EvilMonkey

QUOTE (greg775 @ Sep 5, 2015 -> 06:40 PM) If Hillary loses, drinks are on me up to 200 bucks at a Sox game someday (dunno why I stopped at 200). Yeah, that is only what, 5 beers?

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Aug 26, 2015 -> 04:58 PM) I love that argument. If the US military ever decided to go crazy and control people, it'd be game over in about 10 seconds. Just like the Russians controlled all those insurgents in Afganistan many years ago? If the 'military' ever decided to go crazy, you can bet a sizable chunk would disobey those orders and there would be chaos.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 26, 2015 -> 03:07 PM) Well, when a guy uses "social media" to basically publicize his murder of two people and he shoots and kills two TV people while they are on live TV and it's broadcast live, that is horrifying news that will be shown nationwide. Unfortunately these social media platforms will lead to more of this. It's just very sad. But of course you are right about video being more and more influential. People can tape their own vile unlawful disgusting actions such as today's. Can you imagine today's horror? Two people working at a TV station who both are dating/in love with two other people at the station are murdered while at work today. Sad and awful. Ban social media then.

QUOTE (HickoryHuskers @ Aug 24, 2015 -> 08:10 AM) OK, there isn't a general auto racing thread and I didn't really want to start a whole new one, so I just put this here. Just under four years after Dan Wheldon lost his life on the track, IndyCar has another driver in a coma and in critical condition. Justin Wilson was hit in the head yesterday by debris from a wreck in front of him. It knocked him out cold which in turn sent his car head first into the wall. Obvious concern for Justin but also for the sport since a second on-track death in four years could really damage the sport. The connection to Tony Stewart: he loaned his plane/pilots free of charge to Justin's family memebers to fly from Indy to Pennsylvania, where Justin is hospitalized. Not to sound morbid, but damage it how? Unless you mean by lawyers,I don't see it. People tune in to see crashed, the drivers live to drive (even if it kills them) so I don't see them willingly stopping.

I would go with Wells. I hated him when he tried to call out Thomas for not playing hurt.

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 22, 2015 -> 03:49 AM) They are checking handbags and backpacks here in Lawrence. Seems kind of silly. The low paid movie people are all teenagers. They are checking handbags for contraband FOOD. This gives them the cover to do it. previously if they did, patrons would raise a stink about it.

neither link says that he chased them two houses away and killed him. They say he chased them into the yard and shot them. From what the two stories say, the guy who got shot could have ran the two houses away before he died.

QUOTE (DrunkBomber @ Aug 21, 2015 -> 12:54 AM) http://www.vice.com/read/how-jared-fogle-w...d-in-prison-820 Looks like your avitar is doing to that fish what some of the inmates will do to Jared...

Those Tea-party bastards at AP don't like the deal much. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/a9f4e408039...-nuke-work-site VIENNA (AP) — Iran will be allowed to use its own inspectors to investigate a site it has been accused of using to develop nuclear arms, operating under a secret agreement with the U.N. agency that normally carries out such work, according to a document seen by The Associated Press . . ."International inspections should be done by international inspectors. Period. The standard of 'anywhere, anytime' inspections - so critical to a viable agreement - has dropped to 'when Iran wants, where Iran wants, on Iran's terms,'" said U.S. House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Ed Royce in a reaction typical of opponents of the broader deal. Yeah, an agreement with some TEETH! What difference is there between this and 'letting it crumble' as you say? We should at least be keeping that cash and not returning it. Call it payment for all the inspections we don't get to do.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 14, 2015 -> 12:41 PM) Last month a group of Senators met with the negotiating representatives of the other major powers in the agreement & heard their positions about what would happen if the US voted down this deal. Of course they would. Follow the money! http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/6339/ira...uropeans-profit

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 15, 2015 -> 12:35 AM) Unless there's proof that PP is "profiting greatly" (and that would have to be defined, which would be hard to do to anyone's satisfaction) from the tissue above and beyond the normal costs/fees that are passed on in similar situations, I'm not sure what the great stink is all about. If they are profiting AT ALL, it is illegal. They should know what thier costs are so they can recoup them, if that's all they are doing. But instead they are making money off it, which is illegal. Change the law if you don't like it, but it is illegal.

QUOTE (caulfield12 @ Aug 14, 2015 -> 08:06 PM) 1) Every year, it's the same thing. Cut government waste. Cut foreign aid. Help our own people, etc. 2) The fact of the matter is that numbers aren't going to be adding up over the next 15-25 years with entitlement programs. Other than raising taxes or raising retirement ages, how are you going to control costs when a higher percentage are retired than working? There's a saying, reforming entitlements is the third rail of American politics...and anyone who runs on raising taxes (Mondale/Dukakis) or actually does it (Bush Sr.) gets crucified eventually. 3) Lots of super rich people think it's basically ridiculous they still receive social security, but try taking it away. Indexing that in terms of net worth would be one step, but even progressive moves like that aren't palatable. 4)0Obamacare was our effort to reign in medical care costs, which continue to skyrocket (especially compared to countries like Norway, Finland and Sweden that do it much more cost-effectively with outcomes that are often better despite our spending 2-3x as much.) 5) As far as government workers vs. private, how do you propose to find a balance when so much of compensation is tied to stock options/ipos/capital gains....often for financial services companies/banks that bring about moral hazard with their reckless behavior, and who are eventually bailed out by those same middle class workers who pay higher tax rates than Warren Buffett. So they want to take away pensions from government workers...what are private workers willing to surrender? High risk, high reward. Is it fair that the private sector never seems to pay the consequences for risky behavior...that the Enrons of the world are few and far between, and, even then, most high level officials escape any real consequences (Mozilo/Countrywide Loans, for example) over abd over again. 6) If you want to cut waste, why don't you take on all the churches/charities/501 c 3's who take in billions of dollars and spend it on executive salaries, fundraising, posh dinners and congratulating themselves when the lion's share of money isn't going into direct services that are beneficial to everyday people? If you held them accountable and actually withdrew their tax exempt status in the case of poorly run organizations, you'd probably be more effective than trying to reform the government. 1) YEs, do it now 2) You are correct, trying to fix a system that is broke somehow becomes political suicide. We need someone not interested in reelection to even have a shot. BUt two-termers are more worried about their 'legacy'. 3) Same as #2, however you can't do nothing. Cut programs where you can. So what is the saving is 'only' $50 millions. Cut enough and it will eventually add up to something. Every damn agency should have to start with zero budget accounting and have to justify their budget every year. None of this 'spend it or lose it next year', no automatic increases. They should all get an immediate 10% cut, actual cut as opposed to reduction in increase, and then go from there. And if the agencies decide to teach us a lesson by laying off people that would be the most painful instead of the 4 buddies who have corner offices and don't do s***, well, you fire those directors immediately. You can't do nothing because it, by itself, won't solve things. 4) So we spend 2x-3x more than other countries on education and still suck at it. You want government to try that with healthcare, which according to you is already at that ratio of suckage? 5) Most private workers don't have pensions anymore, so those are already sacrificed. With the job security they have, do they really need to have such high end retirement systems in place? Why is SS not good enough for government employees? Seriously, why are they not on it like everyone else? 6) I don't have a problem making churches pay taxes. As long as you also apply that to all the damn 'foundations' out there sitting on billions in cash. But once the churches pay tax, look for them to get even more involved in politics. With no tax exempt status to worry about, can catholic churches start pushing catholic politicians to go pro-life? Sure can. As for other 501-c3's, by all means audit them. Most are poorly run as most of the money brought in goes for overhead, salaries and fundraising.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 15, 2015 -> 10:15 AM) The debt to GDP ratio is not projected to increase until after ~2025 and that is improving every year as the Affordable Care Act's effectiveness in controlling costs becomes more obvious. So basically, we are not "spending beyond our means" and we've improved the long-term budgetary situation over the next 15+ years. By the time the full cost control measures of the Affordable Care Act take hold (the "Cadillac Tax and the hugely important Independent Payment Advisory Board have yet to be implemented) there is a good chance that the long term budget issues have been completely dealt with during the Obama Administration, barring additional tax cuts or another economic collapse. It will just be a matter of putting money where it needs to go to meet the current obligations. So the answer is 'no'.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 14, 2015 -> 04:15 PM) "Slightly lower rate" If I use the phrase "Adam LaRoche is hitting HR at a slightly lower rate than last year", the dropoff in the budget deficit is still larger. Has he passed a balanced budget or is he spending beyond our means?

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 14, 2015 -> 02:38 PM) The deficit is shrinking? How so. I thought it gets bigger every day and is soon to cripple us from what they're saying. it will be the end of us when it reaches a certain number he said. All what SS means is that he is still spending more than we take in, just doing it at a slightly lower rate. Still can't balance a budget. Still adding to the amount we all owe.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Aug 14, 2015 -> 12:45 PM) No, they donate it, and are allowed to charge a fee for shipping/handling/storage. This is how all medical donation works. Sounds like you just accepted the anti-PP claims at face value. And sounds like you have equally accepted the PP version. That's fine. But when they negotiate the pricing, that isn't 'recouping costs'.

QUOTE (CrimsonWeltall @ Aug 14, 2015 -> 08:22 AM) How so? Ben Carson is outraged that Planned Parenthood would donate aborted fetal tissue to medical researchers. Ben Carson formerly performed medical research involving donated aborted fetal tissue. They don't 'donate' anything, they sell it. Big difference. And they need the consent of the women to even do that, which the last 2 videos claim they rarely got.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Aug 13, 2015 -> 02:31 PM) It tells us about Republican primary voters and who may ultimately get the nomination and what they might have to do/say on their way. The underlying story being presented is sort of the opposite of what Matt Bai thinks it is. It's not that the entirety of the Republican party backs Trump or what he's saying or that a majority of the general population does. But there is minority of Republican voters who lap up his "gives no f***s" attitude, the nativism, the sexism, the racism, and that may be influential enough in the primary season that it will damage the Republican (whoever he ends up being) in the general election by forcing them to tack hard to the right. The "both sides!" without any actual examples is a nice touch, though. Matt Bai is pretty consistently wrong, such as when he predicted that Jon Hunstman would eventually be the reasonable, aspiring politician that would be the Republican nominee in 2012. Because we all know that there are no crazies on the Democrat side.

Most of Trump's support will go away fast. I know people who are having fun with this, but who would never actually vote for him. I think the rest of the field should take note, however, that there is a sizable chunk of voters that want them to speak up. They don't have to be so un-PC about it, but they don't have to walk on eggshells either. Talk about border security. Stop being afraid of being called a racist.

Very nice.

Here's why liberals think that anyone with a gun will go crazy at a moments notice and start shooting. Its because THEY would do it if they had guns. Projection. I say we start by banning liberals from having guns. That should reduce the crime rate almost right away. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/10...n-at-boyfriend/

QUOTE (greg775 @ Aug 9, 2015 -> 03:09 PM) I guess it's possible those other candidates are so bad, so boring, so ordinary that he gets the nomination. But my gut is telling me people are LOVING somebody speaking his mind and not acting like a politician but ULTIMATELY Trump and his wild hairdo will start to bore a populace that likes to move on to the next great thing. \ I believe that is where most of his appeal is coming from. There is a big PC backlash and it is somewhat refreshing to see someone go without a filter. I believe most people want SOMETHING done about illegal immigration and everyone else is afraid to talk about it unless they are kissing the amnesty crowd's asses, so when he goes off about deporting everyone and electrified fances etc., people like that they are hearing something for a change, even if it isn't something the wholeheartedly agree on.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Aug 7, 2015 -> 04:50 PM) Are you guys willing to invade and occupy Iran for a 10+ year period? Why is that the only other option? How about doing some actual negotiations. Obama got pants. Kerry got pants. Iran is laughing at them right in their faces and they can't even see it. How about some actual inspections? How about someone independent getting samples? How about no 30 day waiting period. What the hell do we get out of this except a piece of paper that says something that won't happen?

QUOTE (Cknolls @ Aug 7, 2015 -> 02:18 PM) Well its a good sign that Iran will comply with the agreement, after all the Quds Force General just travelled to Russia against currently imposed UN Sanctions... Do you want war? Shut up and let them do what they want!!! Treaties? They don't need no stinkin' treaties!!! That's a deal with the Great Satan. Death to America!!!!!

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Aug 7, 2015 -> 01:26 PM) Said with zero evidence to back it up. As Alpha pointed out before, don't think if that situation happened in the last 10 years, even once, that anti-gun nuts would be screaming about it from the mountaintops? I've literally never heard of that happening, where a would-be vigilante ending up killing or hurting someone. Never. I'm sure it's happened, but obviously not to a degree that we hear about it as a legitimate problem. Although you do get Balta screaming about how someone ALMOST did something wrong during the Giffords episode...