Comments Posted By chris
Displaying 31 To 40 Of 204 Comments
Good times! More popcorn, please.
Comment Posted By Chris On 26.03.2008 @ 21:54
DEMOCRATS WILL BE FINE BY NOVEMBER (PROBABLY)
jazz,
I disagree. These Dem factions aren't likely to unite and make nice with one another."I would say that any glee over Rezco and Obama’s pastor is also a bit optimistic and overblown. Both relationships are certainly valid areas for examination and discussion, but I’m still waiting to see any real meat on those bones that would move the needle very far in the general election. And let’s remember that pretty much every politician has had some pretty shakey “relationships†and actions in their past and somehow America gets over it. In fact, we have a president right now who had a DWI, faced suspicions of past drug use, and had a multitude of shady relationships with a series of failed business interests, both domestic and abroad with a cozy relationship with some high profile Saudis in the oil industry. None of this ultimately seemed to bother his electability."
First off, I take exception to there being glee at the recent revelation that BHO's pastor and mentor is an unreconstructed demagogic bigot. I don't think there are many center-right adherents who want to see a full-on racial meltdown in this country. Yet that seems to be where the Dem's are headed. Nominate BHO and get a repeat of the 1968-1972 electoral maps. Deny him and watch Denver erupt. That's my prediction and don't see how it's avoided.
While I could be wrong, I don't see how at this point. To say that, for instance, the DWI didn't harm Bush's electability, is to ignore the Florida-2000 fiasco. He had a five-point lead there a week from election day. Had Bush been associated with some white separatist nut-jobs, I dare say that not only his election would have been unlikely but so would even his Rep. nomination.
Denver had better make sure all its insurance policies are up to date and the deductibles have been reset to the lowest #'s possible. This could make Chicago '68 look like a picnic.
Comment Posted By Chris On 16.03.2008 @ 16:35
What America does to stay on top is work hard, innovate, export the fruits of our labors, and reluctantly use the wealth and industrial capacity we have earned to involve ourselves in the problems of the rest of the world. After WWII we found ourselves facing off with a totalitarian expansionist empire of roughly equal strength, fueled by antithetical values, and bent on subverting ours. I can see how the ensuing struggle would produce a love/hate relationship for your own country.
Racism is not what it was 40 years ago, or even 20 years ago. This is an indisputable fact. What racism remains in this country is more subtle, but also universal among ethnic groups. Blaming whitey for your problems in today's world is infantile. Like any past trauma, what matters is how you respond today. For any other trauma, the bottom line is; get over it. You were wronged in the past. OK, we get that. What are you doing today? Still acting on old resentments, or moving on?
Comment Posted By Chris On 15.03.2008 @ 09:26
OBAMA-REZKO AND MEDIA IGNORANCE OF "THE CHICAGO WAY"
Nice post, Rick. No need to mention that this story has legs and you should stick with it. Your proximity should make it a little easier and you obviously have a good lay of the land, so to speak. Smoke-yes. Fire-? Likely.
Comment Posted By Chris On 6.03.2008 @ 21:27
It was fun to watch him play. How many other opposing athletes can you say that about?
Comment Posted By Chris On 7.03.2008 @ 15:03
CLIMATE CHANGE? OR JUST A STRETCH OF BAD WEATHER?
Too funny.
"Render unto science the things that are science’s, and unto politics the things that are political."
Somebody needs to wake noted theologian/scientist and nobel prize winner, Algore. Are you freaking kidding me? You are arguing that because I am not a scientist, even though I've taken advanced physics and chemistry, that I have no right to weigh in on this debate? And I must submit to the will of divinity school drop-out Algore? Send in the freaking clowns. If this is the best argument the pro-AGW side can muster then we're almost through with the nonsense.
Comment Posted By Chris On 3.03.2008 @ 22:37
WITH a dissenting view. Jeez.
Comment Posted By Chris On 3.03.2008 @ 00:14
Ross,
Nice comment and couldn't agree more with one exception. #3--think China recently surpassed the US in CO2 output.Rick,
Interesting post but I think when the adherents to AGW are proscribing draconian measures (returning our economy to an agrarian model-for starters) to combat their bugaboo, the burden of proof is decidedly on them. A simple cost-benefit analysis of Kyoto might be in order. For something like a tenth of the costs associated with that UN boondoggle, we could bring potable water to the entire third world and wipe out malaria and a host of other diseases.They don't want to do those things, however. Why? I would submit that it is not the goal of these AGW fearmongers to improve the plight of the third, or first for that matter, world. The goal is to bring the evil US to heel under the boot of a global carbon-cop run out of the UN.
It essentially comes down to redistribution of wealth. That is the end goal. AGW (along with various schemes like cap and trade) is merely the means. And the ends truly do justify the means for the watermelon Gore acolytes.
I realize this sort of view doesn't sit well in Manhattan coffee shops or Hollywood production lots but it is empirically true. Science is about repeatable results not threatening anyone who challenges a dissenting view as an apostate. That is more the hallmark of extreme religious doctrine.
The science is not settled for if it were, then people like Gore wouldn't be afraid to debate and defend their theories. Nor would they be forced to propagate doomsday porn in an effort to whip up hysteria on the part of the masses.
There is one serious way to reduce oil dependency and simultaneously CO2 emmissions--nuclear power. It's good enough for France but not for Al Gore and Hollywood. Again, why? Could it be that a solution is not what is being sought? Perish the thought. The political left would never want to keep an issue around to demagogue.
When Arianna and Leonardo forego their private jets then I'll consider climbing out of my SUV. When Al Gore chooses to debate the issue honestly and in good faith, I'll climb onto my roof and install solar panels. Barring either of these unlikely events, pardon me for hitting the snooze button everytime these alarmists spout off.
Regards,
Chris
Comment Posted By Chris On 2.03.2008 @ 23:44
This isn't a bad analogy, but the first Crusade was not an army of peasants. It was made up of knights, with their retainers and men-at-arms. It was a professional army, which is why it was successful in wresting the Holy Land away from the Muslims. The kingdoms that the first Crusade carved out remained in European hands for 200 years, until internecine squabbling and complacency, coupled with a united Muslim enemy, made them ripe for reconquest.
I think you may be a little hard on the Obamaniacs. Young people aren't too keen on critical thinking in any generation, and becoming invested in the political process for the first time is often a largely emotional reaction for most. I voted for Jimmy Carter in 1980, for God's sake, because I was 19 and thought that people should share what they had. I didn't have anything, so what did I know about earning a livelihood, or providing for a family? Like edward cropper said, they will learn for themselves that politicians can't change the world and usher in the age of Aquarius.
Comment Posted By Chris On 15.02.2008 @ 07:20
DELEGATE MATH DOESN'T ADD UP FOR ROMNEY
Can someone please tell me why everyone is demanding Romney give it up instead of Huckabee? Is it possible that everyone knows Huckabee is only in to screw Romney, but noone wants to say so, and this if Romney would just give up, Huckabee would stop the idiotic charade? I can't fathom why people don't start analyzing Huckabee and how ridiculous it is for him to stay in. Huckabee has no chance of becoming the nominee, Romney has about 3% chance becoming the nominee, and McCain, presumably the nominee, has -10% chance of actually winning the race- probably even less because of the debacle that Huckabee and McCain have caused by really sticking it to Romney. Their selfish self-interest (unlike Guilianni and Thompson)is only causing grief, resentment, lack of fundraising, extremely poor publicity, and getting the Democrats excited because they can smell Republican blood and they know not only will they kill the Republicans in the fall, but the Republicans are killing themselves now. How is this Romney's fault? He's staying in to date because he was viable- Huckabee is in to screw him (how Christian)and McCain is in because he wants the nomination at any and all costs, regardless of what's best for the party. I'm glad he'll probably get it, because I'm convinced that after what he and Huckabee have done (don't blame talk radio for being mad), McCain will experience that exquisite "joy" of being internationally humiliated when the energized Democrats eat him alive, spit him out, and kick his sorry remains out of DC.
Comment Posted By Chris On 6.02.2008 @ 23:33
