Comments Posted By Chuck Tucson
Displaying 161 To 170 Of 536 Comments
TIME TO PHASE OUT FARM SUBSIDIES
Rob F said:
However, abolishing the subsidies doesn’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of happening, no matter how good doing so may be in the long run.
Amen to that. If we were willing to sit by and watch Saddam use gas to murder untold numbers of Iraqi people just so we could continue the billion dollar agriculture trade from southern farmers during the Reagan years, we're sure as hell not going to see subsidies going anywhere anytime soon.
Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 7.07.2009 @ 21:13
A FEW WORDS ON THE EFFICACY OF CHANGING ONE'S MIND
jharp said:
The teabaggers need to quit whining about losing an election and just once try to offer constructive ideas.
Eight years of Republican governance shed light on two basic rules:
1) Never admit you were wrong about anything.
2) If you change your mind in light of new information you are a gigantic sniveling pussy intellectual who hates America.
What you're suggesting is that Tea Party people help fix the problems that their programs and policies caused. Unfortunately though, this would violate rules 1 and 2 above and is therefore impossible.
This is unfortunate.
Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 6.07.2009 @ 13:33
Just because Obama has decided - wisely - to lay low, doesn't mean that the US isn't pumping money and resources into Iran to fuel the opposition fire. I really hope this works.
Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 19.06.2009 @ 14:51
'THIS CAN'T BE HAPPENING HERE'
And if you can’t see “the problem” with a news network overtly shilling for one party or the other, there is no hope for you and I wish you well in our brave new world.
So, the Dems spewing garbage on ABC is somehow different than your guys spewing garbage on FOX? Got it, thanks.
Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 16.06.2009 @ 10:43
This is putting a huge media conglomerate at the disposal of the executive branch in order to achieve the president’s policy goals.
You're implying that ABC is giving up the network for free. It's not. The air time is being paid for. Smells like good old fashioned capitalism to me. Money is being exchanged for goods and services.
A one trillion dollar program that will fundamentally alter not only our health care system but re-order American society itself and we are only to be presented with one side of the debate?
Too bad that fairness doctrine isn't in place.
The issue is the crass, obvious, dangerous, and radical manipulation of the media to serve the ends of government and not serve the people.
So it's a completely overt and obvious infomercial. What exactly is the problem? It seems a little more straightforward than the covertly paid experts that showed up on all the networks when they sold us the war.
ABC News should immediately alter the program to include opposition voices to what the Democrats are proposing or cancel it altogether.
Again, sorry to hear about that fairness doctrine, oh, and that whole capitalism thing.
I don't know. Maybe you should have read the damn thing before commenting.
ABC is presenting this program as news. No one is paying for it (if you have a link that says someone is, I will alter the text in the post). There is also no indication that any opposing views, i.e. the GOP plan, will be allowed on.
And if you can't see "the problem" with a news network overtly shilling for one party or the other, there is no hope for you and I wish you well in our brave new world.
ed.
Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 16.06.2009 @ 09:59
MUSEUM SHOOTER INFLUENCED BY RIGHT WING RHETORIC?
Gayle Miller said:
Are there any intrepid citizen journalists out there who want to take a crack at confirming or denying this story, with incontrovertible evidence?
Sounds like some possible dot connecting to me.
Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 12.06.2009 @ 09:05
If life was about connecting dots, we’d be born with pencils for fingers and a child’s puzzle book for brains.
The human brain organizes and catalogs all information by connecting dots. Conscious thought and memory would not be possible without connecting dots. Neural networks are massive collections of organized and interconnected dots.
While some connections are obviously forced, one only needs to look at your analysis of the car dealers to see a clear example of attempting to connect dots. I can understand the anger and frustration of watching others attempt to associate these events with your politics. However, you might consider another, less hypocritical, approach in exposing the non-connection between this shooting and your team.
How is it "hypocritical" when I shot down the dealer closing meme by showing that in this case, the dots did not connect?
The problem isn't dot connecting. It is people making psychological evaluations without a clue.
ed.
Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 11.06.2009 @ 09:31
Jackson1234 said:
And Rick: to call a distinguished senator a “cretin” because of a stupid remark doesn’t really help your case.
His case is pretty solid. Also, a United States Senator calling the President un-american kinda detracts a bit from his "distinguished" status.
Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 10.06.2009 @ 14:47
Rick Said:
I can’t find the words to describe how idiotic it is to believe that one’s patriotism is more heartfelt than another’s, as if love of country is something that can be quantified or measured.
I wish both sides truly understood this.
Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 10.06.2009 @ 12:18
c3, that's the nicest thing anyone's ever said to me. Thank you.
Comment Posted By Chuck Tucson On 10.06.2009 @ 18:15
