Happy 4th of July.

[luns101]

It's really silly for you to just ignore facts which go against what you want to believe and only consider ones which suit your purpose.

It took you that long to see it for yourself?

Although it is instructional for others to witness.

[Neutrino]

BJS reports that in the late 1990s, conviction rates in both federal and large state courts were the same regardless of the type of attorney a defendant had. However, defendants with publicly financed attorneys who were found guilty were more likely to go to prison (71% compared to 54% in large state courts, and 88% compared to 77% in federal courts). BJS does not speculate on why this is so.

I think this just blew your argument out of the water

No, what it shows is that you are truly not taking the time to consider my point. I quoted the same exact thing and even said that it seemed to back up your point. Really Neutrino, you're being a bit weird. I'm wondering if you're not letting your personal feelings get in the way of reason. Even though you went back and saw it the second time, that shows that you are not thoroughly considering facts which go against your ideology.

I'm not quite sure what you are saying here. I read the first part of your quote, found sources to support my argument and quoted them. Then, I Copyed and Pasted the second half of your argument, found sources for that and quoted them. Somewhere in there, obviously, the part of your argument where you pre-emptively agreed with my quoted source was lost. I later noticed this and added a bit onto the end of my post.
What's the problem?

I didn't respond directly too your "Court-appointed and Private lawyers have roughly the same conviction percentages" thing because I couldn't think up any arguments to explain or disprove this. There could be a host of possible reasons why the percentages are roughly similar.
It could be because those who need court-appointed lawyers generally are those who commit more crimes (i'm not insinuating anything here). The percentages could be the same because although there are more crimes being committed by those who have low income, the actual severity of those crimes is pretty low (Petty theft and such). The numbers and severity of these crimes could balance out and leave you with roughly the same conviction levels as those who can afford private lawyers.
As you can see, this isn't a particularly strong argument, which is why I left it out. I suppose that eventually I would have thought up something more accurate or strong, but sinse the time available to type my response up was limited, I decided to go with the "Yes, that may be true, but look at how it fails here..." approach.
You may have beaten me too it, but I didn't know that at the time.

It's really silly for you to just ignore facts which go against what you want to believe and only consider ones which suit your purpose. If that's the way you want to make arguments, then I will simply ignore your citations and say I'm right no matter what, because that is how you are approaching this.

Methinks you have a very bad understanding of yourself and humanity in general if you think that trait is solely mine. I'm not saying it is a good thing, just that targeting me for doing it is the hight of hypocracy. If you haven't noticed, you, Beezer and Luns have been doing the exact same thing. My points about "If America were truely great then they would let everyone in, regardless of whether they had the good fortune to be born nside the US or not" have gone largely unnoticed sinse Luns effectively left. You ignore my points about the US' Space Program and then come back to it, time and time again, just so I can say the same thing over and over. Even Luns was doing it. His last long post was phrased in such a way as to suggest that the US has no significant problems. Things that your average US citizen would complain about or feel ashamed about were barely worthy of a mention. Things which any non-naive individual would scoff at were treated as fact.
Hell, you're doing it with the post that I am quoting. Both of you ignored 66% of the informational content of the post (excessively low cuttoff point for court-appointed lawyers and information that contradicted your source on the average length of conviction).

I know you're not going to believe me when I say that I know I also ignore contradictory information (I did just put in a large paragraph berating you for doing it) but it is true. I do my very best to find unbiased sites to quote, but it is actually part of debating to stress your point and ignore or disprove theirs.
I've been trying to point out that I am not arguing that America is a crap country, populated by evil ghouls. I know that it, much like Australia is a relitavly pleasant place populated my relitavely pleasant people. What I am trying to point out is that because it does have problems, quite severe ones, that it does not deserve the title of 'best country'
No country does.

[DangerBoy]

Methinks you have a very bad understanding of yourself and humanity in general if you think that trait is solely mine. I'm not saying it is a good thing, just that targeting me for doing it is the hight of hypocracy. If you haven't noticed, you, Beezer and Luns have been doing the exact same thing. My points about "If America were truely great then they would let everyone in, regardless of whether they had the good fortune to be born nside the US or not" have gone largely unnoticed sinse Luns effectively left. You ignore my points about the US' Space Program and then come back to it, time and time again, just so I can say the same thing over and over. Even Luns was doing it. His last long post was phrased in such a way as to suggest that the US has no significant problems.

When you keep getting the same response to what you're doing from different people, don't you think the problem might be with yourself? I also think AllOutOfDollars was trying to make this point to you, but in a sarcastic way.

The point of this thread was so that we Americans could wish each other a happy birthday. Why is it so bad if someone chooses to express that by saying they think this is the best country on the earth? I happen to think that as well. Does that make me a bad person? You're acting like it by pointing out all these bad things about us and saying that our systems are a joke.

I agree with you that the US has problems, but your examples of why are not very good.

[Neutrino]

Methinks you have a very bad understanding of yourself and humanity in general if you think that trait is solely mine. I'm not saying it is a good thing, just that targeting me for doing it is the hight of hypocracy. If you haven't noticed, you, Beezer and Luns have been doing the exact same thing. My points about "If America were truely great then they would let everyone in, regardless of whether they had the good fortune to be born nside the US or not" have gone largely unnoticed sinse Luns effectively left. You ignore my points about the US' Space Program and then come back to it, time and time again, just so I can say the same thing over and over. Even Luns was doing it. His last long post was phrased in such a way as to suggest that the US has no significant problems.

When you keep getting the same response to what you're doing from different people, don't you think the problem might be with yourself? I also think AllOutOfDollars was trying to make this point to you, but in a sarcastic way.

The point of this thread was so that we Americans could wish each other a happy birthday. Why is it so bad if someone chooses to express that by saying they think this is the best country on the earth? I happen to think that as well. Does that make me a bad person? You're acting like it by pointing out all these bad things about us and saying that our systems are a joke.

I agree with you that the US has problems, but your examples of why are not very good.

Well, if you think the points aren't very good, then why not just say that when they come up, rather than just flatly ignoring them? It is the point of debating to prove your points and disprove your opponents'. But I have only seen the first. You provide a point, I rebutt, any mention of my arguments dissapears. The next day, you will come back with the same arguments and completly ignoring any information I have posted. Notice something odd? I'm doing my half of the debating but you are not doing yours.

If you don't want to debate, nothing is forcing you to. I'm only doing this as a nice way to eat up some time which would otherwise be filled with homework and learning and such. If you want to back out, then go right ahead, but I will continue debating until I run out of people to debate with (This thread is actually quite a fun intellectual excercise and i'm not going to give it up while there is still fun to be had).

[beezer]

So basically we're dealing with a stubborn kid. No wonder, this is starting to make a little more sense now.

[Neutrino]

So basically we're dealing with a stubborn kid. No wonder, this is starting to make a little more sense now.

Let the highly thought out and well crafted philosophical points roll!

If you want to debate, then debate. If you don't, then don't.
Not. That. Hard.

[beezer]

If you want to debate, then debate. If you don't, then don't. Not. That. Hard.

Apparently with you it is. You're just being a stubborn little kid who won't admit that he's wrong. Your examples are just stupid. The latest one you threw up there involves something that happened in Australia...

My brother's best friend's father was injured by one of those roller-doors. It was known to be faulty, yet the company who owned it (Bunnings Warehouse) did nothing about it. He is suing them for compensation because he can no longer function in his former job (builder).

...how in the world can you use an example of something that happened in Australia as proof to back up your accusations against the United States! You are really undebatable Neutrino because the way you think is....not normal.

I hope you didn't just take these numbers straight of the DoJ's website... You should know that taking stastics off a site that is undeniably biased (and the DoJ is very undeniably biased...) is not a good idea...

That's crazy! If you won't accept those then you won't accept ANY figures. Which means I and others get to totally reject ANY figures you cite simply because they are biased. That's really crazy! I don't know how to debate someone who's convinced themselves that government figures are "undeniably biased". Your standard for truth is really outlandish...whatever it is.

Have I ever heard of outrageous court cases from countries beside America?
Nope.

Then you're either too young or are being willfully ignorant. Didn't you hear recently about the Dutch woman, Helene de Gier, who tried to sue due to emotional distress because her neighbors won the lottery and she didn't. There's crazy litigation happening in many countries...not just the US.

I'm only doing this as a nice way to eat up some time which would otherwise be filled with homework and learning and such. If you want to back out, then go right ahead, but I will continue debating until I run out of people to debate with (This thread is actually quite a fun intellectual excercise and i'm not going to give it up while there is still fun to be had).

Which shows you are not yet ready to thoughtfully process facts that are presented to which you personally oppose. I am starting to see Iz Man's point.

[Neutrino]

Apparently with you it is. You're just being a stubborn little kid who won't admit that he's wrong. Your examples are just stupid. The latest one you threw up there involves something that happened in Australia...

Oh yeah, insults. That's sure to prove your point.

If you want to flame me, take it to flame wars. If you want to debate in any reasonably intellectual manner, then do it here.

...how in the world can you use an example of something that happened in Australia as proof to back up your accusations against the United States! You are really undebatable Neutrino because the way you think is....not normal.

Ummm...

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9 ... nlargePage

The essentially strong similarities between Australia and the United States...

The US and Australia are very similar.
Any example for one can equally apply to the other.

That's crazy! If you won't accept those then you won't accept ANY figures. Which means I and others get to totally reject ANY figures you cite simply because they are biased. That's really crazy! I don't know how to debate someone who's convinced themselves that government figures are "undeniably biased". Your standard for truth is really outlandish...whatever it is.

I was questioning the validity of his figures because they came directly from a site that has a huge need to maintain a postive spin on any information; aka, bias. Although my source was significantly biased, it approached nowhere near the level of bias displayed by the DoJ's website; their jobs aren't riding on the continued apparent success of the DoJ. Looking at figures from official webpages is good because you are likely to find what you are looking for, but these are bad figures to quote because of their excessive bias.

Which shows you are not yet ready to thoughtfully process facts that are presented to which you personally oppose. I am starting to see Iz Man's point.

You actually thought I was serious!
Ok, I would just like to say that that was a joke.
Methinks you need to develop a sense of humor. If someone idley makes a statement along the lines of "Learning is not important" you can be pretty sure that they are, in fact, being sarcastic.
Do you think I should put [joke] and [/joke] tags in? It might ruin my magnificant humor, but it will prevent a lot of these 'misunderstandings'.

Now, if you have finished personally attacking me, it would be nice to approach something even remotely resembling a civilized debate.

Well, if you think the points aren't very good, then why not just say that when they come up, rather than just flatly ignoring them? It is the point of debating to prove your points and disprove your opponents'. But I have only seen the first. You provide a point, I rebutt, any mention of my arguments dissapears. The next day, you will come back with the same arguments and completly ignoring any information I have posted. Notice something odd? I'm doing my half of the debating but you are not doing yours.


Same site.

Defendants represented by court-appointed lawyers could expect to spend two more years in prison than defendants represented by salaried public defenders — or by a private attorney.

I think my site is much less obviously biased than yours

Also:

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/app ... 7707010495

"A person working 40 hours a week will not qualify (for a public defender) if the hourly rate exceeds $2.33 per hour."

This means that you can't expect to get a court appointed lawyer if you earn above $4846 anually. Does this seem to be a reasonable cuttoff point?
I would question your humanity if you said yes.



Did everyone else miss this thread?
http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 07&start=0

What would happen if Bush declared the US a dictatorship right now? Massive civilian uprisings? You betcha. Destinct chance of loss of power? Definatly. Huge casualties and economic damage? Nothin' but.

He's not an idiot (or at least, the people who plan things for him aren't). He knows that there is a chance, probably a pretty good one, that he will be kicked out of power, or, at least held in stalemate long enough for it to be worthless. Rather, a better plan is to play a long game; gradually strip away liberties until no-one notices the final slip into Totalitarianism.

I'm not saying this will happen, but, with those laws, it makes it a destinct possability.





It dosen't matter how harsh your immigration laws were 20 years ago, what matters is that you call your country 'the greatest country on earth' and then try to keep it all to yourself. If it were truely the greatest, then wouldn't it be open to everyone?

Most of your immigration, illegal or otherwise, comes through Mexico. Don't you think it's faintly possible that imporving the general standard of living in that area would essentially eliminate your immigrant problem?







Why would I hate America and Americans? I find the majority of American ideals to be good ones and have absolutly nothing against the place. What I do hate, however, is how some Americans refer to their country as 'the greatest nation on earth'. If they were truely great then they would be doing their best to help everyone, irrespective of wether it is to the US's immediate advantage to do so. They wouldn't restrict the border, so that only those that they deemed 'worthy' can pass through. They would have a fair and just legal system, one that it dosen't cost $40 000 to fight a simple case in.

These are the signs of a truely great country. When the US, or, in fact any other country does this, then and only them will I call that country 'great'.

Those are just the points that I could easily find that haven't had proper answers yet.

[Jenos Ridan]

So basically we're dealing with a stubborn kid. No wonder, this is starting to make a little more sense now.

Let the highly thought out and well crafted philosophical points roll!

If you want to debate, then debate. If you don't, then don't.
Not. That. Hard.

We did. You're the one with an issue against the facts.

And as far as debating skill, all you've done is scream bloody murder 'the MAN is keeping us all down with his money and capitallism!' We post facts and point out flaws in your reasoning, you scream louder.

Seriously, are you that dence?

[Neutrino]

So basically we're dealing with a stubborn kid. No wonder, this is starting to make a little more sense now.

Let the highly thought out and well crafted philosophical points roll!

If you want to debate, then debate. If you don't, then don't.
Not. That. Hard.

We did. You're the one with an issue against the facts.

And as far as debating skill, all you've done is scream bloody murder 'the MAN is keeping us all down with his money and capitallism!' We post facts and point out flaws in your reasoning, you scream louder.

Seriously, are you that dense?

Somewhere, somewhen, somehow, there is a universe in which someone else in this thread wishes to actually debate the point as to whether the US is in fact the greatest nation ever, and not wade through page after page of you lot slagging me off.
Unfortunatly, that universe is nigh-inaccessable

I've said it before, i'm saying it now and i'm certain I will have to say it again: If you want to flame me, take it to flame wars. If you actually want to utilize your higher neural functions (for once ) then do so and see if you can come up with some decent information.


Please, provide recordings of such bloody-murder yellings. The word 'capitalism' hasn't been mentioned in this thread for the last two pages (until you came along...) so it's not going to be anything recent.
I view the fact that America is a Capitalist country as a major flaw, yes. If you want to prove that ease-of-exploitation is actually a good trait, then go and prove it.
If you cannot or will not do so, then shut-up-and-go-away. You will obviously not be contributing anything useful to this thread (and the mimimum usefulness threshold for this thread is really low ) and therefore you presence is neither wanted nor needed.

If providing some arguments for a capitalist system proves too difficult, there are a whole host of other points which have yet to be responded too. I'm sure your buddies could use a hand.

PS. Please, if in future you are accusing me of being dense, spell it correctly.

[beezer]

Using the logic that Australia and the United States are similar - since there are car accidents in Australia, that is undeniable proof that the US highway traffic system is a joke.

You're undebatable, Neutrino. Every time you're presented with facts you just put out more weird things, each one getting incrementally stranger. I do think that you are just posting now in order to be irritating. And yes, I did not see that you were joking as it's hard to judge that from simply reading text. You can't seriously believe the things you're posting.

[DangerBoy]

The US and Australia are very similar.
Any example for one can equally apply to the other.

I guess it would be impossible to debate this guy seeing as this is his standard.

So similar = equal

Huh?

[beezer]

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2007707010495

"A person working 40 hours a week will not qualify (for a public defender) if the hourly rate exceeds $2.33 per hour."

This means that you can't expect to get a court appointed lawyer if you earn above $4846 anually. Does this seem to be a reasonable cuttoff point?
I would question your humanity if you said yes.

Neutrino, I did read this article. This is just frustrating trying to discuss/debate things with you because you are either too young or you are willfully choosing to not read articles (even your own articles) correctly.

The part you just quoted from YOUR OWN article deals with indigent defendants who are above the poverty level. That means they don't qualify for a public defender So what does the judge do? He gives the defendant a court-appointed attorney. The court-appointed attorneys are private lawyers who work hand-in-hand with the courts.

So, the defendant DOES, in fact, get a court-appointed lawyer...not a public defender. Sheesh! This is from YOUR OWN article. How can I debate this kid when he doesn't even understand his own citations?

[dwightschrute]

so much for this being a happy 4th of July thread.

[luns101]

so much for this being a happy 4th of July thread.

Take heart, Dwight. America is still wonderful despite the criticisms of people who live outside our borders. Norman Rockwell did a wonderful job of summing it up with paintings...here's just one of my favorites which deals with freedom of speech despite one's economic status.

[dwightschrute]

so much for this being a happy 4th of July thread.

Take heart, Dwight. America is still wonderful despite the criticisms of people who live outside our borders. Norman Rockwell did a wonderful job of summing it up with paintings...here's just one of my favorites which deals with freedom of speech despite one's economic status.

yeah really I have read some of these very long posts and mainly the two sides are people from the Rogue State Clan and the people that are not in it, also Neutrino isnt even from here.

As for Norman Rockwell, he is a great painter I have heard of him and I have seen some of his paintings. Nice of you to point him out.

[Neutrino]

Neutrino, I did read this article. This is just frustrating trying to discuss/debate things with you because you are either too young or you are willfully choosing to not read articles (even your own articles) correctly.

ZOMG! He accidently typed 'court appointed lawyer' instead of 'public defender'! He must be an idiot!

The part you just quoted from YOUR OWN article deals with indigent defendants who are above the poverty level. That means they don't qualify for a public defender So what does the judge do? He gives the defendant a court-appointed attorney. The court-appointed attorneys are private lawyers who work hand-in-hand with the courts.

Hmmm?

Indigent
a person so poor and needy that he/she cannot provide the necessities of life (food, clothing, decent shelter) for himself/herself.

Poverty
the state or condition of having little or no money, goods, or means of support; condition of being poor; indigence.

They both have and do not have the means to support themselves?


Court appointed lawyers are private now?
http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-a-court ... torney.htm

Court-appointed attorneys are employed by the federal government in most cases

In most cases, court-appointed attorneys are not completely free of charge unless the defendant is not convicted of the crime they were originally charged with. Typically, if a defendant is convicted, a judgment is entered requiring payment based on several factors including financial situation, severity of the charge, and depth of defense

So you get the double-whammy; loose your court case and suddenly have to pay for a lawyer that you thought would be free.
Reeeeaaaallll fair.

To the best of my knowledge, you can only really get a court-appointed attorney if you committed a really serious crime, there are children involved in the case somewhere or you are mentally or physically disabled. That dosen't leave a huge number of cases that can actually be fielded by court-appointed attorneys.

If the laws of probability assert themselves and you get stuck with a Public Defendant, things do not bode well.

A client coming up through the State Public Defender system has a difficult battle, Sabel said, because there isn't the same kind of money in government legal defense as in prosecuting entities, like the district attorney's office and law enforcement departments.


"Some attorneys (working with the poor) might talk their clients into taking a plea agreement, even in a good case, rather than prepare and go through a jury trial for $40 an hour," she said.

The normal lawyers are massively overpaid ($143 000) and the Public Defence lawyers are massively underpaid and overworked.

So, the defendant DOES, in fact, get a court-appointed lawyer...not a public defender. Sheesh! This is from YOUR OWN article. How can I debate this kid when he doesn't even understand his own citations?

Actually, as I said above, unless they are being tried for a very major crime, is a child or has a serious disability, they won't get a Court Appointed Lawyer.

As for the text: Eh. I was in rather a rush to get that particular piece of text typed up, so I didn't get a chance to read my sources in any real level of detail. I hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me of this grevious crime against humanity.

Now, before you start crowing my apparent hypocracy to the world in general, I would just like to say that it was not in fact the flaming I was asking you to stop, rather it was the lack of arguments or reasoning to accompany those flames that irritated me. As you may notice (or not, given your current track record) this post is acompanied with a whole host of quotes, links and reasons. Therefore, something productive has been achieved with this post and I have no problem with flames that go with productive posts.


Is anyone else confused with the path that this thread is taking? It is supposed to be about whether America is the greatest country that ever lived yet has become a debate about the US legal system. While the essential crappyness of the US legal system was one of my points, I never meant it to become the whole thread.

If anyone else wants to getthis thread back on track, here is a list of my arguments to argue with:

1. The US legal system is crap. It is far too expensive for the majority of people to use without making major sacrifices, is incredibly easy to manipulate for those with adequate money to outwait the other party and the systems designed to help those who do not have enough money to use the Legal System employ a majority of below-average lawyers who are so overworked and underpaid that they are wiling to convince clients with a good chance of victory to settle.
2. The US Space Program is crap. Billions of dollars are dumped into it and all that comes out is a series of overfunded probes. These probes then die before completing their mission and another hugely expensive probe must be sent. It's only Surface - Orbit rocket, the Space Shuttle, is the result of a bad compromise born out of the Cold War. Americans refer to themselves as 'Pioneers' yet the 'final frontier' remains overfunded and underexplored.
3. If the US were truely the greatest, then it would let everyone in. Only those who the US decides to let within it's borders (i.e. those with valuable skills to the US) are allowed to enter. If it truely had a 'culture of humanitarian giving' then it's borders would not be inforced at all; they would be left unguarded, sinse all people would be viewed as equal and all would be given an equal chance to make a life in 'the greatest nation on earth'.
People speak of illegal immigrants 'stealing US jobs'. Why are US citizens more worthy of employment than those who have obviously gone through great hardship to gain entry to the country?
If you do not wish to share your country with foreigners, then why not improve the standard of living in other countries? If the standard of living in Mexico and other Central American countries is increaced to anything like that of the US, then it's citizens will have absolutly no reason to cross the US-Mexico border.
Already 2 million have been killed in Congo and the US government has done effectively nothing. Does this seem like the actions (or lack of such) of 'the greatest nation in the world'?

These are the reasons why I do not believe the US to be the greatest nation in the world. A good nation, but not the greatest.

[Neutrino]

The US and Australia are very similar.
Any example for one can equally apply to the other.

I guess it would be impossible to debate this guy seeing as this is his standard.

So similar = equal

Huh?

More or less any.

Happy now?
The one time that I miss putting in the mitigating words is the one time that you notice...

[Neutrino]

Using the logic that Australia and the United States are similar - since there are car accidents in Australia, that is undeniable proof that the US highway traffic system is a joke.

No, since Australia and the US are similar, if there are car-crashes in Australia, then there is a very strong possibility that there will also be car crashes in the US.

It's not the most complex of ideas, so I assumed a mind as august as yours should be able to work out the underlying theme in a mere 5-10 minutes!

You're undebatable, Neutrino. Every time you're presented with facts you just put out more weird things, each one getting incrementally stranger. I do think that you are just posting now in order to be irritating. And yes, I did not see that you were joking as it's hard to judge that from simply reading text. You can't seriously believe the things you're posting.

Yes, yes yes. We all got the point that you consider my mind 'wierd' after about the third time you said it. Any further repition is merely a waste of your precious time.

Actually, I have both you and DangerBoy outposted in links, 8-1

[Neutrino]

so much for this being a happy 4th of July thread.

Take heart, Dwight. America is still wonderful despite the criticisms of people who live outside our borders. Norman Rockwell did a wonderful job of summing it up with paintings...here's just one of my favorites which deals with freedom of speech despite one's economic status.

Luns, why do you insist on posting things that imply that the US is the only country with such new-fangled things as Freedom of Speech? As you may have noticed, all countries fit to call themselves 'developed' have the exact same damn thing.
I'll ask it again: What particular US unique trait sets the US apart from the entire rest of the world?

[luns101]

Luns, why do you insist on posting things that imply that the US is the only country with such new-fangled things as Freedom of Speech? As you may have noticed, all countries fit to call themselves 'developed' have the exact same damn thing.
I'll ask it again: What particular US unique trait sets the US apart from the entire rest of the world?

I don't remember addressing you. You are insistent in your ideology and it is evident by your recent posts. It is instructional for US kids to see how you justify your accusations. I'm going to continue to post reasons why I am happy to be living in the greatest country on earth.

[beezer]

-Edit-

I'm not going to say anything more to Neutrino. He's set in his ways and perhaps might change when he gets a little older.

It is awesome to see and hear from those of you who love this country. NFL football is coming up and I can't wait for all the rivalries to start again. Tailgaiting!!! Only one more month to go.

[Neutrino]

-Edit-

I'm not going to say anything more to Neutrino.

Ha! Just as soon as I get my arguments into some kind of understandable order, Beezer gives up.
I'd have thought you would have at least noticed that I failed to put in specific numbers for the average cost of a court case. This is a huge, gaping, unsupported hole and jet you didn't notice it!

Throughout this thread you have continually criticized me for my lack of links and supportable information, yet you still have not posted anything even remotely link-like.

He's set in his ways and perhaps might change when he gets a little older.

Zing! Didn't see that one coming. You've said that, what, 7, 8 times already. If this is your greatest standard of flaming, then Flame Wars is the place for you.

I'm set in my ways? You have yet to show even the faintest sign of considering my arguments to be anything other than crap. I think someone here has a double standard.

[beezer]

Now that we've gotten past the All-Star break, we can concentrate on the pennant races. Of course the Dodgers and the Giants hate each other which is great, but that usually doesn't come down til the very end of the season. The best is whenever the Yanks and the Red Sox hook up. They're scheduled to meet at the end of August, which will really be great. I love the American rivalries. American sports is awesome.

[MeDeFe]

Luns, why do you insist on posting things that imply that the US is the only country with such new-fangled things as Freedom of Speech? As you may have noticed, all countries fit to call themselves 'developed' have the exact same damn thing.
I'll ask it again: What particular US unique trait sets the US apart from the entire rest of the world?

I don't remember addressing you. You are insistent in your ideology and it is evident by your recent posts. It is instructional for US kids to see how you justify your accusations. I'm going to continue to post reasons why I am happy to be living in the greatest country on earth.

You might have said it already, but I'm a forgetful person, so I don't remember just what makes the USA so much greater than all other countries. Just what unique trait there is in that country that lifts it above all others. Maybe you could reiterate, please?