....lybob

This board fascinates me - I believe that if someone leaked documents that proved J.F.K. was killed by the C.I.A., that 9/11 was an inside job, that we have an agreement with extraterrestrials that allows quotas for anal probing and organ harvests, and that Dick Cheney heads a Satanic cult of pedophiles- that the majority of this board would be pissed at the leaker- unless Obama was one of the Satanic pedophiles then outrage would be split.

yeah that's what I thought- embarrassing stuff about many countries Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, India, Israel,U.K. to name a few.

Probably mid-level bureaucratic peons who aren't getting a piece of the pie from the organized criminal cartels that masquerades as legitimate governments and would like nothing better than start a s#!t-storm for the basterds .

excuse me sir: can I have your autograph, and how about a cheek swab and a retinal scan not mentioned in the video but of interest to me is the docs showing we support the Kurdish (separationist/freedom fighters/terrorists, depending on what side your on) in Turkey- another slap in the face of a moderate secular Islamic country and N.A.T.O member- Turkey has had a fairly pro-american government but it is one of those Democracies that we like in the abstract but often find a pain in the a$$ in reality.

He almost called a foul but didn't in the spirit of bipartisanship.

Sounds good to me- I support someone because I think they have policies that would be good for the country not because of what team colors they wear. I voted for Obama because I saw him as a reputation of Bush/Cheney policies and McCain/Palin as a continuation of the Bush/Cheney policies- so if Obama continues Bush/Cheney policies why should I support him. I would rather the country have clear cut choices and if that means Palin/and a republican House and Senate then so be it. If under that right-wing administration the country flourishes we will have an answer and if the country crumbles we will also have an answer.

The volt is a good choice for car of the year not because it is the best value or best execution of a car but because it is the precursor to to our driving future.

Clinton had worked with Morris before and tried to hire Morris for the 1992 campaign - Morris refused because depending on which version you believe (there was an incident where Bill tackled him and was going to punch him until Hillary intervened) or ( Morris didn't think Bill had much of a chance and didn't want to be associated with a losing campaign). Clinton ran as a centrist and was a pragmatist, he had both right and left leaning legislation from day one of his administration and going right to the end. As to whether you perceived him moving left to right that is your perception, and just like your perception that Obama is a socialist it bears no resemblance to reality.

Are you the quantum leap guy- I ask because you seem to be from an alternative timeline- well maybe you're not as cool as the quantum leap guy- how about the fat windbag from sliders

I also don't get where you are coming from, Clinton ran as a moderate "NEW" democrat from the get go- after a dem congress in his first two years he had Republican the next six, is that what you are trying to get at? this is a timeline of Clinton's legislation why don't you show us where he changed himself after two years.

No matter what party is in power the new great game goes on unabated- 65+ years and going strong will probably go on another 65+ years at least.

Obama has done so many things to de-energized his base this is small potatoes- at least the Saudis are actually paying for the Jets not getting them as a bribe like the Israel deal offered.

find it yourself - don't you get the Rand philosophy.

My link Thought they did a pretty good job but left out changes in accounting rules and agencies who also should get smacked a little bit just like the rating agencies.

I love cookie

geez at least someone can get a joke- look at the Heath Shuler thread to see what I go through.

99.9999% of people have never had a meaningful original thought, we are really arguing about the value of our derivative sources- and I'm not making this up I read it somewhere.

yippy someone knows how to play the game.

I have to say that Shuler has a distinct advantage in a lame duck congress because if anyone know wounded ducks it's Heath Shuler.

You may not think Shuler has the Dems scrambling but they were thrown for a loss, Shuler is running strong and he's tackling some tough issues and some think what he threw out there was accurate and well targeted but others think his comments were out of bounds the question is will they be well received or will it all spiral out of control, did Nancy drop the ball and fumble an opportunity to reach the goal? we will have to see who has more support in the trenches, well Shuler seems ambitious going for the whole nine yards but it might be a false start that he will be severely penalized for.

I can understand if you think my trash talking is unsportsmanlike conduct but Shuler has the Democrats scrambling, you think a guy has a conservative game plan then he throws up a hail Mary without huddling with his team leaders, it's not that I'd like to see him sacked or traded but being so public with his Monday morning Quarterbacking of Pelosi seems like a rookie mistake.

Shuler has proven to be a better blocker than passer in congress and just like in football he can at times seem to be purposefully helping the opposing team, you do have to admire his versatility and guts in trying a low percentage end around play but he may have his legs cut from under him- I don't know about his political health but I once saw him on TV where he suffered a strained analogy- although in retrospect I think the audience suffered more.

I think he has a good chance at beating her as long as it has nothing to do with passing a football- and one thing I can say about Heath Shuler is that he better than anyone should be able to recognize a leader who can't lead a team to victory.

your right when I wrote Agriculture I did not mean "Joe a couple hundred acres family farmer" I meant ADM, Monsanto etc- I probably should have said the multinational Food producing, processing, and distribution industry- As for your other point my Mom was raised on a dairy farm and there are a lot of farmers on her side of the family- so I know government both giveth and taketh away, Farming is hard work and you have to be able to adapt fast, most of my uncles, now cousins were mainly in dairy but after the consolidation they concentrate more into fruit, my uncle George had one of the first farms to use dwarf fruit trees in WNY.

Magox I don't mind you and TPS hijacking my thread I find the back and forth pretty interesting. But my real interest is does anyone see Capital controls as a small reemergence of the national perspective as opposed to the global perspective. I will state here that I see many of America's problems as a acceleratingly unequal yoking between the American nation state and the American corporate governance multinationals. I think that many of the heads of the multinationals have an almost religious view of their purpose as portrayed by this scene from Network When Lloyd Blankfein says he's doing God's work I don't think he's being disingenuous I think he believes that Goldman Sachs and the financial industry as a whole is a force of nature like the weather, and if they cause a flood here and a drought there it is insignificant when compared to how they make the flowers,trees and crops to grow.