I don't know if you vote, but you seem to be part of the problem. The problem is that no one ever changes their party.
No, the problem is when people don't demand accountability from members of the party. Delay was going to be indited, so Republicans changed the ethics rules to stay on as majority leader. Republicans were ready to impeach Nixon in the 70's. But at least Nixon was competent - Bush has been totally incompetent and done far, far worse than Nixon, and Republicans still defend him to the death.
Uh, no. Slick Willy LIED UNDER OATH (it's called "perjury")
No, it's not. The judge ruled that whatever happened with Monica was irrelevant to the Jones case. And if it's not relevant, it's not perjury.
I don't know what crazy world you live in, but I think it's a pretty big deal when the President lies under oath, regardless of how petty the thing he was lying about.
No, it's a pretty big deal when someone engages in a witch hunt on you with no probable cause. The reason we have courts and put people under oath is to see if a crime was committed, not make them jump through hoops until you can bust them for "perjury" even though there was no wrongdoing. If there were real justice in this country, Starr and the Republicans in Congress would have served nice jail terms for malicious prosecution.
Personally I'm against idiots spending more money than they have, and then declaring bankruptcy to get out of it, so I'm happy they changed the law, there.
Oh? We should have more sympathy for credit companies that constantly send offers to those with horrible credit ratings, those on the verge of bankruptcy? And once the consumer does declare bankruptcy, send them even more credit offers since they can't declare bankruptcy again for 7 years? It's like taking your alcoholic buddy out to the bar, keep putting drinks in his face, and then acting shocked - shocked! when he finally takes up up on that first drink, has a few more, and then crashes his car on the way home.
Besides, the vast majority of people who do end up declaring bankruptcy don't do it out of bad spending and laziness, but because of a job loss, accident or illness. No, the consumer bankruptcy bill wasn't about stopping a revolving door, it was about giving a big old hand job to the financial industry.
You mean like trying to negotiate a solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Or ending the genocide in the former Yugoslavia? Or fighting Al Queda? Of course, every time he tried to attack them, you had the Republicans in Congress accusing him of "wagging the dog".
Bush, the worst President? Are you old enough to remember Carter?
Are you dumb enough to think he wanted OPEC to cause an energy crisis or was as fault for the CIA overthrowing Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953?
And Reagan pardoned a heroin dealer. Clinton made some bad pardons but none of the people he pardoned were covering his ass. The Libby commutation is the worst act of clemency since Herbert Walker Bush pardoned everyone involved in Iran Contra that could testify against him.
Vigilantes, no matter how much we love the underdog, are generally a bad thing.
Not in Marvel they aren't. With exceptions for Wolverine and the Punisher, the heroes in Marvel never pronounce sentence on the bad guys, they turn them over to law enforcement.
Marvel is pretty big on keeping characters dead, with a few exceptions..
Yeah, excepting just about everybody now. Norman Osbourne was the *one* major bad guy to actually stay dead for decades, until John Bryne brought him back in a fantastically shitty story line.
pardons and commutations since the Nixon pardon. And, perhaps, the Marc Rich pardon as well.
Yes, Marc Rich was a bad pardon given the conflicts of interest, but it's not on the same planet as Libby's. Rich had to pay $100 million fine for the pardon to take effect, and Rich wasn't covering for Clinton and other officials in leaking intelligence information for political gain.
No, Libby's pardon is the worst since Bush pardoned everyone in the Iran Contra scandal that could have testified against him.
Let's remember there was no crime to begin with, and this was a case of a prosecutor run amok.
No, lets remember that both the judge and the prosecuting States Attorney were Bush appointees, and that anyone who recites the "there was no crime" excuse is full of shit.
Yeah, well keep in mind that back during WWII the Democrats were not namby pamby wusses who thought that guns were evil
Which Democrats, exactly? Guiliani, Bloomberg, and George W. Bush?
we need to talk to the Nazis and have heart-to-heart to find out why they feel the way they do
Fine, don't talk to the Iranians. Just study history for two minutes and find out that we overthrew their peacefully elected, but *gasp* socialist government and installed a strongman to find out why they are pissed as us.
Reason magazine gives a good summary why the government shouldn't be involved with health care.
Reason is full of shit. Let's look at their claims:
But his radical prescriptions, which include a call for a British-style, single-payer system, will likely have little resonance with viewers.
The health insurance industry is in business to take premiums and deny claims. The movie is going to resonate with any American that has struggled to find decent insurance. It is going to resonate with any American who has had to pay through the nose for insurance. It's going to resonate with anyone who's had to fight their insurance provider to cover legitimate medical claims. And it will resonate with anyone who knows someone who has had a serious accident or illness but rapidly hit their benefit caps and have to run bake sales to cover medical costs.
As with much of his previous work, Moore's latest film is, by turns, touching, naïve and maddeningly mendacious, a clumsy piece of agitprop that will likely have little lasting effect on the health care debate.
And as with many of his previous films, Moore's critics are Pot calling the kettle Black. Case in point, Reason's naïvette and mendaciousness.
Take the case of four-year-old Elias Dillner. In 2004, Dillner's parents were told by doctors that their son too would benefit from cochlear implants. After being fitted with the first implant, Dillner's insurance provider said the second operation could not be "prioritized." The family would have to wait. "We will do anything," Elias's mother told reporters, "even if it means that we have to take out a loan for the operation." Without insurance, the second procedure would likely cost $40,000. But Dillner's truculent insurance provider was not Aetna or Kaiser, but the notoriously generous Swedish welfare state, where health care is "free."
Ah, the right wing's #1 tool in arguing against torts, unions, and nationalized health care: the anecdote. And then the Moore haters accuse him of "cherry picking". Reason spends the rest of their article doing just that: cherry picking.
But let's go ahead and ignore the statistics that prove that the U.S. lags far behind other industrialized nations, and for the sake of argument say that the U.S. system is no worse than Canada's or France's. But at least under socialized medicine, at least you wouldn't be throwing away trillions of dollars at useless middle men. Anyone who defends U.S. health care system is either ignorant, a Libertarian loon, or a tool for the insurance industry.
Further, Dr. Paul certainly knows much more about the health care system than you or I.
Dr. Paul seems to have real convictions and integrity, which in today's Republican party is like getting a shot of novocain after a root canal. But he's still a Libertarian loon.
Putting aside whether or not elections were "stolen" in the past (how can it be proven one way or another?)
We might never know about 2004, barring the appearance of some evidence or a few confessions. But 2000 definitely was stolen, and yes it was proven: a press recount showed that Gore would have won with a statewide recount, as provided for under Florida law.
I understand your caution, if you aren't a citizen. If that happens to me, the conversation will go like this:
Them: You can't take photos here.
Me: This is a public place. You have no right to privacy in a public place. Now get fucked before I call the cops on you for harassment.
Or if it's a cop, I will point out the same, then ask for his name, his badge number, his station phone number, and his supervisors name and phone number.
This should be love at first site to most Liberals. Any kind of Nannyism and tyrannical rules. Hard to discern which is worse at times...the Puritanical Right...or the Tyrannical Left. Just imagine Bloomberg as president...this is just a start as you can see by his rein in NYC.
So bricko, as long as we're throwing around bullshit ad hominems, just when did you stop beating your wife?
Bottom line is that Reaganomics worked and socialism is largely discredited, and that's that.
Reaganomics worked? I guess if your definition of "worked" is inventing the trillion dollar national debt and starting the income divide that is getting worse and worse every day. And no, socialism wasn't discredited, it was overthrown by the CIA.
I still can't fathom why Apple chose to go exclusively with one provider.
Because it helped them get the features they wanted out of the carrier, like visual voicemail. And because some cell companies, especially Verizon, want to hobble the phones on their network so they can nickel and dime their customers to death while having the same crappy interface across all their phones.
Easy solution for that, too: the Senate has to confirm the nomination for a replacement VP. First impeach Cheney, and then impeach Bush before voting to confrim the nomination for Cheney's replacement.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know if you vote, but you seem to be part of the problem. The problem is that no one ever changes their party.
No, the problem is when people don't demand accountability from members of the party. Delay was going to be indited, so Republicans changed the ethics rules to stay on as majority leader. Republicans were ready to impeach Nixon in the 70's. But at least Nixon was competent - Bush has been totally incompetent and done far, far worse than Nixon, and Republicans still defend him to the death.
Uh, no. Slick Willy LIED UNDER OATH (it's called "perjury")
No, it's not. The judge ruled that whatever happened with Monica was irrelevant to the Jones case. And if it's not relevant, it's not perjury.
I don't know what crazy world you live in, but I think it's a pretty big deal when the President lies under oath, regardless of how petty the thing he was lying about.
No, it's a pretty big deal when someone engages in a witch hunt on you with no probable cause. The reason we have courts and put people under oath is to see if a crime was committed, not make them jump through hoops until you can bust them for "perjury" even though there was no wrongdoing. If there were real justice in this country, Starr and the Republicans in Congress would have served nice jail terms for malicious prosecution.
King George was reelected because the Democrats ran someone so much WORSE
Worse than Bush how, exactly?
Personally I'm against idiots spending more money than they have, and then declaring bankruptcy to get out of it, so I'm happy they changed the law, there.
Oh? We should have more sympathy for credit companies that constantly send offers to those with horrible credit ratings, those on the verge of bankruptcy? And once the consumer does declare bankruptcy, send them even more credit offers since they can't declare bankruptcy again for 7 years? It's like taking your alcoholic buddy out to the bar, keep putting drinks in his face, and then acting shocked - shocked! when he finally takes up up on that first drink, has a few more, and then crashes his car on the way home.
Besides, the vast majority of people who do end up declaring bankruptcy don't do it out of bad spending and laziness, but because of a job loss, accident or illness. No, the consumer bankruptcy bill wasn't about stopping a revolving door, it was about giving a big old hand job to the financial industry.
Slick Billy did and everything came true.
You mean like trying to negotiate a solution to Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Or ending the genocide in the former Yugoslavia? Or fighting Al Queda? Of course, every time he tried to attack them, you had the Republicans in Congress accusing him of "wagging the dog".
Bush, the worst President? Are you old enough to remember Carter?
Are you dumb enough to think he wanted OPEC to cause an energy crisis or was as fault for the CIA overthrowing Mohammad Mossadegh in 1953?
And Reagan pardoned a heroin dealer. Clinton made some bad pardons but none of the people he pardoned were covering his ass. The Libby commutation is the worst act of clemency since Herbert Walker Bush pardoned everyone involved in Iran Contra that could testify against him.
Okay, but Marvel used to be known for keeping the dead, dead. I say Captain America isn't coming back. Someone else might step up to the name, though.
Yes, they "used to be". Then they served up a shit salad with the return of Norman Osbourne, the one main bad guy to have the decency to stay dead.
Vigilantes, no matter how much we love the underdog, are generally a bad thing.
Not in Marvel they aren't. With exceptions for Wolverine and the Punisher, the heroes in Marvel never pronounce sentence on the bad guys, they turn them over to law enforcement.
Marvel is pretty big on keeping characters dead, with a few exceptions..
Yeah, excepting just about everybody now. Norman Osbourne was the *one* major bad guy to actually stay dead for decades, until John Bryne brought him back in a fantastically shitty story line.
You fail reading comprehension 101.
I don't waste my time debating people who can't read.
Oh, he can read just fine, and you know it. You just don't like getting your butt kicked.
Except that Clinton didn't have massive conflicts of interest because he never worked at Haliburton.
pardons and commutations since the Nixon pardon. And, perhaps, the Marc Rich pardon as well.
Yes, Marc Rich was a bad pardon given the conflicts of interest, but it's not on the same planet as Libby's. Rich had to pay $100 million fine for the pardon to take effect, and Rich wasn't covering for Clinton and other officials in leaking intelligence information for political gain.
No, Libby's pardon is the worst since Bush pardoned everyone in the Iran Contra scandal that could have testified against him.
Because he lied and obstructed the investigation. Which is what he was charged and convicted for.
Let's remember there was no crime to begin with, and this was a case of a prosecutor run amok.
No, lets remember that both the judge and the prosecuting States Attorney were Bush appointees, and that anyone who recites the "there was no crime" excuse is full of shit.
That's right, the judge in this case was a Bush appointee.
So was Fiztgerald, the prosecuting States Attorney.
Yeah, well keep in mind that back during WWII the Democrats were not namby pamby wusses who thought that guns were evil
Which Democrats, exactly? Guiliani, Bloomberg, and George W. Bush?
we need to talk to the Nazis and have heart-to-heart to find out why they feel the way they do
Fine, don't talk to the Iranians. Just study history for two minutes and find out that we overthrew their peacefully elected, but *gasp* socialist government and installed a strongman to find out why they are pissed as us.
Reason magazine gives a good summary why the government shouldn't be involved with health care.
Reason is full of shit. Let's look at their claims:
But his radical prescriptions, which include a call for a British-style, single-payer system, will likely have little resonance with viewers.
The health insurance industry is in business to take premiums and deny claims. The movie is going to resonate with any American that has struggled to find decent insurance. It is going to resonate with any American who has had to pay through the nose for insurance. It's going to resonate with anyone who's had to fight their insurance provider to cover legitimate medical claims. And it will resonate with anyone who knows someone who has had a serious accident or illness but rapidly hit their benefit caps and have to run bake sales to cover medical costs.
As with much of his previous work, Moore's latest film is, by turns, touching, naïve and maddeningly mendacious, a clumsy piece of agitprop that will likely have little lasting effect on the health care debate.
And as with many of his previous films, Moore's critics are Pot calling the kettle Black. Case in point, Reason's naïvette and mendaciousness.
Take the case of four-year-old Elias Dillner. In 2004, Dillner's parents were told by doctors that their son too would benefit from cochlear implants. After being fitted with the first implant, Dillner's insurance provider said the second operation could not be "prioritized." The family would have to wait. "We will do anything," Elias's mother told reporters, "even if it means that we have to take out a loan for the operation." Without insurance, the second procedure would likely cost $40,000. But Dillner's truculent insurance provider was not Aetna or Kaiser, but the notoriously generous Swedish welfare state, where health care is "free."
Ah, the right wing's #1 tool in arguing against torts, unions, and nationalized health care: the anecdote. And then the Moore haters accuse him of "cherry picking". Reason spends the rest of their article doing just that: cherry picking.
But let's go ahead and ignore the statistics that prove that the U.S. lags far behind other industrialized nations, and for the sake of argument say that the U.S. system is no worse than Canada's or France's. But at least under socialized medicine, at least you wouldn't be throwing away trillions of dollars at useless middle men. Anyone who defends U.S. health care system is either ignorant, a Libertarian loon, or a tool for the insurance industry.
Further, Dr. Paul certainly knows much more about the health care system than you or I.
Dr. Paul seems to have real convictions and integrity, which in today's Republican party is like getting a shot of novocain after a root canal. But he's still a Libertarian loon.
Putting aside whether or not elections were "stolen" in the past (how can it be proven one way or another?)
We might never know about 2004, barring the appearance of some evidence or a few confessions. But 2000 definitely was stolen, and yes it was proven: a press recount showed that Gore would have won with a statewide recount, as provided for under Florida law.
I understand your caution, if you aren't a citizen. If that happens to me, the conversation will go like this:
Them: You can't take photos here.
Me: This is a public place. You have no right to privacy in a public place. Now get fucked before I call the cops on you for harassment.
Or if it's a cop, I will point out the same, then ask for his name, his badge number, his station phone number, and his supervisors name and phone number.
This should be love at first site to most Liberals. Any kind of Nannyism and tyrannical rules. Hard to discern which is worse at times...the Puritanical Right...or the Tyrannical Left. Just imagine Bloomberg as president...this is just a start as you can see by his rein in NYC.
So bricko, as long as we're throwing around bullshit ad hominems, just when did you stop beating your wife?
Bush may not be the most successful prez all round but he's been successful enough.
Successful at what? Wasting trillions of dollars, thousands of American lives, and our military on his incompetence?
And he's been a buttload more successful than leftie posterboys like Clinton.
If by "leftie" you mean "right of center", yes the Clintons are that. You want a real left winger, you need to go to Cuba.
Bottom line is that Reaganomics worked and socialism is largely discredited, and that's that.
Reaganomics worked? I guess if your definition of "worked" is inventing the trillion dollar national debt and starting the income divide that is getting worse and worse every day. And no, socialism wasn't discredited, it was overthrown by the CIA.
I still can't fathom why Apple chose to go exclusively with one provider.
Because it helped them get the features they wanted out of the carrier, like visual voicemail. And because some cell companies, especially Verizon, want to hobble the phones on their network so they can nickel and dime their customers to death while having the same crappy interface across all their phones.
That giant "whooosh" noise you just heard was the point sailing over your head.
Easy solution for that, too: the Senate has to confirm the nomination for a replacement VP. First impeach Cheney, and then impeach Bush before voting to confrim the nomination for Cheney's replacement.