Stephen Colbert's response was just drop-dead hilarious: "You can say Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, or whatever you choose to celebrate the birth of the baby Jesus." I haven't watched him yet...I'm going to have to start tuning in though, because that line is pretty priceless!
idunnocan'treadyourentry thanks for the laugh tova. Happy Christmas, Gid!
Cool facts...Here's the only one I can come up with... Did you know that the "manger" that Christ was born in is more like a cave? There is now a church over it in Bethlehem, but it definitely reminded me more of a cave than a manger--kind of a hole dug out of rock. It's pretty awe inspiring nonetheless. I highly recommend it to anyone visiting that region.
but we dont have any extra $$ to pay for a sitter. Do you have any neighborhood kids? When I was about five I used to watch my neighbors cats, go over and make sure that they had enough food and water and some play time. Granted, they lived next door, so it wasn't a big deal. I think they would eith
I think the whole thing is ridiculous. I have always said both Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays. And when I say Happy Holidays I'm referring to Christmas and New Year's. Of course, I try to remember to wish my Jewish friends a Happy Hanukkah rather than a Merry Christmas--but that is simply an attempt to be polite. I certainly wouldn't be offended if they slipped and wished me a Happy Hanukkah. I mean, how on earth do you get offended by someone
Simon wants cell phones just to keep in our vehicles in case one of us breaks down. I agree this is a good idea, because we wouldnt give the numbers out to anyone but each other. My problem is finding a decently priced phone that doesnt require 2 or 3 year committments LW--You should look into the pay a
Personally, I think that everything viewed by the state should be "civil partnerships." If churches want to have "marriages" that's fine, but the state should just call everything a "civil partnership" for things like tax codes and the whatnot. If "marriage" is a religious institution as so many claim it is, then it should stay within the church...just my two cents--not that you asked. <img src="http://images.stardock.com/JU/smiles/Smile.gif" border=0
Well, it looks like he would break the law if he ever ordered a wiretap to go for more than 72 hours without a warrant. or more than fifteen days after the war was declared... <TD class="mb-Body-Quote-Text"
Theory was my word, Dr. Guy--not the scientists. THEY HAVE FOUND THE GENE THAT CREATES RESPONSES TO ALCOHOL. I'm not sure what is left to prove to you.
Thank you for proving my point. It is a theory, not a fact. That is all I am saying. Dr. Guy--did you read what I wrote? They have linked a gene to the way that people react to alcohol. I'm sorry that you decided to play a game of semantics and use my word choice rather than the meaning of my post a
The following quote is from the Office of Personnel Management (ie, the Federal Government). American Society of Addiction Medicine published a definition reflecting the current understanding of the disease: “Alcoholism is a primary, chronic disease with genetic, psychosocial, and environmental factors influencing its de
There is the idea that alcoholism is a disease, rather than the result of poor life choices. Sure it is hard to stop, but that's an addiction. So, Jamie how would you explain the hereditary nature of alcoholism?
You've got mail!
I spend a lot of my week on hold as well--but from the other end of the equation! I've been reading your stuff but haven't had much to say lately, so I thought I'd let you know I was still around!
But to leave the selection up to a lottery, as it were, denies students with the intangibles that can't be measured by random selection the opportunity to attend a university they've worked hard to attend. I just want to doubly clarify. There is no random lottery to get into Oxford. Yet, once you are a
Gid, I think you are confused here. No one is taking away Oxford's right to choose students. Oxford University however, is taking away the rights of its colleges to choose their own students. So, St.John's College at Oxford will not longer decide who it will enroll, Oxford University will. Basically Oxford University has centralized its admission process. How in the world is this socialism?
those eyelashes are sweet! I love em!
You either didn't get the theme of this dictionary either, like our friend above, or your imagination is lacking. Or else, we just didn't find your definitions nearly as witty as you did.
Rarely does it take the form of violence, except on the left What? I must have missed those liberals who were out killing abortion doctors. In fact, the Southern Poverty Law Center does a better job than I when addressing this. If you aren't afraid of facts, read below and follow the link to
I dunno, but I blacklisted someone a long time ago, and then their wife wrote an article about why I would have blacklisted her (which I didn't but assumed it had something to do with blacklisting him). I removed him and she could comment again. Strange, but too technical for me to really be concerned with it...
my rosy rear end Get your facts straight, Gid--it's her "shiny white a@#" as she so very kindly pointed out to Karma a while back.
Me I've yet to be blacklisted I could fix that Forever (just kidding!)
But as long as you refuse to be associated with a political party, ladies, how can you hope to elevate it once again to electable status? Shades, you admit to being liberal, yet don't want to be defined as a Democrat. Tex, you don't want to be defined as anything! I will grudgingly accept the lab
TW--My favorite part of JU political debates is the "oh, no, I don't mean you when I say liberal" line. You see, there is this imaginary "liberal" out there somewhere wrecking havoc on the world, and us ordinary libs have to pay the price. You see, the thing is, i know wonderful caring libs and conservatives. And, I know libs and cons who are jerks, capable of killing their
Merry Christmas, Tex!
JoeUser Forums