Comments Posted By Jeff
Displaying 11 To 20 Of 33 Comments
THE TOTAL WITLESSNESS OF OBAMA APOLOGISTS
I actually think Obama is being Swiftboated ... he is being destroyed by his own actions and words ... the "swiftboating" is pointing out the truth ...
It was a nice con job while it lasted, I'm sure alot of "consultants" for Obama have gotten quite rich this year ... they'll need the money because when this con job unravels they'll be out of work for a long time in DC ...
Comment Posted By Jeff On 25.04.2008 @ 15:54
FINALLY, THE MEDIA 'DISCOVERS' OBAMA-AYERS RELATIONSHIP
Ah ... Still Liberal ...
Ayers was published on 9/11/01 as saying he wished they had set more bombs ... doesn't sound like he cleaned up anything ...Go ahead make excuses for Obama ... seems like the guy attracts alot of slimy people ... I can only assume you have no issue with Wright, Rezko or Ayers ...
Its not guilt by association ... its associating with guilt, and racists, and domestic terrorists
Comment Posted By Jeff On 17.04.2008 @ 15:07
I agree totally with you about the Trop. It was the first casino I walked into during my recent trip to Vegas. My only thought as I circled the small run down casino gaming area was im sure the rest are much nicer than this dump. And as far as the musty smell you mentioned- it lingers in the casino area as well. Its amazing that a hotel that has a street named after it would be such a rat hole. I was in Vegas for work and I stayed at the exquisite Motel 6(thanks boss)located on Trop Ave. just east of the trop. Hot water, clean room, decent bed. GO FIGURE Sorry about your hellish experience.
Comment Posted By Jeff On 11.12.2007 @ 23:36
IRAQ IS NOT LIKE VIET NAM EXCEPT WHEN IT IS
"I had to read that amazing passage about our pullout from Viet Nam having “few negative repercussions for the United States and its allies†several times before I could believe it. Is the Times actually trying to argue that there were no “negative repercussions†for Thailand or Cambodia, both of them close US allies at the time?"
This is a perplexing statement. You said you read that passage several times, but it seems it didn't do any good. No, Mr. Moran, the NY Times said the U.S. pullout had "few negative repercussions"; they did not say there were "no" negative repercussions.
"To say that our pull out didn’t have negative repercussions for the US or many of our allies is insane."
What's insane is to claim that "few" means "no." If you had been accurate, the question you should have asked is "Is the NY Times actually arguing our pull out from Vietnam had few negative repercussions for Thailand and Cambodia."
Basically you took down your own straw man. Nice job.
Comment Posted By Jeff On 24.08.2007 @ 10:37
Trust me. Even if I did, and I am not certain that I do: What about your successor? What is it said about power? Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely? When I think back to the Clinton years and the missing FBI files and juxtipose it with what I do not know about this administration and I project this image onto the future with the unknown variables of personality and blind ambition to gain power for powers sake, I shudder.
I agree with the commentor who state if self policing worked there would be no need for the police.
Comment Posted By Jeff On 4.08.2007 @ 14:22
RAGE AGAINST THE NIGHT - AND GLOBAL WARMING
>Rick Moran Said:
>1:41 pmÂ
>You people really don’t do nuance very well, do you.I agree. There have been many un-nuanced arguments posted above including: "global warming doesn't exist," "Al Gore et. al. are goofs so global warming doesn't exist," "unless we have 100% certainty, we should do nothing about global warming," "reducing our pollution will impoverish us," and "there are many who wish to use global warming to stick it to the United States and the west as well as impose their own belief system regarding “sustainable life†on the rest of us."
I find this last one particularly interesting given that 1) to date it is western governments (with the exception of the U.S.) that have taken the lead on fighting global warming, and 2) any child can see that sustainability is not a "belief system" or "lifestyle."
Sustainability is the principle that, in any finite system, taking resources from that system without replenishing them will lead to the system's collapse.
THE PLANET IS A FINITE SYSTEM! It is not like the economy. Economies are not finite or zero-sum. They grow. Increased economic activity increases wealth AND the opportunity for even more activity. Sadly, the almighty market meets its match at the planetary scale. Or even sooner.
History is littered with civilizations that collapsed because they didn't respect their finite resources. The ancient Maya burned so much of their forest (to produce lime for the construction of their cities) that their rivers clogged with silt and their irrigation dependent agriculture collapsed. Likewise, the Easter Islanders deforested their island (to aid construction of their spooky giant-head totems) and their agriculture collapsed.
Our predicament is not so clear cut (pardon the pun). Air pollution from our civilization threatens to change weather patterns, with consequences for world water supplies, coastal real estate, extreme weather events, species extinction and, of course, agriculture.
Luckily, we're much better equipped than past civilizations to deal with this. We've got incredible scientific insight into these mechanisms and risks, and incredible technology to deal with the problem.
I'm not calling anyone a "yahoo" or any other epithet, nor do I wish to attack anyone's sincerity, or intelligence, or right to their own opinion. I think it's really sad how quickly this and other debates in our country descend into such attacks. For me, it shows how poorly educated in clear thought and constructive argument we've become as a society. How intolerant we've become for views other than our own. For my part, I'm just trying to throw facts into the debate, as clearly and respectfully as I can.
And about certainty... If over 90% of Wall Street analysts said there was a 90% chance that such and such a stock was about to tank, would you invest in it?
Comment Posted By Jeff On 11.07.2007 @ 13:04
Hi Rick.
As you said in your piece "What I Believe about Global Warming," despite the scientific consensus that human activity is raising the temperature of the planet there is still much uncertainty about the issue. Why don't we err on the side of caution --traditionally a conservative approach-- and act as if the dire warnings were correct?
Perhaps this will cause some economic pain (although many European countries have reduced their GHG emissions without damaging their standards of living at all). But what if we look at any such cost as similar to an insurance premium? The chance of one's house burning down is slim but no one uses this to claim that fire insurance isn't important.
I suspect you'll say that the costs of reducing GHG pollution are greater relative to the economy than insurance premiums are to our personal incomes, but some quick math show this isn't the case. Let's say I make $30K/year and my insurance costs $300/year. That means I'm paying 1 percent of my income to cover this risk. One percent of our current GDP ($13 trillion, conservatively) is $130 billion. You quoted $1.2 trillion over 10 years as a worst case scenario combat GHG's, or $120 billion per year. Paying to clean up GHG's would cost us no more as a country than fire insurance costs us a family!
Maybe the planet won't 'burn,' but if it turns out it does, I think we'll all regret we didn't buy the insurance that was available to mitigate the damage. And perhaps life insurance is a more accurate analogy because the risk of global warming will effect our children and grandchildren much more than it effects us. We all need to start acting on behalf of their futures.
Just in case.
Comment Posted By Jeff On 9.07.2007 @ 20:11
"NOBODY HERE 'CEPT US INCOMPETENT JIHADIS..."
I don't think you adequately answered the charge that the NJ plot has gotten a massive amount of attentiton in the MSM and the blogosphere, while the AL plot has gotten virtually no attention. They are almost identical except for the ethnicities/religions of the perpetrators. I also wonder if you can explain to me why the perps in AL were not charged with any type of terrorism charge, just possession and manufacture of gernades?
Comment Posted By Jeff On 9.05.2007 @ 08:24
Morning. Wish we'd started this raiding/cleaning up of musques sooner ...
Comment Posted By jeff On 16.02.2007 @ 06:54
THE SLAUGHTER OF THE MODERATES
I don't get why people are "afraid" of Social/family values Conservatives. 20 years ago, I believe most people lived their lives with basically the same "scary" morality Social Conservatives espouse today. American Society as a whole has moved to the left, and the traditional American values that built this great Country have seemingly all but disappeared. We need to hold on to & cherish these values, not discard them like yesterday's garbage. Conservatism is about Liberty AND Values. So is America. At least it used to be.
Comment Posted By Jeff On 10.11.2006 @ 23:35
