Letters to the Editor
-
LWM and foolishness ...
Money stolen from the working poor? How can that be? The poor, by definiton, have no money. Shooter tells me that the poor don't pay any taxes. He assures me that the only money being "stolen" comes from rich people in unfair taxation.
The working poor do have money, regardless of your bigoted remark. The working poor are decimated by government worshipers like you. Today it was at least 200 Billion to a small wall street firm, and that does not include the inflation that your precious government is racking up paying for the military that you love so much.
Yes you. You called me "pacifist" and other names when I mentioned that we need to stop policing the whole world.
I see nothing else to comment on, you do not know enough economics to even get started --- hell, the poor have no money is the worst stupidity I have seen in print in a while.
-
Both parties sought Ike for '52
Sysprog... Actually, despite the anonymous adviser's protestation, the McCain folks would be quite at home, running an "anti-wonk" campaign. After all, that's part of what the GOP did in '52, '56...
He only declared as a Republican in January 52. Interesting campaign. He'd have to run an anti-wonk campaign against Adlai, who was known as the "egghead".
The Democrats picked Illinois Governor Adlai Stevenson, a witty and urbane politician whose thoughtful speeches appealed to liberals and moderate Democrats. His credentials were impressive: he was a Princeton-educated lawyer who had served as special assistant to the Secretary of the Navy during World War II, an influential member of the U.S. delegation to the United Nations after the war, and a successful governor with an enviable record of reform. But as a campaigner, he was no match for Eisenhower.
Eisenhower inspired confidence with his plain talk, reassuring smiles, and heroic image. He kept a demanding schedule, traveling to forty-five states and speaking to large crowds from the caboose of his campaign train. The slogan "I like Ike" quickly became part of the political language of America.
Yet it was not just Ike's personal charm that mattered, his campaign used a clever strategy of ignoring Stevenson -- Eisenhower never mentioned his opponent by name -- and attacking Truman. And Eisenhower had a formula for victory -- K1C2. The stalemated war in Korea, corruption in the Truman administration, and Communist subversion were the issues that Republicans emphasized throughout the campaign. Eisenhower held a clear lead over Stevenson in the polls, as voters looked to Eisenhower to clean up what even Stevenson had called “the mess in Washington.”
http://millercenter.org/academic/americanpresident/eisenhower/essays/biography/3
-
See a doctor, bucky
A shrink, and let him see you.
I'm taking a nap.
-
lwm says: See a doctor, bucky
Wow, the sick giving medical advice.
lwm wrote: "it's one of Lew and Ron's big complaints about the Fed. They can just print more money anytime they want. Don't you know anything? "
Yes they can just print up more money until there is no value to the currency at all. It is an elementary law of economics; otherwise why does the government not just give everyone in the world ten trillion dollars and eliminate poverty? Because it won't work, the money would be worthless as anything but toilet paper.
Take a nap? You need to go back to the bottle.
-
Syllogism
Facts are stupid things.
— Ronald ReganReality has a conservative bias.
— shooter 242Facts = Reality
Therefore: Stupid things have a conservative bias.
Remember, You heard it from shooter first.
-
Telecom Executives
Telecom administrators are idios, simple Godless pricks, that need to have there situation rectified in prison.
-
Cheney is damned and determined to reignite CoIntelPro...
All bow to President Cheney and his dunce lab dog, Spot. Uh, Dubya...
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2008/03/14/president_weakens_espionage_oversight/
They are determined to get their nose in our underwear by any way that they can...
-
The Obama We Can Expect
The Obama I know
By Cass R. Sunstein
Not so long ago, the phone rang in my office. It was Barack Obama. For more than a decade, Obama was my colleague at the University of Chicago Law School.
He is also a friend. But since his election to the U.S. Senate, he does not exactly call every day.
On this occasion, he had an important topic to discuss: the controversy over President Bush's warrantless surveillance of international telephone calls between Americans and suspected terrorists. I had written a short essay suggesting that the surveillance might be lawful. Before taking a public position, Obama wanted to talk the problem through.
In about 20 minutes, he and I investigated the legal details. He asked me to explore all sorts of issues: the president's power as commander in chief, the Constitution's protection against unreasonable searches and seizures, the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the Authorization for Use of Military Force and more.
Obama wanted to consider the best possible defense of what Bush had done. To every argument I made, he listened and offered a counterargument. After the issue had been exhausted, Obama said he thought the program was illegal, but now had a better understanding of both sides. He thanked me for my time.
...
In other words, after soliciting the advice of an expert whom he trusted, Obama rejected the advice and promptly reverted to the standard, doctrinaire liberal-Democrat position. Thanks for the heads-up.
-
Hats off to the Elephant Man
Look past his disfigured appearance, people. Behind the horrible tumors and growths, there beats the heart of a MAN.
A man with such an iron will that he can stand day after day before audiences who mock and jeer, who have paid good coin to gaze upon the storied freak with their own eyes, and still return for performance after performance, unbowed and undiminished.
Tell me more about this Sunstein "expert," Sir Elephant Man. Tell me why he isn't running for president. Explain to us how it is that Obama, hapless fool that he is, has not hired an adviser with whom he disagrees to advise him in his campaign.
-
@L.W.M.
No, haven't heard of him. His expertise appears to be in political science, and western political science at that. His history of Tibet in the feudalism article is laughable, and exceedingly nice to the Chinese. He claims to be critical of the Chinese occupation but also critical of feudal Tibet, but he isn't clear on when the occupation started and how.
The idea that any feudal society is nice and modern is not worth arguing about, but he should note that in describing the peasant class and corvée system, he is fitting the Chinese mold of what a society looks like: Gentry + farming peasants. Reality is: 80% of Tibet is nomadic, even today. And the relationship of Kublai Khan to Tibet is one of Mongol to Tibetan, not one of Chinese Emperor to Tibetan. Believing in the Chinese-ness of the Mongols is believing modern Chinese government propaganda, pure and simple. The Tibetan empire bordered Mongolia during the heavy Buddhist expansion days of the Pala kingdom in India.