TPS
-
Posts
7,635 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Gallery
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by TPS
-
-
Found it with a quick google. Haven't read it yet. Will do so now.
-
-
-
From the bit on Triplett from BB.com:
"Levy said Tripplett will serve the role as a penetrating tackle, and the team will use a bulkier player to play alongside him."
-
From the article entitled "At Conservative Forum on Bush, Everybody's a Critic". Somehow implying that, because it's a conservative forum, everyone there's somehow more informed?
A good chunk of those phrases are crap. A good many are actually true. A good many I've said before myself. So what?
And by the way...I'm not a Republican.
I think the point he was trying to make is that a could part of the conservative base no longer supports this administration, which has significant implications for the midterm elections.
-
As I recall, we could've had DE Darren Howard with that pick. He's had a very solid career so far.
-
You're saying that like it's a bad thing.
Do you really believe that a "unilateralist" US/UK global policy is that much worse than seeking consent from the Sino-Franco-Russian-UN hodgepodge? Heaven knows, that quartet has a deep history of helping out mankind, and that commitment to human rights is codified in their very existence.
Yes, I should've added, "and they've completely bungled it."
-
I guess where I see them different is their belief in using a unilateralist foreign policy and the muscle of an unchallenged super power to pursue their strategic global objectives. Otherwise, dem=rep and rep=dem when it comes to using government as a redistributive mechanism to reward cronies.
-
All gigantic surprises at the end of the day. Charitable organizations who accomplish more than bloated bureaucracies? People in charge who can't comprehend basic information? Partisans apologizing for the sins of their chosen deities while hypocrites on the opposite side point angry fingers?
It's hilarious that people act like this administration is somehow different, regardless of political affiliation.
Don't worry though, the Democrats will fix it all once they're back in charge.
Oh, and I doubt anyone who's ever had involvement with the government needs to head to New Orleans to know the bureaucrats are talking a better game than they're playing. Don't worry though, we'll just throw another half a trillion of taxpayer money at a city on the water that's below sea level. Because we're really smart and that'll keep Mother Nature out next time.
the only point I disagree with: this administration is different.
-
-
I wonder if this puts Oakland in the mix for Ngata now?
-
Where was the press in his first 4 1/2 years? Where were the attacking liberal democrats?
Do you seriously believe he's been a good president or this has been an outstanding administration? Or is it just a witch hunt?
-
The effective joint liberal and media PR campaign to take down Bush and Cheney is a meaningless battle victory; Bush is not running in 08. I doubt that the attacks on Bush will bear any fruit in the 06 elections for the simple reason that Democrat’s have no message or plan other then the anti-Bush theme.
The conservatives have won the war in the Supreme Court with two new conservative members. I see this as the most important legacy of the Bush administration effectively putting and end to the far left designs of judicial activism and the living constitution concept. Ahhhh I can breathe easier.
.
Geesh! Thank you Hillary Clinton. Bush is going down because it's a conspiracy of the liberals and media....good one!
If only we could all think for ourselves....
-
Ahhh!!!! My dream combination come true!!
Let's get ready to ruuuuummmmmmmbbbbllllllllllllleee!!!!!!!!!
The Samoan Strangle in the middle baby! Ngata and Sape! It's the Samoan War Dance on every play--take no prisoners!!!
I can't wait.
-
-
And, a lot of what you are cranked about has already been fixed. I'm not saying that wasn't the way it was at the time. Folks within this community have to operate within the laws and regulations that govern their functions and actions.
And, referring to the article and it's intent- I still say it's about internal issues with certain peoples and probably personalities.
What one doesn't hear about, are those people who discover stuff wrong - get it pointed out to the right people - and get stuff fixed WITHOUT going outside the system. There is actually a lot of that, but it doesn't make for what some people here consider "good, righteous news". I also notice you choosing not to address the part about going outside the system because it can create bigger problems.
I guess my point is, and continues to be that there is often more than one aspect to things receiving media attention - but the media will always portray it in a light to suit their purpose, either intentionally or unintentionally. Probably as much or even more significance to the things that don't reach the media, for whatever reason.
This administration has been the most secretive and vindictive in history. Political hacks and yesmen have been put in postions of power everywhere--you don't get in unless you pass the GOP Litmus test. I know we went over this, and your argument is that it's really about "resistance to change," but I have a hard time believing (agreeing with) someone who tries to appear objective, but everything posted just happens to support the administration.
With respect to "going outside the system," of the cases noted which one(s) "create bigger problems, and why?" What specifically came out publicly that Al Queda doesn't already know or thought about? That we're data mining US residents whether we think they are involved in terrorism or not (like anti-war groups)? What's to prevent Bush/Cheney/Rove from "accidentally" eaves dropping for political advantages?
I'm sorry my sarcasm is hard to suppress, but seriously, convince me on this one: how, specifically, have these particular whistle blowers created bigger problems?
Thanks.
By the way, if I don't respond, it's because I'm leaving shortly for the long weekend.
-
How big a difference is it between listening in on suspected foreign nationals outside the US and suspected foreign nationals INSIDE the US? Do you really know who they were tapping? What constitutes a resident? Would a terrorists plotting bad things living in an apartment in Lackawana be considered a US resident and if so should we just give him a pass because he LIVES here?
That's what the FISA court does. It gives the ok to do domestic wire tapping on suspected terrorists. From what I've read, the AD group was restricted and focused on external suspects.
-
Maybe you should do a little search on Able Danger; you'll find there is a difference between listening in on US residents and listening in on suspected foreign nationals outside the US....
-
-
What's to talk about? And what does any of it have to do with "ball washing"? Anything mentioned in the article looks to be internal issues with different organizations.
1.The guys from "Able Danger" prevented from passing along info to FBI about Atta.
2. Someone saying it was Sr. officers NOT the rank and file who were guilty at Abu Grhaib.
3. NSA pursuing unconstitutional spying.
4. Altered terrorism documents in Florida.
Yea, it's just internal issues...
Chances are very good that many of the principles involved have been around through several administrations and have done bad things to people in an effort to protect their own ass.Yea, that's all it is, disgruntled workers protecting themselves...
These aren't partisan issues. These people are trying to point out some very serious shortcomings in our efforts to prevent terrorist attacks, unconstitutional acts by the NSA, and acts that go to the very core of what the US represents. Maybe you righties trivialize this because it implies incompetent and illegal activities under this administration's watch.
I don't care who is to blame, but I do care that FBI and counter-terrorism agents are being prevented from doing their jobs by higher ups. I do care that the administration is trying to circumvent the constitution. I do care that treating prisoners like we have at AG and Gitmo makes us no different than the terrorists.
One of these days the lemmings are going to wake up and wonder what happened to their freedoms, because they have (not all, fortunately there are some conservatives who stick to their values) allowed this administration to do anything it pleases in the name of fighting terrorism.
Now, let the boys go back to the playground...
-
-
Let's see we tax it at the level of consumption because it creates negative externalities (smog, global warming, etc.), but we subsidize its production. Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense, unless of course Haliburton benefits somehow...
-
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/13/...in1308008.shtml
The republican congress doesn't think so.
Where'd the cheerleaders go?
-
http://today.reuters.com/news/newsarticle....OCKS.xml&rpc=23
Hmm...
"The U.S. budget registered a surprisingly big surplus of $20.99 billion in January as strong receipts outweighed spending, a Treasury Department report showed. "
interesting.........now what were you saying about large buget deficits...
I was going to ask if you were serious with this question, but then read through the other thread...
Why do you focus on one month's data when the tax cuts were made starting in 2001? Did the administration predict that the most significant impact from its tax cuts would occur in January 2006?
I could play the "Bush Bad" line with the kind of logic you're using. Fourth quarter GDP for 2005 was 1.1%. Does that mean the economy sucks? I wouldn't be stupid enough to say it does based upon one data point....
In fact, the CBO's prediction for this year's deficit is about $320 billion (although the White House predicts it to be $400 billion so at the end of the fiscal year they can claim it was much better than expected).
So yes, spending increases and tax cuts lead to deficits....err...except in January 2006 (and a few other months that traditionally generate surpluses because of quarterly tax payments).
This ought to generate some controversy
in Politics, Polls, and Pundits
Posted
Why do you consider AIPAC a "right-leaning group"?