Ordinarily, I only delete comments that use profanity or are off topic.
But in your case, Steve, it would be hard to top your post for idiocy. And since I feel I have to maintain some standards on this site for intelligent discussion, your comment is gone.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 22.05.2006 @ 13:18
A word in my defense -
Henderson's men showed up at the motel, not Bierko's terrorists. Are they one and the same? Not in their motivations surely but rather in their methods. I consider it a 99% probablity that the little girl was offed by Henderson's mercs. If it had been Bierko's men, I would have put it at a dead certainty.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 22.05.2006 @ 08:13
Your solution sounds familiar. I know I've heard it somewhere...
OH YEAH! I wrote the exact same thing (with the exception of no benefits to illegals) in the article.
I agree. I agree. I agree.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 17.05.2006 @ 21:00
You're rolled, hon.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 18.05.2006 @ 05:11
I would hardly call what you "give off" as pherenomes.
Perhaps more like a combination of swiss cheese, ham, onions, with a sprinkling of something more exotic that I just can't put my finger on here....wait! I've got it!
Troll droppings!Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 17.05.2006 @ 09:38
How could you ever think I'd take you guys off my blogroll?
The pherenomes you guys give off are good for 500 hits a day alone.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 17.05.2006 @ 06:36
You're right in saying both Bush and Reagan were pragmatists. I would have to say however that Reagan felt the pulse of conservatives a lot better and was able to finesse their disappointment.
We all remember the James Watt plea "Let Reagan be Reagan" - as if he could be anything else! What Watt was really saying was let Reagan's rhetoric match his actions. The conservatives during Reagan's terms were mad at James Baker, Don Regan, and David Gergen because they thought that those guys and other moderates were holding back Reagan from doing some really whacky stuff. Reagan ended up doing what was possible while still making it look like a victory for conservatives.
Bush as President with his own majority in Congress isn't given that same benefit of the doubt. These "full loaf or nothing" Republicans don't look to Bush's aides for the answer to thier frustration, they blame the President himself. In a very important way, Bush has been his own worse enemy on this and it's probably too late to change.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 16.05.2006 @ 18:47
You've left some pretty ignorant comments in the past at this site but this one takes the prize; full blown idiocy.
The problem with 100 million immigrants over the next 20 years is our ability to absorb and assimilate them - a problem you conveniently ignore in favor of calling people who are concerned about it a racist. That tactic of the left meant to delegitmize rather than engage debate is typical but doesn't work here. Rather all it does is reveal your own shortcomings in analysis as well as a casual attitude toward the facts.
The nativist element is much smaller than it ever has been both statistically and in decibel levels. This debate on the right (there is no debate on the left - there never is among the lockstep loons who always seem to be able to ascribe evil motives to their adversaries) is about security and the rule of law vs. economic necessity. It's the main street Republicans vs. the ultra-capitalists who you have pointed out on more than one occasion are pretty chummy with Bush.
And those poll numbers are likely to plummet the more people realize what is really in that Senate bill - a recipe for disaster. Read the Heritage piece and come back here and be as sanguine as you appear to be. It simply is not possible for the United States to absorb and assimilate that many people in so short a time. It's about doing what is possible and in accordance with the law and our own national security interests.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 16.05.2006 @ 13:30
Molino was hit in the hip. He's still alive and on his way back to CTU.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 16.05.2006 @ 10:24
First of all, this story has nothing to do with the NSA surveillance programs. ABC's attempt to generate scare headlines by telling everyone that the FBI is investigating lawbreaking (read the update to the ABC story on their own website) is a shockingly shameless use of their trust as a major media outlet.
As far as investigations, no one has said anything about informing the intel committees in Congress. They seem to be up to speed on most aspects of the programs. Even the Democrats on those committees are NOT saying they are illegal or that they should be stopped. The only people who are saying that are those who know precious little more about the TECHNICAL ASPECTS of the program - how the data is collected, how is it collated, who if anyone sees it - than you or I. I listen to Jane Harmon who has been upset that some details weren't shared with the entire committees but has otherwise supported the programs.
Perhaps a better system for informing Congress can be developed. But the idea that there is no oversight is just plain wrong.Comment Posted By Rick Moran On 16.05.2006 @ 14:25
Pages (132) : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84  86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132