HereComesTheReignAgain

I'll pay attention to all the complaining people interviewed by the media and see if most of them are "required" to be there or if they are there by choice. The first one I saw went there to have their baby baptized. I will bet that any government scientists or researchers won't be the ones raising hell. They probably understand the danger involved in their work. If you agree to work in Lebanon, you are no different than any other person who does a dangerous job. Firemen don't start complaining to the government when the fire gets too close to them. (none that I know of anyway). I'm certainly not saying we should abandon the Americans in Lebanon, I just think it is outrageous to complain about the US Government not saving you quick enough after they told you not to go there.

That's exactly what I said huh? That all the Americans over there need to be blown up? I know you must be smart enough to realize that is not what I wrote. Then again maybe I'm giving you too much credit. (that doesn't mean I want you blown up by the way) I don't care what they were doing there, they knew of the danger in traveling to that country and accepted the risk.

That's fine, the US Government warned them not to travel there. They chose to ignore that warning. Don't complain to the Government when the stuff hits the fan!

The Rochester DEMOCRAT & Chronicle runs Richard Cohen articles. He is truly an idiot!

Here's the address.link http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,204278,00.html

It is funny that CNN doesn't mention that Pelosi voted for the bill that required these "poor trapped victims" to pay for transportation out of Lebanon. If you ignore the Govenment's repeated warnings for the last several years about traveling to Lebanon, what makes you think you should be such a priotity in that same Government's agenda? You were told not to go, now live with the consequences.

I believe lebanon voted Hezbolla into some part of the Government. I could be wrong. If you are working in Lebanon you still chose to go there. Last I knew your employer can't force you to relocate at gunpoint. I have no problem with our Government taking their time getting people out of an enemy country that supports terrorists. If you support our enemies, don't expect us to fall all over ourselves to rescue you.

Cocker Spaniels led the nation in dog bites a few years ago! A dog is your property, if it hurts somebody without good reason, you should be held responsible. I personally spend no time worrying about my dogs (golden ret and german shorthair) attacking somebody unprovoked due to good breeding and training. I don't even know if they would attack somebody if they broke into my house. That's what the 45 is for anyway!

You travel to a country that hates the US and has elected terrorists to govern it, and have the nerve to complain that the US Government evacuated you too slowly! I would be willing to bet a lot of these people are huge critics of the Government...but demand the most help from it. I have a great idea, don't travel to the middle east if you are looking to avoid trouble. Why should lives be risked to evacuate you if you chose to travel to a terrorist nation? It would be different if somebody was kidnapped and taken to Lebanon, but these people chose not to avoid the situation. On a side note, Nancy Pelosi is outraged that the evacuees were going to be charged for their rides home. This policy was enacted in the 2003 Foreign Relations Authorization Act which Pelosi voted for! But hey, it's a chance for her to take a jab at the President.

I hardly ever listen to these idiots anymore. I got Sirius and get much better info from the NFL channel. I actually wrote an e mail to WGR a while back letting them know that many people I know are tiring of the constant Bills bashing and dissmissing any caller who wants to talk objectively about the Bills. They seem to be proud of the fact that nobody from the Bills organization will deal with them anymore. I told them they are losing a lot of listeners that don't want to hear how great Regier is and how horrible everyone associated with the Bills are. I actually caught a segment where they were spoofing the Bills ticket office and pretending that the workers there were not getting any calls. Last time I looked, the Bills have sold out all but one game in the last two years. The Sabres had one of the lowest attendence records in the NHL when they were losing. I wonder if they will appologize now that 4 games are nearly sold out allready? It must be nice to have no competition anymore. I miss WNSA!

After reading a lot of TKO's quotes and watching some interviews, I had to go with an authentic away jersey. He really impressed me with his drive and sincerity when talking about his love for the game. I hope he comes back 100% this season. He made an interesting comment on NFL total access about not being 100% for a while before the injury. He could actually be better than before the injury. Lee Evans would be my second choice.

Not Yet.

I have to hang up my Moulds jersey for a while and had a tough time deciding who to get. Hopefully Spikes comes back strong this year. Who do you feel warrants your hard earned $ this year? What are your criteria when buying a jersey? Longevity...Attitude...Skill...

I guess I'm not much of a high roller, I only got a bunch of $10 tickets to pass out to our gang at the first tailgate. It has become a tradition to do this at the beginning of each season. I will be $760 richer after the Bills win the superbowl!

The funny thing is that a story like that is enough to convince many people that the world is ending. I heard President Bush moved the lizard anyway.

How about raising the retirement age to "whenever you save enough to quit working". Get rid of SS completely but do not give in when the people in society that were simply too lazy to work beg for help from the hard working members of society. I work in a 401(k) dept and see people take out their puny 401(k) balances all the time when changing jobs..."hey it's free money" Everyone knows that the Government doesn't let you starve no matter how unwilling you are to work or save. We need to focus our welfare efforts on those who truly need it and have no other means to support themselves. I think we all know someone who is too "dissabled" to work but bowls, plays softball, etc. every weekend. How many people wait to look for their next job until their unemployment runs out. Have you ever been behind someone at the food store who buys food with food stamps or WIC and tobacco and booze with their own money? The working man is a sucker.

If people don't want their conversations listened to, don't talk on your phone on a plane full of people!

I remember hearing about some very rural towns in the midwest requiring all residents without a criminal background to have a gun in the house. If you did not want to keep a gun on hand, you needed to file a request with the town. Can you imagine a better way to convince a criminal to move out of your town or skip it all together!

The "assault rifle" ban is a mess of insignificant restrictions. After purchasing my post ban AR-15, I was not allowed to put a collapsable stock so I simply bought a standard stock, no less lethal. I could not buy NEW magazines that held more than 10 rounds, so I bought some military surplus $15 30 round magazines, still no less lethal. I can not mount a bayonette on my rifle so no more stabbing sprees I guess, possibly less lethal. I guess these restrictions make the uninformed feel safer without actually accomplishing any real reduction in crime, so it fits the mold of most recent gun control laws. I don't know about crimes in your town, but most shootings I hear about in rochester involve cheap, small caliber guns that can be tossed away after the shooting. Not many street hoods carry thousand dollar guns!

I suppose if they could invent a safety device that in no way reduces the reliability of a gun, you might see some acceptance. As I said before, some of the most popular gun designs and calibers are decades old simply because the fire when you pull the trigger virtually every time. I would never trust a computer chip and battery to recognize me before my gun could fire. Gloves, hand injury, blood, could all render your gun useless. As far as tracking guns, the current systems do not work well at all. The balistic fingerprint program has been a huge waste of money. We have a system in Rochester that is supposed to track gunfire and notify the police of the location and type of gun used. So far it too is a failure. Hopefully they get the bugs worked out because it seems like a good idea if it works. The key to any "gun control" law is restricting the bad guys from getting guns without restricting the good guys. Not an easy proposition. Until they figure this out, the more good guys firing back at the bad guys, the better.

You cannot take away all the guns in existence in the U.S. even if you passed a law prohibiting gun ownership. Britian tried to eliminate gun ownership in America long ago and it didn't work out too well. Unless you can assure me that no criminal will ever get their hands on a gun, you cannot take away my right to protect myself against that criminal. That includes pricing guns out of the market with idiotic requirements like "smart bullets". One other point on the new bullet technology. If it is too expensive to practice markmanship and shooting skills, how many more misses and mistakes will this "improvement" cause. You cannot just pick up a handgun and hit everything you aim at without practice and training. I spend a lot of time at the range improving my skills unlike the common street thug who hits every bystander within 50 feet.

Keep telling yourself that! Criminals are not allowed to own guns or use them when committing crimes. Surprisingly, the criminals often don't obey that law. How does limiting/prohibiting law abiding citizens from owning a gun make anyone safer? (other than criminals). Enforce the current laws, and there is no reason to create more restrictions and bans. I don't think there are many pro-gun advocates that are opposed to harsher penalties for crimes involving guns. (again, other than criminals). Just look at D.C., Chicago, NY City., or San Francisco as an example of what the "gun control" politicians would like. They have banned virtually all handgun ownership. Try concealing a shotgun when walking home down a dark street! Gun control means hitting what you are aiming at right?

This has got to be one of the dumbest ideas I have seen in a while! There is a reason low tech revolvers and calibers haven't changed for years....They work when you pull the trigger. The most popular current style of handgun was created in the early 1900's with few changes since then. Your car is much more likely to kill an innocent person than my guns. Thank god I have enough rounds to take out a few hundred bad guys in case the gun control crowd gets their way. Can you say grandfather policy. I don't understand the concept of total dependence on a stranger for safety and protection. Anyone who suppports this idea should be forced to put a sign on their house and car declaring that they do not own any evil old guns. Can you imagine the outcry if anti-gun advocates had to give up the security they enjoy because criminals do not know who owns guns and who is defenseless. Put your money where your mouth is and let the world know that you will not be able to fight back when confronted with a knife, bat, gun, etc. Hypocrisy runs deep with this issue. Chucky Shumer has a carry permit and carries a gun to all his events yet fights to take away your right to protect yourself. He is evidently more important that you and your family. Hillary Clinton enjoys armed protection at all times and has secret service living on her property (tax payer funded of course) yet is one of the countries biggest anti-gun advocates.

Damn right it fits my agenda to slam a paper that consistently endangers Americans by printing stories detailing U.S. efforts to stop terrorism. I'm sure those other papers are garbage too. Most media has hit rock bottom. By the way, Republicans and Democrats both knew about this program and approved it. This should not be a partisan issue, all Americans should support legal efforts to stop our enemies from attacking us. But hey, if you would rather turn the Times into a victim of the mean Bush Administration, go ahead.

The Times cares more about it's liberal agenda than the lives and well being of Americans. It is an act of treason to leak this classified information and the person who leaked should face the death penalty...no matter what party they belong to. It is unfortunate that the likely victims of the next terrorist attack will be good Americans and not the staff of the Times. It would be great irony if the Times building was blown up by a terrorist that was being tracked by phone or bank records until the Times articles tipped them off. The again why would they bomb their allies.