What happens when you oppose Bu$hCo too vigorously

Since 2001, over 90,000 cyclist's have joined Cycling Forums to discuss topics from general cycling to equipment, training, racing and travel or vacation destinations (especially in europe during the tour de france). We also feature an great deals in our online store, 100's of articles, classifieds and product reviews.

I said the government wastes money.That's about the only thing you've said that's correct.

Biggest Waste of Gov't Monies to Date: Iraq conflict/defense spending during Chimpy McFlightsuit's regime.

2nd Biggest Waste: Homeland "Security".

3rd Biggest: Tax giveaways & corporate welfare.

Given that "your" tax money has been pissed away so blatantly and you claim to be so upset about it, why aren't you marching on Wash, D.C. leading a tax-payer's revolt, nns??

How would you characterize a gift of $110,000,000,000 to the gulf coast area :confused: Granted, a goodly portion of that will be eaten up for administrative costs & red tape but its better than nothing. Courtesy of the Good ol' U.S. of A. federal government.
Most of the actual, practical help down there has been donated. By charities and church groups. Most of the up to your knees in the mud, back-breaking work and feeding people is done by ordinary citizens in their little church vans, going down there and sleeping in tents and giving way more than you could possibly imagine. The govt takes a year to give away their stupid trailers they have sitting in Arkansas, and I won't go into how the entire thing was handled. My point was that you would be better off using your own money or begging or borrowing it to get your own trailer and put it where you want and sell it when you're done, than to depend on the govt. People should not depend on the govt, as it is a massive, creaking bureacracy. I think it is appropriate for some tax money to be used for rebuilding infrastructure there, as it is gone. There are no bridges, and HWY 90 is half washed away. But of course, they aren't expected to finish the first bridge until the end of 2007.

It is not radical to suggest that the government is bloated and wastes money and handles things worse than normal people would on their own.

That's about the only thing you've said that's correct.

Biggest Waste of Gov't Monies to Date: Iraq conflict/defense spending during Chimpy McFlightsuit's regime.

2nd Biggest Waste: Homeland "Security".

3rd Biggest: Tax giveaways & corporate welfare.

Given that "your" tax money has been pissed away so blatantly and you claim to be so upset about it, why aren't you marching on Wash, D.C. leading a tax-payer's revolt, nns??
Wow, that would work!

You're awfully confused. I didn't SAY I was self-sufficient. I said the government wastes money. Their programs are inefficient. They blackmail you with things like roads, etc., because the only way they can continue their pork is to attach it to things that people have to have. Their "assistance" can be a burden in the end, as it has been for many who survived Katrina. What is confusing about that? :confused: :confused: :confused:

When the govt wants to "help", it f --ks everything up worse than before they started.Corporations such as Enron are much more efficient.Halliburton,KBR,Bechtel...very efficient.
Not.
:eek:

Given that "your" tax money has been pissed away so blatantly and you claim to be so upset about it, why aren't you marching on Wash, D.C. leading a tax-payer's revolt, nns??
Good question. some of her tax money went to corporate privateer coffers in Iraq (KBR) which were subsequently found to have used a goodly amt. fraudulently :mad: . I'd rather have my taxes reaping SOME benefit (domestic social assistance that she abhors) rather than having NO benefit (corporate giveaways to Bush's buisiness cohorts in Iraq).

Good question. some of her tax money went to corporate privateer coffers in Iraq (KBR) which were subsequently found to have used a goodly amt. fraudulently :mad: . I'd rather have my taxes reaping SOME benefit (domestic social assistance that she abhors) rather than having NO benefit (corporate giveaways to Bush's buisiness cohorts in Iraq).

Dave,

And don't forget, dear old George wanted to privatise part of your country's Social Security ie. invest the proceeds in the "market" in order to get a "return".
Thankfully, that idea got quickly binned.

Bush's management of your economy has to be a cause of concern - and not simply a partisan political party issue.

It's interesting.
I do some work for a US subsidiary based here in Ireland.
Your Senate/Congress passed an Act giving US corporations foreign subsidiaries a one year tax holiday for profits earned abroad.
I won't name the company but it specifically setup here in order to keep profits "off shore" for the USA since the late 1990's.
They're taking advantage of the holiday and they're repatriating a dividend of
$6.1 billion to the US this year (profit which will be tax free).

This measure was passed in the hope that US firms would reinvest in the USA
instead of abroad, their profits.

Corporations such as Enron are much more efficient.Halliburton,KBR,Bechtel...very efficient.
Not.
:eek:
Corporations with government contracts = fraud and inefficiency. Did I say it didn't? Remember the $100 hammers? Or maybe it was $1000, I can't remember! People spend government money like water. Hey, they can always get some more! No accountability. Why are you arguing with me anyway? Habit? Have I ever defended corps like Enron?

Good question. some of her tax money went to corporate privateer coffers in Iraq (KBR) which were subsequently found to have used a goodly amt. fraudulently :mad: . I'd rather have my taxes reaping SOME benefit (domestic social assistance that she abhors) rather than having NO benefit (corporate giveaways to Bush's buisiness cohorts in Iraq).
I'd just rather have my tax money!

Domestic social assistance reaps a benefit for Democrats in Congress. That's about it. Private charities have proven to be the most effective means of delivering true domestic social assistance, provided they aren't as much of a huge bloated bureaucracy as the federal govt (the Red Cross comes to mind). That's why Bush has this INSANE idea to give federal money to faith-based charities, which I totally disagree with (and I work with some as a volunteer). No quicker way to screw up what's working than to involve the federal govt. Please, Wurm, give me some black ops background on his REAL reason for doing this?

Dave,

And don't forget, dear old George wanted to privatise part of your country's Social Security ie. invest the proceeds in the "market" in order to get a "return".
Thankfully, that idea got quickly binned.

Bush's management of your economy has to be a cause of concern - and not simply a partisan political party issue.

It's interesting.
I do some work for a US subsidiary based here in Ireland.
Your Senate/Congress passed an Act giving US corporations foreign subsidiaries a one year tax holiday for profits earned abroad.
I won't name the company but it specifically setup here in order to keep profits "off shore" for the USA since the late 1990's.
They're taking advantage of the holiday and they're repatriating a dividend of
$6.1 billion to the US this year (profit which will be tax free).

This measure was passed in the hope that US firms would reinvest in the USA
instead of abroad, their profits.
As I have stated many times before, they (our Senate/Congress) are all rich and powerful and more interested in staying in power than anything else. They are all in bed together. When it comes to corporations dominating politics, there is only one party, not two. And the only people who run for office and say this publicly are nutjobs like Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan.

I am constantly accused of defending or "worshipping" George Bush, when in reality, I just keep posing the question: who is the savior? From what I can tell, the majority of politicians are lawyers in this country, working to screw everyone "legally" while furthering their own careers and bank accounts. I do not think George Bush stands alone here. Wurm's favorite source, FTW, links Clinton quite thoroughly to Bush Sr. and the CIA and drugs etc etc etc. But no one may speak ill of Clinton. Only Bush.

What is going to happen in 2008? Who will sweep in and make everything so nice for the world?

Given that "your" tax money has been pissed away so blatantly and you claim to be so upset about it, why aren't you marching on Wash, D.C. leading a tax-payer's revolt, nns??
It sounds like, Wurm, that you are of the opinion that the fruits of my labor belong entirely to the state, and they generously allow me to have some of it. But according to davidmc, I mustn't use the word "communist." :rolleyes:

2nd Biggest Waste: Homeland "Security".

??
I would like to elaborate here by including federalizing the airport screeners :mad: . I had to go to a funeral, so because I bought a ticket at the last minute, I was selected for "special security" (sounds like winning a prize - not!). I won't tell you what I look like, but let's just say it's "not like a terrorist." I had to sit there forever while they used all their special equipment to search my luggage and my shoes :rolleyes: for bomb making residue. I was sitting next to this old man in a wheel chair who I would also describe as looking "not like a terrorist" while they did the same thing to him. I am willing to be inconvenienced for " the cause" but this was unbearable only because it is SO stupid. Homeland Security- boy do I feel safe.

As I have stated many times before, they (our Senate/Congress) are all rich and powerful and more interested in staying in power than anything else. They are all in bed together. When it comes to corporations dominating politics, there is only one party, not two. And the only people who run for office and say this publicly are nutjobs like Ralph Nader and Pat Buchanan.

I am constantly accused of defending or "worshipping" George Bush, when in reality, I just keep posing the question: who is the savior? From what I can tell, the majority of politicians are lawyers in this country, working to screw everyone "legally" while furthering their own careers and bank accounts. I do not think George Bush stands alone here. Wurm's favorite source, FTW, links Clinton quite thoroughly to Bush Sr. and the CIA and drugs etc etc etc. But no one may speak ill of Clinton. Only Bush.

What is going to happen in 2008? Who will sweep in and make everything so nice for the world?

But you're not interested inseeing the "status quo" changed, nns.
So spare us the crock tears.

It cannot help being noted that the Republicans have occupied the White House for the past 26 years - except for 8 years, 1992-2000.
I do not believe that it's coincidence that in those eight years, America enjoyed rude financial and political strength.
A time of relative peace and unequalled prosperity.
1992-2000.

But you're not interested inseeing the "status quo" changed, nns.
So spare us the crock tears.

.
Why would you say that about me? What have I said to warrant that remark? That I don't think it WILL change? That's called being realistic.

You really are a hateful bunch! I thought Irishmen were supposed to be charming...

No one has yet to speak of what they want to happen. What do you and Wurm and stevebaby want to happen? In the real world, okay, not in Pollyanna land?

Why would you say that about me? What have I said to warrant that remark? That I don't think it WILL change? That's called being realistic.

You really are a hateful bunch! I thought Irishmen were supposed to be charming...

No one has yet to speak of what they want to happen. What do you and Wurm and stevebaby want to happen? In the real world, okay, not in Pollyanna land?
In case you haven't realized...you're fighting an uphill battle.

Hateful is accurate and despite the fact that they don't live here...they are experts on America.....well in fact...it appears....experts on everything.

Not worth the time in my opinion.

I won't tell you what I look like, but let's just say it's "not like a terrorist." I had to sit there forever while they used all their special equipment to search my luggage and my shoes :rolleyes: for bomb making residue.

...

I was sitting next to this old man in a wheel chair who I would also describe as looking "not like a terrorist" while they did the same thing to him.


What does a terrorist look like exactly ?

Did McVeigh look like a terrorist ? (Killed 168 people in the Oklahoma bombing of 1995)

Does Martin McGuinness look like a terrorist ? (Admitted to being a member of the IRA, allegedly kneecapped civillians for the cause)

Did Menachem Begin look like a terrorist ? (Killed 91 in the King David Hotel 1946, including 15 Jews)

Does Luis Posada Carriles look like a terrorist ? (Killed 73 people on Cubana flight 455 in 1976)


I am willing to be inconvenienced for " the cause" but this was unbearable only because it is SO stupid. Homeland Security- boy do I feel safe.


The fact of the matter is that terrorists only have to be lucky once, whereas the authorities have to be lucky every time. The law of diminishing returns applies.

In the case of the US you've gone from practically zero screening to OTT screening in no-time flat. Over here in the UK we started screening after the Pan-Am plane fell out of the sky over Lockerbie and it seems to have been reasonably effective.

I am not convinced about the extreme measures taken recently here in the UK (law of diminishing returns), simply because the alleged threat seems to be grossly overblown. The accused don't appear to have been anywhere *near* being in a position to do harm, and the methods by which the authorities claim they were going to carry out their attack seemed more likely to blow them up in their own kitchen. They certainly had absolutely no chance of mixing up those cocktails in the plane's toilet, the chemistry is non-trivial and more likely to result in poor grade explosive or a weak detonation during the combining process.

What scares me are high-capacity batteries and hi-proof alcohol. It's way too easy to start a major fire onboard with any of those articles, and the FAA have reported numerous incidents of Li-ion batteries catching fire onboard aircraft. Airlines should ban alcohol, butane, batteries and anything else onboard that can start fires if they're serious about safety and security. I can't see the point in farting around scanning for terrorists when laptops regularly set fire to aircraft by accident...

The *best* way to sort out terrorism is to see what you can do to ameliorate the motivation behind terrorism. Sure, it's likely to be more intellectually challenging and it's not as sexy or glamorous as a Police State and killing thousands of people thousands of miles away, but it is cheaper and more effective.

~woah~ the debate goes on...

What does a terrorist look like exactly ?

Did McVeigh look like a terrorist ? (Killed 168 people in the Oklahoma bombing of 1995)

Does Martin McGuinness look like a terrorist ? (Admitted to being a member of the IRA, allegedly kneecapped civillians for the cause)

Did Menachem Begin look like a terrorist ? (Killed 91 in the King David Hotel 1946, including 15 Jews)

Does Luis Posada Carriles look like a terrorist ? (Killed 73 people on Cubana flight 455 in 1976)


The *best* way to sort out terrorism is to see what you can do to ameliorate the motivation behind terrorism. Sure, it's likely to be more intellectually challenging and it's not as sexy or glamorous as a Police State and killing thousands of people thousands of miles away, but it is cheaper and more effective.
Didja see the guys who flew the planes into the buildings? Okay? Didn't notice any tiny, middle-aged, red-haired housewives in on it.

The best way to sort out terrorism is to kill as many of them as possible. That's their currency. "Ameliorate the motivation behind terrorism" sounds like appeasement to me. Are you suggesting we all convert to Islam and live by Islamic law, since apparently that's what they would prefer, infidel.

.......The best way to sort out terrorism is to kill as many of them as possible. That's their currency. "Ameliorate the motivation behind terrorism" sounds like appeasement to me. Are you suggesting we all convert to Islam and live by Islamic law, since apparently that's what they would prefer, infidel.Them? Of course, the ones with the terrorist uniform, who subscribe to "Modern Terrorist."

Understanding motivation is about learning why radical fundamentalist religion holds such appeal. Usually it's because people are either afraid, or have run out of hope. Why does life look that way to certain people...? It's about preventing those conditions from existing.

It's NOT about appeasing the insane demands of those who are already "radicalized."
.

Them? Of course, the ones with the terrorist uniform, who subscribe to "Modern Terrorist."

Understanding motivation is about learning why radical fundamentalist religion holds such appeal. Usually it's because people are either afraid, or have run out of hope. Why does life look that way to certain people...? It's about preventing those conditions from existing.

It's NOT about appeasing the insane demands of those who are already "radicalized."
.
So now we have to prevent the whole world from feeling afraid or running out of hope? So they won't then want to kill you, personally, and your whole family?

You are ignoring the "religion" part of the "radical fundamentalist religion." They want their own countries enslaved to it, and the Western ones as well. Isn't that why you see Arabs in Britain holding signs that say "The Future Of Britain" during Ramadan? How much hope did people have living under the Taliban? That's the kind of hope they are offering Muslims. That is the kind of hope a Muslim will receive from Osama. It's the mullahs who are ruining their lives, not Americans.

So now we have to prevent the whole world from feeling afraid or running out of hope? So they won't then want to kill you, personally, and your whole family? .....No. Ending the suffering of all beings is a voluntary task, should you decide to become a Buddhist...

But there is a minimum requirement on all of us to see what suffering we are actively causing. Take Iran, for example. You can really draw a line straight from our overthrow of Mosaddegh, through the installation and our support of the brutal Shah, right to the Islamic revolution. All of this is a pretty orthodox reading of history, by the way.