Meet your new thread, same as the old thread.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
Ty would argue that the guy has to let the Crips wear red (blue?) to class.

As long as the red was limited to their shemaghs, I don't see the problem.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
Do you really believe this?

that almost sent me over the edge too. That right there is proof Ty is an elaborate hoax sock- maybe SEF or Notme, back to mess. Or he has serious blinders on.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
that almost sent me over the edge too. That right there is proof Ty is an elaborate hoax sock- maybe SEF or Notme, back to mess. Or he has serious blinders on.

You're the one who defends the embarrassment at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. You don't have any room to talk about blinders.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Comptent = more involved, more "nanny." More social safety nets. More oversight. More agencies and more regulation.

Maybe that too, but maybe not. I mean competent. Like having domestic policy run in the White House by someone who isn't a campaign manager 365 days a year.

I want it all downsized - defense, social programs, everything.

Yeah, well keep dreaming. When you vote Republican these days, you're voting for the opposite.

I want competent bridges and military and no more using the govt as a subsidy for businesses, as Bush has. I likewise want half the agencies and programs in the country ended.

And I want a pony.

At any rate, I didn't say I wanted a bigger government. I said I wanted a better government.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Probably not, but the slip is telling...

I can't figure out who amongst the candidates (of either party) has a hope of escaping the patronage problem. The patronage issue is my biggest problem with Obama (look at who he endorsed in Illinois state and local elections).

[SlaveNoMore]

sebastian_dangerfield
I was still grappling with what "Shmatta schmatta shmatta I can't give it away on 7th avenue..." meant at that age.

Doesn't matter.

There is unrest in the forest,
There is trouble with the trees,
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas.

The trouble with the maples,
(And they're quite convinced they're right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light.
But the oaks can't help their feelings
If they like the way they're made.
And they wonder why the maples
Can't be happy in their shade.

There is trouble in the forest,
And the creatures all have fled,
As the maples scream "Oppression!"
And the oaks just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights.
"The oaks are just too greedy;
We will make them give us light."
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.

You left out the verse where the maples post a bunch of angry missives on dailyKos.com

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
You're the one who defends the embarrassment at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. You don't have any room to talk about blinders.

Slave and i will criticize Bush in PMs. He has many flaws, in particular with his social agenda. The reason i keep fighting (and winning) against you lot is that while there are many better R. candidates than W., there are none of you guys that could possibly be President in today's world. You can't stand up to your own Special interest groups let alone the murdering clouds gathering against us. Tough love. sorry i have to be so frank.

[SlaveNoMore]

Tyrone Slothrop
....a Democratic president will appoint officials who believe in public policy rather than patronage.

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha:rofl:

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally posted by Cletus Miller
I can't figure out who amongst the candidates (of either party) has a hope of escaping the patronage problem. The patronage issue is my biggest problem with Obama (look at who he endorsed in Illinois state and local elections).

You dance with them that brung you. Problem for everyone, I think. I'd like to think that the Dems wouldn't put a horse lawyer in charge of fema, but who the hell knows.

I don't remember, though, the Clinton DHHS being as much of a revolving door straight to big health care lobbying as the Bush II DHHS is. Past performance not indicator blah blah blah, but it's seems that every other year the head of CMS is wandering off to be a lobbyist.

I don't remember that being the case under Shalala.

[SlaveNoMore]

ironweed
But I am looking forward to reading some more inspiring dissents, which admiring schoolchildren will no doubt read in 2075 (if mankind is still alive).

In Arabic or the original English?

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
You dance with them that brung you. Problem for everyone, I think. I'd like to think that the Dems wouldn't put a horse lawyer in charge of fema, but who the hell knows.

I don't remember, though, the Clinton DHHS being as much of a revolving door straight to big health care lobbying as the Bush II DHHS is. Past performance not indicator blah blah blah, but it's seems that every other year the head of CMS is wandering off to be a lobbyist.

I don't remember that being the case under Shalala.

I like to think they wouldn't choose people to rebuild Iraq based on their opinions of Roe v. Wade.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
At any rate, I didn't say I wanted a bigger government. I said I wanted a better government.

And I, too, want a pony. While the mere removal of Cheney will give us "better" government, I have my doubts about the ability to soon have "better government" while maintaining or reducing the cost (percentqage-wise, if not in nominal dollars) of government (which I think is a necessary part of better government, at this point).

The increases to the structural costs of the federal goverment that GWB has implemented (e.g. Part D, interest on $4 trillion add'l debt, the Iraqi adventure which won't end by the end of '09), have really limited the options of the next president. And any thought that it will "starve the beast" is a bunch of non-sense, as has been adequately demonstrated--at some point, everyone (in Congress) gets on board to raise taxes to pay for their friends and supporters.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
I like to think they wouldn't choose people to rebuild Iraq based on their opinions of Roe v. Wade.

well, Bubba picked a copyright attorney with no Patent experience to run the Patent Office. it seemed the only real reason was he liked male genitals, and billy needed to point to a few appointments of gays.

[Shape Shifter]

Originally posted by Hank Chinaski
well, Bubba picked a copyright attorney with no Patent experience to run the Patent Office. it seemed the only real reason was he liked male genitals, and billy needed to point to a few appointments of gays.

And look at the mess our country is today because of that.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Shape Shifter
And look at the mess our country is today because of that.

i was speaking about the one appointment for which I have actual knowledge. Are you sure all of your opinions are based upon personal knowledge and not some blogger's opinions?