Lol! No, no, not at all. I'm just a big fan of old slang.

...and you are the cat's pajamas.

In reply to this comment by Boise_Lib:
Thanks Adrian. Very nice to hear.

But, "groovy" is that a comment on my old age?

Cause I'm like old, dude. ;

In reply to this comment by AdrianBlack:
Excellent work, Boise!
Not only do you sift groovy things...you also promote, fix, and quality the sift in Chicago Typewriter speed. Both impressive and appreciated.
Congratulations!

And I want to publicly say that I think you are the cats pajamas -- fierce and smart and loyal and passionate. All good things. You are a class act, my friend.

In reply to this comment by UsesProzac:
I want to apologize to you for attacking you and not the topic of the debate. It was unsportsmanlike of me. We are all passionate about what we believe, and I'll try to remember not to step on people when expressing said beliefs.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

I want to have a pajama snuggle party with all of you.

Believe me I'm not arguing that Saddam nor Gaddafi were nice guys. I making the distinction between a country being run by a corrupt leader, and destroying a country because of their corrupt leader. In my opinion Gaddafi didn't suddenly become more of a threat after his speech. In fact, he did what almost EVERY country on the face of the planet would do when faced with an armed uprising (this includes the US and the UK). There are other issues at play here also, such as why Burmese, Rwandan, Ivory Coast, Kenyan, North Korean, Saudi, Bahraini leaders deserve more respect than Iraqi and Libyan (oil rich) leaders.

By UN estimates the US killed 100,000 Iraqis (civilians and soldiers)in the first Gulf War. Other estimates show countless thousands died due to the sanctions in the 90s, and god knows how many in the last Iraq War disaster. The entire infrastructure of the Iraqi state has been in shambles for 20 years. In fact, they went from the most modern, secular, arab state to a destroyed wreck of a country. I strongly feel that a 70 year old Saddam Hussein was less of a threat to the Iraqi people than the US war was. In my opinion time would have been a much kinder ally to the Iraqis than the US was. Though I understand your point about the Kurds, realistically anything said about Iraq could easily be said about Turkey, one of our biggest allies.

"As for other Gulf States, would you really prefer Libya was left to Gaddafi's mercy just because that's exactly what's happening elsewhere?" I guess my answer to you is yes. Foreign policy consistency across the board would go a long way towards stopping dictators from betting that they will get away with human-rights crimes. Inconsistency is not going to help anyone.

Thanks for you civil and informed answer. Just so you know, I probably won't have the time to respond again any time soon.
>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^vaporlock:
Truthfully, I never did pay much attention to Libya. Partially because I figured a nutjob like Gadhafi had to be on the US payroll (which, apparently until recently he was (banking, oil, etc).
Anyway, thanks for the quote. I've been hearing about it for weeks now and never knew where it came from. No offense meant, but like most of the media hyped quotes from Saddam Hussein, it is probably either a bad translation, out of context, a cultural/religious way of saying things that westerners don't get, or a combination of these. Without too much analysis, I can say that the part about going "house by house" to get rid of a rebellion/uprising is pretty SOP (see Iraq).
I have many more suspicions after reading the AlJazeera blog than I had before I read it (ie. why are so many protester signs in English?), but I don't have time to get into it now. Starting a bombing campaign based on a "speech" is ridiculous to begin with and Gadhafi's actions are not too far from what all of the Arab Gulf States have been doing in recent weeks.
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^vaporlock:
I'm interested in finding out where he said this. Have you ever found an actual statement by Gadhafi saying this? It isn't something I can imagine him (an arab socialist) saying.
Wearing silk pajamas with a funny hat, yes. "I'm going to commit genocide", no.
This statement has the reak of pre Desert Storm propaganda. Most of which was proven false (ie. Iraqi troops emptying Kuwaiti baby incubators in the hospitals). >> ^bcglorf:
"Gadhafi would currently be finishing off the genocide he promised to commit against the opposition"


Are you at all familiar with Gaddafi? His speech from Feb 22 he threatened to "cleanse the nation, house by house", and warned that just as the world never came to help the victims of Tiananmen square no one was coming to help you(the opposition). Don't take my word for it. Don't take the word of any anti-Arab biased western media. Go read Al Jazeera's live blog from the day that speech was delivered.


like most of the media hyped quotes from Saddam Hussein, it is probably either a bad translation, out of context
Slow down before you dismiss Gaddafi's statements on genocide because they resemble Saddam's speechs. Nobody, and I mean nobody(Arab,Palestinian,Iraqi) denies Saddam's record on mass killings.
In his Anfal campaign against the Kurds there estimates higher than 200k murdered by Saddam. Half of the dead are from military operations against civilians including the use of chemical weapons, while the other half are mass executions complete with bulldozers to dig large enough graves on site.
The estimates of his crushing of the Shia uprisings at the end of the first gulf war exceed 100k dead as well, with gunships and tanks being used to lower the number of 'unruly' civilians to something more 'manageable'.
You are right about the similarities between Gaddafi and Saddam. It's a reason to take his threats regarding genocide of those opposing him as deadly serious.
Starting a bombing campaign based on a "speech" is ridiculous to begin with and Gadhafi's actions are not too far from what all of the Arab Gulf States have been doing in recent weeks.
It wasn't just a "speech". He followed the speech up by mobilizing his army and marching across the country killing anyone even suspected of being with the opposition. He was within a single city of having taken back full control of the country and being able to "secure" his gains. I hate having to point that "secure" in this case means systematically hunting down killing as many supporters of the opposition as it takes to be certain no-one will ever consider doing it again. Whether that can be done with 100 or 100 thousand doesn't matter to a dictator, it's just a means to an end.
As for other Gulf States, would you really prefer Libya was left to Gaddafi's mercy just because that's exactly what's happening elsewhere?

>> ^vaporlock:

Truthfully, I never did pay much attention to Libya. Partially because I figured a nutjob like Gadhafi had to be on the US payroll (which, apparently until recently he was (banking, oil, etc).
Anyway, thanks for the quote. I've been hearing about it for weeks now and never knew where it came from. No offense meant, but like most of the media hyped quotes from Saddam Hussein, it is probably either a bad translation, out of context, a cultural/religious way of saying things that westerners don't get, or a combination of these. Without too much analysis, I can say that the part about going "house by house" to get rid of a rebellion/uprising is pretty SOP (see Iraq).
I have many more suspicions after reading the AlJazeera blog than I had before I read it (ie. why are so many protester signs in English?), but I don't have time to get into it now. Starting a bombing campaign based on a "speech" is ridiculous to begin with and Gadhafi's actions are not too far from what all of the Arab Gulf States have been doing in recent weeks.
>> ^bcglorf:
>> ^vaporlock:
I'm interested in finding out where he said this. Have you ever found an actual statement by Gadhafi saying this? It isn't something I can imagine him (an arab socialist) saying.
Wearing silk pajamas with a funny hat, yes. "I'm going to commit genocide", no.
This statement has the reak of pre Desert Storm propaganda. Most of which was proven false (ie. Iraqi troops emptying Kuwaiti baby incubators in the hospitals). >> ^bcglorf:
"Gadhafi would currently be finishing off the genocide he promised to commit against the opposition"


Are you at all familiar with Gaddafi? His speech from Feb 22 he threatened to "cleanse the nation, house by house", and warned that just as the world never came to help the victims of Tiananmen square no one was coming to help you(the opposition). Don't take my word for it. Don't take the word of any anti-Arab biased western media. Go read Al Jazeera's live blog from the day that speech was delivered.



like most of the media hyped quotes from Saddam Hussein, it is probably either a bad translation, out of context

Slow down before you dismiss Gaddafi's statements on genocide because they resemble Saddam's speechs. Nobody, and I mean nobody(Arab,Palestinian,Iraqi) denies Saddam's record on mass killings.

In his Anfal campaign against the Kurds there estimates higher than 200k murdered by Saddam. Half of the dead are from military operations against civilians including the use of chemical weapons, while the other half are mass executions complete with bulldozers to dig large enough graves on site.

The estimates of his crushing of the Shia uprisings at the end of the first gulf war exceed 100k dead as well, with gunships and tanks being used to lower the number of 'unruly' civilians to something more 'manageable'.

You are right about the similarities between Gaddafi and Saddam. It's a reason to take his threats regarding genocide of those opposing him as deadly serious.

Starting a bombing campaign based on a "speech" is ridiculous to begin with and Gadhafi's actions are not too far from what all of the Arab Gulf States have been doing in recent weeks.

It wasn't just a "speech". He followed the speech up by mobilizing his army and marching across the country killing anyone even suspected of being with the opposition. He was within a single city of having taken back full control of the country and being able to "secure" his gains. I hate having to point that "secure" in this case means systematically hunting down killing as many supporters of the opposition as it takes to be certain no-one will ever consider doing it again. Whether that can be done with 100 or 100 thousand doesn't matter to a dictator, it's just a means to an end.

As for other Gulf States, would you really prefer Libya was left to Gaddafi's mercy just because that's exactly what's happening elsewhere?

Truthfully, I never did pay much attention to Libya. Partially because I figured a nutjob like Gadhafi had to be on the US payroll (which, apparently until recently he was (banking, oil, etc).

Anyway, thanks for the quote. I've been hearing about it for weeks now and never knew where it came from. No offense meant, but like most of the media hyped quotes from Saddam Hussein, it is probably either a bad translation, out of context, a cultural/religious way of saying things that westerners don't get, or a combination of these. Without too much analysis, I can say that the part about going "house by house" to get rid of a rebellion/uprising is pretty SOP (see Iraq).

I have many more suspicions after reading the AlJazeera blog than I had before I read it (ie. why are so many protester signs in English?), but I don't have time to get into it now. Starting a bombing campaign based on a "speech" is ridiculous to begin with and Gadhafi's actions are not too far from what all of the Arab Gulf States have been doing in recent weeks.
>> ^bcglorf:

>> ^vaporlock:
I'm interested in finding out where he said this. Have you ever found an actual statement by Gadhafi saying this? It isn't something I can imagine him (an arab socialist) saying.
Wearing silk pajamas with a funny hat, yes. "I'm going to commit genocide", no.
This statement has the reak of pre Desert Storm propaganda. Most of which was proven false (ie. Iraqi troops emptying Kuwaiti baby incubators in the hospitals). >> ^bcglorf:
"Gadhafi would currently be finishing off the genocide he promised to commit against the opposition"


Are you at all familiar with Gaddafi? His speech from Feb 22 he threatened to "cleanse the nation, house by house", and warned that just as the world never came to help the victims of Tiananmen square no one was coming to help you(the opposition). Don't take my word for it. Don't take the word of any anti-Arab biased western media. Go read Al Jazeera's live blog from the day that speech was delivered.

>> ^vaporlock:

I'm interested in finding out where he said this. Have you ever found an actual statement by Gadhafi saying this? It isn't something I can imagine him (an arab socialist) saying.
Wearing silk pajamas with a funny hat, yes. "I'm going to commit genocide", no.
This statement has the reak of pre Desert Storm propaganda. Most of which was proven false (ie. Iraqi troops emptying Kuwaiti baby incubators in the hospitals). >> ^bcglorf:
"Gadhafi would currently be finishing off the genocide he promised to commit against the opposition"



Are you at all familiar with Gaddafi? His speech from Feb 22 he threatened to "cleanse the nation, house by house", and warned that just as the world never came to help the victims of Tiananmen square no one was coming to help you(the opposition). Don't take my word for it. Don't take the word of any anti-Arab biased western media. Go read Al Jazeera's live blog from the day that speech was delivered.

I'm interested in finding out where he said this. Have you ever found an actual statement by Gadhafi saying this? It isn't something I can imagine him (an arab socialist) saying.

Wearing silk pajamas with a funny hat, yes. "I'm going to commit genocide", no.

This statement has the reak of pre Desert Storm propaganda. Most of which was proven false (ie. Iraqi troops emptying Kuwaiti baby incubators in the hospitals). >> ^bcglorf:

"Gadhafi would currently be finishing off the genocide he promised to commit against the opposition"

I'm a massage and aquatic therapist for people with physical disabilities (and sometimes accompanying intellectual disabilities)
I provide intensive in home behavioral and life skills support to a woman with a physical disability, an intellectal disability and major behavioral challenges
I work with adolescent boys with autism and asperger's fostering social skills, broadening their scopes of interest and focusing on dealing with stress and anxiety.
And I also babysit a man who is blind and has autism a few times a month. He's my super buddy.

My job is awesome cause it allows me to tap into the things I'm best at in life. I don't have to sit in anyone place for very long, I go somewhere different everyday and do something different everyday and have creative control over the activities. I basically have no "boss", I have set of standards and am accountable to the state for proper documentation and following ethical guidelines, but I don't have to "check in" with anyone. My schedule is between me and my clients. As a single mom, that's something thats invaluable to me. If my kids get sick, I just call my clients and reschedule, there are no "write ups" or "attendance policies" and "tardiness" isn't an issue. If I get stuck in traffic I just call and say "hey, give me 5 minutes". I will never be written up for being 5 minutes late 3 times within 3 months ever again. I also, the most appropriate thing to wear just happens to be sweat pants and tshirt. fuck yes!! i work in my pajamas.

down sides: It doesn't pay enough and I have no benefits package or worker's compensation insurance.

Thanks for the Halloween promote! You're the cat's pajamas!

I'm not trying to offend you brother. I think you are the cats pajamas. That's just how I see it. I could claim that you aren't trying to comprehend democracy, or decry the long list of shallow epithets (statist, authoritarian, communist, nazi, fascist, socialist, Moaist, Stalinist, Marxist, government cock sucker, cult member, proponent of violence, thief etc.) that you use here on a daily basis - terms which are twice as offensive as anything I've said above - but I don't, because your opinion is your opinion and I feel perfectly comfortable in our disagreement. It doesn't offend me that you think what I believe is wrong. More power to you.

You don't seem to see the double standard here, probably because you believe yourself to be absolutely objective in your judgments. You are just as partisan as I, if not more so, and your point of view is no less subjective than mine or V's or NR's.

I believe you mean well, and I try to be open minded, but the fact that I can't get a straight answer to...

"What does 'people have direct control of the market' mean, and how does it specifically translate into either 'stopping a corporate dictatorship' or achieving meaningful change?"

..makes me think you don't have an answer. If I could get a satisfying answer to this question - a tough task no doubt - it would do a great deal to improve my confidence in your ideology. It's at the crux of my skepticism towards free marketism. If you don't like tough questions, then by all means, feel free to turn the tables and hit me with your own. If I can't answer them, then you win!!!

I haven't always had such a negative view of the free market. It's only after studying it and talking to free market libertarians that I've changed my perspective. For what it's worth, you are probably the person who has informed me the most on free market politics, so either you need a better sales pitch or our world views are just dramatically different.

Yes, I do think you are misguided, but isn't that always the tacet implication in political argument? You've called me a cult member and a kool aid drinker, which sounds like you think I'm misguided too? I'm OK with this. Why do you fucking care so much? If I think you are wrong, it doesn't mean you are wrong, just wrong to me.

love, your friend and sparring partner, distoepeeanfewchertooday

That was the bees knees...the cats pajamas...the ELEPHANTS EYEBROWS!

I agree with everyone up there ^ ,you're the top, the cat's pajamas, the bee's knees even.
Congratulations!

I love cats and don't laugh at me but I buy dunkin donuts coffee at costco...I think it's the cat's pajamas.

I see... you were dissapointed that she wasnt rubbing her boobies the whole time,huh? Maybe next time.
I want to teach elem. school. I wish i could only do math and science but in the lower grades you have to teach it all.
I forgot you were a baby. Well, good for you for doing that. Its about time.. I mean you ARE 19....

In reply to this comment by EndAll:
Ugh, yeah.. thumbnail was promising, video was disappointing. A downvote resulted! No harsh feelings.

And that's awesome! What grade do you think you'd like to teach?

My program is, well, to get credits to get my highschool diploma! I'm 19, now.. I missed a few back in the day, just gonna go in now and get that all sorted out pretty quick - and then the world will be my oyster! Well, I can only hope.

In reply to this comment by inflatablevagina:
It was my hot for words vid.."In My Pajamas"
Yeah I am back in school in a teaching program... woo hoo. Whats yours all about?

In reply to this comment by EndAll:
hey turd nugget.. I think I do have a rule.. I dunno what it is though right now, what video are you talking about?


I've beeeen aroundddd. Just trying to get back into a program for school, actually. I remember you were doing something along the same lines, no? how'd that go?

In reply to this comment by inflatablevagina:
Hey poop hole.. I thought you had a rule to explain your down votes?

BTW.. where ya been anyhow?