Palin's a quitter!

[jriddle3]

Originally Posted by bipolarboy

Newt's the guy you put up front to get annhilated early and shield the real candidates. Newt (bare with me) got most of the fanfare he got off of charisma. Contract with America was mostly fluff, smoke, and mirrors. However, Newt proved he couldn't out-charisma Clinton on multiple occasions. He damn sure couldn't get the spotlight off of Obama. As for Mitt I still say that there's absolutely no way that the Christicans will vote for a Mormon. I think they'd have fewer "family values" issues voting for a Catholic or Jew. Those other guys you mention are also dead in my opinion.

For the record, I talked with someone over the weekend that went to high school with Marc Sanford. She was not surprised and said that his wife had known about his infidelity for some time.


It's like I keep saying the person in the GOP who will pull the sword from the stone will be the first person to call Rush Limbaugh a fucking idiot at some point. That's the only way the moderates and undecideds will even consider a Republican, and probably the only way the 'base' will shake itself awake.

Whether someone will nut up and actually do it, and then not apologize for it remains to be seen.

That may very well be true,... I am thinking they need to distance themselves from Rush at least a little and focus on many key items including:
1) Fiscal Responsibility - Balanced Budget
2) Fiscal Responsibility - Trim the pork/Line Item Veto
3) Fiscal Responsibility - Cut waste
4) Less Government/more Constitutionalism
5) Alternate/Improved Energy Sources (better batteries, Pebble Bed Nuclear, etc)
6) Border Security/Immigration reform
7) Income Tax Reform - The system is bullshit, can everyone know 18,000 pages of tax code? Many key personnel in our current administration obviously cannot.

************************************************** *******

[JustinA407]

Originally Posted by chevy706

Fine, if that offends you, we'll go with God hating, illegal immigrant felons who would kill their own mothers if it meant you could get something for nothing the rest of your lives.

Just to be clear, are you saying you wouldn't like something for nothing? We can debate whether there is such a thing, but if there were, wouldn't you want it too?

[JustinA407]

Originally Posted by jriddle3

That may very well be true,... I am thinking they need to distance themselves from Rush at least a little and focus on many key items including:
1) Fiscal Responsibility - Balanced Budget
2) Fiscal Responsibility - Trim the pork/Line Item Veto
3) Fiscal Responsibility - Cut waste
4) Less Government/more Constitutionalism
5) Alternate/Improved Energy Sources (better batteries, Pebble Bed Nuclear, etc)
6) Border Security/Immigration reform
7) Income Tax Reform - The system is bullshit, can everyone know 18,000 pages of tax code? Many key personnel in our current administration obviously cannot.

************************************************** *******

Yes, I vote for you!

[bipolarboy]

Originally Posted by jriddle3

That may very well be true,... I am thinking they need to distance themselves from Rush at least a little and focus on many key items including:
1) Fiscal Responsibility - Balanced Budget
2) Fiscal Responsibility - Trim the pork/Line Item Veto
3) Fiscal Responsibility - Cut waste
4) Less Government/more Constitutionalism
5) Alternate/Improved Energy Sources (better batteries, Pebble Bed Nuclear, etc)
6) Border Security/Immigration reform
7) Income Tax Reform - The system is bullshit, can everyone know 18,000 pages of tax code? Many key personnel in our current administration obviously cannot.

************************************************** *******

Ugh, we were having a nice discussion.... fine, mouth piece back in.

The federal government has to be able to run a deficit. Just like corporations have to be able to borrow money. Believing otherwise shows no understanding of large scale finance and is also pretty hypocritical to core Republican planks. Line Item Veto has already been deemed unconstitutional... part of Contract w/ America, remember? Constitutionalism is just a buzzword. The very idea that there is only one interpretation of the Constitution is laughable. In truth, had we had a more liberal-minded Supreme Court, one who considered pragmatism and not just the strict words on the page, we'd probably have the line-item veto. There's no way the founding fathers could've foreseen the rider system being used the way it currently is (in much the same way they couldn't have foreseen assault weapons), but you're never going to get the so called 'conservative' judges to see it that way. So... again, you're kind of arguing against yourself here, JR.




There're already billions being given to alternative energy sources... stimulus money. There are a lot of alt-energy companies springing up with some very interesting innovations that that money is going to help already.

I'm all for simplifying the tax code, but if you're thinking flat tax you can pick any of my previous posts (usually replies to Archer) of why that's a fairy tale.

[jriddle3]

Originally Posted by bipolarboy

Ugh, we were having a nice discussion.... fine, mouth piece back in.

The federal government has to be able to run a deficit. Just like corporations have to be able to borrow money. Believing otherwise shows no understanding of large scale finance and is also pretty hypocritical to core Republican planks. Line Item Veto has already been deemed unconstitutional... part of Contract w/ America, remember? Constitutionalism is just a buzzword. The very idea that there is only one interpretation of the Constitution is laughable. In truth, had we had a more liberal-minded Supreme Court, one who considered pragmatism and not just the strict words on the page, we'd probably have the line-item veto. There's no way the founding fathers could've foreseen the rider system being used the way it currently is (in much the same way they couldn't have foreseen assault weapons), but you're never going to get the so called 'conservative' judges to see it that way. So... again, you're kind of arguing against yourself here, JR.




There're already billions being given to alternative energy sources... stimulus money. There are a lot of alt-energy companies springing up with some very interesting innovations that that money is going to help already.

I'm all for simplifying the tax code, but if you're thinking flat tax you can pick any of my previous posts (usually replies to Archer) of why that's a fairy tale.

Not for Flat tax per se, simplify 18,00 pages of BS.

Obama shys away from Nuclear technology (Pebble Bed is extremely safe). Still, all alternative energy should be on table fro next republican.

Still think Line Item veto and tort reform (not that they will ever happen) are good ideas.

[stsags]

Originally Posted by LivinginNegadelphia

No it isn't. Where did this quote come from:

That was not in the Boston.com article you posted. Show me where you got this. You quoted it in your post, so it had to come from somewhere.



The $13B I quoted came from YOUR link to deftoner's thread. Here's the quote and the statistic:

Here's the thread with the article: Mad-off gets 150 years in prison

Do I feel for the people who lost their money? Yes, but I feel for them as much as I feel for the guys who spend their last twenty on smokes and scratch off lottery tickets. So you believe capitalism doesn't work because one guy swindled $13B out of investors who did not do their due dilligence on the guy's investments? You ever hear that phrase, "If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is"? Well, that's what we got here. I'm not condoning what Madoff did, but any person that believes they can get 10% year in and year out without any risk is incredibly stoooopid and naive. Nobody averages 10% annually.

This Ponzi scheme fails in comparison to Social Security.

He is the only one? Madoff is metaphor, symbolic or an example of what really happens out there and does every damn day. Most of the reason the economy went into a tail spin is because of a corrupt financial system in place that was taken advantage of by the rich like what Madoff did, he is the tip of the iceberg. He ruined pension funds and screwed more people's future than you think but I digress, it is only money.

It is not even Madoff himself, it is the fact that you rant and rave at Democrats but when the real shit shows it's ugly face, you shy away and never say a word.

[stsags]

Originally Posted by pswift00

Is that what happened? One man completely disregarded all of the rules of the system, and now capitalism is broken? So if somene commits murder, is the legal system broken too? Who fucked the poor again? Sstags, seriously, you are so completely out of touch with the average person and reality in general that it's not even worth it to argue with you anymore. Really, if Bernie Madoff is your microcosm of the way modern capitalism works, I am truly sorry, but I really don't think you could find even one person in a hundred who shares that same belief. What really confuses me about you is that you talk about your life experiences as if you're someone who is at least well into their 30's, but then you turn right around and say stuff like you just said as if you're a 19 year-old college student who just read Das Kapital and is ready to take on 'the man.'

Look beyond dude and realize Madoff is nothing more than a symbol if what I was saying. It was not meant to be literal but a further proof of why our system is nothing but fucking the other guy.

You're right, I am out of touch and I stay that way for a reason. What you are missing is I speak/write in grandiose embellishments on here, on purpose. This is online world not real life. This site is a bastion of neo-con thinking and to it's very core the people here have Ronny Reagan shoved up their ass, I say things for affect not responses because I could give a shit.

[jriddle3]

Originally Posted by stsags

Look beyond dude and realize Madoff is nothing more than a symbol if what I was saying. It was not meant to be literal but a further proof of why our system is nothing but fucking the other guy.

You're right, I am out of touch and I stay that way for a reason. What you are missing is I speak/write in grandiose embellishments on here, on purpose. This is online world not real life. This site is a bastion of neo-con thinking and to it's very core the people here have Ronny Reagan shoved up their ass, I say things for affect not responses because I could give a shit.

So profound,...

These statements provide insight into why you cannot subscribe to logic and reason. You have everyone pegged for what you think they are, not what they are in the reality.

Basically, you are saying that anything you post is radical extremist horse hockey.

[bipolarboy]

Originally Posted by jriddle3

Not for Flat tax per se, simplify 18,00 pages of BS.

Obama shys away from Nuclear technology (Pebble Bed is extremely safe). Still, all alternative energy should be on table fro next republican.

Still think Line Item veto and tort reform (not that they will ever happen) are good ideas.

I don't disagree with you that line item veto could be a productive thing, and I think malpractice reform should be a part of any healthcare package. After all, you change the way doctor's bill, so that it's not an assembly line mentality, then you reduce the probability of mistakes, so why not cap punitive damages.

I don't care how safe pebble bed nuclear is: a) it takes a ridiculous amount of time to permit those plants. I'm talking years, plus another 18 30 months to construct a plant. It's retarded, and you can't just say, 'well, we need to clear up this gov't beaurocracy b/c we're talking about nuclear fucking material, which brings me to b) there's still waste, which we have no idea how to deal with. Even France, which is 78% nuclear powered admits that they've probably got less than two decades to figure out how to dispose of it or else they're screwed. We have a huge chunk of this country with land that's good for little else besides getting blown around, so wind energy and solar are the most rational alternatives at the moment. Granted, T. Boone Pickens has a stake in wind energy, but here's a guy who made billions off oil and is now devoting his life to trying to get the heartland of America dotted with wind mills. Nuclear was a great idea twenty years ago. Now, with the tech we have available to and could have available in the next couple years, wind and solar are the ways to go.

[jriddle3]

Originally Posted by bipolarboy

I don't disagree with you that line item veto could be a productive thing, and I think malpractice reform should be a part of any healthcare package. After all, you change the way doctor's bill, so that it's not an assembly line mentality, then you reduce the probability of mistakes, so why not cap punitive damages.

I don't care how safe pebble bed nuclear is: a) it takes a ridiculous amount of time to permit those plants. I'm talking years, plus another 18 30 months to construct a plant. It's retarded, and you can't just say, 'well, we need to clear up this gov't beaurocracy b/c we're talking about nuclear fucking material, which brings me to b) there's still waste, which we have no idea how to deal with. Even France, which is 78% nuclear powered admits that they've probably got less than two decades to figure out how to dispose of it or else they're screwed. We have a huge chunk of this country with land that's good for little else besides getting blown around, so wind energy and solar are the most rational alternatives at the moment. Granted, T. Boone Pickens has a stake in wind energy, but here's a guy who made billions off oil and is now devoting his life to trying to get the heartland of America dotted with wind mills. Nuclear was a great idea twenty years ago. Now, with the tech we have available to and could have available in the next couple years, wind and solar are the ways to go.

All valid concerns.

The moving parts in wind mills make them a maintenance issue and studies have yielded serious environmental effects, insufficient production, and high production costs.

Development & production costs are probably going to hinder all but wind and solar. Hopefully, battery development with make a big leap (maybe more time analyzing the flying saucers at Area 51).

The rest of the world is moving ahead with pebble Bed Nuclear plants while we are wrapped up in our panties. China is aggressively pursuing as many as 200 plants over the next 40 years (with 30 in the next 11 years). S. Africa, Germany, and France as also developing such plants.

As for the impending nuclear waste disposal issue, shoot it onto a barren planet with absolutely no hint of life (Prime directive and all,...) ???
This is where a more aggressive space program may have helped us.

We obviously cannot send it into the depths of the Earth, Ocean, Desert, or into orbit around the planet. The Sun is apparently not a viable option either.

All jokes aside, there are merits on both sides of these issues.

[bipolarboy]

Originally Posted by jriddle3

All valid concerns.

The moving parts in wind mills make them a maintenance issue and studies have yielded serious environmental effects, insufficient production, and high production costs.

Development & production costs are probably going to hinder all but wind and solar. Hopefully, battery development with make a big leap (maybe more time analyzing the flying saucers at Area 51).

The rest of the world is moving ahead with pebble Bed Nuclear plants while we are wrapped up in our panties. China is aggressively pursuing as many as 200 plants over the next 40 years (with 30 in the next 11 years). S. Africa, Germany, and France as also developing such plants.

As for the impending nuclear waste disposal issue, shoot it onto a barren planet with absolutely no hint of life (Prime directive and all,...) ???
This is where a more aggressive space program may have helped us.

We obviously cannot send it into the depths of the Earth, Ocean, Desert, or into orbit around the planet. The Sun is apparently not a viable option either.

All jokes aside, there are merits on both sides of these issues.

True, but realize you're touting the fact that China is going forward with them as a sign that it's safe and environmentally not evil.

[jriddle3]

Originally Posted by bipolarboy

True, but realize you're touting the fact that China is going forward with them as a sign that it's safe and environmentally not evil.

Point taken. I admit that anything can be misused or abused, especially by those with a history of questionable ethics and/or an over-estimation of their intellectual abilities.

If it was China and South Africa alone, without wide ranging scientific support that validates its' safety, I would indeed not be so quick to jump on board.

[crew]

Originally Posted by LivinginNegadelphia

It'll be interesting to see where she ends up. I'd have to believe this wasn't just an out-of-the-blue decision. My best guess is that she will become a CEO of some large corporation or will join the entertainment industry in some capacity (the ying to Oprah's yang?).

I am not a fan of Palin's politics, but it amazed me how cruel the left was to her. She had arguably more experience than Obama and maybe even Clinton. We have a comedian in Franken joining the Senate and there's no mention of the experience question. She had as many 'dumb' radio bytes/ TV clips as Biden which isn't saying much I will admit, but she was verociously attacked whereas Biden was given the shaft.

I don't want her to be President, but the utter disdain and hatred thrown her way was uncalled for.

Awww that's so sweet of you...

[crew]

Originally Posted by jriddle3

That may very well be true,... I am thinking they need to distance themselves from Rush at least a little and focus on many key items including:
1) Fiscal Responsibility - Balanced Budget
2) Fiscal Responsibility - Trim the pork/Line Item Veto
3) Fiscal Responsibility - Cut waste
4) Less Government/more Constitutionalism
5) Alternate/Improved Energy Sources (better batteries, Pebble Bed Nuclear, etc)
6) Border Security/Immigration reform
7) Income Tax Reform - The system is bullshit, can everyone know 18,000 pages of tax code? Many key personnel in our current administration obviously cannot.

************************************************** *******

Sort of contradictory... The Supreme Court declared Line Item Vetos unconstitutional.

I'm sure it's something every President wants, but my guess is when the constitution was written they tried to limit the power of one man - even in regards to this.

While it seems like simple solution to getting rid of waste, it also could lead to even dirtier politics... Even with the new ideas of line items that get sent back to congress for a vote.

As the adage goes, one persons waste is another persons museum (or something like that).

A way to get rid of waste? Any state that asks for federal money needs to find a way to generate relatively equivalent revenue to offset it.

[Negrodamus]

Originally Posted by jriddle3

All valid concerns.

The moving parts in wind mills make them a maintenance issue and studies have yielded serious environmental effects, insufficient production, and high production costs.

Development & production costs are probably going to hinder all but wind and solar. Hopefully, battery development with make a big leap (maybe more time analyzing the flying saucers at Area 51).

The rest of the world is moving ahead with pebble Bed Nuclear plants while we are wrapped up in our panties. China is aggressively pursuing as many as 200 plants over the next 40 years (with 30 in the next 11 years). S. Africa, Germany, and France as also developing such plants.

As for the impending nuclear waste disposal issue, shoot it onto a barren planet with absolutely no hint of life (Prime directive and all,...) ???
This is where a more aggressive space program may have helped us.

We obviously cannot send it into the depths of the Earth, Ocean, Desert, or into orbit around the planet. The Sun is apparently not a viable option either.

All jokes aside, there are merits on both sides of these issues.

could you imagine one of those waste rockets exploding in the atmosphere? that would fucking suck

[DCDawg]

I find it interesting that in response to bipolar's post advocating wind over nuclear power, jriddle's first two arguments involved maintanance and environmental effects. Not saying that those are non-issues for wind, but those factors probably don't help the nuclear argument much.

Good to see some intelligent discussion here, and good that we've been able to camoflauge it with some good poo-flinging in the thread so that visiting readers don't think we're a bunch of intellectual snobs who speak and write in grandiose embellishments.