, as lame as that may be. I'm with ya bro. I'm re-reading the 5th one right now, this is my 5th time reading the 5th book..some would say I'm obsessed. Well I mean, that is the best of the HP books so I don't think anyone would fault you too much for that. I've read 1984 like 5 or 6 times so I'm pretty much the same way. And like I said earlier, I did pick up Dying to Win and Rant earlier today so I'll have some reading to enjoy over the next little bit here.

I'm going to the bookstore later to see if anything catches my eye. I'll probably get Dying To Win by Robert Pape (about the motives of suicide terrorists), and Rant, the new Chuck Palahniuk novel.

Keeley

Heigl

I think everyone kinda suspected something was up when he went on the DL for a sprain in April and there hasn't really been any serious talk about him coming back anytime soon.

Yikes. He's really had a rough go of it since leaving the Marlins. Well, if he eventually leaves the Yankees it'll be much easier for me to root for him.

Keeley

Brook

Pinder

I feel that. Like I said before, I think finally diagnosing his excema will work wonders from preventing the blisters/skin irritations in the future. I just don't believe he got this irritation from throwing the curve again. I hope you're right, he's gotten off to a great start this year.

(I love, by the way, how at one point while he's talking the caption beneath him is "Blaming U.S. for 9/11.") That's foxnews for you. It was actually CNN.

And if I was in the Red Sox' position I'd much rather have 2007 (which is essentially the same as 2005) Josh Beckett, who will probably miss a few starts with finger injuries, than the 2006 version who was basically handcuffed to avoid getting hurt and had a pretty weak season. I can't agree with this. Beckett's success this season compared to last year is not simply due to the fact that he was trying not to get a blister (ie not gripping as hard, etc). Personally, I don't think that has anything to do with that and nothing really suggests that. It has everything to do with his gameplan (which he started going with late in the season) of throwing more good curveballs and not laser straight fastballs all the time. At the same time in the season as last year, he has cut his walk rate in half and his K's are up 33%. Mostly because his curveball is disgusting and throwing it consistently and often has improved his game so much (batters hit like less than .140 against it). He also changed his mechanics, and has a much easier and fluid motion to his delivery (NESN showed a great comparison to his delivery this year as oppossed to last year he didn't even look like the same guy). He changed the way he pushes off from the rubber as well - coming off from the center rather than either side. It's not that he was trying not to get a blister last year, it's that the team changed his routine, trying to keep him from injury. One of the changes mentioned (I believe it was in the Globe but there's no way I'd be able to find the article at this point) was that he was barred from throwing his curveball between starts. It seems like that would make a huge difference in terms of how effective his curveball is in the actual game. A few weeks ago, Beckett mentioned as well that coming out of spring training in 2006, he was advised not to throw his changeup because it was too hard. The funny thing is that he's been given a lot of credit in '07 for adjusting his approach--and you are right that he has changed his windup--and I'd heard it mentioned that "it had to be hard to change what had worked so well for him." But the problem was that last year his approach was actually completely different from what had worked for him in Florida. Unlike Burnett, nobody around here ever accused Josh of relying too much on his fastball when he pitched for the Marlins.

The US can not become an isolationist country in the current world climate and economy. Who said anything about isolationism? This is a global economy and isolationism isn't a viable option for ANY country in this day and age. Also, less military spending doesn't have to mean less preparedness. Do you realize that we have troop deployments in over 130 countries and dozens of operations? If we weren't spread so thin, we could have a much better military with fewer troops. Fewer troops obviously saves you on salary, retirement, and benefits, but it also saves on equipment, leasing, contracts, training, and scores of other ancillary costs. So, theoretically, you could reduce the overall defense budget while increasing the $ spent per soldier. You could actually pay an enlisted soldier below the rank of E-4 enough that they would no longer qualify for food stamps. Imagine that? They could buy combat armor and night vision for combat units. Wouldn't that be nice? They could eliminate ridiculous spending rules and wasteful contracts [we had to buy pens from a certain approved supplier, for example, that charged us $2 for each pen when we could have gotten the same thing at Staples for 89 cents!]. There is an incredible amount of waste in military spending and that could easily be cleaned up. I guarantee you that they would never survive a Spitzer audit! I would be a proponent of shifting the funding away from a US military presence in most countries and towards intelligence and diplomatic agencies. I would also love to see the Department of Homeland Security get completely abolished and the Patriot Act repealed. Then again, I'm just a dreamer. :thumbup That's the point exactly. Military spending likely would be reduced, but we could do tons more to protect the country with what we spend than we're doing now. Why could we possibly need to have troops stationed in over 130 countries? It's not "sitting on our hands," it's refraining from costly foreign adventures while redirecting resources to more effectively target our enemies. And with regard to the point in the debate, Ron Paul appeared on CNN yesterday (link)to talk about how he was basically quoting the 9/11 Commission Report and the assessment of bin Laden's motives from the CIA. (I love, by the way, how at one point while he's talking the caption beneath him is "Blaming U.S. for 9/11.") What's the point of the media if they refuse to call candidates--especially frontrunners--on blatant inaccuracies during a nationally televised debate?

My entire team went into a batting slump at the same time.

I would call but it'd feel a little strange...I'll try to check out the podcast for sure though.

Statement from Dr. Paul's campaign: Press Release Why Hasn't Rudy Giuliani Read the 9-11 Commission Report? May 16, 2007 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE ARLINGTON, VA - During the "First in the South" GOP debate in South Carolina last night, one thing was made clear: Rudy Giuliani does not understand how to keep America safe. When Congressman Ron Paul, who has long served on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, explained how 50 years of American interventionism in the Middle East has helped compromise our national security, Giuliani interrupted saying he had "never heard anything so absurd." This statement is particularly troubling coming from the former mayor who tries to cast himself as a security expert, since Dr. Paul's point comes directly from the bi-partisan 9-11 Commission Report. "Rudy Giuliani has tip-toed around the issues of abortion, guns and marriage. The only issue he has left is security, and he doesn't even get that right," said campaign chairman Kent Snyder. "It is clear from his interruption that former Mayor Giuliani has not read the 9-11 Commission Report and has no clue on how to keep America safe." The pwn may not have been quite evident last night...but it's there now. link