@Farmer GA: It was my impression that scientific theory was always up for debate.
Yep, like gravity.posted @ Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - 17:22
This is a man who legislated morality with little moral compass himself.posted @ Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - 17:11
@hang em high: That's all you can talk about? Nothing at all about a "good" woman without a gun who stopped a "bad" man with a gun?posted @ Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - 17:04
Play for pay makes absolute sense. You should not be paid for travel, meals and lodging when you didn't physically attend a meeting and haven't had to pay those expenses out of pocket.posted @ Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - 16:57
Be more cynical, America, be less easily fooled: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YLo7gik5Eoposted @ Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - 15:36
Maybe Sposato wasn't the guy that took the gun and wasn't involved in the robbery. One of the guys went to a house while the other guy stayed behind and stole the gun.posted @ Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - 14:11
Congratulations Mr. Harris, students need advisors like you who've walked the walk and not just talked the talk.posted @ Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - 14:03
A mountain out of a mole hill. I don't particularly like the players who mock their opponents and dance in the end zone but if they get to act like fools, so does Sherman.posted @ Wednesday, January 22, 2014 - 13:56
@nowheregirl: Good luck to you.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 17:31
@snarkydude: I guess you miss the QE program that was Obama's and Tim Geithner's baby. $85 billion a month qualifies as "funneling" to me.
Quantitative easing has been nicknamed "printing money" by some members of the media, central bankers, and financial analysts. However, central banks state that the use of the newly created money is different in QE. With QE, the newly created money is used to buy government bonds or other financial assets, whereas the term printing money usually implies that newly created money is used to directly finance government deficits or pay off government debt (also known as monetizing the government debt).
Prove I am lying. You keep saying that, so now prove it.
Independent, my royal red behind. If "independent" is defined as left-leaning, so-called "progressive"....which means Democrat, THEN and only then can you be listed as an "independent". To date, I can't recall that you have expressed an independent thought on here. You follow the talking points-party line item for item.
I am an Independent. If you'd review my prior comments on other threads, you'd have learned this fact. You are a liar if you keep calling me a democrat. So, I'll say it again: YOU ARE A LIAR.
The welfare system threatens to bankrupt us, by creating a class of people we will support forever, and one that keeps growing. The rich do put a net gain back into the economy. The welfare class is a net loss.
BS. What do you consider the welfare system to be? Welfare spending is only 12% of our federal budget. How is 12% bankrupting us?
You just can't seem to accept is that we will always have a disadvantaged class. The point of government is to minimize the amount of citizens that are disadvantaged. Thus the war on poverty. And it worked until conservatives decided to war on the "war on poverty." And they were successful. From 1964 to 1970, poverty decreased 43%, from 22% to 12%. Since 1970 and the start of the conservative war on the "war on poverty", poverty has risen back up to 15%. You have your conservative war on the poor to blame.
Name a program that Obama has sponsored that has created any measureable job increase......any program. Don't count part-time jobs. Remember "shovel-ready"? Oh, and don't count the "green" jobs that went "poof" when those companies went bankrupt with billions of taxpayer dollars in someone's pockets. Bring me up to speed on his claim of "jobs created or saved". About the only ones I can think of that he "saved" were the UAW jobs that should have been eliminated in bankruptcy, except that Obama decided to ignore bankruptcy statutes in favor of his political cronies.
Name one program that the republicans have proposed and passed that created any jobs. Can't, can you? Why don't you bring me up to speed on the jobs they "saved or created"? Can't, can you?posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 17:27
@Farmer GA: Only what is below that statement in your post.
I forgot, Obama does nothing except play golf and take vacations to exotic places. I guess if you don't lead, you can't be held responsible for actons on your watch, in your name. Is that what you are saying?
If Obama was to slice Stevens' throat on national TV, you would still deny he had anything to do with it, or, at best, that Steven's asked him to do it.
Really? I think your comments speak to your sanity. Do you deny that Stevens was asked twice if he wanted military security and he refused?
While there is a libertarian bent to many, in the Tea Party, the Libertarians have been around much longer and are seperate from Republicans. The TEA party is a rebellion from within the Republican party.
I find that teapublicans and libertarians have many core principles: personal liberty and property rights, limiting the size of government, constitutionalists, cutting taxes, reducing the national debt and deficit, and free market capitalism.
BTW, where are my examples of racist laws and goals of the TEA party?
Teapublicans have supported anti-gay, anti-abortion and anti-voting (targeting minorities) laws.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 16:58
@davidxto: 17% of me says the stuff you write is BS. But the 83% of me says you might have some interesting perspectives that I missed.
Good luck to you.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 16:18
@grove600: You too Grove600, even when we disagree, you are civil. Which is a rare commodity on these sites. I'm guilty of being uncivil at times but work to curb it. I'm just not too successful. Good luck to you.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 15:59
@Farmer GA: Do you deny that the IRS targeted the Teaparty and other conservative groups? Obama didn't until it got a little hot for him. His people were involved one of them "took the 5th" to avoid telling the truth.
Do you deny that Fast and Furious was a program headed by the DOJ and, if I am not mistaken, Holder was appointed by Obama. Am I wrong? Holder also lied under oath about the program.
Did Obama not appoint Killery to the State Department? The state departement had been stonewalling the Senate investigation. Those are all under Obama.
Admit it, if these same things had happend under Bush, you would be demanding his head on a pike.
What a bunch of BS.
First Obama didn't order it. No one close to Obama ordered it. And it isn't targeting if you also look for liberals groups that might not fit their nonprofit designation too. None of the conservative groups were denied. But a few liberal groups were. HIs people? He didn't appoint them and they are not close to him. This is just manufactured manure that you and republicans keep spreading.
Second, Fast and Furious was compromised by a rogue agent who went off the reservation and did things off the grid and latter blamed his superiors and others. Once again Obama didn't order it. The actual program began under Bush. Holder didn't order it. No one close to Obama was implicated. Once again just manure on your part.
Third, Obama was not responsible for refusing embassy security and neither was Hillary. Republicans cut millions from embassy security funds before and after the Benghazi attack. And if anyone was culpable it was Stevens himself who twice refuse military reenforcement to his security because he had a misplaced trust in Libyan militias.
No I wouldn't blame Bush for these manufactured scandals. Now there were plenty of things I could blame Bush. Wars without funding, programs without funding, deregulations, deficit...
I never said that they were. Many of them are not. The only real conservatives left are now called Libertarians.
Sorry, libertarians are the teapublicans.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 15:33
@Digdug: I'm going to miss my argumentative foes and friends. I've felt enriched (not monetarily) from our interactions. I will not be going over to the FB site that some here are moving too, so I guess this is it. Good luck to you and I wish you the best.
And if you see this, you too, theold33, you old geezer. I'll miss your sense of humor and your sweet disposition.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 15:09
@snarkydude: Obama is just as guilty, possibly even more so, of funneling money to the big banks and brokerage houses. The QE program didn't begin under Bush, it has been Obama and Geithner's baby all the way.
You keep making these assertions without any evidence. What funneling? Care to elaborate?
At WHAT point in time have the Democrats refused donations from big banks, investment companies, Wall Street firms or anyone else? Selective memory? Look in the mirror.
Your selective memory does not allow you to even admit that republicans are as guilty as sin when it comes to promoting Wall Street interests over Main Street. I can and do admit there are democrats that do the same but most of the republican party votes in lock step for laws that are beneficial to big business at the expense of the public.
Instead of concentrating on jobs and the economy, your hero, catering to the 47% of voters with their hands in someone else's pocket, chose to spend his time forcing Obamacare on us, which is still the biggest job-killer and biggest tax increase ever laid on the American people. Because of Obama and his healthcare bill, we will now have a part-time economy.
Once again you are lying through your keyboard. Obama has supported legislation for job creation which the republicans have opposed because they don't want Obama to successfully turn the economy. But he has just not as robust as it would be but for republican obstructionism. And by all credible accounts Obamacare is creating more jobs.
Your party is responsible for the welfare programs that threaten to bleed this country into bankruptcy, and have brought about much of the social decay we see today. Your party is responsible for the give-away programs that brought about the financial collapse. Your party is responsible for the income-redistributive programs that take money away from people who have been productive, and give it to those who have not.
There you go again, lying through your keyboard. I don't have a party. I'm an Independent. I've told this to you many times. I guess it's selective memory again. Your party this, your party that...why don't you just substitute your party for republicans and you'd be correct.
Both parties are equally guilty of taking special interest money. That's a fact, but only one party is guilty of creating a welfare state that threatens to bankrupt us all.
BS. It's not the poor that is bankrupting us, it's the fat cats and one percenters. Why is it that even with all this SUPPOSED welfare that is flowing to the poor they're getting poorer? And the middle class is shrinking? The only ones getting richer are the rich.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 14:45
@Farmer GA: Yeah. Federal agencies, like the IRS, NSA, DOJ, State Department, etc, have absolutly no link to the President of the United States. OK. whatever.
Where is your evidence that Obama or those close to Obama had anything to do with any of your fake scandals?
I believe you have the Conservatives and Neo-cons confused. The Republican party is full of Neo-cons, but, they are not conservative as most of them advocate for a larger and more powerful Federal Government. That is something that a real conservative would never do.
Oh, I'm sure there are plenty of neocon republicans too. But teapublicans aren't REAL conservatives either. Small government advocates who want government in your personal lives isn't small government. Laws that discriminate against race, gender or nationality aren't conservative values either. But they flourish as ideas and goals in the teapublican platforms.
If you were honest, you wouldn't have written this.
You call me dishonest? You might benefit from a little introspection yourself on honesty. But I know I'm just talking to the wind.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 14:25
@JGForster: Yes do tell, all those environmental lawyers and activists are truly in need. This is beside the point anyway...you give to who you want to and I will give to who
Wrong. I'm talking about giving to nonprofits that actually give most of their donations to charity unlike churches that give a way lot less.
Secular charities receive as much if not more in government subsidies...so what. PP gets direct government funding. If you change the laws it simply means more for the government to waste and less for the charities to distribute.
Secular charities are not religions. Religious organizations should not get ANY subsidies from government.
I guess you figured that if you throw out enough obfuscation, you could prove your assertions. You say this study corrects for cost of living and tax burden, but does it measure charitable giving as a percentage of income? You mention the top 5 states; what do the top 25 look like?
As I said, the myth that conservatives are stingy has been destroyed. The only money we are stingy with is OPM by believing that the federal government should stick to a few basic things it can do well and leave everything else to the states or the people. Maybe if the tax burden wasn't so high in those blue states, they could find more money in their wallet for charity and your argument would carry the day.
When I refute your assertions you continually move the goal posts.
My number one contention that Arthur Brooks methodology was wrong because he included ALL contribution to religious organizations as CHARITY. Which is a problem because religious organizations do not give ALL their donations to charity. Only about 20% actually go to charities. The Mormon church only gives 0.7% of their income to charitable works.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 14:17
@Farmer GA: Conservatives do not support Christie. He is not even close to being conservative.
BS. Real conservatives or who I'd call traditional conservatives do support Christie and it's the teapublicans who don't support Christie. And contrary to what you think teapublicans are a minority in the republican party.
Not exactly. I was tying in with the obvious bias of the media. Just because Christie has an "R" behind his name, the media will crusify him for something far less discusting than what has been done by the President and other government officials, who happen to have a "D" behind their names.
Same argument. Wrong on both accounts.
They seem to have plenty of time to dive into these scandles as they are not now, nor have they ever done their jobs when it comes to Benghazi, Fast and Furious, NSA, IRS, constant over reaches of power, etc, etc..
What is so sad on your part is trying to link Obama to stuff that has no links or ties to him when those who are close to Christie got caught with actually doing what they were accused of and we'll eventually find out if Christie had his hand in the cookie jar. Ridiculous to tie fake, made up scandals like the examples you gave to real ones committed by republicans.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 13:49
@Farmer GA: There has been State Department personel testify that those budget cuts had NOTHING to do with the lack of security for the embassy. Try again. Obama and Hillary both have said that the buck stops with them. I guess they meant when that buck is not covered in the blood of 4 Americans.
Try reading and digesting the contents of the article. This $224 million is cut from the embassy security AFTER the Benghazi attack. So much for the republican concern for future attacks.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 13:37
Customer service is the first to go when businesses aren't doing well. Which actually should be the last thing to go because customer services is what distinguishes your business from the others. Good customer service retains customers and their word of mouth attracts even more.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 12:21
One thing that glares out to me is the fact that republicans are so swift to blame Obama for Benghazi but I noticed they went along with cutting $224 million more from embassy security. This tells me they really don't care about the dead Americans and the attack on Benghazi except to try to link it to Obama and Hillary.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 11:56
In the report, Ambassador Stevens twice declined more embassy security from the Defense Department and it also said there were no evidence of an al-Qaida plot.
Now tell me, who got punished for the 1983 bombing of the US barracks in Beirut that killed 241 US personnel? And who got punished for the over 3000 that died in the Twin Tower attack? Or all the embassy attacks during Bush?Republicans try to blame and punish folks from the other party but rarely want to punish their own, huh?posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 11:50
The team is starting to look like champions. Congratulations and keep it going!posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 11:29
@Farmer GA: Ah yes the liberal media that is controlled by corporations owned by rich conservatives. Yep, the media that fawned all over Christie and his presidential aspirations before the bridge fiasco prompted more attention to the "pro quid quo" type of governing that New Jersey is famous for.
And still trying to tie it with Benghazi. Pitiful. Your one trick pony died last year and you're still beating it.
Bridgegate, Developegate, and what other scandals will we learn about when the media finally does it's job of vetting a governor's corrupt staff which might, possibly, point back to the bully boy himself.posted @ Tuesday, January 21, 2014 - 11:21
Summary: I'm not saying it's lonely to be a movie critic, but we often find ourselves seated alone in an empty theatre when we're watching new stuff. I know people who say they won't go see anything unless they have at least one other person to go with, but I've always enjoyed having the place to myself. I'm not saying it's lonely to be a movie critic, but we often find ourselves seated alone in an empty theatre when we're watching new stuff. I know people who say they won't go see anything unless they have at least one other person to go with, but I've always enjoyed having the place to myself. read more
As you might imagine, the vast majority of the editorial cartoons available these days for publication through the syndicate which supplies cartoons to the Athens Banner-Herald/OnlineAthens are addressing the situation in Ferguson, Mo., where the fatal shooting of a black teen by a white police officer has touched off a number of demonstrations -- some peaceful, but many not at all peaceful, with tear gas fired by police officers and gunshots fired by some protester. read more