EvilMonkey

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 18, 2010 -> 10:58 AM) Exposed? for what it was? And it wasn't simply that business has better lobbyists and is much, much, much better at buying off congress? Couldn't be that could it. We all know the Unions secretly run everything. Sure, those helped. But the whole card check idea is crap, and people know it.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jan 17, 2010 -> 09:51 PM) if the unions had so much power they would have been able to get card check at least to a vote with a huge democratic congress. Card check was exposed to the public for what it was, a blatent power grab and attempt to be able to use intimidation to increase union rolls, and it failed because many of the congresscritters couldn't stand the heat.

How long until a story comes out about a purple-short roughing someone up or intimidating someone? http://rpc.blogrolling.com/redirect.php?r=...%2Face.mu.nu%2F You know that these 'volunteers' are getting paid. It's abot time that unions be on the same level as businesses as far as thier political activities go. It is (well, SHOULD be) criminal that union dues are allowed to be spent on such partisan activities.

Terror attack thwarted in Millennial Tech Magnet Middle School in San Diego! Well, not really. Seems some stupid ass vice principle saw a science project and freaked out thinking it was a bomb, even after talking to the kid. http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/ja...las-view/?imw=Y Worst part is that they want to try and recover costs associated with responding to the incident ffrom the kids parents, when they should be going after the dumbass that called them in the first place. It is a TECH SCHOOL, and they are having a SCIENCE FAIR, and they even TALKED TO THE KID, and still over reacted.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 16, 2010 -> 02:31 PM) There's actually quite a logical reason for giving the unions a couple years exemption; because union contracts tend to last multiple years, you're giving the unions and the businesses a chance to take that into account in their next set of contract negotiations. That's the whole idea of the tax anyway; it's to make it less profitable for companies to sell high-cost plans that keep pushing HC costs higher. What's kind of impressive is that the Dems are still keeping a tax that hits a large number of unions because it is good policy, even if its terrible politics. Then perhaps you start the tax in say 5 yearas time for EVERYBODY. It also applies to contracts negiated before it starts, so might as well just say hey, join a union now, save money on your taxes for next 5 years! It's a farce.

Nothing like exempting unions from paying thier fair share when they try and tax 'Cadilac' plans. WHy don't they just come out and change it to 'all Democrats are exempt from paying anything more for the first five years'. http://tinyurl.com/ygmg24h

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 14, 2010 -> 02:48 PM) His read on the current list: Pawlenty the only one from that list I really like.

QUOTE (mr_genius @ Jan 13, 2010 -> 01:47 PM) Hey, if a reporter asks a question you don't like have your goons 'rough em up a bit'. USA! USA! Suprised they weren't wearing purple SEIU t-shirts.

You know the economy is bad when the guy with the world's largest penis is unemployed! http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-jonah-falcon-penis/

It's not the Kennedy seat, its the people's seat! Great line.

QUOTE (LittleHurt05 @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 03:19 PM) = highway robbery by the White Sox To be followed by highway robbery in arbitration.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 03:10 PM) So, your perspective is that it would be better off for them to have left a false statement out in the public mind, and perhaps continued repeating it, regardless of reality? I think you are well aware that his perspective is that it would be nice if all their retractions were posted front and center instead of some being selectivly buried.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 11, 2010 -> 10:17 AM) Supposedly the NYT ran a correction on December 30th. Impressive how little that got picked up. Was it buried on page 42D underneath the ad for Barry's Discount Bras, like their retractions usually are?

QUOTE (lostfan @ Jan 10, 2010 -> 01:34 AM) Was it Graham or DeMint that recently said something equally dumb (probably worse actually)? What do you guys mean "free pass" I didn't recall that getting blown up in the media like you guys say it would be, outside of the political blogs and whatnot where you'd expect it. Reid should at least have to step down from his leadership role. I recall Trent Lott having to do that for merely showing up at Strom Thurmond's party back in 2002? 2003? And if Reid is saying things like that in a leadership position, how many others below him are saying the same thing? And if they are saying that about Obama behind his back, what do they say about gays behind closed doors?

Anyone except Paulie. I think I can actually run faster than him. Maybe.

QUOTE (Tex @ Jan 9, 2010 -> 03:30 PM) What would Republicans have done? It wouldn't have mattered because within mere moments, the msn would have had been calling for his resignation and tarred his as a racist for life. Olbermann would have had a Worst Person segment for months, Maddow would talk about how this is endemic of the Republican Party, Matthews tingle would have traveled elsewhere since he is convinced there isnt a true black person in any conservative group or organization, Sharpton would be demanding reparations, Caravell (however you spell that) would try to dazzle us with some southern words of wisdon about how only the mean ole Republicans can think that way anymore and Pelosi would have smiled if her Botox would have let her.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 12:09 PM) Did you drive on roads? Don't I pay gas taxes, income taxes and tolls to the tollway?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 11:47 AM) You're forgetting the fact that this country continues to provide huge subsidies for increasing driving. Really? The 17 years I spent driving 110 miles a day on the tri-state and other tollways could have been subsidized? Wish I would have known.

QUOTE (Tex @ Jan 6, 2010 -> 06:26 AM) Is that an argument for longer delays and higher prices with the extra security, or against? Yeah, I have to say both. Somewhere there is the line where the extra spending and delays are not going to make a difference. I don't know where that is. I already don't fly unless I have to. Is there a point where people who fly for business will choose to drive again? Or take a train? Again, I am sure there is, but I don't know where that will be.

QUOTE (Tex @ Jan 5, 2010 -> 06:45 PM) Basically we all agree on this note. But we each clutch something slightly different. I bolded the part where the rubber meets the road. Dems I suspect will be less willing to spend on this, Reps, more willing. And for airport security, isn't this taking from the poor who fly less and giving to the rich who fly more? But a vital airline industry is important for the economy of the country, including the poor. Tourism, business travel, etc depend on airlines. Hurt those, you hurt all businesses, not just airline travellers.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 5, 2010 -> 03:26 PM) Again, you are missing the reality of these heated situations. First, we're not talking about beating a suspect in a locked interview room with a camera. This stuff happens in the in between spaces. Second, the first people to handle this guy are cops and the first available feds - not soldiers or spooks. These people are angry, and human. Now, I am not talking about waterboarding or some such complex, time-consuming exercise here. I am talking about plain old physical abuse, threats to life and limb, etc. And I stand by the idea that those things likely did occur, as they do in such situations, whether or not its logical or sane to do so. One can only hope that if this did happen, it happened somewhere that it wasn't recorded or witnessed by anyone else. You mean like walking the guy thru a door but 'accidently' running him into the wall next to the door? hehehe. Oops!

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 5, 2010 -> 02:23 PM) By the way, had you intended to reply to my fossil fuels question with blanks? That was odd, I know I typed something there. I just edited it and put a reponse in that spot so it doesnt look so wierd.

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 5, 2010 -> 02:18 PM) On a personal level, I agree. But legally, I do not. The guy was arrested here, for a criminal act, and an attempt at a worse criminal act. How about he was arrested for a terrorist act and should not be inthe criminal system at all?

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 5, 2010 -> 02:03 PM) Do you feel the same way about investing in technology to get us off fossil fuels? Yes. keep investing in the technologies, but dont drop what you have until you DO get someting that works, without costing and arm and 2 legs. Drill, baby! And invest in new!

QUOTE (NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 5, 2010 -> 01:59 PM) Adding yet another point to the "we got very lucky" column about this incident... the bomber apparently provided "actionable intelligence" in the hours after his arrest. Until he lawyered up.