OCinBuffalo

I sort of agree. Whenever it's "turn around" time....you don't necessarily want to throw out the baby = real talent, with the bathwater = the bastards who are running their own ideology/agenda instead of what's best for the organization...in this case NYS. I think it's important to identify who the problem children are(cough, Sheldon Silver, cough), but more importantly, who is trading influence by following them, and remove them. The Sheldon Dbags of the world will be tough to get rid of fully. However, if you take away their ball-lickers....then you marginalize them. Watch this happen in 2010 to Crazy Pelosi. However...given the current state of affairs....perhaps the giant middle finger to all of them serves us best. I can certainly see that as a viable option. If nothing else: it's a warning to those who would aspire to take their place.

Yes, of course we are all stupid because someone who is part of the worst Congress this country has ever seen decides to try to make Obama from Kenya and Kansas and not from Hawaii. We are calling this entire activity stupid. We are calling this Congressperson stupid for attempting to run this lame BS on us. This whole thread is stupid. But, trying to tell us that somehow when the dumbass canard fails to fool the people = makes the people dumbasses, and not the idiots who invented it? That is the height of stupidity. Kelly: if these people represent you...and your positions...I am guessing your responses in this thread = "auto-anti-embarrassment mechanism". Might want to actually use that writer's brain to think before you post next time, and spare us your automated response Oh, and sorry for pointing out the obvious stupidity here...but I can't control my "auto-anti-stupidity-mechanism". But..but...but...In "DC Tom-speak": if you don't like fixing healthcare by socializing it...the terrorists win! Thank you for invoking the Cynthia McKinnie = moron example. The part I love about her? I don't need a boogeyman...that dumb biatch found a way to get herself elected! New show that Kelly can write for: "When fat ass, dumb ass, moronic biatches who affirmative-actioned/threatened their state party with civil rights lawsuits...ed their way into Congress....attack!" Yeah...go ahead and call me a racist for calling a moron....a moron....and telling the truth, once again. I can't wait. Maybe I can get Bad "I could never qualify to be a" Lieutenant to show up and try to convince us that I have more in common with McViegh than his broom-pushing, hick-ass does. Perhaps I defined progressive improperly once....but is it me? or does co-opting the word "progress" in your view point mean that you are now duty-bound to actually deliver it? Of course...given that we define "progress" as things actually getting better...for ALL of us.

Nah...they are both wrong. Insurance is a racket, and made even more so by the fact that politicians have involved themselves in it. And, nobody in business gives a rat's ass about anybody's "opinion", other than their clients, their owners, and their suppliers/service providers. The fact that anybody outside that group believes that they are entitled to an opinion about how that business runs...is amazingly arrogant. "People" that think that they get to decide what is "moral" and what is not in terms of how business is done, need to apply that judgment consistently, or not at all. If these phony "do-gooders" are going to talk about bad/greedy business practice, they must also include: Hollywood et al, law firms, accounting firms, consulting firms(that means me), real estate agents, and every friggin sales guy in this country...and others...all of which I can guarantee you make OBSCENE profits, in most cases 30 points higher than any insurance company. These Chicago mob/politicos can't have it both ways: whatever justification they use to shake down the insurance companies, can also be used, word for word, to shake down their own law firms. And they need to realize that the very politicians they support have been extorting these insurance companies for literally billions in campaign contributions for years. IF they want to talk about what they can't tolerate, they need to start with not tolerating the politicians they typically support! They have been shearing the insurance companies on the threat that if they don't get their money, the rabble will be roused. Now, they are trying to finally skin the insurance sheep. If this rabble only realized that their "tolerances" aren't their own, they have been manufactured for them, they might get the rest of us to stop smirking when they talk. But, as usual for this segment of the population, they are often willing to accept some random bumper sticker logic: "gross profit" blah, blah, blah, "huge compensation", blah, blah, blah, "excessive power", as holy writ. Our history says: that is precisely what America is all about. You wish our history said: that is precisely what America is all about. But as you sit there wishing, you denigrate most of what your parents, grandparents and great-grandparents have accomplished: they succeeded, so they could have you, so things would go well for you, so you could be a big Hollywood writer someday Like I said, insurance is a racket, it needs to be regulated, and it is. If it needs to be regulated some more, go right ahead! All of this could have been avoided if Obama and his people were realistic in their approach = fix it all, go after the insurance companies AND the trial lawyers at the same time. They should have stayed away from taking a one sided approach, real or perceived. However, their arrogance, and the fact that they simply don't realize that the vast majority of us don't agree with them, got the better of them. They are paying the correct price for it now, and, it may cost them them the whole thing.

I clearly stated that 75% of the Federal Budget = entitlement programs. The budget has a deficit. Therefore, 75% of the deficit comes from the entitlement programs, within reason. The entire Iraq war represents less that 2% of the Federal Budget. It has been said that "people" can't understand this. I find it hard to believe that most of the people on this board can't understand the concepts laid out in this paragraph. Therefore, again, telling us that only 1% of people understand the deficit, where it comes from, how we got here, and how to avoid it getting worse, or any other connotation presented in any other context is....STILL BS. The bottom line is: for all the bluster...and good points...from both sides, the fact remains that setting up any system whereby the government competes with business means that business always loses. Why? 1. The government can "print money"/deficit spend it's way out of bad management. Business cannot....unless it is bailed out by the government...and we go through this all over again 2. The government, unfortunately, is not required to show a profit. If it was, then I would be fine with this. However, it is not, and therefore it can always undercut its "real business" competition. Profit, in and of itself, is how those of us in the real world judge our performance. Without profit, government has no REAL way of proving it's efficiency, or effectiveness. And this is the big LIE: they can talk about service, they can even talk about results(to a certain degree). What they can't talk about, and what the proponents of big government try to confuse with results is: effective use of resources. If a government manager spends 50k on something that only needed 25k, we won't know, because there is no loss of profit to measure. 3. Name ONE TIME when the objective of any government agency has been solely to provide a service, and its policy has not been overridden by the need to create jobs. Example: They are expanding the Army After years spent on cost cutting, effectiveness, and force multiplying every single soldier, the "solution" is suddenly: hire more soldiers? WTF? So, once again, we see that to the left, even the Army is just one more government jobs program. What happens when these government jobs are created? They become unionized/entrenched, and then it becomes impossible to get rid of them, even when it makes no sense whatsoever to keep them. If you were going to work someplace as a bureaucrat/jackass supply sergeant, where would you work? The government, who has to jump through impossible hoops to fire your ass? or, for a guy like me who will fire you the minute you stop thinking/trying? Clearly this moves these types to work for the government, rather than business, once again making it tougher on business to find people that will work for what they can afford to pay. There's plenty more...so can we stop pretending that government = business when it comes to competition?

Two things first: 1. Kelly's "1% of the American people know what this is about" is wishful thinking, and tells us a lot about the psyche of people on the left. The truth is: that statement is utter BS. In fact there is a hell of a lot of people who know exactly what is going on. Health Care is 1/6 of the US economy. Are you trying to pretend that 1/6 of our people don't know what is going on "big picture" wise at their own jobs? Wishing this was 1933 doesn't mean that it is. Wishing does not make it so, just ask Nancy Pelosi how well her "wishes" have been accommodated. 2. Also, there appears to be this common theme from the left side here that says "the other guys are spreading fear". How do you know that you shouldn't touch a hot oven? For most people, they learned that because they got burned, once, and decided never to do it again. Is it right to say that their "fear" of hot ovens can merely be reduced to "irrational, emoting" and that they shouldn't be on guard against hot ovens, or anything else they perceive to be hot? Of course it isn't. So why then, when we have: 1. 50-60 year old entitlement programs that clearly were never reviewed properly by actuarial staff, and subjected to "what if" analysis, such as "what if there is a giant baby bust right after a giant baby boom" 2. with said programs accounting for 75% of the budget, and therefore the deficit 3. documented, terrible administration of said entitlement programs(see: over regulation in some areas, not enough in others, massive fraud, massive money spent on ineffective containment of that fraud) = most of this has been about government jobs, not effective management of money 4. an expectation that, due to #3, any further government spending will be more about creating government dependence(jobs/services) rather than actually helping people are we being told that we are simply being "fearful", or "spreading fear"? The left seems content to ask us to touch the hot oven again, and then tells us we are wackos when we say no. The fact is that most of us are at least as smart as they are, if not smarter. They are extremely pissed that this reality not only goes against their expectations, it goes against their self-image. It seems clear that most of America is done with taking instruction from people who haven't done a good enough job convincing us that they are right = that the oven is in fact not hot, and that we can trust them. Lefties: the simple fact is this is not the 1930s and therefore your self-appointed position to do all the thinking for the masses simply does not exist anymore. Time to move on from that. The good news for you is that all the years of demanding education for the poor....has been successful. Now that most of this country has a much better education than back in the 30s, especially women, they can figure out if the oven is hot for themselves. You can't complain when they use the very skill set you demanded that they have, and, they use it to look at your ideas, and call them: stupid, because they are.

No reason...other than I think it might be similar to what they are doing with Ko Simpson. As I said in that thread, they tend to give the guys on the bubble a lot of playing time to see what's what. Stupar got his long look last night...and I think he belongs on the the team. The main reason is: he is faster, or at least he looks a lot/plays faster, than both Schouman and Fine. One play in particular he had the safety beat and was wide open. He did that with pure speed more than anything else. The QB messed up, otherwise that was a TD. You want a TE that can stretch the field...for a number of reasons. Personally, I think Fine has shown a lot, especially last season. And, there's little doubt that Nelson is going to be on this team. Take that, and assume that they are going to keep 7 WRs, and one of the 4 TE's has to go, possibly even 2 of them. I think the big thing is: can Nelson/Stupar play special teams? If they both can, then I wouldn't be surprised at all if Schouman got the boot. I'd be very pleased with Fine/Stupar/Nelson as our TEs. That represents a significant upgrade from Royal/Schouman/Fine.

Simple rules we all can follow: 1. When we are on D: Nobody sits. You cannot make the same noise you can sitting down as standing up, that is simple physiology. Everyone gets into it more when we are standing, that is simple group dynamics. Standing and yelling/whacking the seats USED to be what everyone did when we were on D, on every down, automatically. I can't believe we even have to go over this one....but whatever. If you don't like standing up and yelling when we are on D...I hear Tiger Woods plays golf...and that somehow that's fun to watch. Perhaps it's time to look into a nice Assisted Living Community for yourself as well. 2. When we are on O: Nobody stands. This one is tough because as soon as the ball is in the air for a potential long pass....my ass automagically rises out of my seat in direct proportion to how close it is to being caught. This happens whether I am at the game, or in the Bills Backers bar, or my parent's/family's house. I have tried for years, especially given the gallons of beer spilled on myself and others, to curtail my jumping out of my chair - to no avail. But, other than big plays, we should be sitting QUIETLY in our chairs on O. It's ok to cheer on a big play, but this year especially given the no huddle, sit down and shut it as soon as they start lining up for the next one. 3. When we are kicking it away: Nobody stands. Why do we need to stand up for this? Besides, most of us are either arguing with the Neon Nazis about how close we can smoke, getting beers, or trying not to get pissed on at the pee trough, so most of us aren't around anyway. 4. When we are receiving: Nobody sits. You are fooling yourself if you think anybody with a pulse is going to be sitting when the ball is kicked to Parrish or McKelvin. If they are, the second that ball gets into their hands, and especially after that first move, everyone is going to be standing anyway. 5. Time outs, and any other time: Who cares? What are you missing on a time out? Nothing. Plus, everyone is coming and going, so no chance of everyone sitting. Exceptions: 1. IF it is raining unexpectedly like last year against Seattle, you can't expect people to sign up for instant swamp ass due to sitting in their seat. Yes, this is Buffalo and we all know better, but still, you can't blame people for being optimistic about the weather. 2. IF it is crazy cold...and we know what that is...you can't expect people to sign up for having their rear ends welded to their seats due to condensation. Not everybody has a seat warmer, or remembers to bring the darn thing(me), or can afford club seats, and most of us can still feel how cold the seat is through 3 layers...on crazy cold days. These seem to form a reasonable compromise: at least half the game, people should be sitting. Finally, the Ralph has been noticeably less loud than in days past and I lay the blame directly on the club seat people. Nothing is more frustrating than seeing a big 3rd down coming up, looking over my shoulder, and seeing all those jackasses sitting down with their arms folded. Kudos to those few of you up there who are constantly trying to get them off their asses when we are on D. You guys are real Bills fans, and keep up the good work.

That looked like a completely busted play and should be put on the scrap heap. Lynch came out and did a great job of blocking a DE/LB?, but there was an extra guy that wasn't accounted for. Either Edwards needs to find the open man immediately if they are going to overload one side, throw it away, etc., or, like I said, rip that play, or at least that blocking scheme, out of the playbook. From what I can tell, and as I said elsewhere, many here missed the opening drive due to NFL Network buffoonery. The first play from scrimmage was smashmouth, right at them, and Lynch ran behind Wood for 6 yards. On the second 1st down, same thing, right at them but this time it was behind Levitre/Walker for five yards. On the one that got stopped at the line, Lynch faked himself out. If he had just gone with his first move, that would have been a 6 yard run as well, he might have even broken it for big yards. He juked outside, and then back in, right into Lance Briggs . He knew he screwed up and was obviously mad at himself. Each time they ran, the LOS moved 2 yards into the Bears backfield. They simply stopped running the ball and started going to pass plays on subsequent drives. I think they did that more for the purpose of calling lots of different plays, than because the run game wasn't working. If this was a real game, I honestly believe that Lynch would have run for 120 yards. I will watch it again, tonight, but this was like night and day from last week, especially in the run game.

But, It's not like he didn't say he was an average fan, using the internet, etc... I think most people here missed the first drive on offense due to NFL Network buffoonery. What I liked was the very first play from scrimmage: Lynch up the middle over Wood for 6 yards(right behind Wood ). Then, on the second first down, Lynch off the left side for 5 yards. Both of those plays were straight up smashmouth. They went right at them and knocked them back. We simply have not seen that from any Bills O line in a loooooooong time. On that first drive, the O line was knocking their D line back 2 yards on every snap. Man for man, they were beating them. It seemed like they took a step back from that later in the game with more passing plays being called. Also, on the first drive, they were very predictable, and even though the O line was doing it's job, the Bears LBs got wise to it and started making plays.

I'll watch it again at 8pm...but I could have sworn they announced Simpson as the starter on the local TV broadcast. In any case, there's no doubt he played with the first team. He played in every quarter of the game, and he got beat twice on big plays. We'll see...but they have done this with a lot of players they were going to cut early.

From what I can remember, the Billls usually give a player that they are most likely going to cut a lot of playing time in preseason. This has happened with a bunch of players since DJ and crew have been here. They do it because they want to give the player a chance to prove himself, and, because they are nice enough to let him get some film recorded for a potential look by other teams. This has been said by Chris Brown on multiple occasions. I realize that there were injuries at CB/S last night, but, why was Ko Simpson playing in the 4th quarter? Why did he start the game(if you watched it from the beginning, he was the starter, and was announced as the starter, not Scott)? He was out there a heck of a lot throughout the game as well. If you watch the highlights, here, he was in in the third qtr, and was beaten on the last play of the highlights in the 4th. Again, I understand that there are injuries...but it seems strange that Simpson would be playing that late into the game. Given the past history of what the Bills have done with players in similar situations...I gotta say he is at least on the bubble, if not, on his way out of here.

Yes....this is all you can do...punt. You thinking of trying to take over Moorman's job? You can't defend a single thing that you say, and you try to make it about me instead. Buddy, you are weak intellectually. Time to face that. Calling me names without explaining why, or talking about process instead of content, merely makes you look like a fool. Defend your position or get off this part of the board and stop wasting our time.

Apparently, the White House has seen fit to post this: Facts are stubborn things(yeah especially when you ignore the ones that don't support your ideology...tools) Of course I will have to quote this here....because this blog post is going down faster than Chris Matthews on Barack Obama. It might last till 10 am today...maybe. "There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov." Hey a-holes, never mind that there is nothing, Nothing, NOTHING about REAL cost control in your silly big bill. Hint: cutting supply by rationing DOES NOT EQUAL cutting costs. Cutting costs means what it says. Hey a-holes, never mind that there is nothing about improving care delivery/ increasing supply....which means prices GO DOWN, idiots! There is every incentive for people who have the brains to become doctors/RNs/PAs....not to. Where is the focus on lowering the cost of malpractice insurance? The high cost of which is the BIGGEST reason doctors won't get into primary care = they don't make as much as specialists, and they aren't willing to sign up for 10 years of school just so they can't afford to pay all their school bills PLUS the insurance rate. Not having enough primary care doctors is the BIGGEST reason schit costs so much right now. I know why, we all know why: the !@#$ing trial lawyers paid off this administration and especially this congress, period. Go ahead and tell me they didn't I fuggin dare you. This is clearly the worst congress ever. Anyway...never mind all that. Seriously. WTF are these people doing setting up an email account for people to inform on what people write/think?? WTF? Screw these SOBS, and screw you if you support them in this nonsense. Only a GIANT JACKASS would think this is OK. WTF would happen if Bush had set up an email for people to inform on people who wrote things that didn't support the wars? I'll tell you: all the piss-ants would have gone crazy! More crazy than their regular crazy. Super-crazy. "Fishy"? RUFKM? I wouldn't call this latest example of the hubris these people must have "fishy". I would call it f'ing nuts. Enough of these people. They all have to go. This is "bunker mentality" in the flesh. That's right, mentally unstable people are now running things. This country will be ruined by these people...because they are nuts. I am mad enough...that I might actually vote for once...in fact, I might just go volunteer for a campaign, as disgusting as that is to me. I know the guy I work for may be just as bad, which has been why I want nothing to do with this...but maybe not....I am sure that anything is better than these fuks. So run along piss-ants, go ahead and justify trampling on our 1st amendment rights. I am sure there's some excuse someplace that makes it OK in your f'ed up heads. Or, once again this is somebody else's fault...you should blame me Just know that you are the lowest form of human existence, and the perfect examples of what Stalin called: useful idiots. Emphasis on idiots, because there is no real use for you.

Yes, let's ignore the real history of labor relations in this country and attribute most of it to: workers "obtaining knowledge on their own". When the coal mine wars were going on in West Viriginia and Penn. ...what "knowledge" were those workers "obtaining on their own" exactly? You should call up Cornell and let them know that it's time to shut down their ILR school, since apparently their graduates have been doing nothing for the last 65 years. Yes, while the Teamsters were fighting in the streets, all these "other Teamsters" were busily obtaining knowledge on their own, thus making Jimmy Hoffa irrelevant. Only an unmitigated jackass could possibly deny that much history, that many people's life long efforts, and their very existence, and then accuse me of difficulties with..."comprehension". Yeah, I am pretty much done with taking you seriously. I know for a fact that there are literally 100k's of $3/hr jobs here. Why? Because I've seen the books with my own eyes....or better, the raw data. You, on the other hand apparently "know" what each of millions of Central Americans think? Really? What are they thinking right now? How about now? You know what everyone is paying illegal immigrants....because you know? Are you also a big Scientologist? The last time I heard: "I am capable of knowing what millions of people are thinking" or, "I know because I know", it was coming from them. I think it's hysterical that you keep attempting this dismissive tone thing...and then say idiotic stuff like this. Hysterical. And only an unmitigated Jackass would, lamely, try to equate what I am saying = "put all low skilled people to work immediately at whatever wage, and do not let the minimum wage get in the way. INSTEAD of letting them take the usual beating from cyclical unemployment, get them going now" with "sub-minimum wage low skill work will be attractive to a laid off US middle class worker" Weren't you talking about reading comprehension....and arguing points people weren't making....someplace? Good thing that's not what I am saying. Right, the entire 1940's, right after the 1930's, never happened. Let's just take that whole Great Depression thing right out of the history books. Like I said: Jaaaaaackaaaaasssss. Right...and the 1930-40's massive restrictions on immigration in general(Immigration Act of 1924), especially on those perceived to be Communists or leaning that way(um, Jews from Russia and Germany and other Eastern Europeans), and most Asians, detailed here were a great example of "loosening" of immigration policies...accompanying the economic growth of the 40's. .....JackASS! And it's a massively good thing that I keep jackasses from straying away from the reality that there are 2 artificial wage scales, that one wage scale drags down the other, or, one scale not being set by the market, and instead by some artificial standard, are all BAD THINGS, every day, all the time. No. Bad! I wish their was a way to negatively reinforce you every time you don't actually read what I wrote. Wait, I know: JackAss! If you actually read my posts, you would know that I precisely said: "that the low wages would be a temporary blip that would be immediately restored once economic growth reaches XYZ%" I said 4 times that this would be a temporary solution, or, that it's effect would be temporary. So now I can't comprehend what I wrote myself? Or is it the unmitigated Jackass that didn't read what I wrote...again? Moreover, wages get "lowered" in the aggregate all the f'ing time with great benefit to the economy: I.E. Outsourcing/ Downsizing/Takeovers/Turnarounds. Yes, the net effect of which was lower aggregate wages paid out....which created massive...earnings-->stock booms-->.prosperity in the 1990s...even for those who got downsized = making 2x what they were doing consulting, starting/working for new companies. I worked on large client downsizing efforts in mid/late 90's(deregulation of utilities and health insurance companies)....which lowered wages in the billions, but you "know" that lowering wages (ready for the sing along? "..because..it reduces..disposable...income...which reduces...demand..")is always a bad thing? Wait a minute: you are some kind of financial planner/analyst aren't you?! Because your rhetoric here smacks of "sideline reporter"-speak. Jackasses, who "know business" or a business sector because they read earnings statements about it while not actually having anything to do with it, love talking in absolutes, until they are proven absolutely wrong = the 1930's can't possibly exist now according to your absolute definition of what "always happens". Gotta love it when the Joe Buck's try to act like they actually play the game. You really don't "know" how any of this works because you don't actually "do" it. You just read about in a report. Makes sense now: This the same reason why you talk about ideas in terms of always good or always bad. This is the same reason why you think you can sit at your desk and "know" what immigrants think, or why you think you can simply "know" that people "obtaining knowledge on their own" was how workers improved their pay and conditions.

On that point: how hard would it to have been to simply do an emergency round up of everything that wold move people and do a Sam Kinison: "Get your kids, get your schit, we'll make one trip! We'll take you to where the Cat 5 isn't!" Seems like it wouldn't have been hard to get all but the immensely stupid out of there if they didn't have their own cars. EDIT: and let Darwin take it's course On the other hand, they had 3 days notice. It's not like you can't walk 60 miles inland in 3 days and simply get rained on instead of dead.

Chris Brown article: "Jauron Extols the Wonders of St. John Fischer's Facilities" Bills have been going there for 10 years, btw, and did we mention it's the Bills 50th year?

“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results”. -Albert Einstein Given that, and your clear endorsement of Einstein's ability as a philosopher, please explain: the imminent failure of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, basing "new health care" on any of the above, socialized medicine in general, socialized programs in general, the Post Office, the DMV, and why you haven't learned anything from either the blatant failure of, or the forced mediocrity of, socialism in general throughout the entire history of the world. Go ahead and talk about Cuba(still laughing at the "Everybody gets a new pot" economic plan...at least now they have something to piss in). And, don't tell me it's because we haven't gotten to Communism yet.

On board all day with that one.

I don't know. I have been called racist numerous time both here and elsewhere for simply stating the truth, no different than I did above. When I was last in Philly, I wend to this great open mike night a Fergie's. There was this amazing singer that sounded like Ella Fitzgerald. When I complemented her after she was done, and said that nobody would believe that that sound came from a 5 foot nothing tiny WHITE girl, her fat ass black friend called me a racist. WTF is that? Chris Rock also said: "There's alot of racism going on who's more racist, black people or white people? It's black people! You know why? Because we hate black people too! Everything white people don't like about black people, black people really don't like about black people ,and there's 2 sides, there's black people and theres niggas. The niggas have got to go.You can't have sh-- when you around niggas, you can't have sh--. You can't have no big screen TV! You can have it, but you better move it in at 3 in the morning. Paint it white, hope niggas think it's a bassinet. Can't have sh-- in your house! Why?! Because niggas will break into your house. Niggas that live next door to you break into your house, come over the next day and go, "I heard you got robbed." Nigga, you know you robbed me. You didn't see sh-- 'cause you was doing sh--!You can't go see a movie, you know why? coz niggas is shooting at the screen, "This movie's so good I gotta bust a cap in here!"You know the worst thing about niggas? Niggas always want credit for some sh-- they supposed to do. A nigga will brag about some sh-- a normal man just does. A nigga will say some sh-- like, "I take care of my kids." You're supposed to, you dumb mother!@#$er! What kind of ignorant sh-- is that? "I ain't never been to jail!" What do you want, a cookie?! You're not supposed to go to jail, you low-expectation-having mother!@#$er!" yep And this is the point. Look, those of us who are white know that this is a white problem. Therefore, it's not going to get solved by minorities. And certainly not by minorities, or their white enablers, yelling "racist" at people for telling the truth. No amount of name calling or legislation or media attacks is going to solve REAL racism. What is going to solve it? Simple really: the next time you hear someone in your family say something bad about Jews, blacks, etc., tell them you don't want to hear that nonsense, and tell them that Chris Rock also said: "Whoever you hate will end up in your family. You don't like gays? You're gonna have a gay son. You don't like Puerto Ricans? Your daughter's gonna come home with Livin' La Vida Loca!" This is becoming a disturbing trend: Obama doesn't seem to be able to think on his feet. It may be no big deal, because everything is supposed to be planned out for a President...but I worry a little because some days schit just happens and you have to make the right call. Every time things have been "unscripted" both Obama AND Biden seem to f up. Also, I worry because the recent planned out stuff has been patently retarded as well. And, with the reports coming out that Emmanuel and Alexrod are running things, I am starting to worry that we have another Bush-like guy in the White House. At this point, I think it's clear that it's time for Obama to start talking to Emmanuel AND Axelrod about their plans for life after politics, or at least after the white house. Right now, I don't think Obama will do that, even if things get worse.

All we heard from the media, and especially from the moderate or liberal commentators was that this country had clearly moved to the left as a result of the 2008 elections. However, given the dropping approval ratings, the fact that there are calls for Pelosi to step down...from her own party, and all the rest, I think one thing has been proven to blatantly obvious: Americans don't mind Democrats, but they hate the far-left. In fact, over the last 50 years, every single time the far-left has had "their guy" in office, or their guy as the candidate, things have ended badly for that guy, and for the country: LBJ, Humphrey, McGovern( ),Carter, Mondale("I'm going to raise your taxes" ) ....and now Obama. JFK was NOT a far-let guy(fought the Russians, increased defense spending, cut taxes). Clinton WAS a far-left guy in the first 2 years...until things became clear that he was going to lose if he continued that nonsense = he hired Dick Morris. Isn't it clear now, that the values of Americans are what they are, and that while they may get pissed at one party/President or another from time to time, they don't change those values? Moreover, what is it going to take for Democrats to realize that the far-left only represents 15-20% of the country, are mostly despised/made fun of by the average Amercian, and that they need to learn from Clinton's example? How about the example from 50 years of history? This is setting up to be 1994 all over again....and I am sure, once again, when the Democrats lose, it will be everybody else's fault but theirs. Hint: the country hasn't agreed with the far-left for 50 years, it doesn't agree with the far-left now, and it won't EVER agree with the far-left. Why? Because no matter how hard the far-left tries to indoctrinate people, no matter how much they try to stifle opposing speech on college campuses and in the media, there is one fundamental truth that separates Americans from every other population segment in the world and we learn it long before we get even get to school: "Americans love a winner and will not tolerate a loser. Americans play to win all the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in Hell for a man who lost and laughed." - Gen. George S. Patton. Full speech link here. Look at this site: we have people screaming bloody murder every day for Jauron's head! You don't see us saying "well, Jauron is entitled to a job, because, according to his needs, he needs one, and, according to his abilities, we can expect winning from him". And, few of us would rather "shovel schit in Louisiana" instead of put ourselves on the line, take the risks, and try to win the game.

Can someone explain to me how police behavior isn't going to trend in general towards profiling when the following conditions exist...and demonstrate the way things ARE, not the way they SHOULD be, or the way we WISH they were? Blacks Murder rate 7 time higher than Whites. Blacks will go to prison 5 time more often, and Hispanics will go 3 times more often than whites There are a bevy of other stats as well, so let's spare ourselves the BS. In the interest of fairness, more whites killed cops in 2007 than minorities. I am just trying to understand here...I know that police forces purposely train their people not to profile, which is a good thing. But, I find it hard to believe that the average officer out there, seeing the same thing go down year after year, isn't going to eventually start to see a pattern and start to follow it. If your job was to solve any problem, wouldn't you eventually start to learn where the problem is most likely to come from, and then eventually start there more often? I wonder if all the training in the world is a giant waste of time given the the realities "on the ground". I am sure there are all kinds of arguments as to "why" this is the case = crime disparity amongst minorities. And, I probably could be convinced of their validity. However, police don't deal in "why". They deal in "is". I think it would be extremely difficult for any reasonable person to completely ignore a suspect's race, and be a police officer at the same time.

Swing and a miss. I said two posts ago that this would only be a suspension in an effort to let the market price, wherever it is, for labor be met and get the economy going. As far as when it was a good idea, and when it was a bad one...oh I dunno are Unions still fighting for working conditions...or does OSHA do that now? Is it possible that the world doesn't always work in terms of an idea being permanently good, or bad, regardless of conditions changing around it? I will give you: killing people is always bad, so is socialism. But that doesn't mean that the minimum wage retains it's "goodness" forever and under all circumstance. Are you really that linear of a thinker? Same here. One has nothing to do with the other and I know you know that. If you want to get an economy going, how does having people sit on their ass and collect unemployment...help? Also: $50-75k workers implies skilled labor. Your original point was about unskilled labor. Or is that a point that is no longer part of your argument? I would hate to claim it was and have you change your mind again. In all cases, it has been proven over and over, in many countries, that a bottom-up approach to growth not only works but is preferable. This means investment, labor, etc. all being applied to the bottom creates a swell that moves rapidly up the food chain. Given the crisis we are dealing with, the fastest way to get your middle workers back to work, and back to their purchasing power, is to build a solid economy below them. Again, prices are already lowered: Jos. A Bank is doing a buy one suit get 2 free deal. How much more deflation do you need to see? Coffee for a nickel? You are going to spend so much worrying about deflation, that you create more because the longer your "doing nothing" plan goes, the more it erodes consumer confidence and creates even less demand. People making something and buying something is better than doing none of either. And a little demand is better than no demand. And, a little demand can turn into a lot very quickly....you just need infrastructure, natural resources, an educated workforce, technological skill, large capital reserves.....nah, that doesn't sound like America at all. What is your grand plan to stop deflation that has already occurred? A time machine? How is doing nothing going to increase consumption? How is doing nothing going to repay those fixed debts? How is doing nothing going to at least service some of those debts and free up additional capital? Capital is the only thing that hires your $50-75k workers. Where does that capital come from? Thin air? Certainly Obama is an idiot for effecting anything that taxes away capital right now. But not raising taxes is not the only thing that can be done. Capital needs to be attracted to a business plan. As you may know, most business plans are more about the #s and less about the idea from an investor's prospective. Burn rate is king, and anything that will demonstrably lower that, like lowered salaries, is highly attractive to investors. If you don't attract those investors, your $50-75k people can forget about Christmas, never mind back to school. I am sure they would rather be making $40-65k than $4-600 a week. Wait...you are defending the minimum wage...and calling ME Karl Marx? Again, you are acting like this is 2004. It's not btw. I am talking about taking action in a crisis, not normal operation. I would sooner put a bullet in my own head than support stressing low skill work force over high, because that's exactly what I wold be doing financially. But that's when things are relatively normal. Unless you haven't noticed, we are around 10% unemployment, and that is not normal. What's it going to take for you to stop arguing "general practice" and start dealing with the realities?

I actually voted for limiting minority "liar's mortgages" before I voted against it. The spin machine will never stop. This regulations go all the way back to the 70's and 80's....uh yeah, when Barney and his buddies DID have control of Congress. Sorry dude, this BS isn't fooling anyone.

Well. Thanks for ignoring my points and repeating yourself. Your punishment is a long post. Perhaps I can make you "see" it this way: If you look at health care in terms of a supply chain, you will quickly "see" that this plan does nothing to improve it. The main goal of any Supply Chain Management System is to drive out all the nickels and pennies everywhere they can be found. Usually there are opportunities all over the place to do this. But, these opportunities are either based on creating competition, or, incentivizing each member of the chain, in a quantifiable and therefore consistent manner, for their cost reductions. Occasionally they exist for no reason other than the stupidity and/or the comfort zone of the managers of the supply chain. What makes the typical health care entities SCM system much different than other industries is: service is also part of the supply, and materials and service are NOT related to each other consistently. I.E. today, it takes 3 adult diapers to toilet a patient, tomorrow it may only take one. This, and the fact that "taking care of people" apparently has many health care managers convinced that they don't actually have to....manage, and health care workers convinced that they don't have to control cost, is why health care is 20 years behind other industries in terms of their operational efficiency. Right now the GE's and Cerner's and McKesson's and ALL the others, of the world have put together such terrible SOFTWARE systems that their entire company, person for person, would be fired in any other industry. Day one. Why? 1. They are either hardware companies doing software(ALWAYS a bad idea, except Mac, but that's a whole other thing) or, 2. They are JV of the programming world = you make a lot more money elsewhere as a coder. 3. They are in such a hurry to focus on data storage, integration, and fancy hardware...they forget to make the user part...usable. Doctors and nurses don't use paper instead of software because they hate computers, or because they don't have them, or because they don't have software. They don't use it because what they have sucks big ass, it's not designed for them, it's designed for accountants and/or people who work at a desk. The problem is: health care doesn't happen at a desk. It happens at the bedside, the hallway, the OR, your home, etc. How does Obama's plan stack up against these realities? 1. Instead of incentivizing the SCM, it actually works the other way. The proposed "changes only an idiot believes in" do NOT incent cost reduction. a. They either JUSTIFY cost increase = there is nothing about cost per service in terms of competition, and, nothing to incent higher productivity....um Unions have nothing to do with that I'm sure , or, b. they ignore it = there is nothing about bonuses for materials mgt. cost reductions or incentives for capital expenditure competition...(cough, GE campaign contributions, cough), or, c. they drive legitimate competition out of the chain = insurance policies that compete with the government's are subject to government special commissioner approval....um move the goal posts = we already have entire state and federal commissions for insurance...why do we need this guy?. No reason other than to move the goal posts and make sure that eventually private insurance becomes unfeasible. There is no other reason that can be defended rationally by a reasonable person. d. so, with NOBODY incented to cut cost, AND, by adding another 30 million people to the system, AND with everybody thinking in terms of "free health care": you better believe that people will make dumb health care choices...if nothing else than by default. Who stands to gain by them being healthier? consuming less health care? doctor's not ordering unnecessary procedures and tests? Answer: Nobody. Even the lawyers benefit: more consumption means more things that can go wrong = more things they can sue over. 2. The idiot authors of this plan have clearly demonstrated that, not only do they not know how business works, or supply chains, or cost accounting(um, the way the people who do this for a living reduce costs), they don't know how health care differs from standard thinking regarding these concepts. And, they sure as hell don't know how to blend these concepts and create the right recipe for health care. They remind me of the PhD nurse/state employee I met a few years ago who was so proud of her amateurish attempt($20 million grant, btw) at using a data warehouse to predict falls. When I pointed out that her data collection process was hopelessly flawed(because it was, and she also had no way of controlling for it, "best programmers in the state" or not ), and that all the BI techniques in the world don't make up for bad data, she simply stood there like a duck in thunder. So did her programmers...because...they were only programmers. They don't do why, what and when, and they don't design how. So, they did the same thing so many tools do here when they are proven patently wrong, she attacked me and my crew. We took the high road and ignored her. 1 year later the grant was canceled because she could not show consistent results = taxpayer loses again. The first rule of our business is to work THE WHOLE problem. Just like focusing on analysis and BI, and ignoring data collection, this plan targets political enemies and ignores many critical areas, clearly helping political allies. That's not working the whole problem. This plan is a politicized piece of crap, and it has nothing in common with an enterprise solution proposal other than the OP's posting of a nice, colored flow chart. 3. I have to go so I will make this simple: why in God's green earth would you allocate $650 Billion to companies that make crap right now? They have had the 20 years to improve. They make plenty of money, allowing them to spend plenty on R&D...and Nurses and Docs STILL use paper. All that is happening here is a campaign contributor payback. GE and the rest are simply going to take that money and make more bad, faster. Look, there are lots of ways to get lunch today. Everybody wants lunch, we all see the value of lunch, we all like lunch and we are even ok with paying for somebody else's lunch some of the time. There is no dispute with lunch. However, there is a dispute with going to Jim's Steakout and demanding that everybody order the same thing, let Jim's employees demand whatever non-market supported pay they want, thereby making the cost of lunch keep going up, force Jim to buy locked in prices for meat and bread, thereby leaving the materials cost to either go up or at best stay the same, telling people that they can only get lunch from Jim and not Anchor Bar....and calling that lunch....lunch.

Who asked for your expertise? The reason that anyone asks for my opinion is: I am in the thinking business. So, yeah, by definition it's my job to do the thinking for them....and when I'm not a complete idiot I usually do the thinking pretty well(batting about .800). And please, there are just as many "grand thinkers" in corporate America is there are politicians. There are dumb and smart in both groups, and whole lot of mediocre, "pile on" people. Worse, there are those that want to do the best work they can, and those that have a jackass agenda in both groups....so you really don't have a point here...once again.