meangreendork

It does seem really biased. Very biased, actually. Both sides should see airtime here. No question.

There's the "but he's a human being and should be taken care for, etc., etc." argument but that won't work here. And it's really for the reasons stated above. With those actions, he's more or less forfeiting leniency of any kind. It's pretty hard to have sympathy for someone breaking a law based around public safety in a very reckless act while shirking responsibility through violating insurance law and of course, driving like an idiot. I'd say jailtime, but I don't want him eating up taxpayer's money. Send him home would work too, but then he would probably end up doing the same thing all over again.

For Letterman, apparently. You can't just take potshots at people like that, especially when it's pretty much irrelevant.

Yeah, it does. And thanks.

So you made a comment about how you don't like how the government decided it was good for all of us in terms of civil rights. How about you expand upon that for me? I mean, I'm iffy on affirmative action - if you don't make the grade, or if you don't have the qualifications, or if your company doesn't price out to someone's liking, you don't get the job/college acceptance/contract. I know why affirmative action should be around, but I also know it's a flawed system that's only treating a symptom of both needless political correctness and on the opposite side, discrimination. But that's different from civil rights. So help me out with this, will you? Both suffrage and civil right in general would probably have taken place without a general sweep from the federal government, but I do believe it would've been a far slower process.

It's a lot like affirmative action, actually. But AA is still a questionable system at best. It may level the field for some but it also skews it badly for others. The government contracting system should get an overhaul. Mind you, I work for a business that gets special consideration because it's run by a woman, and is more likely to get contracts. But really, there shouldn't be a need for this to begin with. There shouldn't be a need to up the odds for a woman/veteran/minority owned business due to discrimination. It should just be a discussion of who performs the best work, in timely manner, with the best professionalism.

He shouldn't have said the joke in the first place.

Just don't report them and don't get caught.

That's under the affirmative action issue. And really, I'm all for other minorities like me getting hired or companies getting contracted for any state/government work, but if you're not qualified, or if your numbers aren't good, then they're just not. You either don't get the job or you don't get the contract. Competition.

Good call. Had to re-read that myself.

Wait, what?

In other words, it was a bad joke.

Terrorists may be uneducated, but their senior leadership is not stupid. It's fine to look like "Abu the raghead" if everyone looks the same way in Iraq. But that'll get you stopped by the authorities real fast around here. If I want to mask myself away and make it easier for me to hit high value targets, I'm going to look like you and your next door neighbor or I'm gonna recruit easily manipulated people that look just like you or your neighbor. My plan is going raise a lot less suspicion if I have a bomb in the briefcase of a clean-shaven man than if I have it delivered by a guy that looks like Osama Bin Laden. Who are you gonna eyeball at the next Cowboys game? The guy in the Romo jersey who had a recent haircut or the guy in tribal dress with a shemagh around his head?

So then, you only call out people when their jokes are bad? That doesn't even make sense. Actually, that's just worse than tossing around uneven criticism.

Okay, I'm usually for "green" policies, but WTF is this?

You're touching on something pretty close to a major contributor of healthcare costs - and that's the people procrastinate about their medical conditions. The sort of people who wait until a minor sickness becomes a major ailment, and end up in the emergency room instead of the doctor's office as a result. I think part of the plan is to at least attempt to educate the people who do this sort of thing into seeking care beforehand, and avoid conditions that tend to aggravate or cause problems, such as obesity. Maybe providing a set budget for standard care and non-emergency, but more serious treatment isn't a bad idea. I'm with you on the actual apportionment of each dollar spent on medical care service and medical insurance. I know a husband/wife team that used to run their own private practice in the Richardson/Garland area and some of their gross income from the practice went to handling malpractice insurance, which apparently becomes a bigger and bigger issue because so many people are inclined to launch lawsuits these days.

So now the whole detainee system has been contradictory for like a year and change. Awesome. Don't treat them like POWs, but then treat them like regular civil prisoners. Pick one, please. Padilla essentially gave up his citizenship when he decided to work for Al Qaeda. By the way, nice Miranda Rights policy, Bush. Ugh.

Because it makes absolute sense to say that you want the government out of your life, but yet you want them to push religion. Funny. Oh, wait, that's because it's your religion. Wait a sec, then we run into a problem. Judaism? Buddhism? Christianity? Which one? Catholic? Protestant? Orthodox? And then beyond that, Anglican? Baptist? Southern Baptist? Pentecostal? Fundamental? Episcopalian? Church of Christ? Good luck with that. You've got a country with a myriad of religions in it, then an entire flood of denominations, sub-denominations, organizations, and any number of differences in doctrine underneath. Regardless of the original church/state separation's purpose, you're looking at a situation where you either force religion on those who don't follow you exactly, or you're having it forced on you.

I don't think he intended to be friends with the terrorists. They're a pretty unsociable sort, with the blowing up of busses and all. I do think he's running with the idea of getting on at least amicable relations, turning the more legitimate governments of the middle east against the terrorists since they're as much a danger to them as they are to us. You know, "enemy of my enemy is my friend".

Yeah, actually. Zawahiri made a statement about how Obama is making all these other Muslim countries out to be slaves of the U.S., no matter what Obama may say. No one should be surprised to hear that.

ITT: Civil War. A Ken Burns Documentary. Oh. Obama, Zawahiri, Ahmedinejad, Fidel Castro, and Paris Hilton had a 6-pack and a bucket of chicken while in Cairo. I mean, judging from what I'm reading these days around here.

It's okay. Al-Qaeda doesn't like President Urkel either. They're worried he'll actually get the muslim world to like the US. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090602/ap_on_..._al_qaida_obama

Fixed.

That's because they want government supporting their religion. If it was a situation where I wanted a government-sponsored church of Cthulhu or the god of the Pastafarians, I'd see all sorts of flack. And frankly, that's okay. Cthulhu doesn't need the government.

Some Italian dressings are great as marinades. Try it sometime.