mr_genius

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Sep 19, 2007 -> 04:36 PM) No Sledgehammer?!? This list is a disgrace. i completely agree

http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/gor...1696238792.html *stirs the pot a little*

QUOTE(Gregory Pratt @ Oct 12, 2007 -> 09:25 PM) Way to respond to bulls*** with bulls*** Thanks, that was pretty much the point

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 12, 2007 -> 09:30 PM) If William Henry Harrison's inauguration speech had been shorter...9/11 would never have happened! BS! It would have still happened! Now, If Thomas Hart Benson doesn't shoot Andrew Jackson in that duel....then probably no 911.

What? The US Government was plotting against Jimmy Carter? 911 was an inside job. There is no way Reagan is responsible for 911 or other major AQ projects. . Bill Clinton? Yea, that would be a better explanation. then the rhetoric would be that the US is performing 'ethnic cleansing of innocent arabs through starvation embargoes'.

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Oct 12, 2007 -> 08:28 PM) d) bad move by Reagan supporting those dictators. but for some reason you like to gloss over atrocities conducted during soviet rule I never said I glossed over Soviet atrocities. Maoist and Stalinist bloodbaths were absolutely horrid. However, the fact that these took place do not make the backing of Pinochet, the support of the Samozas, etc. seem any better by comparison. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it. As I tell my students -- just because a kid was mean to you does not mean that you have carte blanche to be mean back. e) refer to d). f) a very opportunistic "anti-saddam" statement. so, what, GW Bush shouldn't have righted this wrong? or should he have? It's just one thing to make a bunch of money off the Middle Eastern client state for years, turning a blind eye to ethnic cleansing and even going about helping to arm and fund it in the name of the 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' ideology while claiming that we don't support terrorist activities. Righting the wrong would be to stop funding, arming and assisting a regime that flouts human rights. g) macros regime? Marcos regime in the Philippines -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferdinand_Marcos h) oh yes, aparthied was Reagan's fault. of course. i) don't you know? Reagan created aids to kill black people and gays. duh. It's amazing that he cuts funding for these diseases and to help the poor yet spends money with corporate welfare. Actually, there is still some bitterness on the far-left due to the fact that their accusations and insistence that Reagan was SURELY going to nuke the world, was an evil dictator, created aids in a lab, ect. has all been proven false. There is a lot of far-left rage that their foolish assements will be marked in history and they are desperately seeking some cover. Thanks for the memories, Ron. We're living with the bulls*** you've festered upon us for generations to come, Mr. Ronald "pollution comes mainly from trees" Reagan. you are making it sound like Reagan was respectfully saluting dead Nazi's. he was went to a graveyard which had some SS guys buried there, spoke of how horrible the Nazi's were, and said that some young germans forced to fight were also victims. yea, some people made a big deal out of it, kinda like they do now-a-days with just about everything.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Oct 12, 2007 -> 07:55 PM) That's a very flawed argument. which one? the assessment that mid/high range salaries are often considered a profit liability by corporations ?

Red Sox really look unstoppable

QUOTE(LowerCaseRepublican @ Oct 12, 2007 -> 06:48 PM) a. the US hostages that were needlessly kept in Iran as a political tool to help Reagan's election in 1980 b. the people who have had their lives ended, destroyed and irrevocably altered due to the actions of bin Laden, Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations that were armed, trained and funded by the Reaganistas c. the families of Holocaust survivors when St. Ronald of Reagan went to lay a wreath at the graves of SS officers in Bitburg d. the people needlessly killed by authoritarians that we sided with (i.e. Pinochet) in Latin America throughout the 1980's simply because they said they were 'anti-Communist' and human rights be damned e. the families of Ita Ford, Oscar Romero, the citizens of El Mazote and numerous other places where US backed and trained thugs like the Atacotl batallion slaughtered unarmed women, children and church workers in the name of anti-Communism while being funded by the Reagan administration f. the people who lost loved ones when the US supported the Shah of Iran and the thuggery of Saddam Hussein -- arming both sides during the Iran/Iraq war and fully facilitating the gassing of thousands of Kurds in ethnic cleansing g. the people subjugated by the Marcos regime h. the people who suffered under apartheid as he supported the apartheid regime i. the people who suffered from AIDS and other diseases as he drastically cut funding to research and treat these diseases, yet always found money for corporate welfare and the billions to be pilfered from Savings and Loan a) flawed argument, Reagan can't be blamed for the hostage crisis that happened during the Carter admin b ) the notion that Al Queda is merely a creation of Ronald Reagan is inaccurate to say the least. a very simplistic and fatally flawed conclusion. c) way over the top. are you some how implying Reagan supported Nazims? d) bad move by Reagan supporting those dictators. but for some reason you like to gloss over atrocities conducted during soviet rule e) refer to d). f) a very opportunistic "anti-saddam" statement. so, what, GW Bush shouldn't have righted this wrong? or should he have? g) macros regime? h) oh yes, aparthied was Reagan's fault. of course. i) don't you know? Reagan created aids to kill black people and gays. duh. Actually, there is still some bitterness on the far-left due to the fact that their accusations and insistence that Reagan was SURELY going to nuke the world, was an evil dictator, created aids in a lab, ect. has all been proven false. There is a lot of far-left rage that their foolish assements will be marked in history and they are desperately seeking some cover.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 12, 2007 -> 06:26 PM) And eventually, it's going to be this movement that drives something to finally change. Because when 20% of Americans feel their jobs are threatened, it's a bad thing, but not always enough to overcome the people with a lot of money. But when doctors, lawyers, accountants, and so forth start feeling threatened because it's fairly easy to train a person in China or India to do their exact job for 1/4 of the price, and 50-75% of Americans suddenly feel like their job could be outsourced...that's the kind of motivation that gets the government actually involved. A lot of people have had the notion of "well, I can't be outsources. Only factory workers and low class, uneducated people can" or "no one can do my job as good as me". That's definitely not the case. Many mid/high range salaries are considered to be a liability in today's corporate profit system.

http://stripes.com/article.asp?section=104&article=49460

Outsourcing will continue to spread the gap. I know a lot of companies are now starting to outsource HR, and Accounting. Increased profits, less good paying jobs in the US. I know some major corporations that want outsource around 20% of all HR and Accounting jobs. Also, Engineering, Chemisty and Computer Science are getting heavily outsourced. I know for a fact that one of the major US drug manufacturers in the US already outsources 20% of scientific research to China. Engineering outsourcing has really picked up, and IT outsourcing has been going on for a while. Due to outsourcing fears, I know that the number of Computer Science grads has dropped around 17% - 20%, and companies don't want to outsource they're critical IT systems, but there is such a lack of new people coming in they might have to in the not too distant future. A circular problem I guess.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Oct 12, 2007 -> 11:42 AM) You've got it backwards... they invade us. burn

QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Oct 12, 2007 -> 02:04 PM) Rowand's not worth half that. Not even close. that would be a six-year, $42 million contract. I would sign him for that.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 12, 2007 -> 03:56 PM) You can't be serious. Its OK to bash Gore, someone says Reagan did more than Gore, and its NOT OK to bash Reagan? incorrect. In a thread about Al Gore, a Reagan mocking post was at post #3, by Texsox. No one had brought him up until that. I understand that these threads often veer off, and I am at times the culprit, but i think it would be more appropriate to start a "Reagan was a big fat idiot" thread on it's own rather start that kind of stuff at post #3 in a thread about world peace.

QUOTE(Rex Kicka** @ Oct 12, 2007 -> 11:24 AM) The truth is, the USSR rather enjoyed the barrier between East and West, because accomodations like a divided East and West Germany helped fund a crumbling economy. Of course they liked occupying half of Germany, as they liked controlling Poland and a bunch of other countries. The failed economic system of communism was a major factor in the collapse, but Reagan's policies helped push things over the edge and allowed millions of people to freed from authoritarianism. The claim that Reagan's policies helped the Soviet Union are false. Reagan put increased financial and political pressure on the government, and he also maintained a strong NATO coalition. The cold war was waged over the terms of many presidents, and Reagan certainly did his fair share.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Oct 11, 2007 -> 09:26 PM) fair and logical. the "O'Spock factor", now on FOX news

Actually, I do see a link between raising environmental standards and peace. It is a point of contention between countries. Oh and the Reagan bashing, which started completely out of nowhere, is uncalled for. Honestly, the guy did a lot for democracy, personal freedom from authoritarianism , and the signing of non-proliferation treaties.

bags is a great game still not as good as horseshoes

Someone get John Edwards on the phone! time for a nice payday! http://www.suntimes.com/news/nation/598343...S-sue11.article

if it wasn't for that unfortunate machinery accident at the 'Star Fish Tuna' factory, just imagine how many Grammy's you would have won by now.

QUOTE(sox4lifeinPA @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 10:22 AM) They never have crappy jobs on the OC...and everyone's either a doctor, a lawyer, or a politician on tv. jason must be right. My summer job in high school was lawyer. I never lost a case. EVER.

Joy riding is against the law now?

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Oct 10, 2007 -> 05:40 PM) None with Paul's profile, and none who can get even 1% of the electorate. Paul, with the millions he has rasied, could get a lot more than that. Paul ran as a libertarian before, in 1988 I believe. But I guess he could run as an independent and pull a Ross Perot on the GOP.