About Palin, you libs are full of bullpucky.

[rickshaw1]

I am not addressing most of what you guys are spouting cause its all bs. But, here are some things to think about.

1) As governor of alaska, she is responsible for one of america's lines of defense against attack. Like it or not, Russia is close to america in alaska, about 12 miles, if i remember correctly. Because of this, as governor she has been included in the loop of "people in the know" when it comes to tighter government security. In some cases, she will have much more intimate and working knowledge that some junior senator, no matter how much the dems try to "god-ize" him.

2) Her kids as "props", i believe Grant said. Well, i have also seen Obama's kids trotted out, quite a few humorous remarks about his younger daughter holding things up with her "Hi daddy" remarks. Kinda cheesy of you to leave that out, but you are, after all, toting a lot of water for the dems.

3) Her pregnant daughter- Okay, so Obama would have no problem with one of his daughters having an abortion if she got pregnant. Now, if Palin's daughter had had an abortion, you would have a) crapped yourself because you would have a poster child for "spread'em and kill'em" or b) said "well, every parent should be aware at all times of what their children are doing, no matter what and since her daughter is pregnant, that means that she cannot be a good governor or VP!" as if somehow the two equate. Well, anyone remember Billy Carter, or Clinton's brother? How 'bout rumors of E. Roosevelt's being a lesbian? But, lets take it another notch, and just go with the actual candidates themselves. Roosevelt's mistriss in georgia was widely known, but the press covered for him, as the did for the innumerable mistriss' of notorious whore hopper Kennedy. And the only reason they didn't hide dear sweet Monica was because the press had given up the ludicrus notion that they were impartial and not in it for the money and gone completely Jerry Springer on us.

But, since Palin's daughter is not killing an innocent, unborn life, she isn't shown as someone that made a mistake and is dealing with it and getting on with life and the consequences of it, instead she is being used to show that dems are somehow better than others. Funny, but the dems/libs have no problem killing innocents whose only qualification for being murdered is being concieved, but will demonstrate and protest at the death of someone like Ted Bundy, a proven homicidal maniac. She isn't respected for doing what most people in america do each day, which is try to figure a way to muddle through life, but instead is villified for "NOT KILLING AN INNOCENT CHILD".

Not only that, but, she isn't even a politician or AN ADULT, but an underage girl. So, grown adults are attacking children in the name of politican expediency to push a candidate for PRESIDENT that has far less executive leadership than the VP candidate of the other party.

And then there is the "economy" thing. TAXES TAXES TAXES. Man, it sure would be nice if some of the bloviating blowhards here actually understood what was involved in the economy. But, since so many of you claim to understand everything from the nightly news, lets drop into this.

First, the economy is having a hard time right now thanks to socialist and communist policies pushed by the left. Why, you ask? Okay. For one thing, there haven't been any new refineries in this country in about 30 years. That means that the amount of oil being processed is the same as back in the seventies. Someone, anyone, please do a check on the national census and lets see how much the population has GROWN in the last thirty years. It might just shock you.
Second, have any of you ever heard of China and India and Pakistan? In case you haven't, here is a little refresher course. They have some of the largest populations on earth, and in one case, THE largest on earth. Oh, and EACH ONE OF THEM is currently going through an INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION. And because of this, their own demand for oil has skyrocketed. Which means that the supply of oil, heavily controlled in one region by OPEC, is about the same as thirty years ago, comparatively. What this means is...follow me closely now...THE SUPPLY HAS NOT INCREASED TO MEET DEMAND. AND WHEN DEMAND IS GREATER THAN SUPPLY, THE COST OF SAID ITEM GOES UP! I can retype this slowly if you need me too. So, if the cost of a barrel of oil goes from...for example...one dollar to four dollars, and the oil company makes the same PERCENTAGE of profit, say for example, 10%, then the profit will go from $.10 per barrel to $.40 per barrel. This would explain the socialist/communist hated RECORD PROFITS. Everyone wants lower prices now (supposedly, but i will get to that in a moment) but no lib wants to admit that it is the LIBS/DEMS policies when they were in control of congress thirty years ago that caused this problem. By the way, does anyone else remember AL GORE AND OTHER LIBERALS saying just a few years ago that they wanted the price of a gallon of gas to hit $5 DOLLARS A BARREL? I do.

Now, as to the "drilling in alaska and destroying the environment" arguement that the lib/dems want to use. Now, say there are 40 acres in a mile and roughly 586,400 square miles in alaska, then that means that there are roughly 23,456, 000 acres in alaska. Now, if they need 1,900 acres to do their drilling and pipelines, oh heck, lets be generous and say 2,000 acres, that leaves us with... 23,454,000 acres that would not be touched. So, that means that the acreage needed is 0.00008%. Now, that isn't 8% for those of you with no math skills, that is millionths of 1 percent. Pretty danged small, any way you look at it.

But, being the lib/dem/socialist/communist/green party, you will say "what about the carribou?". I mean, that was the popular refrain I heard so much in the news several years ago. No problem. You see, they seem to love the pipeline that is there. And when i say love, i mean it. Turns out they love the warmth etc...of the pipeline and it is something of a carribou mating hangout, like lovers lane.

Course, knowing what we know, you don't have a problem killing human unborn babies, but they are only human and don't count. But unborn baby animals? Bet you wouldn't want any of them killed.

So, there are some arguements from someone that doesnt' watch the nightly news anymore, any of them.

Oh, and if you want to claim that the "free press" is still the fourth estate, it think it time that there be some reality to that claim. And by that i mean, I think it only right that when we get some writer claiming to see no problem with legalizing marijuana, they should have to have on record their beliefs about it, and whether or not they use it. you see, far too many times so called reporters, collumnists, etc... use their position to favor things that they secretly favor, or will benefit from. But whereas someone like the conservative Armstrong Williams is exposed and basically shut down, too many on the left are never exposed, never have to suffer the consequences of their beliefs or actions, but are the first to scream about first amendment protections. I'm willing to bet quite a few of you don't have the courage of your convictions. Thank god millions of men and women in the armed services have enough for themselves and you.

Thanks for listening.

[NatGertler]

As governor of alaska, she is responsible for one of america's lines of defense against attack.No, she's not. Alaska has military bases, which are under federal control, not state. In the event that they're being used to defend against a foreign attack, the National Guard also falls under federal control. And as it is, we are not currently under strong direct conflict with Russia.


Her kids as "props", i believe Grant said. Well, i have also seen Obama's kids trotted out, quite a few humorous remarks about his younger daughter holding things up with her "Hi daddy" remarks. Kinda cheesy of you to leave that out, but you are, after all, toting a lot of water for the dems.Obama wasn't simultaneous trotting them out and calling for them to be kept out of it.

Okay, so Obama would have no problem with one of his daughters having an abortion if she got pregnant.Sez who? Sounds an awful lot like something you just made up. (Being in favor of something being legal does not mean you're happy whenever it occurs.)


Not only that, but, she isn't even a politician or AN ADULT, but an underage girl. So, grown adults are attacking children in the name of politican expediency to push a candidate for PRESIDENT that has far less executive leadership than the VP candidate of the other party.I have yet to hear anyone criticize the daughter. Really. Sounds like something else you're making up.

[rickshaw1]

"No, she's not. Alaska has military bases, which are under federal control, not state. In the event that they're being used to defend against a foreign attack, the National Guard also falls under federal control. And as it is, we are not currently under strong direct conflict with Russia."

check again. Yes, they are federal, but Alaska has a different setup with the National Guard and the federal government than the lower 48.

"Obama wasn't simultaneous trotting them out and calling for them to be kept out of it."

Name a politician that hasn't had their kids up on the big stage when accepting. Its one thing to have your family present for one of the biggest events of your life, professional or personal, its another to have sleazy reporters digging into the life of a teenager. Or breaking federal law and digging into emails. Hypocracy, thy name is lib.

"Sez who? Sounds an awful lot like something you just made up. (Being in favor of something being legal does not mean you're happy whenever it occurs.)

He did when he said he wouldn't want his daughter to be punished for making a mistake and having it hang on her for the rest of her life. Children aren't mistakes. People not taking responsibility for their actions is the mistake.

"I have yet to hear anyone criticize the daughter. Really. Sounds like something else you're making up."

I would refer you to the various liberal blogs, as well as one thread i participated in for the less than noble opposition on the Wonder Woman board at DC, but the cowardly mods deleted that particular one. Not to mention the not so sly remarks made on the talking head circuits. And just because YOU may not have heard it doesn't mean it isn't accurate. You just haven't heard it.

I don't make things up, bubby. I prefer to club your arguements to death with the reality of things. I'm not for any of the four candidates, most especially Biden, Mr. King of Pork, far more than lil' miss Palin could ever have been as governor of alaska, but the hypocritical bullpucky coming out of the left side is just too easy to stick with a pin and watch the balloon explode.

[NatGertler]

First, the economy is having a hard time right now thanks to socialist and communist policies pushed by the left. Why, you ask? Okay. For one thing, there haven't been any new refineries in this country in about 30 years.The price of oil is a small part of the current economic stresses (most of the current mess is fallout from the uncontrolled issuance of mortgages in the careless hands of the free market. To the degree that the price of oil is involved in the current situation, the production in the US -- which has something on the scale of 2% (http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/international/reserves.html) of the world's known oil reserves -- ain't a significant contributor.

And it's kind of hard to push declining oil production as a mark of the effect of "socialism/communism". For one thing, environmental law isn't socialist or communist. For another, where we see actual communism ended -- oil production in Russia has dropped by over 30% (http://www.gravmag.com/oil.html) over the past two decades.


That means that the amount of oil being processed is the same as back in the seventies. Someone, anyone, please do a check on the national census and lets see how much the population has GROWN in the last thirty years....and is largely balanced out by the dip in per-capita oil usage in this country.

So, if the cost of a barrel of oil goes from...for example...one dollar to four dollars, and the oil company makes the same PERCENTAGE of profit, say for example, 10%, then the profit will go from $.10 per barrel to $.40 per barrel.Yes. So? When they exploit the shortage, they make more money. People tend to note this when the oil company is acting as the victim of the price increase rather than the profiteer, or when they're asking for special government support.

Now, if they need 1,900 acres to do their drilling and pipelines, oh heck, lets be generous and say 2,000 acres, that leaves us with... 23,454,000 acres that would not be touched. So, that means that the acreage needed is 0.00008%. Now, that isn't 8% for those of you with no math skills, that is millionths of 1 percent.No, it isn't. Before you presume to critique others math skills, you may want to work on your own. 0.00008% is eight hundred-thousandths of a percent.... but that isn't what it comes to. It comes to 0.008%... eight thousands of a percent.

And by that i mean, I think it only right that when we get some writer claiming to see no problem with legalizing marijuana, they should have to have on record their beliefs about it, and whether or not they use it.If they write claiming to see no problem with legalizing marijuana, then they are putting on the record their beliefs. That's what writing is.

But whereas someone like the conservative Armstrong Williams is exposed and basically shut down, too many on the left are never exposed, never have to suffer the consequences of their beliefs or actions, but are the first to scream about first amendment protections.If you want to accuse someone specific, put forth the evidence. This just makes it look like a complaint that because a conservative commentator was caught selling his opinion, there must be something wrong with liberals.

If you really want to make points for whatever it is you support, you may want to build your arguments more strongly.

[K'Nort]

"No, she's not. Alaska has military bases, which are under federal control, not state. In the event that they're being used to defend against a foreign attack, the National Guard also falls under federal control. And as it is, we are not currently under strong direct conflict with Russia."

check again. Yes, they are federal, but Alaska has a different setup with the National Guard and the federal government than the lower 48.

No. Speaking as an Alaskan, they really do not.

The only thing in the state that's even vaguely more Russian-related than the rest of the US is the fact that a significant portion of the Natives belong to the Russian Orthodox church.

On a security level, it's zilch.

And I'm a Republican. I just hate disinformation.

[NatGertler]

check again. Yes, they are federal, but Alaska has a different setup with the National Guard and the federal government than the lower 48.You may want to explain that to Major General Craig Campbell of the ANG, who pointed out (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hpxv9PHwtrYyiK-btXIRE8AepmiwD92TGCQ01) that the governor actually has no control when it comes to the Guard when it comes to national defense activities. But then, he probably also knows that there are now 49 states lower than Alaska on the map...


Its one thing to have your family present for one of the biggest events of your life, professional or personal, its another to have sleazy reporters digging into the life of a teenager. Or breaking federal law and digging into emails. Hypocracy, thy name is lib.I miss how all the reporters covering this and the folks digging into the emails are automatically liberal, much less representatives of liberals. I sure don't assume that all conservatives are pro-killing, pro-torture folks like some very visible ones are.


He did when he said he wouldn't want his daughter to be punished for making a mistake and having it hang on her for the rest of her life.Ah, so he didn't say he'd have "no problem", he just said that he'd prefer it over the option of her being punished, if that was the situation she was in. I see. You made something up.

I would refer you to the various liberal blogs, as well as one thread i participated in for the less than noble opposition on the Wonder Woman board at DC, but the cowardly mods deleted that particular one.Ah, so you would back up your claims, except that you won't.

And just because YOU may not have heard it doesn't mean it isn't accurate. You just haven't heard it.It certainly suggests that it's not some loud, unified voice from the various factions that you seem eager to lump together.

I don't make things up, bubby. I prefer to club your arguements to death with the reality of things.I'm sure you would prefer to. You don't seem to have the equipment to do so. You've got various claims without any reality behind them to show, including things that are demonstrably false.

I'm not for any of the four candidates, most especially Biden, Mr. King of Pork, far more than lil' miss Palin could ever have been as governor of alaskaWhy yes, Senator Biden does have considerable federal experience...

[K'Nort]

You may want to explain that to Major General Craig Campbell of the ANG, who pointed out (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hpxv9PHwtrYyiK-btXIRE8AepmiwD92TGCQ01) that the governor actually has no control when it comes to the Guard when it comes to national defense activities. But then, he probably also knows that there are now 49 states lower than Alaska on the map...

Everyone does call it the Lower 48. Even the PhDs.

[The Crime Dentist]

I love how you're taking blogger nobodies to task as somehow part of the Democratic apparatus. I also love how you're criticizing these guys for the exact same nonsense Republicans have been spewing for decades.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=wQK1al91drs&feature=related

If you can't see how ridiculous it all is after that, I don't know what else to say.

[mattx110]

If Russia wants a war with CANADA, they'll nuke Alaska. If they want a war with the US, they'll aim for Washington, Virginia, New York, California, our interests in Eastern Europe, London, our troops in Afghanistan, and probably Paris.

They're not sitting there, "how do we trek through Alaska, Canada, and then take on those stoners in Seattle, we're out of flanel and our coffee sucks?"

edit: accidentily typed "russia would nuke russia" which doesn't make sense...

[badMike]

I prefer to club your arguements to death with the reality of things.If by "clubbing arguements" (sic) you actually mean being insulting and argumentative, use specious reasoning, bitterly debate straw men propositions and challenge thoughts you put into other people's heads, then you're well on your way to joining the Dave Sim Fan Club.

[Michael P]

I prefer to club your arguements to death with the reality of things.

In that case, you might want to get an actual club, instead of that Nerf bat you seem to be wielding.

[NatGertler]

Everyone does call it the Lower 48. Even the PhDs.Yeah, I've certainly heard it used -- although the Alaska folks I've hung with were more likely to simply call it "outside". I think it's a funny anachronism (always makes it sounds like they're excluding Alaska and Maine.)

[Buzz Dixon]

The Governor of the State of Alaska doesn't even know how much energy her state contributes to the U.S. She spouts an innaccurate figure and even after the correct figure is known, she keeps spouting it.

So far she has demonstrated that she is a marginally less-corrupt small time/small town politico with an instinct for jumping off a sinking ship at the last best possible moment.

She is nothing but the snooty stuck up cheerleader in high school who snubbed everybody not in her tiny clique and kissed up to the teachers while dissing them behind their backs.

But she has achieved something unique in American political history: With the possible exception of Thomas Eagleton, the worst effect any other VP candidate had on the presidential candidate was to be such a non-entity that he (or the lone she) added nothing of value to the ticket. Palin has actually managed to depress McCain's post convention bounce all by her lonesome; Obama has regained a small but significant lead in most polls and is statistically tied in all the rest.

Partisans vote for a candidate, independents vote against. Palin is making independents realize that while they may not like Obama, they sure as hell don't want McCain if his judgment is so faulty as to nominate a VP like her.

[NatGertler]

It's telling that the level of discussion almost across the board is on whether she is even at a basic level qualified to be veep. It is far, far from whether she is the best-qualified person he could have chosen. Biden may not be the best possible choice over on the Dems, but in terms of experience and impact, he looks a lot like the sort of person one chooses a serious veep from. Palin comes across looking like a blatant novelty act, chosen for her her-ness. (And to make it sillier, party folks have been acting like she's broken a glass ceiling, as though she's been named the first woman president. No, she's just been made a candidate, and not the first female to be named that. If that's considered breaking a glass ceiling, then that's just attesting to the hideboundness of that party, hitting that point a quarter century later.)

[NatGertler]

(deleted double post)

[rickshaw1]

Lets start with nat:

"The price of oil is a small part of the current economic stresses (most of the current mess is fallout from the uncontrolled issuance of mortgages in the careless hands of the free market. To the degree that the price of oil is involved in the current situation, the production in the US -- which has something on the scale of 2% of the world's known oil reserves -- ain't a significant contributor.

And it's kind of hard to push declining oil production as a mark of the effect of "socialism/communism". For one thing, environmental law isn't socialist or communist. For another, where we see actual communism ended -- oil production in Russia has dropped by over 30% over the past two decades."

No, the price of oil is not a "small" economic stress. First, i am a construction manager. I build residential homes. When the cost of everything from rebar in the foundation to the concrete that covers it to the copper in the electrical lines and the HVAC units go up because the cost of delivery goes up, it increases the cost of the home by thousands of dollars. Not to mention when you have to pay a crew five hundred extra dollars to go to a home that is rurally located just for gas. Now, multiply that by the six or seven different crews that you will have to send out for plumbing, HVAC, electrical, Finishing, siding,etc.

Then you go on about the production in the US. Okay, why did prices sour when Katrina hit? Refineries went down. Why did prices just spike with Ike, Refineries shut down. That is an impact. Yes, you will say "thats the evils of the free market economy". No, it isn't the evil of it, it is the basic rule of supply, demand, and the expected impactors.

Now, as to the "social/communism" factor. Libs/Dems....ya know what, i am just going to shorten that to Dibs...after all, they do think they have dibs on everyone else's money... have for years expoused the socialist/communist ideals of taking more and more from everyone they can and giving it away to whom they see fit. From welfare to imenient domain. Health care for everyone, with means that the system, which is already near collapse, will be burdened even more. You cannot keep taking from someone that is working hard to give to someone that either cannot or will not indefinately and expect them to continue to work their best. What is their motivation? I damn sure and not going to work the sixty and seventy hours a week that i do for my family just to give it to someone that is perfectly capable of working but instead chooses to fry their brains on dope and expect me and others to take care of them.

But, one more little thing about the Russian oil production. Yeah, it has dropped off. But that isn't attributeable to the free market. Its atributable to the fact that in pre-communist russia, the pipelines could not be shut down due to the way they were made, and if a worker refused to work, guess what, they were disappeared. Thats not free market, thats terror under communism. The state ownes you. You have no choice, no say. Hmmm, sounds a lot like what the congress was under the Dibs back in the seventies. "We take from you, you have no say, and if you don't pay, Hello Tax Siezures.

"...and is largely balanced out by the dip in per-capita oil usage in this country."

Except, if that were the case, then the oil production of then would be roughly the same as needed now. Only, there have been more and more products made of oil and oil based petroleum. Not just oil for cars, but things like new needs for plastic. You know, the housing for that shiny new computer you are using. Raw oil and gas may, and i say may, be roughly the same (however, there are many more cars on the road, and we all know how you dibs felt over SUVs) but the product uses have greatly increased.

"Yes. So? When they exploit the shortage, they make more money. People tend to note this when the oil company is acting as the victim of the price increase rather than the profiteer, or when they're asking for special government support. "

That is not exploitation, that is free market. Are you going to drop the price of the home you are selling if the homes around it start selling for double? No, you aren't, and if you say you would then i would suspect you of being a liar or mentally stupid. Markets charge what people pay. But when Hillary and the rest of the socialist left start bitching about "Windfall Profits", you can see the lack of economic education rearing its head and slapping us in the face.

"No, it isn't. Before you presume to critique others math skills, you may want to work on your own. 0.00008% is eight hundred-thousandths of a percent.... but that isn't what it comes to. It comes to 0.008%... eight thousands of a percent."

According to my handy dandy little microsoft calculator: 2000 / 23456000 = 8.52660yadda yadda yadda to the fifth. Five = millionth from what i remember in high school math. Okay, move the decimal and that cuts it back to hundred thousanths. Tell you what, take a piece of moms apple pie and cut me a slice 8hundred thousanths of the whole and I will take the pie, you get the slice. Point is, when you get that small, hundred thousanths or millions dont really matter, its still a tiiiiiiiiiiiiiny little dot on a biiiiiiiiiiiiiiiig map.

"If they write claiming to see no problem with legalizing marijuana, then they are putting on the record their beliefs. That's what writing is."

Not so. Just because you write something doesn't mean that it is what you believe, I have written college papers on murderer and pedophiles and that doesn't mean that i believe they are right. Reporters frequently try to claim impartiality when they are really in support of something. They try to have the best of both worlds. Or, they talk as if they know something about their subjects, and maybe two minutes earlier in the green room you hear them saying that they have idea what they hell they are talking about, and then they divy up sides as to who will say what. That is yellow journalism, or just plain malpractice in reporting as far as i am concerned. Journalists say the people have a right to know everything about everything, but very few of them are willing to put their beliefs, convictions, or financial backing out there for the spotlight to shine on. How many of them like to say they are independent when 99 times out of 100 they vote for the Dibs? Quite a few. And conservatives do it as well.

"If you want to accuse someone specific, put forth the evidence. This just makes it look like a complaint that because a conservative commentator was caught selling his opinion, there must be something wrong with liberals."

Dan Rather, before he was busted. Tom Brokow, Peter Jennings, Walter Cronkite, Sam Donaldson. Oh, theres a great one about old Sam. Seems he was part owner of a large corporate farm. Didn't bother to tell anyone about all the farm subsidies that his company was getting as he raked them in, but didn't have a problem reporting on "pork barrel spending". The problem with your arguement is that unlike you, i assume that anyone here that is smart enough to use a computer is smart enough to start looking things up on their own. I dont' like to spoonfeed people, it dulls their brains and they start to think that anything that sounds good is good without checking into it for themselves. And that is just plain bad for everyone.

[rickshaw1]

"You may want to explain that to Major General Craig Campbell of the ANG, who pointed out that the governor actually has no control when it comes to the Guard when it comes to national defense activities. But then, he probably also knows that there are now 49 states lower than Alaska on the map..."

Never said she had control of it, i said she had more information about it than the average... You might not want to make things up.

"I miss how all the reporters covering this and the folks digging into the emails are automatically liberal, much less representatives of liberals. I sure don't assume that all conservatives are pro-killing, pro-torture folks like some very visible ones are."

Yeah, cause conseravative reporters are going to dig that up and send it out.:rolleyes:

"Ah, so he didn't say he'd have "no problem", he just said that he'd prefer it over the option of her being punished, if that was the situation she was in. I see. You made something up."

Bubba, you think it okay to have someone kill your grandchild before its born, you got no problems with it as far as i am concerned. That isn't making things up, that just disgusting. But hey, you are learning to spin very well.

"Ah, so you would back up your claims, except that you won't."

Ah, see the previous post about spoonfeeding. Think, its good for the brain.

"It certainly suggests that it's not some loud, unified voice from the various factions that you seem eager to lump together."

Ah, now you are making things up, is this another accusation of a vast rightwing conspiracy? Cause i didn't say that for the left, but it sure is funny how so many folks can fall in line with something. Hey, anyone remember the old "gravitas" usage from a few years ago? Had heard that word in ...well, never. Yet in the course of one day the talking heads repeated it over and over and over and over and over.... Sorry, pal, seems like the evidence is more on my side than you.

"I'm sure you would prefer to. You don't seem to have the equipment to do so. You've got various claims without any reality behind them to show, including things that are demonstrably false."

So, demonstrate them. So far, all you have really done is attack the way my thoughts were presented. Tit for tat, as they say.

"Why yes, Senator Biden does have considerable federal experience..."

...at being a pork barrel, obstructionist, partizan hack. I quite agree.

[rickshaw1]

Before you dismiss the fact that Sarah Palin is Commander of the Alaska National Guard consider this.

Alaska is the first line of defense in our missile interceptor defense system. The 49th Missile Defense Battalion of the Alaska National Guard is the unit that protects the entire nation from ballistic missile attacks.It's on permanent active duty, unlike other Guard units.

"No. Speaking as an Alaskan, they really do not.

The only thing in the state that's even vaguely more Russian-related than the rest of the US is the fact that a significant portion of the Natives belong to the Russian Orthodox church.

On a security level, it's zilch.

And I'm a Republican. I just hate disinformation."


As governor of Alaska , Palin is briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counterterrorism. Her exposure to classified material may rival even Biden's and certainly by far exceeds Obama's.

She's also the commander in chief of the Alaska State Defense Force (ASDF), a federally recognized militia incorporated into Homeland Security's counterterrorism plans.

Palin is privy to military and intelligence secrets that are vital to the entire country's defense. Given Alaska 's proximity to Russia , she may have security clearances we don't even know about.

According to the Washington Post, she first met with McCain in February, but nobody ever found out. This is a woman used to keeping secrets.

[rickshaw1]

"Everyone does call it the Lower 48. Even the PhDs."

It wont matter, it isn't the content of the thing, its the seriousness of the charge.

:biggrin:

[Puma]

Before you dismiss the fact that Sarah Palin is Commander of the Alaska National Guard consider this.

Alaska is the first line of defense in our missile interceptor defense system. The 49th Missile Defense Battalion of the Alaska National Guard is the unit that protects the entire nation from ballistic missile attacks.It's on permanent active duty, unlike other Guard units.

"No. Speaking as an Alaskan, they really do not.

The only thing in the state that's even vaguely more Russian-related than the rest of the US is the fact that a significant portion of the Natives belong to the Russian Orthodox church.

On a security level, it's zilch.

And I'm a Republican. I just hate disinformation."


As governor of Alaska , Palin is briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counterterrorism. Her exposure to classified material may rival even Biden's and certainly by far exceeds Obama's.

She's also the commander in chief of the Alaska State Defense Force (ASDF), a federally recognized militia incorporated into Homeland Security's counterterrorism plans.

Palin is privy to military and intelligence secrets that are vital to the entire country's defense. Given Alaska 's proximity to Russia , she may have security clearances we don't even know about.

According to the Washington Post, she first met with McCain in February, but nobody ever found out. This is a woman used to keeping secrets.

...Here's the deal: First off, Sarah Palin plays no role as the commander of the Alaska National Guard outside of the state. She never has, she never will. The actual commander--Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell--said so himself:

Maj. Gen. Craig Campbell, adjutant general of the Alaska National Guard, considers Palin "extremely responsive and smart" and says she is in charge when it comes to in-state services, such as emergencies and natural disasters where the National Guard is the first responder.

But, in an interview with The Associated Press on Sunday, he said he and Palin play no role in national defense activities, even when they involve the Alaska National Guard. The entire operation is under federal control, and the governor is not briefed on situations.

According to Global Security, "the governor commands AKNG [Alaska National Guard] while it is not in active federal service. The principal executive officer of DMVA [Department of Military and Veterans Affairs], the adjutant general, is an appointee of the governor."

It should be noted, however, that the current adjutant general, Gen. Campbell, was appointed in 2003--more than three years before Palin took office. So she didn't even make the decision determining who would run the Alaska National Guard.

[Puma]

Before you dismiss the fact that Sarah Palin is Commander of the Alaska National Guard consider this.

Alaska is the first line of defense in our missile interceptor defense system. The 49th Missile Defense Battalion of the Alaska National Guard is the unit that protects the entire nation from ballistic missile attacks.It's on permanent active duty, unlike other Guard units.

As governor of Alaska , Palin is briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counterterrorism. Her exposure to classified material may rival even Biden's and certainly by far exceeds Obama's.

She's also the commander in chief of the Alaska State Defense Force (ASDF), a federally recognized militia incorporated into Homeland Security's counterterrorism plans.

Palin is privy to military and intelligence secrets that are vital to the entire country's defense. Given Alaska 's proximity to Russia , she may have security clearances we don't even know about.

According to the Washington Post, she first met with McCain in February, but nobody ever found out. This is a woman used to keeping secrets.

So are you also Jimbo? Because your post is exactly this one at the National Review
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWQ2YzMyNGViMmIyY2I0MTliYjRjYmU4MmMxOWZjODA=

[NatGertler]

Then you go on about the production in the US. Okay, why did prices sour when Katrina hit? Refineries went down.Yes, and there was a decrease in localized availability - those tankers out there delivering oil various places can't turn on a dime when the oil is needed elsewhere, and even if they could, they wouldn't bring the tankers in to the gulf anyway. And there was an increase in demand as people were using a lot of gas to get out of the hurricane's path.

Believe it or not, those refineries in Ike's path shut down quite frequently, in anticipation of various storm situations. It's part of their process.


Yes, you will say "thats the evils of the free market economy".You know, this technique of making up stances for folks you're talking about or discussing things with? It ain't effective, it ain't accurate, and it really ain't honest.


Libs/Dems....ya know what, i am just going to shorten that to Dibs...after all, they do think they have dibs on everyone else's money... have for years expoused the socialist/communist ideals of taking more and more from everyone they can and giving it away to whom they see fit.You mean like the hundreds of millions of tax money that Palin wanted for her state? You mean like the $700 billion special friendly purchase that our President just arranged for the banks? Like that?

From welfare to imenient domain.Do you know what they call some of the "Lib/Dems" who gave the US eminent domain? "Founding fathers." The concept is in the Bill of Rights.

You cannot keep taking from someone that is working hard to give to someone that either cannot or will not indefinately and expect them to continue to work their best. What is their motivation?If you want to end taxation, I suggest you come up with a viable other system for keeping our government funded. But I think you'll find that the core of conservatives support the existence of taxation and a funded government.


Except, if that were the case, then the oil production of then would be roughly the same as needed now.No, what I listed refered to the demand for oil in this country, and made no statement about the production. Per-capita use in the US peaked in the late 1970s (http://www.grinzo.com/energy/index.php/2007/07/18/fun-with-numbers-per-capita-oil/), dropped significantly in the early 1980s, and have kept fairly even since then.

You know, the housing for that shiny new computer you are using.Housing for that computer I'm using likely used a lot less petroleum than the housing for the computer I was using in 1978, particularly when the cost of delivering it is included.

That is not exploitation, that is free market.And the free market is based on exploitation. Really. It's not a dirty word. You may want to look it up (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/exploitation).

But when Hillary and the rest of the socialist left start bitching about "Windfall Profits", you can see the lack of economic education rearing its head and slapping us in the face.No, actually, I suspect they know what the term means. It's you who seems to have trouble.

"No, it isn't. Before you presume to critique others math skills, you may want to work on your own. 0.00008% is eight hundred-thousandths of a percent.... but that isn't what it comes to. It comes to 0.008%... eight thousands of a percent."

According to my handy dandy little microsoft calculator: 2000 / 23456000 = 8.52660yadda yadda yadda to the fifth. Five = millionth from what i remember in high school math.Then there's your problem.

.8 is eight tenths
.08 is eight hundredths
.008 is eight thousandths
.0008 is eight ten-thousandths
.00008 is eight hundred-thousandths

Really.

Okay, move the decimal and that cuts it back to hundred thousanths.Here's a little math tip you may want to learn: when moving the decimal point to switch to percentages, you move it not one space but two. And since we actually started at eight hundred-thousandths, when you move it two spaces, you end up with eight thousandths of a percent, and not eight millionths as you had claimed.

Point is, when you get that small, hundred thousanths or millions dont really matterI'm not surprised you think that accuracy doesn't matter.

How many of them like to say they are independent when 99 times out of 100 they vote for the Dibs? Quite a few.Really? Records, please.

The problem with your arguement is that unlike you, i assume that anyone here that is smart enough to use a computer is smart enough to start looking things up on their own. I dont' like to spoonfeed people, it dulls their brains and they start to think that anything that sounds good is good without checking into it for themselves. And that is just plain bad for everyone.Oh, I understand. And you give a strong stream of bull just to test them. What a heroic effort!
Never said she had control of it, i said she had more information about it than the average... You might not want to make things up.You know, that technique of misrepresenting things you've said? It doesn't work well in discussions like this. You didn't just claim she had information, you said "she is responsible for one of america's lines of defense against attack". Responsible, not just informed.

Sorry, pal, seems like the evidence is more on my side than you.He says, scurrying from actually providing the evidence.

I have written college papers on murderer and pedophiles and that doesn't mean that i believe they are right.Did you write "claiming you had no problem" with them?
According to the Washington Post, she first met with McCain in February, but nobody ever found out.As best as I can find, the Post said (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/29/AR2008082901112_pf.html) she met, not met with, McCain. There's a difference in concept from being introduced to someone and taking a meeting.

Bubba, you think it okay to have someone kill your grandchild before its born, you got no problems with it as far as i am concerned.I understand. So when you make things up, I can assume that you believe that making things up is okay and honesty is a sin, right? And post to the world that that's what you believe?
So, demonstrate them. So far, all you have really done is attack the way my thoughts were presented. I don't claim to read your thoughts, all I have is the way the thoughts are presented. And when I show that that the real figure is a hundred thousand percent of what you claim, then yes, that is indeed showing a falsehood that you've presented.

[Charles RB]

If they want a war with the US, they'll aim for ... and probably Paris.

I'd have thought Belgium - take out NATO's main HQ.

EDIT: And also US air bases in Germany and anywhere else that could strike back at Russia.

[Adam C]

Now, as to the "social/communism" factor. Libs/Dems....ya know what, i am just going to shorten that to Dibs...after all, they do think they have dibs on everyone else's money... have for years expoused the socialist/communist ideals of taking more and more from everyone they can and giving it away to whom they see fit. From welfare to imenient domain. Health care for everyone, with means that the system, which is already near collapse, will be burdened even more. You cannot keep taking from someone that is working hard to give to someone that either cannot or will not indefinately and expect them to continue to work their best. What is their motivation? I damn sure and not going to work the sixty and seventy hours a week that i do for my family just to give it to someone that is perfectly capable of working but instead chooses to fry their brains on dope and expect me and others to take care of them.

So basically the alleged link between high oil prices and "socialist/communist policies" (vague much?) is a series of general statements rather than a demonstration of an cause-an-effect link? That's not very convincing.

Additionally you're backing the Pubs whose economic policies have pushed the U.S. to its current condition, buy laying it on the Democrats using the vaguest possible terms without actually backing it up? What about the fact that Bush lowered taxes largely for the richest Americans while not lowering overall government spending? What about McCain wanting to continue the same deregulatory economic policies that allowed mortage companies to play the economic shell games that have produced this current mess? Why does anyone blame the Democrats for this mess when all the available evidence points to the economic policies that the Republicans foster?

Additionally what evidence have you provided that the current lack of refinery capacity is due to the "left's" economic policies?


Dan Rather, before he was busted. Tom Brokow, Peter Jennings, Walter Cronkite, Sam Donaldson. Oh, theres a great one about old Sam. Seems he was part owner of a large corporate farm. Didn't bother to tell anyone about all the farm subsidies that his company was getting as he raked them in, but didn't have a problem reporting on "pork barrel spending".

And what was Dan Rather's record of yellow journalism before his massive fumble on the records regarding Bush's National Guard service? Or Tom Brokaw for that matter? Or Jennings? None of what you stated was very convincing since you haven't provided any examples of bad reporting from these anchors. About the only convincing example you've offered is Sam Donaldson's hypocrisy on government spending and farm subsidies. Moreover, what are good examples of journalism?

[Adam C]

"Why yes, Senator Biden does have considerable federal experience..."

...at being a pork barrel, obstructionist, partizan hack. I quite agree.

So why do you support (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gDPNd-vM53WdWPNvawDe1rYH30xgD92V0MQO0) Palin again?

[The Crime Dentist]

Now, as to the "social/communism" factor. Libs/Dems....ya know what, i am just going to shorten that to Dibs...after all, they do think they have dibs on everyone else's money... have for years expoused the socialist/communist ideals of taking more and more from everyone they can and giving it away to whom they see fit. From welfare to imenient domain. Health care for everyone, with means that the system, which is already near collapse, will be burdened even more. You cannot keep taking from someone that is working hard to give to someone that either cannot or will not indefinately and expect them to continue to work their best. What is their motivation? I damn sure and not going to work the sixty and seventy hours a week that i do for my family just to give it to someone that is perfectly capable of working but instead chooses to fry their brains on dope and expect me and others to take care of them.

This is really what you think about Democrat politics? Really? Those aren't valid representations, those are bad political cartoons.

Europe. Canada. They manage just fine with universal healthcare. Canada's economy is far more stable than the US', and their government has been reducing their debt for years because they've been running a surplus (while 8 years of Republican government has put the US in a historic hole from which it won't escape for decades, if ever).

Universal healthcare means that every company isn't burdened with HMO provision and can invest that money. And it means that people with lower incomes don't have to go without healthcare or be financially ruined when trouble inevitably hits.

And spare the self righteous work ethic speech. There are a limited number of well paying jobs in any economy, period. There are tons of law school grads making 40, 50k simply because there are only so many jobs to go around - and it's not because they aren't working hard. Saying that the people who are outside upper economic rings don't deserve access to healthcare because they're lazy or on drugs shows a poor grasp of socioeconomic reality.

[J L Brooklyn]

There is great tension between Israel and Iran, and Israel feels entitled to help from the U.S. if the two go to war. Plus Russia is acting up big time.

We do not need a hot head hockey mom raring to go nuke for nuke with Russia!
Elect Obama and give peace a chance.

Oh, and to any of you war mongers out there...

Fighting with nukes is cowardly, and fighting because some old fart tells you to is equally pathetic. Get that crap out of your system. Go outside and maim or kill the person you're really having problems with. Then find a way out of getting prosecuted. This will give you a great feeling of accomplishment and cure your bloodlust, because you will no longer feel like you have to prove anything to anyone.

[mattx110]

I'd have thought Belgium - take out NATO's main HQ.

EDIT: And also US air bases in Germany and anywhere else that could strike back at Russia.
Thanks. However wrong I am, Palin is still wronger.

[TimothyCallahan]

How can anyone get past the fact that Palin thinks both evolution AND creationism should be taught "side by side" in public schools? The latter is a fairy tale story and not part of the scientific "debate" she would like to think it is.

I really don't see how anyone can take her seriously in any way when she says stuff like that.

[rickshaw1]

"Yes, and there was a decrease in localized availability - those tankers out there delivering oil various places can't turn on a dime when the oil is needed elsewhere, and even if they could, they wouldn't bring the tankers in to the gulf anyway. And there was an increase in demand as people were using a lot of gas to get out of the hurricane's path.

Believe it or not, those refineries in Ike's path shut down quite frequently, in anticipation of various storm situations. It's part of their process."

And thank you for adding to my point, although to read it you don't think you did.

"Yes, you will say "thats the evils of the free market economy".

You know, this technique of making up stances for folks you're talking about or discussing things with? It ain't effective, it ain't accurate, and it really ain't honest. "

You like that? Good, learned it from having to watch Phil Donahue when i was a kid. Learned from a master Dibs.

"Libs/Dems....ya know what, i am just going to shorten that to Dibs...after all, they do think they have dibs on everyone else's money... have for years expoused the socialist/communist ideals of taking more and more from everyone they can and giving it away to whom they see fit.

You mean like the hundreds of millions of tax money that Palin wanted for her state? You mean like the $700 billion special friendly purchase that our President just arranged for the banks? Like that?"

Yup, just like that. You see, unlike others, when i see a politician doing something wrong, i can call it, even on a side i supposedly like more than others. When conservatives didn't do what they were supposed to and went spend crazy, we let their careers end or be halted by not voting for them. Dibs on the other hand like to keep all their crooks in office so they know who they have to work to steal from.

"From welfare to imenient domain.

Do you know what they call some of the "Lib/Dems" who gave the US eminent domain? "Founding fathers." The concept is in the Bill of Rights."

Ah yes, the eminent domain that was supposed to be about taking needed land for government use, such as schools and roads, and was perverted by the liberal Supreme Court to mean that anything that will generate more taxes gets the land. Yeah, we haven't forgotten that little bit of backstabbing of america. Hey folks, it doesn't matter if you pay your taxes and are an upstanding citizen, if someone comes along that will put ten more tax dollars in the local governments coffers, they now have the right to take your land. People can, according to this ruling, be put out of land that has been in their families for a hundred years so some local developer can create yet another set of condos. Now, i have no problem with the free market economy, and if those families want to sell out, that is their business, but when the government decides that they will be kicked out of their homes and land because someone else will pay more, that is a complete perversion of the law of the land. Think it was Souter that cast that deciding vote. Classy. Gives the average american a real reason to believe that our government is by us and for us. Riiiiiight.

"You cannot keep taking from someone that is working hard to give to someone that either cannot or will not indefinately and expect them to continue to work their best. What is their motivation?

If you want to end taxation, I suggest you come up with a viable other system for keeping our government funded. But I think you'll find that the core of conservatives support the existence of taxation and a funded government."

I never said end taxation. I was talking about the talk right now about raising taxes again on the so called rich. Heres a little info, bubba. Like it or not, rich people don't just stuff money in a vault, sit around drinking liquor, and having orgies while laughing at the little guy. The money they invest in stocks, bonds, script, banks, venture capital, etc... goes to keeping the economy working. And when they buy the things that seem to tick you guys off like yachts and the such, they are EMPLOYING PEOPLE, GIVING THEM JOBS, HELPING TO FEED, CLOTH, AND HOUSE PEOPLE all across the land. Not only does their money go back into the economy, but in general it has a multiplier effect of around 80%. Now, granted, that is remembered from my days taking finance, macro and micro economics, marketing and management, but unless the fundamental rules of limited free market economies have changed (and dispite the buffoonish bill clinton, they haven't), that amounts to quite a bit of money put back into the economy.

Simple economics, if the government wants to increase the growth of the economy, they release funds into the market at a controled rate by the issuance of script. If they want to tighten, they restrict funds. At the same time, when they want to stimulate the economy, they don't increase taxes, which will depress spending, they lower taxes. Even Kennedy was smart enough to know this. Its about the only worthwhile thing he did besides shtup marilyn. So, when i said taxes taxes taxes, i was talking about all the class envy appeal of the Dibs and their chosen new wonderkin, Odama.

"You know, the housing for that shiny new computer you are using.

Housing for that computer I'm using likely used a lot less petroleum than the housing for the computer I was using in 1978, particularly when the cost of delivering it is included."

"likely" meaning you don't know, so you made it up.

"That is not exploitation, that is free market.

And the free market is based on exploitation. Really. It's not a dirty word. You may want to look it up."

I have no problem using what is available. Its the Dibs that go on and on about exploiting labor and resources. But hey, a for effort at twisting.

"But when Hillary and the rest of the socialist left start bitching about "Windfall Profits", you can see the lack of economic education rearing its head and slapping us in the face.

No, actually, I suspect they know what the term means. It's you who seems to have trouble."

You didn't actually say anything here, just made a remark about your opinion, so there's really nothing for me to say except my degree in business based on finance means you really don't know your @$$ from a hole in the ground.

"Point is, when you get that small, hundred thousanths or millions dont really matter

I'm not surprised you think that accuracy doesn't matter."

You mean like when the dibs kept wanting recount after recount in the 2000 election, and coming up with losing after losing counts that were all different? Okay, i made a mistake, i am man enough to admit it. Bet you never will be unless its a snarky comment.

"Oh, I understand. And you give a strong stream of bull just to test them. What a heroic effort!"

Yup, thanks for noticing. Feel dirty just responding to you. Hmmm, I may achieve sainthood for it.

"You know, that technique of misrepresenting things you've said? It doesn't work well in discussions like this. You didn't just claim she had information, you said "she is responsible for one of america's lines of defense against attack". Responsible, not just informed."

Lets see, national guard units are used as the lines of defense for the country to back up the standing military. Governors are responsible for maintaining through state congressional funding the rediness and equipment, etc. Sounds like responsible to me. Just like every other governor in the Union. And i don't misrepresent. I can't help it if you aren't smart enough to read a sentence and get the meaning behind it.

"As best as I can find, the Post said she met, not met with, McCain. There's a difference in concept from being introduced to someone and taking a meeting."

Ah, trying the old semantics routine. Go with some antics and act like the three stooges. They were funny and made people laugh. We are gonna need a lot of that if Odama wins. Again, thats all YOU can see. But, Dibs are notorious for seeing only what they want to see.

"Bubba, you think it okay to have someone kill your grandchild before its born, you got no problems with it as far as i am concerned.

I understand. So when you make things up, I can assume that you believe that making things up is okay and honesty is a sin, right? And post to the world that that's what you believe?"

Naw, see, anyone that lives in the real world knows that if you have a problem with something, you either aren't going to do it, or you are and it isn't really a problem, just someone dithering dramatically. Dibs are good at that too. I mean, look at the current bill i hear the dibs are trying to pass, okaying offshore drilling, but putting it in areas so far out as to be economically unfeasable. Gives them the ability to say, we did it, but knowing that it wont amount to a hill of beans. They have a problem with it, so they aren't going to do it, but they will dither dramatically and look for sympathy votes.

"I don't claim to read your thoughts, all I have is the way the thoughts are presented. And when I show that that the real figure is a hundred thousand percent of what you claim, then yes, that is indeed showing a falsehood that you've presented."

Like i said, i can admit a mistake. Have you got the guts too? Plenty of stuff in here that I have mentioned the dibs doing that was wrong. You dont' talk too much about that. Like i said, dibs like to pick and choose and make the arguement about one tiny little speck of a thing in the ocean of things that need to be done.

No mention by you about the sam donaldson stuff? Factual, yet you run through it like a newborn through pampers. No mention of the hypocracy in the media.

Like i say, you are all bluster and bull pucky.

[Charles RB]

Thanks. However wrong I am, Palin is still wronger.

You could be Bizarro and Palin would still be wronger.

[rickshaw1]

"So basically the alleged link between high oil prices and "socialist/communist policies" (vague much?) is a series of general statements rather than a demonstration of an cause-an-effect link? That's not very convincing.

Additionally you're backing the Pubs whose economic policies have pushed the U.S. to its current condition, buy laying it on the Democrats using the vaguest possible terms without actually backing it up? What about the fact that Bush lowered taxes largely for the richest Americans while not lowering overall government spending? What about McCain wanting to continue the same deregulatory economic policies that allowed mortage companies to play the economic shell games that have produced this current mess? Why does anyone blame the Democrats for this mess when all the available evidence points to the economic policies that the Republicans foster?

Additionally what evidence have you provided that the current lack of refinery capacity is due to the "left's" economic policies?"

No, the seventies and early eighties policies of "Not in my back yard" regarding refineries and nuclear energy, specifically.

Then, there is the class envy thing popping up. Yes, the taxes were lowered on the rich. Its like when they asked the robbers why they robbed banks and they said "Because that is were the money is." Check out the percentage tax paid by the wealthy, the middle class, and the poor. Ya see, if you lower taxes on folks that don't make enough to pay that much in income taxes to begin with, you get no economic movement. But, if ya lower taxes on those that actually pay it in, then they put a lot more money percentage wise into the economy. And yes, i didn't not agree with the bush tax return policy. It shouldn't have had to be returned to begin with. And most of it was not a return, but a giveaway economic stimulus.

AS to deregulation, guess what, deregulation (Are you listening Nat) means that production factors are exploited to greater production value. You may not like that your family hardware store is not economically viable next to Lowes or Home Depot, but that is how the american limited free market economy works. And it is limited due to regulation. You like to say it is a bad thing, but how many of you like your new cell phone with all the downloads and fancy do-dahs? Wouldn't have taken place without deregulation. Or your southwest airline fares for $69 bucks? Wouldnt have happened without deregulation.

Or, the current housing market problem? Guess what, that wasn't so much deregulation as it was fannie and freddie guranteeing bad loans to people that didnt classify for stable mortgages. Fannie and Freddie were, in practical purposes, REGULATING mortgages instead of allowing the limited free market to be effiecient. Deregulation would mean less people got the loans, but the loans made would have been much more stable.

And just in case you are wondering, most of the rules that caused this came about during the dibs congress' of the late seveties through the early ninties. The effects were delayed. Housing goes in cycles, roughly twenty years at the time or so.

[rickshaw1]

"So why do you support Palin again?"

I don't. I dont' support her, or McCain, or Obama, or Biden.

I'm just good at spotting bullpucky when i smell it.

All of them are politicians, which means all of them, Obama, Biden, McCain, and Palin will lie, decieve, twist and turn definitions, etc... to get whatever votes that they can. I just don't like the holier than thou attitudes of most Dibs. Example, the civil rights movement wasn't started by dems, but by repubs. But, somehow and someway, they managed to convince Black americans that they did it all, and that they were the great black hope. And for 40 years, social structure in the black communities crumbled, the black vote was taken for granted, and the dems were in power.

Amazing.

Its like that old saying, the devils best trick ever was convincing people he didnt' exist. Dibs just learned that if you say something enough, lie long enough, people will believe it.

[rickshaw1]

"This is really what you think about Democrat politics? Really? Those aren't valid representations, those are bad political cartoons.

Europe. Canada. They manage just fine with universal healthcare. Canada's economy is far more stable than the US', and their government has been reducing their debt for years because they've been running a surplus (while 8 years of Republican government has put the US in a historic hole from which it won't escape for decades, if ever).

Universal healthcare means that every company isn't burdened with HMO provision and can invest that money. And it means that people with lower incomes don't have to go without healthcare or be financially ruined when trouble inevitably hits.

And spare the self righteous work ethic speech. There are a limited number of well paying jobs in any economy, period. There are tons of law school grads making 40, 50k simply because there are only so many jobs to go around - and it's not because they aren't working hard. Saying that the people who are outside upper economic rings don't deserve access to healthcare because they're lazy or on drugs shows a poor grasp of socioeconomic reality."

And i never said that everyone was. I have no problem helping people that need it, and never will. However, it isn't the place of the government to take the money that i work for to give to others without my direction, unless it is in the case of national defence, or for infrastructure.

As for universal health care.. tell me, where do you think the money for that the government pays out comes from? Some genie in a bottle? No, it comes from the working people. It isn't the governments money, its my money, what i earn is mine. I am not going to work for you. I don't know you or care about you. I do, however, have family in economic trouble, and i do help them out, frequently to my detriment. I have given to help those that have suffered from acts of nature that left them in a bad way, and i will continue to do so. But it is not the governments place, and by extension anyone that votes for that kind of junk, to try and tell me who i must support and when i must do it.

And while the repubs did put us in much more debt, quite a few of us were disgusted at their wasteful spending and didn't support them, thats why the lost the last congressional election. Your side has never had the guts to back off one of your candidates.

By the way, my base salary is 40 a year plus bonus' i earn. I AM one of those hard working lower middle class people. I don't envy the rich, and i sure don't expect the government to take care of my health or take care of me in my old age. Dibs made damn sure that the social security system will be broke by the time i get there, dispite Roosevelt saying it would never be touched by congress. Yet another Dib lie.

[rickshaw1]

"Fighting with nukes is cowardly, and fighting because some old fart tells you to is equally pathetic. Get that crap out of your system. Go outside and maim or kill the person you're really having problems with. Then find a way out of getting prosecuted. This will give you a great feeling of accomplishment and cure your bloodlust, because you will no longer feel like you have to prove anything to anyone."

You mean like getting someone off a murder rap with the "twinkie" defense, or if the glove doesn't fit, the rhyme makes you acquit?

RIIIIIIIIIIIIGT!

[rickshaw1]

Course, no one speaks about Clinton bombing an asprin factory. And no one speaks about Bin Laden giving an interview and saying that the muslin extremist world watched his handling of the FIRST world trade center bombing and decided that we were so weak we wouldn't fight back, and that led to the second.

Defense is not warmongering. And if someone flat out tells you they want you dead, that they want to bring the war to you, only a fool thinks "well, if we sit down and show them how nice we are, maybe they wont cut off our heads."

Newsflash, they don't care if you don't want war, they do, because as those nutcases see it, war is better than what they have.

[Buzz Dixon]

The proof Palin is unfit to be Veep of the US is that she is already unfit to be governor of Alaska. She doesn't know the most vital statistics of her own state and when she's exposed as not knowing, she lies.

One may argue there is doubt to the fitness of McCain, Obama, and Biden, but with Pail there is not doubt.

It's

EPIC FAIL

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

Health care for everyone, with means that the system, which is already near collapse, will be burdened even more. You cannot keep taking from someone that is working hard to give to someone that either cannot or will not indefinately and expect them to continue to work their best. What is their motivation? I damn sure and not going to work the sixty and seventy hours a week that i do for my family just to give it to someone that is perfectly capable of working but instead chooses to fry their brains on dope and expect me and others to take care of them.


I live in Australia, I'm 25, never went to university, and I only work 38 hours a week (which is full time), get four weeks annual leave a year and paid sick days, and, my taxes cover my medical bills - well, probably other peoples, as I haven't been to a doctor in over a year.
Last couple of times I went was just for check ups and the such, and didn't cost me a cent, even when I got a blood test - just to make sure I didn't have anything, with no suspicion that I did* - or the time a few years ago I got a lump removed**.
I don't feel over taxed, heck, I'm making less than I could in my line of work as I like the company I work for, so have stayed on there, and if I ever lost my job we've got a strong social security network.
If I did want to go to University, the fees would be paid using the HECS system, where the government pays the bills up front, and if I get a job over a certain pay rate, it is then taken back out of my pay as a percentage of that each pay cycle (it ceases if I fall below the set rate so that I'm not paying for it if I can't afford to).
Also, if I wasn't able to work whilst studying, and had no support, I could apply for AUSstudy and the government would send me a cheque each week to keep studying.
If necessary, I could also apply for rent assist whilst studying.
Remember, I don't feel over taxed, and yet I've barely skimmed the surface of the money my government gives out.

Australia you see, is far, far left of America as it is - even if Dems took control.

Which of us is winning out?

*Sex education classes at school and STD prevention ads on TV, made me and the girlfriend at the time decide to get checks for safety sake before moving off condoms and onto the pill.
Were both clear and never got pregnant.
Benefits of a well informed society I guess.

**Was nothing to worry about, small and totally benign. But y'know, figured it was better and cheaper to get it checked out.

[NatGertler]

"You know, this technique of making up stances for folks you're talking about or discussing things with? It ain't effective, it ain't accurate, and it really ain't honest. "

You like that? Good, learned it from having to watch Phil Donahue when i was a kid.Ah, your victimization complex. And you're so eager to avoid responsibility for your words. But if you don't care about being effective, accurate, or honest, why bother posting?


You see, unlike others, when i see a politician doing something wrong, i can call it, even on a side i supposedly like more than others.But of course you don't bother to when you're busy whining about some set of stereotypes you have.

When conservatives didn't do what they were supposed to and went spend crazy, we let their careers end or be halted by not voting for them.Or let them serve out their Constitutionally-limited two terms...


Dibs on the other hand like to keep all their crooks in office so they know who they have to work to steal from.

Ah yes, the eminent domain that was supposed to be about taking needed land for government use, such as schools and roads, and was perverted by the liberal Supreme Court to mean that anything that will generate more taxes gets the land. Yeah, we haven't forgotten that little bit of backstabbing of america. Hey folks, it doesn't matter if you pay your taxes and are an upstanding citizen, if someone comes along that will put ten more tax dollars in the local governments coffers, they now have the right to take your land.When it comes to eminent domain being legal for taking land for private use, "now" is "for over 175 years".

Heres a little info, bubba.If you want a little info, you may want to note that my name is not "bubba".

Like it or not, rich people don't just stuff money in a vault, sit around drinking liquor, and having orgies while laughing at the little guy. The money they invest in stocks, bonds, script, banks, venture capital, etc... goes to keeping the economy working.And the money that the government spends also goes to keep the economy working.

And when they buy the things that seem to tick you guys off like yachts and the suchYou seem to be lumping me into some "you guys" that I don't actually belong to. But hey, if you haven't let reality impede you yet...


So, when i said taxes taxes taxes, i was talking about all the class envy appeal of the Dibs and their chosen new wonderkin, Odama.Because if you point out that McCain is also calling for new taxes, it messes up that false dichotomy you're spinning.

"You know, the housing for that shiny new computer you are using.

Housing for that computer I'm using likely used a lot less petroleum than the housing for the computer I was using in 1978, particularly when the cost of delivering it is included."

"likely" meaning you don't know, so you made it up. I've read enough studies on individual items to know that the plastic item often uses up less petroleum than the metal items they replace; while they include petroleum, the combine factors of manufacture and shipping often mean that the total petroleum use involved is less. I haven't seen the specific comparison for the computer I'm using now versus the one I was using in 1978, although given the items involved, it would be surprising to find otherwise. But I certainly know more about those computers than you did when you chose my computer as an example.


"That is not exploitation, that is free market.

And the free market is based on exploitation. Really. It's not a dirty word. You may want to look it up."

I have no problem using what is available.No, you just choose to deny what's going on.

But hey, a for effort at twisting.Pointing out a falsehood isn't "twisting". It's actually drawing closer to the truth.

You didn't actually say anything here, just made a remark about your opinion, so there's really nothing for me to say except my degree in business based on finance means you really don't know your @$$ from a hole in the ground.Wow. You claim to have gotten a degree in "business based on finance", but still don't know what a percentage is? Perhaps you should ask for your tuition back. And have someone else calculate the amount owed for you.


Okay, i made a mistake, i am man enough to admit it.Yes, after having been caught in error, been caught lying about your error, and then been caught shrugging off accuracy. Man enough to admit something where it's all already on the table and you've found that weaseling out of it didn't work. Doesn't seem particularly "manly" to me.


Bet you never will be unless its a snarky comment.

"Oh, I understand. And you give a strong stream of bull just to test them. What a heroic effort!"


ets see, national guard units are used as the lines of defense for the country to back up the standing military.Except that when they actually are used as lines of defense, the responsibility shifts to the Federal government.

Ah, trying the old semantics routine.No, trying the "facts" routine.

Like i said, i can admit a mistake. Have you got the guts too? I've admitted plenty of mistakes in my life. And generally didn't have to have it hammered into me. I go out of my way at times to find errors in my work and publicly correct them.

Plenty of stuff in here that I have mentioned the dibs doing that was wrong. You dont' talk too much about that.I'm not going to talk about a stereotype group that you invented. And if you expect that I'm speaking for them, then you have made bad guesses about me.

No mention by you about the sam donaldson stuff?You put up one example of someone using a standard government program for his farm and used that as balance as someone who was specifically taking government money of dubious legality to specifically promote certain agenda items. ("Yes, your honor, I killed a man, but someone else swatted a fly!") And you try to use that well-publicized example of how folks in your mythic stereotype group are let off the hook? Yes, I had other things to do at the moment than respond to that.

[suttercain]

But, since Palin's daughter is not killing an innocent, unborn life.

Is Rickshaw1 really Levi Johnston trolling? Hell, I say we legalize postpartum abortions. We get a 3 month trial period.

All joking aside. You're an idiot.

[NatGertler]

Course, no one speaks about Clinton bombing an asprin factory.Funny, I've heard reference to it plenty of times. If you've never heard it, why do you speak of it now?

And no one speaks about Bin Laden giving an interview and saying that the muslin extremist world watched his handling of the FIRST world trade center bombing and decided that we were so weak we wouldn't fight back, and that led to the second.And, of course, you trust Bin Laden as the sane and balanced source there...

[FunkyGreenJerusalem]

And, of course, you trust Bin Laden as the sane and balanced source there...

I say it's probably true - wasn't Clinton all set to either assassinate or invade to get Bin Laden, but didn't want to start a war on his way out, and then Bush abandoned the plan?
If Bin Laden caught wind of that, I'm not surprised it encouraged him to attack.

[rickshaw1]

"Originally Posted by rickshaw1
Course, no one speaks about Clinton bombing an asprin factory.

Funny, I've heard reference to it plenty of times. If you've never heard it, why do you speak of it now?

Quote:
And no one speaks about Bin Laden giving an interview and saying that the muslin extremist world watched his handling of the FIRST world trade center bombing and decided that we were so weak we wouldn't fight back, and that led to the second.

And, of course, you trust Bin Laden as the sane and balanced source there..."

Okay, now i know that you are an idiot. The guy that did the bombing tells you why he did it, and to protect your whorehoppin' leader, you try to make out that he wouldn't tell you why he did it when he was wanting the publicity of it.

I've seen corkscrews less twisty than you. But hey, its cool. After all, you are man enough to stand up and say that when someone admits to a mistake, thats the stand up thing to do. Oh wait, instead, you use that in "sterotypical" dib attack on someone.

Water is wet. Dibs are hypocrites. Just like Repubs.

[Puma]

Doing the old sidestep are we?

http://forums.comicbookresources.com/showpost.php?p=7593580&postcount=21

are you a plagiarist as well as a troll?


P.S. the multi-quote function would really assist your diatribes.

[NatGertler]

Okay, now i know that you are an idiot.

idiot: (n) Someone who does not take the word of Osama Bin-Laden as the unvarnished truth.

from The Al-Qaeda Dictionary. (c) 2002 AQ Publishing

The guy that did the bombing tells you why he did it, and to protect your whorehoppin' leaderMy whorehoppin' leader? I assume that you're an American citizen, which would make him no more my leader than yours. And I'm unaware of any actual whorehoppin' involved.
you try to make out that he wouldn't tell you why he did it when he was wanting the publicity of it.Because if you can't trust someone who wants publicity, who can you trust?

After all, you are man enough to stand up and say that when someone admits to a mistake, thats the stand up thing to do.Admitting one's mistake, that's a fine thing to do.

Admitting your mistake while proclaiming what manly man that makes you and using that as a basis to attack others on the basis of false assumptions? That's infantile.

[Steven Grant]

I was out of town for the weekend and missed this thread completely, but since it has already reached the beside-the-point hysteria stage, I'm shutting it down. Not quashing opinions - it'll still be available to read. But I've seen this road enough times before to know where it's headed, so we may as well bulldoze it right now.

- Grant