Magox

I think the point that many are either willfully not wanting to acknowledge or simply just ignoring is, at what cost? Would you have traded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed for this soldier? Would that mantra still apply if the bid was this high? Also, would any prisoner have the same value? I know this is an extreme hypothetical, but it applies, would a sitting US senator have the same value as a soldier who possibly deserted? So the question is Do we bring back any soldier at any cost? There are a lot of issues with the way this went down, but this isn't one of them. Reason being is simple, when you are held captive against a brutal force, the willingness of the prisoner to say anything in order from his possible perception to stay alive is quite understandable. So what he said during this time period, I'd certainly take that into consideration.

I always thought that the US team was at it's best playing in a compact form of defense, operating with a rapid counter attack. That is what we saw this last game vs Nigeria and if you guys remembered when we basically beat most of Spain's A team and nearly beat Brazil in the Confederation's cup of 2009. And don't forget, Spain was #1 in the world on an epic winning streak. That's the way to go, compact defense with a vicious counter. Oh, and that chest trap, cut in and finish from Jozy Altidore, was World Class! And Bradley, what a magnificent game, he indeed is our play making midfielder. Love that guy! And This never gets

It's like "Hey, lets piss off our folks in the military, come off as incompetent goobs, have people roundly mock us, so that Democrats can look good and we retain the senate. WINNING!"

I mean that would have to imply that the president had a well-thought coherent plan to execute this scheme. yeah, that gave me a chuckle too

No offense, but there is no way I'm buying into this. To believe that this administration would place the political lives of others over his legacy is something that I can not and will not buy into. There is waaay too much evidence of his past behavior to the contrary of this opinion. What it is, is simple. He has a team of a bunch of young, ideological eggheads that live in the Obama team bubble that advise him. They thought that: Hey, Obama , you are ending the war in Afghanistan, you just made the decision to wind it down further. We are going to announce in the Rose Garden that we are bringing back our boy with this swap... People will celebrate it, and it will symbolize that the war is ending. Plus, we get to begin the process of closing down Gitmo. WINNING!!!!!! That's what these neophytes thought, and they horrendously miscalculated.

True but as revelations come out that this douchebag did indeed desert, and possibly assist with intel, as soon as it is confirmed, none of them are gonna touch this with a ten foot pole.

You're an idiot

Yes we get it, you're an anti-semite

Have you been paying attention? The way this administration has handled the roll out of his signature legislation and our foreign policy is an insult to the Banana Republic.

No ya nitwit, that's not what I said... Why don't you re read what I wrote and then get back to me.

Yes, they were going up, but not nearly at the rate we saw with the ACA. So there goes that point. If you are a lower income family or someone with pre existings, the law benefits you, if you are middle class with out any serious pre existings, in most cases it doesn't. That's a fact

This idea of repealing the law is not gonna happen. Forget about it. It's embedded, and there many people receiving huge ass subsidies that in many cases are paying for just about the entirety of their policies. I mean we are talking about over $10k a year worth of assistance. Then of course there is Medicaid, the expansion of that has given millions of people coverage for the first time. So the idea that you are going to take away this substantially reduced or free health care from millions of people that in which many of these cases is the first time they have obtained coverage is simply a pipe dream. Sorry, but that's just reality. If they were smart, which they aren't, what they would do is look to repeal portions of the law. 1) Repealing a good portion of the minimum essential benefits portion of the law is a great start. The idea that a 60 year old male needs maternity along with children's pediatric coverage is liberal paternalistic douchebaggery at it's finest moment. This would substantially reduce premiums. 2) Repeal the individual mandate. 3) Repeal many of the surcharges and taxes that make up the price of insurance. I know for a fact that Anthem BC of Ohio lists all the taxes itemized on each policy, and it makes up over 6% of the overall price. 4) Repeal the employer mandate 5) Add some of the conservative ideas, You guys know which one's they are (selling across state borders, tort reform, HSA's) Just with this alone you'd lower premiums for everyone. I'm familiar with this. It's not as bad as it sounds. I've signed up tons of people on the exchanges, mostly Latinos, and if someone has a different income today than what they had for 2012 tax returns, then it will ask for you to provide proof of income verifying the stated income on the application. Same goes with someone who didn't have their Green Card number with them when filling out the application. It allows them to continue on with the application and then they have to provide a photo copy of the Green Card. I know my clients, probably 60% had to send in additional information, like what is being referenced in the article above. *fingers crossed* But so far, the first fifty or so have all sent in their required documentation.

The ACA doesn't !@#$ the rich, they can absorb the price increase, no problem. It's the middle class who gets screwed, because most middle to upper middle class folks don't qualify for a subsidy, and the vast majority of those that don't qualify for a subsidy through the exchanges pay considerably higher premiums than pre ACA.

You can see that Jozy doesn't quite have the confidence he had. There are some instances, obviously not finishing on the called back play opportunity, or the one where he did have a brilliant cut back, but couldn't put it in the back of the net. Also, he did have another play where he was rushing at the goal keeper with the ball with a bad angle, if he had been playing with confidence, I believe he could have cut that back in, and then fired at goal. Even though he did put in a good cross to Mix in which Mix's chest trap went a little to high allowing the defender enough time to knock it away. However, other than those moments, I thought he put in a solid game, both defensively and holding the ball up top to help with setting our offense. And that is key! There is NO ONE else on the US team that can do that, the last player who had that ability for the US was McBride. And in my view, in order for us to have a shot, that unique ability he has will be key. In my view, He has to be on the field for the US team. You just gotta roll the dice and see if he can get out of his slump. I do believe he is coming close. I just hope that proverbial monkey does come off his back that leads to renewed confidence. And let's face it, in just about everything we do, confidence is key to performance.

You'd have to be a complete tard to want to cut Dareus.

Good Grief! Indeed! http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/06/03/republicans-have-a-mandate-for-their-benghazi-probe/

Bush's negatives: 1) The Iraq war took a huge toll on his presidency, and he never recovered from it. 2) The perception of his handling of Katrina, fairly or not, he took a beating, specially within the minority community. 3) Medicare Part D, unpopular with conservatives popular with older folks. 4) He just sounded like a dumbass. Obama: 1) A complete and utter incompetent Goob. Never seen a president in my life time that was as incompetent as him and his administration of political hacks.

He's not just a defensive mid fielder. Just because he didn't do as well in one situation doesn't mean that is how he is defined. He has played by US standards marvelously as the attacking midfielder. That pass he had in this last game is a prime example of that, or what about the game vs. Mexico? Two recent games, two really strong games as the attacking midfielder. Those are quality opponents. He's going to play well as the attacking midfielder in the world cup, that I'm not worried about, AT ALL! The real questions I have are: 1) Is Jozy Altidore gonna execute and score? 2) Is Jermaine Jones going to be disciplined and not veer upfield too much exposing our defense? 3) And is the back four going to be organized and gel with one another?

With this I agree. I believe in balance. Having said that, I was responding to the view from Beckman or whatever his name is, which endorsed the polar opposite perspective, which you happened to imply your approval. So, I was essentially subscribing to the extreme case on the other side and stating that if I had a choice between the two, I'd choose substantially improving people's lives over the cost that brings towards the environment. In any case, it's not so much the policies on the books that were the cause of some of these environmental mishaps, but more so gross negligence and the attitude towards the environment at the behest of regulators looking out for business. This could easily be fixed. And you really aren't the best spokesman for advocating against dualist thinking when you are the quintessential dualist of the board. Just sayin'

What you call "expediency and efficiency" is another man/woman's ability to pay their bills. But thanks for chiming in.

No, I'm open to your interpretation. Just looking for your explanation, I don't believe that to be unreasonable.

If you didn't lack basic reading and comprehension skills this question would have never been posed. Look at your question and now look at what I posted http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3 9.1 percent in January of 2011 for the national rate to 6.3 percent for the current rate. Meaning that the decline has been considerably faster than the National rate. Coincidence? Most likely, no.

Ok, explain how? Specifics Thank you

Well, you may have not rated any of them , but others did, Luis Figo was FIFA world player of the year in 2001, and Rui Costa was top 10. http://en.wikipedia....yer_of_the_Year I use to love watching Figo play, so much speed, skill and a wicked left foot, one of the best modern day crossers of the ball that this world had seen. He was my favorite from 2001-2003.

Not sure if you remember but the 2002 world cup, Portugal was one of the top teams heading into the tournament, they were a popular selection by many to possibly win it all. http://sportsillustr...power_rankings/ Remember, Luis Figo? Rui Costa, Sergio Conceicao, Fernando Couto, Nuno Gomes? That team was loaded. Odds are that the US won't make it out of the group, but to state that the only shot US will have of getting out into the next round will be dependent on an injury from Ronaldo, is ....well, lets just say that I disagree.