A disgusting vat of filth that no self-respecting intelligent person would wade into.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by notcasesensitive
What about his meltdown post from the other night? FB appropriate or only good enough for the PB dennizens?

Those were good, but I think the "hot or not" element places his last post clearly in FB territory.

[notcasesensitive]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Those were good, but I think the "hot or not" element places his last post clearly in FB territory.

Fix your quote on the FB post.

I agree with you. I like having the meltdown over here. It is like a fun little secret. (and, added bonus, we could make veiled references to it on the FB and people might think it is an inside reference!)

[Tyrone Slothrop]

For Hank: A blog post on how the Electoral College warps policy.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
I've been interviewing kids for my college for the last couple of weeks, and I let them know that if there is anything I want them to take away from the interview is that, unless their lifelong ambition is to be Atticus Finch and hasn't changed even from the summer interning at their dad's law firm, they are to ignore every single suggestion that they go to law school and that "you can do anything with a law degree even if you don't want to be a lawyer."

I feel it's an obligation of the profession to pass this sort of thing on.

You are doing these kids a big favor.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Those were good, but I think the "hot or not" element places his last post clearly in FB territory.

Meltdown post?

[Spanky]

Question:


1) Will Turkey join ever join the EU? If yes - when?

2) Will the Ukraine ever join the EU? If yes - when?

[Spanky]

Iraq

Don't do it
Dec 7th 2006
From The Economist print edition

The Baker-Hamilton group wants to set a date for leaving Iraq. George Bush should say no

IT IS not quite a coup d'état. But seldom before has the American Congress—or, more correctly, a bipartisan committee of wise men and women reporting to Congress—put a wartime president in such an awkward predicament. James Baker, Lee Hamilton and their Iraq Study Group said this week that if George Bush adopted their 79-point plan for Iraq, the bulk of America's fighting troops could be out of the country by the first quarter of 2008—that is to say within 15 months or so.

This is not, the wise men said, a policy of cutting and running. On the contrary, Mr Hamilton, a former Democratic congressman, said as he presented the report that the group supported Mr Bush's declared aim of creating an Iraq that is able to govern, sustain and defend itself (see article). Mr Baker, a former secretary of state and a long-time friend of the Bush family, acknowledged that a precipitous withdrawal could cause a bloodbath inside Iraq and perhaps provoke a wider regional war. But the wise men also say—and who could disagree?—that America's army should not remain in Iraq indefinitely, in an “open-ended” commitment. So the idea of leaving by early 2008 is a compromise.


The Baker-Hamilton analysis of what has gone wrong feels right. It is that Iraq is sliding into a sectarian war mainly because its fractious politicians have not been willing to make the concessions needed to achieve national reconciliation. In particular, the Shias and their Kurdish allies have not done enough to allay the fears of the previously dominant Sunni minority that they are being excluded and disadvantaged under the new order. But the group strays on to much more treacherous ground when it proposes a way to correct this.

Do what we say or we go (but we're going anyway)
Its central recommendation is that America should use its muscle in Iraq to put pressure on its elected government to make concessions to the Sunnis. Indeed, the group wants Mr Bush to give Iraq's prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, a list of reconciliation “milestones”, such as softening the rules on de-Baathification, agreeing on a fairer way of sharing oil revenues and revising Iraq's new constitution in ways that allay the other fears of the Sunnis. The wise men say that if the Iraqi government fails to make substantial progress on this, and on improving its performance generally, America should reduce or remove its political, economic and military support.

Fine, in principle. Having spent so many lives and dollars on Iraq, why shouldn't America shove its government towards reconciliation? That is what America's energetic ambassador in Baghdad has been trying to do behind the scenes for many months. The odd thing about the Baker-Hamilton group's idea is that it wants Mr Bush to do this shoving after he has already thrown away his principal means of persuasion.

If Mr Bush adopts the plan, Iraqis will know that the bulk of America's forces will be out by early 2008. If opinion polls are to be believed, that will delight many Americans as well as many people in Iraq. By thinning out its army, America will reduce the Iraqis' sense that they are under occupation, and so suck some of the oxygen out of the anti-American insurgency. But the Baker-Hamilton group is surely wrong to believe that announcing the army's departure will strengthen America's leverage over the internal politics of Iraq. The opposite is likelier. Mr Bush, a lame-duck president, would be a lame-duck president presiding over a lame-duck occupation.

In fairness, the group is not advocating a complete withdrawal. Some 15,000 American soldiers would stay behind to train the Iraqis, as would some rapid-reaction troops, and special forces to lead the hunt for al-Qaeda. If the Iraqi government performs, it will still receive political and economic support. The wise men hope these will be inducement enough for Mr Maliki to do as America says. Hope is all it can be. At present, the American army is the only strong military force capable of holding the ring in Iraq. Pulling it out may merely encourage a vicious fight to fill the vacuum.

But at least it's a plan
The best argument for the Baker-Hamilton report is that the present strategy is failing. It will soon be four years since the invasion. Iraq is now so violent that many Iraqis think life was better under Saddam Hussein. Robert Gates, Mr Bush's own choice to replace Donald Rumsfeld as defence secretary, said candidly to Congress this week that America wasn't winning. Haunted not only by their losses—nearly 3,000 soldiers dead—but a sense of being unwelcome and making matters worse, the American people are aching to put the whole misadventure behind them. Now that a powerful, bipartisan committee has dangled the possibility of doing just that within little over a year, it would take extraordinary stubbornness—or courage—from Mr Bush to ignore it.

He should not ignore it. The report contains many useful recommendations. These include the proposals to enlist the help of Iraq's neighbours and for bolder peacemaking in Palestine. It would be a mistake to expect instant results. For example, Baker-Hamilton proposes talks between Israel and those Palestinians who recognise its right to exist—but the Palestinians' present Hamas government refuses to recognise Israel's right to exist. As for Iran and Syria, they have little reason to help an America that insists rightly on preventing Syria from intimidating Lebanon and Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. All the same, it does no harm for America to be seen to be working with an open mind and flexible diplomacy.

What will not help is scuttling from Iraq before exhausting every possible effort to put the country back together. The Baker-Hamilton group is right to say that America should neither leave precipitously nor stay forever. Leaning harder on Iraq's politicians is an excellent idea. But setting an arbitrary deadline of early 2008 for most of the soldiers to depart risks weakening America's bargaining power, intensifying instead of dampening the fighting and projecting an image of weakness that will embolden enemies everywhere. On this recommendation, Mr Bush needs to insist on his prerogatives as custodian of America's foreign policy and just say no.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Spanky
Meltdown post?

Would Belgrade Bimbo call you sexist?

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Would Belgrade Bimbo call you sexist?

The real one or the one that posts to this board?

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
Would Belgrade Bimbo call you sexist?

I would imagine that she likes her men manly, and fully understands that beauty/sex is woman's greatest strength. Because she is steaming hot, she does not need to joint feminist groups or really have any opinions about things like should women be allowed to own their own property; should it be possible for a husband to rape his wife, or is that just a myth since she, well, kind of sort of belongs to him? These are not of concern to Belgrade Bimbo.

Though, I'd love to hear from her on this topic.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Spanky
Question:


1) Will Turkey join ever join the EU? If yes - when?

2) Will the Ukraine ever join the EU? If yes - when?

1) That's an excellent question. Seems like it looks less likely lately. The question seems not so much whether Turkey wants to join as whether the EU will let them. But if this drags on much longer it will fuel the anti-EU feelings in Turkey.

2) I'll go out on a limb and say "no."

[Belgrade Bimbo]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I would imagine that she likes her men manly, and fully understands that beauty/sex is woman's greatest strength. Because she is steaming hot, she does not need to joint feminist groups or really have any opinions about things like should women be allowed to own their own property; should it be possible for a husband to rape his wife, or is that just a myth since she, well, kind of sort of belongs to him? These are not of concern to Belgrade Bimbo.

Though, I'd love to hear from her on this topic.

You think you so smart, but really, what woman need school or think too much? Men who are so much manly do not like a woman who think too much or have too much opinion. It only matter that I am hot and will remove my clothing for him and allow him buy me expensive and sparkly gift. And also that I sometimes return his creepy staring into my eyes.

As long as I am beautiful (and I let me assure you, I am!), real man like Spanky always want me. Not you, smart girl. In fact, I think you are jealous of me and how man like Spanky want me. Who can blame you? Happy for me, I not need worry about those things you say, because I always hot and sex, so always have spanking man want me and buy me things.

If someday, I am not hot, I will know it is time to end my life. Life for woman is not worth living if she is not hot.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Belgrade Bimbo
You think you so smart, but really, what woman need school or think too much? Men who are so much manly do not like a woman who think too much or have too much opinion. It only matter that I am hot and will remove my clothing for him and allow him buy me expensive and sparkly gift. And also that I sometimes return his creepy staring into my eyes.

As long as I am beautiful (and I let me assure you, I am!), real man like Spanky always want me. Not you, smart girl. In fact, I think you are jealous of me and how man like Spanky want me. Who can blame you? Happy for me, I not need worry about those things you say, because I always hot and sex, so always have spanking man want me and buy me things.

If someday, I am not hot, I will know it is time to end my life. Life for woman is not worth living if she is not hot.

That is so hotttt.

[Spanky]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
1) That's an excellent question. Seems like it looks less likely lately. The question seems not so much whether Turkey wants to join as whether the EU will let them. But if this drags on much longer it will fuel the anti-EU feelings in Turkey.

I don't think Turkey will ever be allowed in. Although the EU was instituted for practical economic purposes, the people of Europe have some say what will happen, and those people don't want to be involved in any politica entity that has 50 million (is it more?) muslims. Albania will be OK because that is just a few muslims. But Turkey never.

An easy excuse to turn them down is that its capital and the majority of the country is not in Europe.

I believe that the new EU constitution was defeated in France because the people were sending a message they did not want Turkey.

It would be great if they allowed Turkey in because it would really solidify Turkey as a secular western leaning nation. But it won't happen. Greece won't let it happen anyway.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop 2) I'll go out on a limb and say "no."

I believe they will eventually let the Ukraine in. It is an eastern Slavic state like Bulgaria, Poland and the rest. The people of Europe seem to be OK with caucasian christian nations, even if they are eastern and Slavic. Even with practical political economic institutions peoples ethnolinguistic bigotry comes through.

The European Union is limited to Europe (Morocco was told not on your life), not because of some practical reason, but because Europe is mainly Christian and White. At least that is what I think.

[SlaveNoMore]

Spanky
Question:


1) Will Turkey join ever join the EU? If yes - when?

2) Will the Ukraine ever join the EU? If yes - when?

1) No

2) No

3) EU dissolves by 2013