Must've been made by dem commies.Espy said:Turns out metal bed frames aren't the way to go.
Certainly wasn't Repub fascists. They don't do real workFutureking said:Must've been made by dem commies.Espy said:Turns out metal bed frames aren't the way to go.
Now now, people, let's be reasonable. The inferior work was clearly requested by the green agenda in their continuing attempt to destroy developed civilisation by crippling our metalworkers with spurious 'environmental regulation'. Nothing else makes sense.Krisken said:Certainly wasn't Repub fascists. They don't do real workFutureking said:Must've been made by dem commies.Espy said:Turns out metal bed frames aren't the way to go.
This.Krisken said:It's cool to not agree. I just feel like ideas are less respected than staunch fanaticism often within this thread. Sometimes adding my own two cents won't really help any.Espy said:Eh, it's just my 2 cents. I'm not happy with the government spending and bailing out.Krisken said:I had comments, but suddenly stopped feeling like it was worth saying.Espy said:That was more my feeling of the entire situation. It's just stupid. This is just one brick in a giant wall of government ineptitude.
You don't have to agree, it's all good. :slywink:
That I must agree. Heck, it took what, 200 years for the presidents to get the debt to a trillion, and just 3 republicans to double it, and now just Obama to double it more.Espy said:Oh JCM, don't get me wrong, I have no problems with the government saying here's what you can and can't do with all the trillions we are giving you, it's just the overall mess of the whole thing that's got me going
Every so often I head on over and read the threads to see what the FARK independents are up to. Their zeal is astounding.JCM said:This.Krisken said:It's cool to not agree. I just feel like ideas are less respected than staunch fanaticism often within this thread. Sometimes adding my own two cents won't really help any.
I was surprised that anyone would find blocking of bonuses of a few white-collar crooks as anything but good, especially those against social security and giving money to the poor... main reason why avoid FARK threads these days:aaahhh:
Look at the bright side...apparently there's nothing more important for the EU to worry about! All of the world's problems have been solved! i:GasBandit said:You know how much I love the idea of being politically correct .. the EU has decided to ban the use of "Miss" and "Mrs" because they are sexist.
Well, there IS a tradition of old Presidents not critisizing their replacements. That's why Clinton, for example, didn't start really critisizing Bush until he started campaining for his wife. One of the few civilities that still exists in American politics - well, MOSTLY still exists, Dick Cheney certainly doesn't seem to be following it.Futureking said:Bush says he won't criticize the new president and he plans to write a book
If he's good enough for Bush.....
Remember when Obama said we were a country that honors our contracts? Guess not.The United States Constitution said:Article 1 Section 9
No Bill of Attainder or ex post facto Law shall be passed.
Article 1 Section 10
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
GasBandit said:Seems Florida just now realized they don't actually have a law on the books prohibiting bestiality. The REALLY funny part is the part where a state senator, when hearing of an amendment so that the law doesn't prohibit practices as part of normal animal husbandry, said "People are taking these animals as their husbands? What's husbandry?"
Wrong link, though.Espy said:GasBandit said:Seems Florida just now realized they don't actually have a law on the books prohibiting bestiality. The REALLY funny part is the part where a state senator, when hearing of an amendment so that the law doesn't prohibit practices as part of normal animal husbandry, said "People are taking these animals as their husbands? What's husbandry?"
Now that made my day!
I agree. The government is COMPLETELY out of control right now.Krisken said:
GasBandit said:Do you want your healthcare system to be described as "third world"? Well then take a look at what is happening with Britain's National Health Service.
So please don't tar the entire organisation with the failures of one lot of management staff.From the very same article said:Mr Brown insisted it was an isolated incident, saying the Healthcare Commission had assured him there were no other hospitals or parts of the NHS which had displayed similar failings
So please don't tar the entire organisation with the failures of one lot of management staff.[/quote:2du5439t]Mr_Chaz said:[quote="From the very same article":2du5439t]Mr Brown insisted it was an isolated incident, saying the Healthcare Commission had assured him there were no other hospitals or parts of the NHS which had displayed similar failingsGasBandit said:Do you want your healthcare system to be described as "third world"? Well then take a look at what is happening with Britain's National Health Service.
Iaculus said:Wrong link, though.Espy said:GasBandit said:Seems Florida just now realized they don't actually have a law on the books prohibiting bestiality. The REALLY funny part is the part where a state senator, when hearing of an amendment so that the law doesn't prohibit practices as part of normal animal husbandry, said "People are taking these animals as their husbands? What's husbandry?"
Now that made my day!
Sorry, didn't want to quote the whole thing, it was long. Anyway, first of all, I find it amazing that you continue to call yourself non-partisan. You quote ONLY democrats who are being populist shills about the AIG bonuses, when there are plenty of Republicans who are being just as idiotic, if not more so. For example, Senator Charles Grassley, who suggested that AIG executives should commit suicide (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090317/ap_ ... assley_aig).GasBandit said:Lots of stuff about AIG
Yes, Russia has become so much more agressive since we got this weakling President. Like invading Georgia. Oh wait, that was before Obama was even elected. But sure, that was Obama's fault as well, somehow. *rolls eyes*Here's some more comforting news. Russia has decided that it is going to rearm itself. I guess they recognize the weakness in our new president.
And how many times have they USED them or have been able to disable a negative situation with their guns? None.GasBandit said:The Washington Times is reporting that the Obama administration is quietly ending the federal firearms program that allows pilots to carry guns if they've completed a federal-safety program. As of right now, 12,000 pilots have been approved to carry guns. There are zero cases in which those pilots have improperly brandished or used those guns.
And who told them? Who knows? Sources not given. How convenient.Fewer than one percent of the officers have any administrative actions brought against them and, we are told, virtually all of those cases “are trumped up.”
I never said I was non-partisan. I said I was libertarian. Libertarians can be extremely partisan. In fact, I've often said that bipartisanship is one of the things harming this country.Dieb said:Sorry, didn't want to quote the whole thing, it was long. Anyway, first of all, I find it amazing that you continue to call yourself non-partisan. You quote ONLY democrats who are being populist shills about the AIG bonuses, when there are plenty of Republicans who are being just as idiotic, if not more so. For example, Senator Charles Grassley, who suggested that AIG executives should commit suicide (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090317/ap_ ... assley_aig).GasBandit said:Lots of stuff about AIG
No, the connecticut law just says they'd do double damage if they sued and won (and with that kind of scratch at stake, you can bet they'd get some damn good lawyers involved). The federal government is not right to decide not to honor legal contracts just because they bought an 80 percent stake in a company after the contracts were signed. To pass a tax bill (legislation) which would de facto eliminate the bonuses in contracts that were signed and legal BEFORE the bill was passed is the very definition of ex post facto. Such a bill could only constitutionally affect new contracts going forward. There's another section in that quote, too, about impairing the obligation of contracts. But then, I guess I shouldn't be surprised, what with all the talk of "cramdown" legislation being put through, where a judge can just arbitrarily change your balance and interest on a mortgage to whatever he feels it should be. This country's turning more and more centralized each day.Also, at least one of the proposed ways to get the bonuses back (the 100% tax thing that you mentioned) would certainly not violate ex post facto law, nor would it be a breach of contract for the Conneticut law. Now, I don't want to make it sound like I'm in favor of the current pitchfork waving populism over these bonuses. I'm not. But your arguments against the legality are fairly silly.
Yes, Russia has become so much more agressive since we got this weakling President. Like invading Georgia. Oh wait, that was before Obama was even elected. But sure, that was Obama's fault as well, somehow. *rolls eyes*[/quote:2kgxoiw6] No, that could also no doubt be attributed partly to sensed weakness, but in a different form: in the form of the US already deployed in 2 theaters, not to mention so much militarily isolationist caterwauling going on during the presidential campaigns.[quote:2kgxoiw6]Here's some more comforting news. Russia has decided that it is going to rearm itself. I guess they recognize the weakness in our new president.
So, if you've not experienced a wreck, you should go ahead and cancel your insurance? We can't know how many spitballed ideas got mothballed before even being spoken by the knowledge that pilots would be armed. That's the thing about deterrents.Edrondol said:And how many times have they USED them or have been able to disable a negative situation with their guns? None.GasBandit said:The Washington Times is reporting that the Obama administration is quietly ending the federal firearms program that allows pilots to carry guns if they've completed a federal-safety program. As of right now, 12,000 pilots have been approved to carry guns. There are zero cases in which those pilots have improperly brandished or used those guns.
It's not, and I am fair. I never claimed to be balanced, though. And you can go fuck yourself.This whole thing is bullshit, GB. Nicely done, Mr. Fair & Balanced.
I have a stone to sell you that keeps aliens from probing you. I've been protected by it, so it must work.GasBandit said:So, if you've not experienced a wreck, you should go ahead and cancel your insurance? We can't know how many spitballed ideas got mothballed before even being spoken by the knowledge that pilots would be armed. That's the thing about deterrents.
I phrased that badly. I didn't mean non-partisan as in someone for bipartisanship (I know how you feel about that) I meant as in someone who doesn't take sides in the Republican vs Democratic debates. Now, your point about the Dems being very firmly in charge is a good one (although lets remember the Republicans had control of all branches of government 2002-2006, although they certainly never had as large of majorities in Congress as the Democrats do now) but I did find it interesting that you were ONLY quoting Dems on this. At least we can both agree that both sides in Congress are acting like chickens with their heads cut off on this issue - and 99% of other issues as well, just worse than usual with this AIG mess.GasBandit said:]I never said I was non-partisan. I said I was libertarian. Libertarians can be extremely partisan. In fact, I've often said that bipartisanship is one of the things harming this country.
That's an excellent link there, showing a republican being just as stupid as the other guys I linked. The difference is, the guys I linked are in charge. More firmly in charge than any political party has been in my lifetime. Your point about Republicans though is completely valid and I am in agreement with it.
Wait, militarily isolationist caterwauling in the presidential campaings? Were you watching the same campaigns as I was? Sure, there were some cranks on both sides who could be said to be isolationist (Ron Paul maybe, or Dennis Kucinich) but none of them had a shot at even getting nominated by one of the major parties. John McCain had probably the most gung-ho interventionist foreign policy ideas of a Presidential candidate since, well, Bush in 2004, but other than that....maybe JFK? Or even FDR? Regan would have sounded like a pacifist next to what McCain said in the campaign. And let's remember Obama campaigned explicitly on a surge in Afghanistan. And called for the Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO. Hard to call his views isolationist.No, that could also no doubt be attributed partly to sensed weakness, but in a different form: in the form of the US already deployed in 2 theaters, not to mention so much militarily isolationist caterwauling going on during the presidential campaigns.
So please don't tar the entire organisation with the failures of one lot of management staff.[/quote:1cg2clli]Mr_Chaz said:[quote="From the very same article":1cg2clli]Mr Brown insisted it was an isolated incident, saying the Healthcare Commission had assured him there were no other hospitals or parts of the NHS which had displayed similar failingsGasBandit said:Do you want your healthcare system to be described as "third world"? Well then take a look at what is happening with Britain's National Health Service.
Dehydrated patients were forced to drink out of flower vases, while others were left in soiled linen on filthy wards.
Receptionists carrying out initial checks on patients;
Two clinical decision units - one unstaffed - used as 'dumping grounds' for A&E patients to avoid missing waiting targets;
Nurses who turned off heart monitors because they didn't understand how to use them;
Delayed operations, with some patients having surgery cancelled four days in a row and left without food, drink or medication;
Vital equipment such as heart defibrilators was not working;
A savings target of £10million met at the expense of 150 posts, including nurses.
Silly Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, Congress doesn't listen to their voters.Krisken said:*smbc*
Thought this Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal was funny.
The unspeakably huge election budgets say otherwise.Covar said:Silly Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, Congress doesn't listen to their voters.Krisken said:*smbc*
Thought this Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal was funny.
I might be slightly less skeptical of your claim if I'd actually been probed by Aliens at some point. I thus far have been thankfully probe-free. However, if you'll remember 2001, we definitely experienced a situation in which armed pilots would have saved not just hundreds but thousands of lives.Krisken said:I have a stone to sell you that keeps aliens from probing you. I've been protected by it, so it must work.GasBandit said:So, if you've not experienced a wreck, you should go ahead and cancel your insurance? We can't know how many spitballed ideas got mothballed before even being spoken by the knowledge that pilots would be armed. That's the thing about deterrents.
Yes, they did have a slim majority, and they behaved extremely badly. They spent like there was no tomorrow. The reason I'm quoting mostly dems on this is because I believe the dems actually believe what they say. I don't believe republicans actually believe anything except the erroneous belief that pretense to the center is a good way to retain seats... which it isn't. The last election definitely showed that. Or, to put it another way, I think the democrats are the spearhead on this and the republicans in question are bandwagon jumping windsocks.Dieb said:I phrased that badly. I didn't mean non-partisan as in someone for bipartisanship (I know how you feel about that) I meant as in someone who doesn't take sides in the Republican vs Democratic debates. Now, your point about the Dems being very firmly in charge is a good one (although lets remember the Republicans had control of all branches of government 2002-2006, although they certainly never had as large of majorities in Congress as the Democrats do now) but I did find it interesting that you were ONLY quoting Dems on this. At least we can both agree that both sides in Congress are acting like chickens with their heads cut off on this issue - and 99% of other issues as well, just worse than usual with this AIG mess.
Then why didn't the russians start rearming under Bush? Especially around the time of the Georgia invasion? Could it have been because they didn't want to influence the presidential election toward a "war veteran" and away from a "peacenik?" Didn't want to be McCain's october surprise, as it were?Dieb said:No, you nailed it with the first part: the US was, and still is, deployed in two theaters already. We're overextended. We can't operate like an empire over the entire globe with the current amount of resources we devote to the military, not to mention how underfunded the State department is for the kind of power projection it would take to be so globaly dominant. I agree that it is this sense of "weakness" (I put it in quotes because after the Cold War ended, the US was more powerful than any nation has ever been on Earth) that is causing Russia to flex its muscles. I just don't see what it has to do with Obama.
I don't know that they listen to their voters so much as they listen to their contributors.Iaculus said:The unspeakably huge election budgets say otherwise.Covar said:Silly Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal, Congress doesn't listen to their voters.Krisken said:*smbc*
Thought this Saturday Morning Breakfast Cereal was funny.
They mmay not act on what they hear, but they certainly listen.
There is no evidence that pilots being armed would have been an effective deterrent, even in that situation. Which was my point. Which you knew, of course. One instance does not a valid argument make.GasBandit said:Krisken said:GasBandit said:So, if you've not experienced a wreck, you should go ahead and cancel your insurance? We can't know how many spitballed ideas got mothballed before even being spoken by the knowledge that pilots would be armed. That's the thing about deterrents.
Thats pretty funny. Very Bushie.GasBandit said:Obama is completely dependent on his teleprompter. Ok, we knew that already. But did we know the dependency was so intense that he'd even read somebody else's speech and end up thanking himself before he noticed something was wrong? To be fair, the other guy read Obama's speech for a couple paragraphs before he realized it wasn't his.