During World War Two, at the Battle of Bastogne, part of the Battle of the Bulge, the 101st Airborne in and around Bastogne was surrounded by German forces. The German forces sent an envoy bringing a request for surrender, saying the Americans faced "certain annihilation". The Commanding Officer of the American forces, General Anthony McAuliffe, had one word for them: "Nuts!".
One famous example comes from the time of the invasion of Philip II of Macedon. With key Greek city-states in submission, he turned his attention to Sparta and sent a message: "If I win this war, you will be slaves forever." In another version, Philip proclaims: "You are advised to submit without further delay, for if I bring my army into your land, I will destroy your farms, slay your people, and raze your city." According to both accounts, the Spartan ephors sent back a one word reply: "If." Subsequently, both Philip and Alexander would avoid Sparta entirely.
I read the description of that in the article, but it still strikes me as quite irresponsible for an elected official sworn to uphold the constitution to write off the valid human rights concerns of an entire religious group off with a single word.
I read the description of that in the article, but it still strikes me as quite irresponsible for an elected official sworn to uphold the constitution to write off the valid human rights concerns of an entire religious group off with a single word.
I'm not defending him, just telling you that his strategy is a thing.
I read the description of that in the article, but it still strikes me as quite irresponsible for an elected official sworn to uphold the constitution to write off the valid human rights concerns of an entire religious group off with a single word.
I'm not defending him, just telling you that his strategy is a thing.
I've proceeded to pen a letter to him that consists solely of the word "Derp."
The article assumes that people who are investigated but not charged are criminals. Remember, innocent until proven guilty is our creedo. If you have evidence, convict. If you don't have evidence, shut the fuck up.
The article assumes that people who are investigated but not charged are criminals. Remember, innocent until proven guilty is our creedo. If you have evidence, convict. If you don't have evidence, shut the fuck up.
Well what I gathered (from reading most of the first page only admittedly) is that matter under investigation that didn't become full investigations were wiped entirely away as if they never happened. And the some of those were companies now under investigation, and the documents that were destroyed from back then may have been of use. Or repeat MUIs might have become full investigations had all the previous MUIs been at the disposal of investigators.
It's just a lot of shady stuff by what's supposed to be the good guys.
also, for an MUI (the documents that are being destroyed) to go forward into a full blown investigation, it has to be approved by a guy who's likely career goal is as a high priced lobbyist fighting FOR the banks and companies the SEC is supposed to regulate.
Its analogous to organized crime investigations having to be approved by people who will likely end up in the Mob after leaving the force.
Hate to tell you this, but politics in the US doesn't work like that anymore.
Really? I hate to tell you this, but comments like this make you sound like a pompous douchebag.
A few years is hardly an irreversible trend in Congress. There are more politics than just the national Congress, and in many local and state arenas moderate republicans are doing just fine for their people.
Agreed, on a local and county level, party lines tend to blur a bit. As one state congressman once told me, "Most of us would call ourselves either Yellow Dog Democrats or Boll Weevil Republicans."
Just read a book on this. The parties are polarizing. Most people are towards the center. Right now, the most centered candidate running is Obama.
Don't most forms of energy conservation save energy that costs money? I was under the impression that there is conservation to be done that is simultaneously fiscally responsible. Personally, I'm in the camp that thinks humans have little to nothing to do with Global Warming, and it's inevitable, and unstoppable.
Please succinctly state why you believe that human beings are not causing significant changes to the climate.
Additionally, cite primary sources.
I am willing to change my mind. I only know that the earth is getting hotter, and that it does that from time to time. it gets cold sometimes, too. (Not part of global warming discourse, but just an example of the occasional knowledge I gain by challenging what I am told.) Also upon further analysis, recycling is sometimes wasteful, and the number of trees are increasing (albeit becoming more homogeneous). So, I am skeptical, and therefore, intellectually (and emotionally) healthy. I definitely don't deny it's getting hotter... that's pretty evident. I don't have a coherent opinon on this yet, so by all means- inform me.
In this episode of "Don't ask me about things that I actually said things about in the past", Tea Bagger and not a witch Christine O'Donnell walked off the Piers Morgan show after he asked her about her past stance on masturbation and about gay marriage. She addresses gay marriage in the book, but refused to knowledge that fact when Morgan asked her about it, and became offended, eventually walking out on the interview. Now she's saying it was "borderline sexual harassment" and that the questions were offensive. Doubly hilarious is that she also hung up on a Delaware radio show because they were pointing out how she wasn't nearly as successful in her campaigning has she was insinuating. I think we should start a count of how many times Tea Baggers walk off interviews because they aren't being handled with kit kid gloves and being asked actual questions.
Clearly I needed to be corrected about a typo in the most condescending manner possible. Because, you know, that was also the most important part of the post.
Clearly I needed to be corrected about a typo in the most condescending manner possible. Because, you know, that was also the most important part of the post.
Hey, Give a brother a break - I know Kilarney is usually swings a little harder, has a little more punch, or at least has a little more substance to his posts, but shit, they can't all be gold. Everybody has off days, you know?
I wonder if this is the new face of global Bizzaro democracy; legions of libertarian assembled by by people like the Koch brothers and legitimated by organizations like News Corps. in a war everything progressive that's happened socially in the last 100 years.
Comments
!!!!
It's just a lot of shady stuff by what's supposed to be the good guys.
Its analogous to organized crime investigations having to be approved by people who will likely end up in the Mob after leaving the force.
I was under the impression that there is conservation to be done that is simultaneously fiscally responsible.
Personally, I'm in the camp that thinks humans have little to nothing to do with Global Warming, and it's inevitable, and unstoppable.
(Not part of global warming discourse, but just an example of the occasional knowledge I gain by challenging what I am told.) Also upon further analysis, recycling is sometimes wasteful, and the number of trees are increasing (albeit becoming more homogeneous).
So, I am skeptical, and therefore, intellectually (and emotionally) healthy.
I definitely don't deny it's getting hotter... that's pretty evident. I don't have a coherent opinon on this yet, so by all means- inform me.
Doubly hilarious is that she also hung up on a Delaware radio show because they were pointing out how she wasn't nearly as successful in her campaigning has she was insinuating.
I think we should start a count of how many times Tea Baggers walk off interviews because they aren't being handled with kit kid gloves and being asked actual questions.
I wonder if this is the new face of global Bizzaro democracy; legions of libertarian assembled by by people like the Koch brothers and legitimated by organizations like News Corps. in a war everything progressive that's happened socially in the last 100 years.
Also, this is the guy kilarney thinks is smarter than Obama?