OCinBuffalo

Actually...Medicare and Medicaid is a much bigger problem. We have attracted the poor and elderly from other states at an alarming clip over the last 20 years, because our medicaid standards are "prime rib" while most other states are "mac and cheese". If you saw the numbers and what we paying out due to this migration, you'd cry. We are like the assclown Statue of Liberty...give me your poor, huddled masses...and we will make them dependent on us, make them live in crappy apartments, stand in line for hours to get a pittance, dehumanize them at the grocery store...and call ourselves "Compassionate".

Oh I guarantee it takes them longer to read them than me to write them. So, "battle of attrition" . conner: Read a sentence. Google "battle of attrition". Read another sentence. Google. And so on.

Well, well, what do we have here? Just when I think I am done.... Ron Paul sounded good on 60% of his responses, but then sounded like a doddering old fool on 40%, and they were more memorable. He's not helping libertarians at this point. He's helping himself to attention, and he's getting some of the message out. But, honestly?, for as much as I was happy to see him last time around, it's time to go.

No, it was basically what I remembered from a book I read about Alexander the great. Actually a lot of it was verbatim, because I just seemed to remember it and out it went onto the screen. So, yeah, I was basically regurgitating a text book....and making conner?, might have been somebody else, read it. Probably the first text he's ever read beyond 9th grade material.

Yes, I did, and I was trolling conner, pBrain and I forget the other poster that day. The point was not the plan, the point was to the thread and make them read long posts. That was my punishment for conner, for quite literally years. The reasoning being: the more time he spends reading long posts, the less time he has to start new threads. He, and especially Moslon Golden, who was probably the same person, would start 20 threads a day. All were crap. So, I responded. The funny part is I just write as much as I can as fast as I can, and they never were really able to find fault with it...even though there were often glaring errors. Makes me But, you didn't know any of this, so turns out I was also trolling you. Nice work. As far as you are concerned: Stop being a phony, Peace, and things will go better for you here.

It's a DaveElma thread...so, ...duh!

Hmm. I can see what you are saying, and it makes Obama look silly, again... But, honestly, all goofing aside? I am not too worried about an army of fat, lazy, ignorant people, and I doubt the TEA party is either.. The only thing they really can do is vote. But we already knew that. I don't expect massive funds/ground game to come out of these people. Even if they produce some...the TEA party will produce much more.

The whole thing is just to set up the Sarkozy thing. France's New Napolean....and chicot is over here giving me a hard time. It is plausible though...I am not saying smart, or reasoned...just plausible. EDIT: I'm just hoping he reads that before he reads this.

Uh, isn't this this the exact thinking that got us into this mess, and other messes like Medicare, in the first place? What happens when we apply the same thinking to everything else, like we have since the 1930s? Then everything is 'a budgeting issue'? Then we end up with incremental spending that becomes massive and no accountability. And, what right do we have to determine what is happening 75 years in the future? Do you honestly believe pieces of paper being hand carried from one place to another will be how we do things..75 f'ing years from now? What happens if we had funded pensions for buggy whip makers 100 years ago? Enough of the one-size-fits all. Put every postal worker on a 401k, and be done with this ridiculousness. When I say "progressives" aren't for real "progress", and never will be, this is what I mean. "Progressives" are for holding onto their Norman Rockwellian programs from the last century, with no changes, for as long as possible, or until they die. Look at my sig, think Norman Rockwell, and then think Buftex in her apron, bringing her husband his whiskey and paper. That's your "progressive".

Learn how to read a map. Serve as an officer in a real Army...then get back to me. Saddam ceased being useful to us the minute his war with Iran ended. You don't understand the plan? Ok, I will explain it to you: Afghanistan is on one border of Iran, and, we were going in there no matter what. Oh, an opportunity presents itself! Iraq and Kuwait on the other border, which provide a secured supply line to the sea. Every other border Iran has is either hostile/unwilling to help, or inaccessible to armor/vehicles = supply is easy to cut off. Meanwhile, the "axis of evil" speech clearly defined the enemy. The "big oil" guys, Bush and Cheney, certainly know where their oil comes from, don't they? Not Iraq, so why else should we attack them? WMDs? Please. That was just a smoke screen that got unintentionally politicized. They miscalculated, big. They thought the Democrats wouldn't dare oppose Bush in a time of war, and in truth, most of them didn't, but, they didn't stay that way. You invade Iraq, and now we have massed armor and infantry with nothing between them and Tehran but open terrain. The Iranian Army is much bigger than Iraq's, so, you don't want to fight them on one front...that's where Afghanistan comes in. You use the Airborne Corps and Rangers from Afghan bases to constantly raid their rear areas, and force them to divide that army. Plus we have air superiority. You use the harassment from the Afghan border to draw them out, and hammer them with air. Keep taking ground slowly, goading them into a major battle on the ground you want. And, when they take the bait, it's over. The goal was Iran, and that's also why they didn't see the possibility of getting bogged down in Iraq. They didn't want to see it. This is classic groupthink. They had no plan for post-assault Iraq, because phase 2 was always assault Iran. Look, our military planners are excellent. But, they don't decide what they plan for or why. You can't tell me they were told to plan for occupation and counter-insurgency. They did nothing of the things they would have had to do if that was the plan, until much later. I am not saying I like what they did, I have no opinion about it, because that's for politicians to decide = people who have all the intelligence, unlike you. You can say you don't like it. I don't really care, because your opinion is uninformed. But none of this means I can unknow what I know. Our guys just asked for permission to attack Iran(link above).....so who's right? Dick Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. knew that once we deployed, there was no going back. We will use this strategy to stop Iran from getting a nuke, unless Iran implodes/has a revolution, and there's nothing anyone can do to stop it, certainly not Obama. Here's the fun part: Hell chicot...aren't you French? Sarkozy said he wants to to attack Iran. Love how the Russians call him the New Napoleon. I wonder: if Sarkozy wants to attack Iran, whose bases will he use? Whose lines of communication? Whose air power will he ask for? Whose strategy will be used? Will he ask for harassment from Afghanistan? It's already starting....

Surprise....don't forget the word surprise. It's bound to be in there. This way, they weren't wrong...they were...surprised. Who doesn't like a surprise? Hell, under your scenario, Sports Center will run a "who is the biggest surprise team so far?" poll around week 8, and then say "see the fans were surprised too".

You're conveniently leaving out the Harvard and Berkley professors whose stated objective was to deal with the economy on the whole. Paulson was a Bush guy, and he only worked on TARP. Bernanke was simply reacting monetarily to what was happening fiscally, and the only one of these three who is still around on that side is Geithner, but Christina Romer, etc are the real culprits here. What did they do? They funneled 80% of the money into non-multiplier things...like giving money to states for the "Fireman, Teachers, and Police", all of which was not Stimulative. This notion of infrastructure is nothing more than: pay off the unions, both public and private, by not only propping up the broken system they have negotiated/elected people into, but also trying to expand it. There was no money, other than stimulus money, that could have propped it up. Then, when the money ran out, the states were left with real trouble = 2010 elections = the ass fell out of the thing anyway. All the stimulus did was delay the inevitable. It was giant waste of money, and it was politically foolish. When I say: they are not Keynesians, they are socialists-->expanding the public sector in a recession as a "solution", that's what I mean. This is getting to the point where it's no longer a theory, it is rapidly becoming historical fact.

Simple: they aren't thinking, they are wishing.

Oh, I forgot! Look! It's a thread started by DaveElma that isn't BlackPeopleBad! Well, sort of, but still, if you believe that the President is an office first and man second, and that it's all about policies, as you should, then this isn't a bad story about a black guy. I call it progress. We'll see.

Until Iran sends a brigade over the border, thinking they have the initiative, and Obama has to send all these troops right back in. Also. I wonder...RCP had an article about "senior military commanders" were asking for permission to cross the border and hit the Iranian supply lines. Link Here Strange that this comes right after my link. Coincidence? Nope! And, who was right about Iraq merely being a platform to attack Iran? Of course, not you "No Blood For Oil" idiots. We haven't seen a drop of oil from Iraq...but I guarantee you we have been using Iraq to go after Iran. How's it feel to be wrong? Again? Let me tell you what it feels like to be right, again....I feel...nothing. I have been right so many times that for the first time I am becoming bored with it.

I refuse to click the link, on the grounds that I don't want to see her Fugly mug, and I only have 3 lives left.

I get to use "you're an idiot" whenever I want. Because lord knows I am grandfathered in. And, Tom uses "unmitigated moron" whenever he wants... When I first got here, this board was nowhere near what you see now. We had what I am convinced were paid message board spammers, and an assortment of idiots who wished they were. We had people who literally started 20 threads a day. Hence I began my campaign of abuse, making people read long posts, hyperbolic silliness, whatever it took...but always logical...and as funny as I could be...to go on the offensive. I was not alone...no, no. There are many posters here, and mods, from all sides of the political spectrum, that began weeding out the idiots. Each of us did things their own way(see Tom's "idiot" thing, and the hypno-frog's ninja like one sentence kills), and eventually the BushBad spammers were defeated. But it's not one sided: we currently have a BlackPeopleBad spammer that must be dealt with, in as funny a way as possible of course, til he gets banned. On the left we have a guy who knows less than nothing about economics, that keeps posting retarded economics threads. We will reform them, or we will crush them. (Seriously...don't take any of this seriously. This is every bit as grabasstic as the field house in high school...it's just that most of us use bigger words.) ... So, you DOOOOO get volume. I am goofing. The only way this works is in something like oncology, and that's not really the same model anyway. I am not kidding about the kickbacks/golf though.

Jesus Buftex...you say this: Which is accurate. Only foothold. It's not more or less. And that foothold can easily be lost. And then you say....this: You were so close...and then it's right back to assclown land. The words are inconsistent, because that is the TEA party by design. It's the eventuality that comes form not having centralized leadership. What is it going to take for you to get that these are bunch of regular people and trolls like me, not political operatives lead by a central committee? There may be operatives trying to move in and curry favor, but, at the heart of it, it's still "lead" by people that are similar to posters here: they give a schit, they have had enough of the failures and wasted money that your ideology has produced, and they want to do something, however small. In many cases, all they did was start a website, and the next thing they know, they are on Beck's old show. Believe me, as soon as these people get back from vacation, as soon as they grasp even a hint of a Republican candidate being willing to subvert any part of their agenda in favor of some social issue political albatross they will turn on them like a mother-in-law. Or, because these people aren't very experienced, they may not see it/screw up. I wouldn't worry though(not that you will). This is all based on the internet. If the internet can defeat ALGORE, Dan Rather, and others, it can certainly defeat a social conservative trying to take over and bastardize the TEA party, or, the biased media/liars on the left pretending/wishing/claiming that's what's happening.. In all cases, liberals needs to stop telling us things we know are broken will suddenly work if we throw more money at them. That is the only way to truly "stop" the TEA party.

No, I'm not, see my edit. See, BillsFanM.D.? Tom, lurking, waiting, for any detail, and even when he can't find one...still it's "idiot". However, I wouldn't have DC_Tom be any other way. There is Death, Taxes, DC_Tom saying "you're an idiot" and Alaska Darin hurling insults that on rare occasion spawn classic, HOF threads. Consistency can be comforting. Oh, and M.D.? Ask Darin if he will send you the recipe to retatta sometime.

I meant it like you said it, and, I said it that way(EDIT: as far as you knew ) . If 90% of doctors did it all the time, then the number would be more like 80%, not 40%. And, it appears you are new to this part of the board. HINT: I do the hyperbole thing sometimes(used to do it a lot more) because we have some posters(used to have a lot more) on PPP who get their info solely from Huffington Post/MSNBC, and are severely undereducated on economics, statistics, business, law, Constitution, war, diplomacy, science...basically everything you need to hang on this part of the board. Therefore, they obviously don't know when I am doing it, and that makes me . They are fun to play with....especially when their ignorance means I can argue "their" positions better than they can. Doubly so when they latch onto something I say...that mostly....isn't. EDIT: As you can plainly see above, we also have posters here who spend inordinate amounts of time trying to catch the smallest detail, treat it as a massive mistake, and then be the first to say "you're an idiot". It's also fun to tweak their radar as well But understand, it's like the opposite of taxes, the more you do it, the more of it you get. I am well aware of the problem. But, given what I do, I see this problem as already solved, because we solved it, years ago. PM me if you want to know how. Also, the premise here is Europe...not here. The doctors don't have the same responsibility. In the European Utopia, this is more likely to be the state's problem. tiny bit of hyperbole, mostly accurate tho... I have heard that...but I have also seen instances of what you say isn't happening, right in front of me, year after year since 2001. I wouldn't describe it as "rampant". I would compare it to basically the same thing we did with clients in other industries...so I never saw much wrong with it, until I got further into this. Also, if you prescribe something, don't they have to keep seeing you? Doesn't that have an impact on your bottom line? Like I said, I am well aware. ...especially if you do it in volume. How wrong is Chris Rock, when he says "They don't cure anything, they treat it...[sic]...it's all about comeback"? Big load of hyperbolic crap designed to provoke... Ok, last time I give you the notes...you are on your own. Don't say ignorant things like "Lincoln would be a Democrat today" or, I will be on you like white on rice. 90% of doctors isn't 90% of the time. Why do I care what it sounds like to you?....oh, that's right...the hyperbole thing. Neither of you are in my target package because both of you know it when you see it, and both of you certainly aren't ignorance-oriented. However, words do mean things, and I am sure that 90% of doctors eat hamburgers, or whatever, but that few of them do it all the time. So, not only am I right, I am also "not an idiot".

I know he's a WR, thanks I meant specific plays/routs that would normally be reserved for TEs. Nelson is the one WR on this team that I think can handle getting hit by a LB. It's hard to describe, cause I'm ignorant , but there has to be a TE "look" that actually ends up being Nelson running the route from the slot/wing back whatever.

Uh, has anybody considered: 1. 90% of doctors practice defensive medicine, so, it's better to go ahead and diagnose somebody and give them the pills, rather than be wrong? This also has the added benefit of extra money and that annual free golf week from the pharma companies. 2. We have let the Jenny McCarthy types/hypochondriacs...and more importantly, their lawyers....run wild for far too long? All of them need to be told to get a life. Or, in the lawyer's case, get a job that produces something. 3. 50% of people have such a high image of themselves, that anything that contradicts that image, makes them "crazy"? How else do you explain people thinking that we care about what they are doing at any given point in the day? When their loserdom is confirmed, it's a big fall. 4. The average European can drink the average American under the table with ease? If your every day lunch consisted of 4 pints of Guiness and a hard roll w/butter, you might struggle with "alcohol dependence" too. But most of all: these people have been living a lie they were psychologically committed to since WW2. That lie is rapidly falling apart. It's bound to cause some dissonance. It's bound to cause some "holy F, not only am I wrong, but, I have basically been acting like a d-bag to Americans for the last 20 years thinking I was superior...and that's depressing" moments.

Swing and a miss. I was talking about nominating Hillary, instead of Obama. Clintons may be bad people, but, their massive egos mean that they would never allow the far-left to put their Presidency in jeopardy. They are the definition of practicality. Hillary would never have made the Health Care mistake...twice. Hillary would have seized the opportunity to cut spending but also raise taxes, just like Bill did. At the very least, saying that the budget was "balanced" would provide confidence in her leadership that would have paid off in terms of private sector hiring. She would then be able to take credit for the economic growth-->2nd term. You haven't looked at the numbers. Obama is done. There is no Florida. There is no North Carolina. There is no Indiana, Ohio, or Virginia. Even running the Pennsylvania, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan table, which won't happen, doesn't add up. The only assets you have are: the Daley family tradition of trying to steal elections and a whole lot of money that will be wasted trying to chase multiple candidates around and attack them. Most of those attacks will end up being on people that aren't the nominee....um, Bachman. What did Obama do to prove that liberal Democrats should be allowed to be President, in the context of the last 40 years?

"Hey Mike, you wanna block? You wanna hit that guy?" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ov-1S8Xxd94