birdog1960

weather related claims: avg of 50 bil/yr in the 80's. nearly 200 bio/yr over the last 10. no, i don't see it as a good thing at all. increased risk to life and property is never good.

"the legitimate redistribution of economic benefits by the state..." is what he said. i have no idea where you quotes come from but they're not from the article you linked. this pope speaks very plainly. it takes real and largely unsatisfying effort by those attempting to parse his words into something other than what he clearly means. i doubt you're fooling anyone but yourself.

i guess the insurance industry is overreacting: http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/may/08/lloyds-insurer-account-climate-change-extreme-weather-losses

of course he does. read between the lines. it's often where the truth lies: http://www.huffingto..._n_5299307.html. more simply, follow the money.

i replaced "satanists"" with "rastas" because i didn't want to offend you. but let's just watch and see how compliant the good people of deerfield beach are to this request.

the pomp and opulence can get in the way for some people. i think st peter's basilica is breathtaking and inspirational. i see many of the treasures in the vatican as remnants of a bygone era when the church acted as one of the world's major and most important arts benefactors. one could argue that they divest themselves of all the treasures but if sold to individuals, the public would likely be denied access to many of the works. in effect, ther vatican is in this way acting as an extremely popular and accessible museum. that certainly shouldn't be it's main focus and it isn't. francis is clearly not interested in personal wealth and institutional wealth, where it exists in the church, is under intense scrutiny.

the article i linked highlighted the pope's comments on abortion as well as redistribution. i've read several others and they've all mentioned it. there's no inconsistency in his statements. there's really no argument as to what he really means on these two issues. the redistribution issue is of higher priority to many people, Christian or not. that i chose to highlight his comments on economic issues illustrates that it is for me. it doesn't follow that I or anyone else that agrees with his stance on redistribution disagree with any of his other opinions. you must go to different hotels in vegas than any i've ever been in. i've been to the vatican as well and i had a very different experience. perhaps you should attend a mass there. maybe a guided tour of the art works in and around the vatican (not that they are integral to the faith but beauty is wasted if not appreciated). i see no similarities between the two places whatever. and did you find jerusalem similar to vegas as well?

http://news.yahoo.com/pope-demands-legitimate-redistribution-wealth-103132075.html?.tsrc=lgwnForceRecrawl:0/. staying on point.

which begs the question, why was this the year? 7 years without the playoffs not enough? 10? 13? no one knows how this move will turn out. the history of the draft shows repeatedly that there is no sure thing. there's a fine line between brilliant and reckless. but actually trying to win right away is a refreshing change from the bills history of the last decade, for whatever reason.

in north carolina? among conservativers? what's important is how it played to moderates. this is one of many contests that will allow us some insight. kinda what i was thinking...

wow. does your crystal ball work for the stock market?

reading your posts, one would conclude that she was actually losing in the polls. she's ahead despite her appropriate support of the aca and running in a state turning more right by the minute.

while it's not my style, using the same tactics frequently employed by conservatives on this site seems fair game. class and dignity have frequently been in short supply.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2014/senate/nc/north_carolina_senate_tillis_vs_hagan-3497.html

which one. i like the lower far right, double' entendre intended. it really shouldn't be a contest in nc. never would have been if not for howard dean's insistence that dems could win in previously considered write- off states like it. as it is, hagen has a very good chance of retaining her seat. and very little changes for 2 years regardless, including the aca. obama wields veto power.

she's very likely correct. he's far right enough to win the primary in a state with a very conservative repug base. he's likely become more that way due to tea party candidates chances of winning. at any rate, she's far from crazy. it's smart politics to paint your opponents as extremists. even smarter if it's also true.

yup. i can see the logic. similar scale, scope and consequences on a national and international level for events in iraq and libya (especially bengazi). ya'll are fanatics. proportion is a useful concept.

in a bman mood today: http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/06/opinion/kohn-benghazi-gop/index.html?iid=article_sidebar

It's important that this not be seen as a victory for "moderate" repugs over "far right" repugs. the truth is that the entire GOP has shifted to the right and these are all contests betyween different factions of conservative republicanism rather than a true ideological war within the party. http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/07/opinion/zelizer-tea-party-fading-primaries/index.html

from the newspaper of the largest physician specialty organization in the US and the world: http://www.acpinternist.org/archives/2014/05/washington.htm. I fully agree.

zero and i certainly don't wish it on myself or anyone else.

He's the new normal: http://www.policymic...y-be-in-poverty. 40% of americans will live at least 1 year in poverty. 1/2 of all children will live in a household using food stamps for some time. ama zing how those here seem to defy the statisitics. if they were typical, it might change their perspective.

how would you feel about druid chants, hari krishna singing, pagan sexual rites or rasta pot smoking to begin a govt meeting? they don't belong as part official gov't activities and neither do more mainstream religious rituals.

there's a reasonable intermediate position between not responding to racist remarks and being obsessed with racism. greggy doesn't appear obsessed to me. some of the posters here have not responded and some have been apologists for a racist remark which is another polar extreme position. on this board, ignoring the statement would appear to be the middle ground. at huff po, that would be far from the middle. and in a mythical but imaginable cross sectional america (you know, with faces of many colors like at the dem national convention and not the repug one) i believe it would be far from the middle as well. so i'd think it wise to keep your opinion on my or anyone elses opinion in that context. a big problem that i have with this episode is that the powers that be in right wing media chose to elevate this moron to cult hero status. when he says something this inflammtory, they defend him rather than condemn him. it's obvious to everyone but his jaded relatively few sympathizers that the man is overtly racist. same for sterling. they are both clearly on the wrong side of the issue but some will never admit that. then again, there are those (quite a few actually) that still believe the north was on the wrong side in the civil war.

if you can't beat em, be an !@#$...