KRC

If I go to Vegas and lose my life savings, why should the taxpayers be held responsible for my reckless behavior? You do not need to be an investment guru to find a safe avenue for your money. People do it all the time with their personal IRA's and other retirement accounts. There does not seem to be a problem with that, so why is there a problem with extending it to SS?

Soon, he will be in the same league as Dean. He just needs to make these comments on a regular basis.

Which means that we will be addressing this again in the future with a MUCH higher pricetag. Nice job.

You can't possibly be that dense. Wow. No wonder the Democratic Party cannot win elections, with brilliant activists like this working for them.

For that dish, do you sautee your mushrooms in 10w30 or 10w40?

...or I could buy you a comma.

Darin owes me a new keyboard and monitor.

Isn't that what I said? Let the government take care of everything.

Seriously, I think he was a Shakespearian actor before BB.

Wasn't he performing Shakespeare before working on the Brady Bunch?

You are correct. It is a mentality, not an age thing.

Slippery slope, my friend. It is easy to say that it is not a problem, unless it is your home or business that is being uprooted. Let's say the government decides that it needs a new shopping mall in your neighborhood. The problem is that your house is in the way. Now the government tells you that you need to move. You are going to say, "Well, since it is for the greater good of my former neighborhood, I will leave."? I am guessing not. If you do not have a problem with it, let me know. I change professions and become a developer in your neighborhood. I could make a crapload of money

Nobody said they were being evicted without compensation. The point is that the government can kick people out of their homes and businesses. There is nothing to stop the corruption that will inevitably result from this.

She doesn't have to. She knows that New Yorkers will still vote for her, regardless.

I can't possibly see how this could go bad in a hurry...

They don't. From the link:

That was actually funny. Who wrote it for you?

In that case, go ahead. Just don't ask for a puppy.

Did you fill out the proper paperwork, vet it through the proper multiple government agencies, had the appropriate background check and wait the appropriate waiting period?

Simple concept, but yet some do not understand. Some have no trouble allowing the government to ban this or ban that. They have no trouble allowing the government to control what you can and cannot own. That is, of course, until they target something that they want. Then, all of a sudden, government intrusion in our lives is a bad thing. Slippery slope.

Calm down. The government knows what is best for you. Just let them dictate what you can and cannot own.

What the !@#$ are you talking about?

They only became evil when Bush took office.

Nope. Just wanted to get real information (yeah, I know I am in the wrong place for that). If we are not the best, prove it. How are we not the best?

I keep hearing the statement: "The U.S. needs to be better than the rest of the countries, wrt treatment of detainees and with interrogation techniques." This impolies that we are currently not treating detainees better than the rest. While this statement makes a good soundbyte for the Hot Pockets® crowd, there is no real information backing this up. Even with our faults and media/politically generated hysteria over information which has been proven to be false, are we still better than the rest? For those who feel we are not the best, let's start tossing out real information. I challenge you to find how other countries treat their detainees and interrogate prisoners, and compare it to the U.S. Let's see where we are worse. That way, the above statement will actually have meaning. Are the U.S. troops really similar to Nazi's as alleged by Dick Durbin? Are the U.S. troops running a Soviet-style gulag as alleged by Amnesty International? Without real data to analyze the situation, the above statement is meaningless. If you can make the above statement, then you obviously have enough information to prove this statement true. I have seen this posted many times on this board, so I know that those posters will be the first to provide the information to back it up.