Alaska Darin

So when I said this: I have zero love for the pork system and the ridiculous earmarks that lawmakers put in. And this: Since that's how the system "works", the state gets far more than it's share of pork AND this: Just like "Native" Alaskans shouldn't have hospitals built for them with taxpayer money that only they're eligible to use. Nor should they be allowed to form "for profit" companies that are given preferential treatment to the tune of billions of dollars annually. Pay special attention to: You're preaching to the choir where that's concerned. Yet your conclusion is exactly the opposite. Sheer genius. Why would I? I'd venture to guess I pay more in taxes annually than you make.

I'll bet you were. Sorry, it was there.

Just mentally.

Where exactly did I say that? Be very specific.

Once again, STOP TAKING WORDS OFF MY KEYBOARD THAT DON'T EXIST. That's the problem with you partisans. It's an "all or nothing" proposition. Keep ignoring reality. You masters count on it.

You are an absolute partisan idiot. My mother could have been President of the United States during the 1990s. Every single economic star lined up while the books were being cooked. But you go ahead and pretend it had something to do with who held the Executive and the passage of "The Debt Reduction Act". Then ignore the fact that the bubble of all that bull sh-- has burst these 8 years later and all that crap came tumbling down - as it was going to do no matter who was in office and what got passed. And that's not me giving a pass the current Administration, whose staggaring lack of competence is trumped only by the terminally stupid electorate (of which you're obviously a part of).

Where exactly did I advocate any of those things? Stop trying so hard to take words off my keyboard. And INFRASTRUCTURE is not limited to roads and bridges.

Nice job on attempting to reduce something like the Budget of the United States of America to something as small as which party holds the White House. Welcome to why partisan politics has such a firm hold on this country. Perhaps we should look and see who controlled Congress during the majority of those 8 years? Would that be just as valid? Or will you actually get this point? Our education system really is a disaster.

There's a difference between pragmatic and contrarian. Jesus Christ, I'm not at all desperate.

Translation: Blah, blah, blah. Socialists good. At least the Obama ad "is talking" about the economy? Well there's a high bar. Thank God for Tivo. Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack! 90+ percent of Americans don't watch Fox News. For the life of me I cannot understand why you limp-wristed liberals can't use the 90% control you have of the media to your advantage. Perhaps you people just aren't as smart as you proclaim to be. So is holding the Executive branch. You know, 24 out of the last 32 years. But keep using the same tactics and wondering why they don't work. Welcome to liberalism's reality.

That was crazy.

So the Republicans are going to use tactics they've used successfully in the past? Looks like the Bishop is in mid-campaign whine already. Man, I love election season.

I asked Rafael Septien if the number he was wearing on his back was part of his prison number or if it was the over/under age of the girls he liked to molest.

Does it? So you're advocating that each state should get back EXACTLY what they put in? What's the point of the Federal Government being in charge of infrastructure if that's the case? Wouldn't the states be better off deciding how best to spend their own money rather than sending it off to the black hole of our Nation's Capital? Because like most of the rest of America, they continue to vote for the same people over and over again. Since that's how the system "works", the state gets far more than it's share of pork. You wanna take on the apparatus and change it? Good luck given your abilities. Nope. Just like "Native" Alaskans shouldn't have hospitals built for them with taxpayer money that only they're eligible to use. Nor should they be allowed to form "for profit" companies that are given preferential treatment to the tune of billions of dollars annually. You're preaching to the choir where that's concerned. But as far as "infrastructure" (roads, bridges, etc), the Federal Government has not held up their end of the bargain. Try and stay on topic.

You mean because every state should get back exactly what they put in? That somehow makes sense, right? I have zero love for the pork system and the ridiculous earmarks that lawmakers put in. But if you think that newer, less populous states don't deserve a disproportionate share of the infrastructure pie than older, more developed states then you're an idiot. But thanks for parroting the another ridiculous talking point. The "For Profit" media is proud of themselves for a reason.

Your idiocy has no limits. That's pretty awesome all in itself.

This is yet another example of you taking 2+2 and figuring the sum to be "concrete". IF - and that's a big IF, the U.S. government actually cared about their Constitutional responsibilities rather than pandering for votes there'd be more than enough money in the Treasury to take care of the infrastructure of the country. That's because they touch $.20 of every dollar in the richest country in the history of the world. The amount they actually collect is more than all but a handful of countries can even generate. Of course, our really "smart" politicians and manage to spend all that and a significant percentage more. But if they had just a little more money, everything would be just like heaven. They keep selling, tardos keep buying. So rather than taking care of those responsibilities, they build little empires for themselves and get the retards to repeat all their little slogans. If you can get the people to concentrate on minutia, they tend to ignore the actual problems. People like George Washington (heard of him?) warned of these very things while this country was in its infancy. Reality is a tough sell.

Obama has campaigned on doing pretty much exactly that. Because he's so smart he'll be able to figure it out. You know, being the savior and all that.

What was the situation on this one? Last week he had the ball in the wrong hand - a ridiculous mistake for someone at the pro level. There aren't many "football" people who think Mike Hart is going to make it in the NFL. He's just not quick enough and takes too many hits.

I kinda hope you get hit by a car. You know, so you understand why everyone thinks you're an idiot for wishing injury on someone else.

Yeah, it really does.

Yeah, because it's that easy. There are plenty of places in America that don't have a second option that's close by. I know that's hard to comprehend but America is a pretty big place. There are very few jobs in this country that have the right to refuse service based on religious beliefs. What you're advocating is a VERY slippery slope. Everyone needs to think back to when they got behind MADD because Drunk Driving really sucks. Would any of you really have believed that the government would start seizing people's vehicles because they were sleeping one off instead of driving or taxing beer to the point that a sixer of sh------- American Lager is now over $7? Watch out what you wish for - you'll ending up getting it and a hell of a lot worse.

Nah, you were comparing him to air. You didn't have the balls to pick another "OLYMPIAD" to compare Phelps to - mostly because it would be a futile effort. If what Phelps has done is so unremarkable, WHY IS HE THE ONLY ONE WHO HAS EVER DONE IT? Thanks for using the really big font, though. Futility never looked so good. You started this thread because you're one of those "I desperately need to be smart in a contrarian manner" without any fact to back it up other than "I swam competitively" - as if that holds any merit. How about the thoughts of another actually "competitive" swimmer: "The view from 200 butterfly gold medalist Melvin Stewart, who was blown away by the versatility Phelps showed by swimming what at the time was the third-fastest 100 freestyle ever in the lead leg of the 4x100 freestyle relay: "It's good to see Kobe Bryant is there to see the greatest athlete in the world. If Kobe goes out and wins a gold medal in badminton, that's what it's like to see this guy win the 200 fly and swim that leg in the 400 free."" You think maybe that guy knows anything about the difference in specialties in the pool or has a modicum of understanding on what Phelps has accomplished (which didn't even mention the fact that he's set the WR in EVERY event thus far)? Probably not as much as some internet blowhard. But I'm an ignorant farmer. And it still sounds retarded. Repeating something over and over again doesn't make it true.

Now try using that "lahjik" on the government you worship so much.