OCinBuffalo

Honestly? We haven't had serious immigration enforcement since the 1910's/1920's and even then it was only about 70/80% effective. Sure, it beats the hell out of what we have now, but come on. The fact is that every single President has failed to enforce the laws on the books already. When everybody gets done talking, the facts that the laws are clear and they have not been enforced by any President will remain. Remember this: This did not start as an Obama issue. But, if he isn't smarter about it, it will end as one. Of course, that would require him to listen to rational people(read: not his advisers), accept reality, forgo this "let's create Democratic voters by making them legal" lame-dick trap, and remind himself that 100% of these voters are heavy duty hard work-respecting Catholics who aren't ever going to support his free hand out/socially liberal agenda anyway. These Latinos are the ultimate Reagan Democrats. Common sense screams it. How come Republicans are running Latinos all over the place and winning, if Latinos are all Democrats?. This "goal" of pandering to Latinos simply doesn't get liberals that much. The Democrats are looking to buy votes in all the wrong places. They assume they will be able to take Latinos for granted the same way they do with African Americans. Unless Obama gets serious about doing the job he is legally bound to do, and can show results, he risks getting exposed for playing politics with national security = time to look for another job.

Cue up Obama's Captain Kirk impression:"Infrastructure...crumbling...must...spend...money." Hey, it's everything you want in made for Nickelodeon parlance. Create a fantastical scenario and a plethora of problems that either don't exist or are based on pure speculation, and then provide seemingly plausible, and over-simplified solutions to them. And, Obama is every bit the over-actor as Shatner, so he can pull it off. What do you want?

Listen Dammit! Don't you understand that we need to spend trillions on a "green economy"? It's like you haven't been paying attention this entire time! Solutions don't solve problems, spending money solves problems. We have to spend money, in order to save it.* * Brought to you by all the rest of the LBJ, Vietnam-era nonsense. The 60's. An entire waste of time and money spent on intellectual vapidity.

1. It doesn't end there. Medicare/Medicaid are fundamentally based on the concept of people paying for other people who don't. 2. Price fixing inevitably leads to wage fixing...which in turn would lead to even less primary care docs, and we already don't have enough. 3. Believe me, there are literally trillions in cost that can be cut before we even get close to worrying about price caps. I find new ones every week. The real problem is: insurance companies aren't in charge of managing a provider's health care costs, or cutting them, but they are being treated as though they are. They simply pay the bill. They don't create it. 4. By far, the largest creator of empty, ineffective/inefficient, and/or useless costs in health care is the State and Federal government. Their regulatory mechanisms are patently retarded, so is their reimbursement structure. Managing these processes add 30-40% to provider's budgets, solve nothing, can't stop fraud, require legions of government employees to manage, and...have yet to improve quality of care/save lives. They don't solve problems, and they create new ones. 5. Finally, the elephant in the room is Medicare. Medicare, not insurance companies, sets the price of everything...because they are the largest "insurance company" by far. If Medicare agrees to pay $2000 for a procedure, every other insurance company will get in line behind that and pay a little less or more, largely depending on how many doctors they can marshal to a hospital. You want to cut cost? You have to start with Medicare's contractual agreements and the ridiculous government agencies that regulate health care. Their results = get fired everywhere else. But, nobody wants to accept and deal with the obvious. Health care needs to be regulated to be sure. But, it should be done by people who have a clue how quality assurance actually works, not health care Ph.D's/government employees = amateurs. Absolutely. Are we to assume that you have taken up the cause of supply side economics? Because, deregulation and investment in the supply of primary docs are certainly not Keynesian policies. And what about those who "truly need the most" who are "truly responsible" for their own predicament? Are you telling me that 20 years of being willfully obese, and developing diabetes as a result = free health care...because now it is "needed"? I can accept a "preventative maintenance" argument and/or anything pediatric. I cannot accept "you get to live like a douche, and it's my job to cover your health care cost". I can accept "you get to live like a douche, provided you pay for your own health care". Otherwise, this is just one more "give away free schit for votes" program, and you can spare me the phony moral superiority. There's nothing moral about stealing money from some people and giving it to other people who piss it away.

I have a theory....about conner. Let's take this post and see if it applies. He doesn't agree with it...but he makes sure to get the talking point out there again. I mean the words..."lower the costs". Who cares that anyone with any business or economic education knows that this is impossible? All he wants is to say the same words again. Oh, and remind us of the "success" of getting the "law" passed. Also a consistent, while ineffective, talking point. Of course a personal attack is used instead of an actual refutation of the statement. We refute conner all the time here, but he never bothers to actually attempt to refute any of us. Instead, he moves on to another thread, or, more likely, starts a new one himself. Or, he spams us with links...in the hopes that we will click on them...which serves both the purpose of getting us to read "the billboard" again, and, drives traffic to these sites. And of course, another pointless platitude, that attributes "killing people" to people that don't agree...with an asinine bill that has 0 chance of ever lowering costs. See what he did here? The conversation is about costs...but that's not going anywhere, so, conner makes sure to get one last unrelated talking point/ridiculous platitude in before he abandons yet another thread. So here's my theory: conner is a paid political troll. His only concern is about making sure our eyes read the same retarded words as many times as possible, much the same way a billboard works.

Due to that...I'd guess paid "netroots" type who trolls on this and every other political message board he can find. His lack of ability to construct a valid argument, and disinterest in doing so says it all: he's about spewing out posts for their billboard value, and he didn't count on having to actually back up them up. But, whoops, he runs into the posters on this board. And, our expertise, education, knowledge+experience=wisdom, combines to swat away his idiotic billboard posts literally every day. I may disagree wholeheartedly with the likes of SDS, X.Benedict, Kelly the Dog, etc., but there's no doubt they are reasonable people that aren't here here to spew nonsensical, billboard spam. Conner is nothing like these guys and it's clear by the sheer # of posts he makes, that there's something more to this for him than the casual dalliance it is for the rest of us.

That's fine, you hold the constitution as not up for debate. Great. But that means you don't get to argue for any kind of gun control. And, you don't get to argue for the current abuses of eminent domain. You don't get to argue for the current income tax system. You don't get to argue for illegal immigration. You don't get to argue against defense spending, and on and on, because all of these, and many more, are clearly defined/provided for in the Constitution. All of them are "Constitutional Issues". That is, if we don't want the Constitution to be clouded by any irrelevant opinions.

So, according to you: this lady is still a moron, because in fact there were no "ideas of the revolution" to reject?

How do we know this? Also, as I have said elsewhere: Islam is the only religion I am aware of whose participants, who have no direct link to terror, indirectly support it by laughing it up and dancing every time one of these losers kills somebody. You don't see Christians dancing and singing the praises of the murderer of an abortion doctor. We only see that type of activity in one religion. Islam. You can't tell me that it's only about extremists when we see that kind of stuff going on. You can't tell me it's only about extremists when we have supposedly American White House journalists denying Israel's right to exist. You can't tell me it's only about extremists when you have literally 100ks of Muslims, all over the world, carrying signs denying Israel's right to exist, and saying much worse things. I am sick of being told something that I know is BS, and being told that somehow the clear evidence that it is BS doesn't exist...because the teller says so. Right now, what I put in bold above seems awfully like something I am being told, that seems awfully like BS, and you damn well better be able to give me something more than because you say so.

Fidel: 'Cuban Model Doesn't Even Work For Us Anymore' 1. This is an article from the Atlantic, which is a reasonable magazine, and is written by a self-described "ex-self-defined socialist". 2. Clearly this is one person's point of view, and anecdotal. But, this is what we have, and there's no reason for this guy to lie. If anything, his (ex-?)political views tell him to cover it up and/or deny it. So, apparently Michael Moore telling us that we should be more like Cuba...isn't in line with the guy who created Cuba seems to think. Also, apparently this guy took a moron with him on his trip: I asked Julia to interpret this stunning statement for me. She said, "He wasn't rejecting the ideas of the Revolution. I took it to be an acknowledgment that under 'the Cuban model' the state has much too big a role in the economic life of the country." How can you have a Communist revolution, of all things, whose "ideas" aren't about government control of the economy? Were the "ideas of the revolution" about Fidel being a baseball guy and his popular support? I wonder what else this lady "takes to be"? Up = down? Like I said...moron. Also, this journalist missed a great opportunity. He should have taken Guevera's daughter aside and asked her: 1. how difficult it was growing up as the daughter of a mass-murdering sociopath who apparently thought it was a better idea to spend more time in Africa and Bolivia than with her? 2. does she get any royalties from the T-shirt industry? 3. does she find it ironic that the tools buying the T-shirts are directly participating in the kind of economics her father spent his life and died fighting? 4. do the relatives of those people her father had executed with 0 due process ever tell her how happy they are that her father saved them from suffering? 5. does she think it's ironic that the people who claim to love her father, are the same people who are currently demanding due process for the terrorists on that island, when her father was such an ardent supporter of group trials, summary judgment, and firing squads?

Does it feel better to get that out of your system?

So, are we to believe that: The bad propaganda for us due to Koran burning is bad.... but, The good propaganda for them if they can use the Mosque as "trophy" is good? I am not saying that they will. But, what if they do? Mostly I am saying, regarding your propaganda argument in general: keep in mind it's a double edged sword. Sure we don't want to do stupid things that make us look bad. But, the other side of the sword is: we also need to deny the enemy things that make him look good.

We have some nice apple sauce for you, and later today, some kids are going to come in and sing "You're a Grand Old Flag".

ALL of these links are based on data that has either been discredited outright, has yet to be re-reviewed using proper methodology by a properly selected, OBJECTIVE, panel of scientists, was part of the Climitegate scandal, has been show to simply not exist, or has been defined as "speculation". Show me something new, or, show me that any of the data has been re-reviewed properly, and I will listen. But they haven't...and the silence is deafening. Why haven't these guys come back and defended themselves? Because they can't? We were told to listen to the scientists: OK, I have yet to hear a peep from the actual scientists. The only people we hear from on this anymore is a few left-wing TV talking heads trying to fight a rear guard action while their leaders and elected people are apparently pulling out.

Winner = Supply Side...even Obama gets it finally. Accelerated Depreciation So as I said above, "Instead of raising capital taxes, you cut them", has been proposed by the Obama administration, to the letter. It's pretty funny when these idiots can figure it out...finally....but idiots like Dave still can't. What's a matter Dave? Did Obama outrun your coverage?

Offense: 1. Spiller starting etc. is a smoke screen. If you look at Gailey's history so far, everything he says is misdirection. I wouldn't be surprised to see that, while Spiller does in fact start the game...we give them a heavy dose of Lynch pounding and power blocking especially if we get a lead. But who knows? Using Lynch is also obvious, so it too may be a load of BS. 2. Everybody knows the Dolphins DBs are suspect. Hell, they traded away their #2 WR, who was their best before Marshall, just to get a serviceable CB. They are weak at DB, so let's get as many of them on the field as possible. Why not force them to replace their good LBs with many, awful CBs? Yeah...I see 4 WR sets and/or RBs motioning out wide and/or RBs running routs out of the backfield. In fact, I see Parrish/Evans, not Spiller, as the offensive star of the game. Or, I see 3-4 WRs getting 50+ yards I also predict at least one bomb to Evans for a TD, maybe 2. The way we have run our spread takes away the blitz. So, if they can get to the QB in 3 seconds, good for them. If not, we kill them with crossing patterns and posts. Defense: 1. Our defense either can't stop the run, or, we are seeing more misdirection. One thing we know for sure: the Dolphins WRs are not better than our DBs. I hope they use that fact, and blitz the hell out of Henne. I am not worried about putting McGee/Florence/McKelvin up against Marshall and 2 rookies to be named later. Put our DBs on an island and make them beat us 1 v 1. I don't think they can, and until they prove it? Unleash Whitner and Poz up the middle and crush Henne. And, look for Maybin to possibly make an impact against a new LT on 3rd and long. I know it's not a popular thing to say, but Maybin did get better each game in preseason. 2. This is one of those "offense is the best defense" things. IF the offense can exploit their weakness at DB, and get us ahead, then we take away Miami's running game. We do that, we play to our defense's strengths, and it's going to be breasts up on Sunday. ST: For the first time in a long time, we may have serious problems here. I am very concerned that ST will have a significant impact on the game. But, again, for all we know, most of what we did in preseason could be BS, like everything else has been, and mostly designed to get players on film for evaluation. And of course, there's always the "plans of mice and men" factor, so who knows? There is a decent chance, but if we get run on for scores? Nope.

I'll say it again: You have to love a guy who fakes out his own WRs, and the people they are blocking, because he is in the defensive backfield, because he broke a LB's ankles after bouncing off a DL 2 yards behind the line of scrimmage. Good O line or bad O line, that's a guy I want on my team, because he simply wills everyone around him to be better.

Leopards, spots, etc. We'll see what happens if the Redskins get beat in the passing game a lot and Snyder decides to "help" by trading next year's 1st and 2nd for Polumalu, or something equally ridiculous.

The elephant in the room in DC, that many are ignoring, is the Redskins FO. Which is really only another way to say Dan Snyder. Of course Shanahan didn't make the moves that brought in all these old vets that have seen better days. That was Snyder. Do I have to list the "aggressive"(read: stupid) moves that this fool has made, from 3-4 coaches ago? Archuleta ring any bells? Shanhan is probably going to fall victim to the same buffoonery everybody else has. The funny part is: I don't know how they fit Snyder and Shanahan's egos into the same restaurant, never mind conference room. Unless Synder has completely capitulated, and I don't see how that's even possible, Shanahan(or, according to him, "The Ultimate Leader") better get used to FAs that don't fit his scheme being signed and overpaid because Dan "has heard of them", and, he better learn to enjoy drafting 1 player a year. The reason you never hear about Redskins draft busts is because they never draft anybody. I see chaos and meltdown...which would be consistent what the Redskins have been doing since Snyder bought the team. IMHO, Shanahan made a big mistake in going there, and he may find himself out of football permanently because of it.

"This was the intent of the structure put in place in the past," Of course it was...no different than what was "planned" when he left the: Giants Patriots Jets Cowboys Dolphins He always does pretty good and his teams usually make the playoffs for a few years, but, he inevitably screws them up with draft choices/giveaways and cap hell, and never sticks around to clean up his own mess. I imagine he will "retire" from football, for a 5th time...and then suddenly pop up with somebody like the 49ers in 2 years. Hehe...I heard a Pats beat reporter say today that "The Patriots have no pass rush. They are going to have to outscore people, and that's not good because Brady usually throws a late interception in those games"(Funny, I said the exact same thing in another thread). How long before Parcell's star pupil decides to "retire" as well?

Hehe....You're going to enjoy my link below Oh no, this is a whole new kind of stupidity...read on... Obama et al has been doing something stupid every single week for weeks on end now...this week is now covered. In Obama's own words: “one of the biggest lies in government is the idea of ‘shovel-ready’ projects.” Link here, there, everywhere And the point of the link is: either he's an idiot or he's extremely naive. Ok...let's assume he's neither, and he simply made an honest mistake. Then why on God's green earth is he making the same mistake all over again with ANOTHER 50 billion? From my link, if he "learned" that only $20 billion of the $40 billion is actually going to do something useful...then why spend another $50 billion this time around? All things being equal, including DC douchebaggery, half($25 billion) is probably right. Although given the 50% waste factor? How about $0 billion dollars until these people get their act together and/or we remove the red tape? There goes our assumption that he made an honest mistake. Or, that he's not an idiot. Either he doesn't care about willful participation in something he defined as a lie, or he IS an idiot. You can tell me how important infrastructure is until the cows come home. Until you provide solutions for the real union/bureaucracy/government employee problems that block real, cost effective, infrastructure improvement, your argument is a waste of time, and the president, supposedly, agrees with me. Autumn of advancement? This is more like the Fall Back plan.

I'm no expert. I don't think this lady will ever have a chance at being objective, given the horrible things Muslims did to her community. So this is a grain of salt type article. But, it would seem clear that trying to separate the terrorists from Islam is much more difficult than say: abortion bombers from evangelicals. You don't see churches in this country celebrating, ringing bells and carrying on when an abortion doctor is murdered. You don't see the murderer's family dancing around and being given money/stuff by the community. You see all of those things when an Islamic murderer gets away with it/homicide bombs people. All the BS, and spin, and PC crapola doesn't change the fact that today, we only see this behavior in Islam, the Balkans, and Africa....where it's also directly/indirectly about Islam. Dancing around and offering MORE of your sons up for homicide bombing...is f'ing evil, period. It's indefensible, it goes against many human principles and is therefore immoral, and there is no excuse for it. That's pure evil, and the only thing we can do with that is put it down.

Ah another no value post. And name calling to boot. Why is it that Booster never says anything insightful? Ah that's right, Booster isn't capable of that level of thinking. We never see Booster start a thread with something interesting. In fact we never see Booster post early on in a thread....because he has to have everyone else explain things for him, and do all the high level thinking....so he can come along and tell us what he "agrees" with and what he doesn't. Booster, the linear thinking ex-bartender with no analytical ability whose insecurity is made worse every time I post See, the truth is worse than all the names you could ever call me. I think we should start calling Booster Charlie Gordon from here on out. Except instead of a wonder drug that makes Booster temporarily smarter than he is, its posts and linked articles on this board.

Oh no. Uh-uh. The "progressives" have been telling themselves and anyone who will listen that they are smarter than everybody else by virtue of simply being progressives, and that has been going on since Woodrow Wilson. The far left Democrats have thrown in belief in Global WarmingTM as a phony intelligence test and have been telling everyone that if you aren't in lock step with their religion, you either have to be ignorant or stupid. This has been going on for years. And now, finally, with the Pres/Congress in hand, and given the golden opportunity to demonstrate their supposed superior intelligence? We get "cops acted stupidly", "we have to pass the bill so we can see what's in it", "the war is lost...but now that Obama is president, the war is...un-lost", and the cavalcade of unforced errors we have seen. Not to mention the awful policies and laws that have come from these people. So, no, sorry, this was their big chance to demonstrate the intelligence they have claimed to have for years. Instead, we see now that they are no more smarter or open minded or about "working the problem" than the religious right.

Looks like I created a monster with this post. First of all, bringing in an inside offensive lineman makes all kinds of sense, for all kinds of reasons. Most have already been discussed in this thread, and the one from yesterday. It doesn't matter if they do/don't actually switch people around, what we want is the options to be available, because options remind players that they have to keep competing, and, options are very handy when injuries come along. I will trade Hangartner getting the message and stepping up his play, for singing a potential bust who we got for league minimum any day. And, I agree with the sentiment that Urbik may not have fit with the Steelers, but may fit here. Gailey seems to like old school, straight ahead blocking, and if this guy is a straight ahead, mauler type of player...maybe he's in the right spot.