idrankwhat

Was Greenspan critiquing DoD policy or simply stating something obvious? And if Petraeus stated that Greenspan's policies were geared more towards boosting the US economy, I'd have to say that he's probably right.

Must have read Greenspan's new book. “I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil,” http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article2461214.ece

I guess it depends on who you ask, and what the definition of "success" is. Wasn't the "surge" launched to secure Baghdad from sectarian violence, help stabilize the government and the police force? edited to add: It seems like Bush's idea of success is to be able to return to the situation we were in a year ago in time for for the 2008 elections.

Absolutely! Barley pop is a great drink. Alcohol aside it's better for you than soda, even has some B vitamins. Sadly, I don't think you can make a Chimay Grand Reserve or a Dogfish 90 min IPA without alcohol.

Still buying the argument that AQ is THE problem?

Isn't Tony Snow's position open after today? I answered a simple yes or no question. Sorry my answer seems to be causing you so much confusion. Oh I see. So have you stopped beating your forum?

Isn't Tony Snow's position open after today?

You mean a filter can't be overwhelmed by contaminants? Nope Was that "nope", a filter can't be overwhelmed or "nope" that you didn't mean it?

That's right. Dictatorial Martial Law is right around the corner. Actually, now I'm thinking that Bush just wants the next year to go by as fast as possible so he can get the hell out. His presidency has been just as successful as his past business ventures. He's looking for the bail out.

I think you're right but I don't think Hillary is a viable candidate for a lot of people and a lot of reasons. I think she has the capability to do the job but she's not a good choice. If she's elected she'll be attacked on a personal level, not a policy one, which will mean we spend our time and money talking about stupid, inconsequential crap like we did when her hubby was in office. Also, if she were elected she would be the first woman president. Due to the enormous mess that 43 has caused I predict that 44 will be a one term loser regardless of which side of the arbitrary right/left line they come from. And when she fails I'd hate to have people put the blame on the gender.

The Dems will nominate a status quo candidate. The R's will nominate a status quo candidate. And nothing will change except the headlines. But somehow there will be a great rhetorical division in this country about how one side of the business party is so much superior to the other side of the business party.

No, that would be "Man LIBERATES Moon"

Not trying to steal the thread, and don't want to but the above statement isn't accurate. I only point it out because I'm a bit concerned in who will be writing the history books that my kid will be reading.

Another of Avery's greatest hit jobs: "The Silent Killer in Organic Foods", saying that people are more susceptible to e. coli poisoning with organic foods and quoted Robert Tauxe at the CDC as his source. Tauxe said he never made that claim and asked Avery to quit using the CDC in his claims. Avery's response was "That's your interpretation, and I have mine." That doesn't disprove his argument but it does provide insight into the source. But regarding the GW question, I wonder how many of those papers were recently underwritten by big oil. Didn't Exxon/Mobile get exposed for paying something like $16 million for anti-GW papers? And lastly, this reminds me of an article that someone showed me earlier today in Chemical and Engineering news. "Bisphenol A Vexations Two government-convened panels reach nearly opposite conclusions on compound's health risks." The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) said that BPA is of great concern. The Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction (CERHR) said risks are "some concern" and "negligible concern", and only addressed repoductive issues. ...NIEHS. The Chapel Hill group reviewed the entire body of published BPA literature, more than 700 studies. .......CERHR panel relied heavily on an unpublished study by Rochelle W. Tyl, ...... which was funded by the Society of the Plastics Industry. ...Another possible explanation for the conflicting conclusions is that there were different qualifications for membership on the CERHR and Chapel Hill panels. The scientists on the CERHR panel were chosen explicitly because they had never done research on BPA. In contrast, the 38 scientists in the Chapel Hill group convened by NIEHS had all published extensive BPA research. Oh, and the EPA says that biosolids are good for you. Sometimes you get what you pay for.

Liberal Libertarian quadrant. I had some problems with some of the wording of the questions so I went hard line. They didn't seem to give me a good way to express my attitude towards big business. I believe in free market capitalism but not unchecked free market capitalism.

So, let me see, if we pull out now and they rip each other apart it's GWB' fault? If Hillary becomes pres. and pulls them out and it falls apart, it's still GBW' fault? Absolutely. This is his turd even if he's not around to smell it or clean it up.

Just in time for Christmas! Sorry Bill. http://www.thinkgeek.com/tshirts/generic/60f5/

1) Those are raw numbers. What's the ratio of cars to deaths vs. SUV's to deaths. If there are four times as many cars on the road than SUV's the numbers are almost equal. 2) Data are plural.

Well what do you expect for your measly $200 million/day? We've got to spend it over there so we don't have to spend it over here

edited to add: .....who weren't there until 2003.

Damn libs.

Canoe on a beetle? No problem. But admittedly, there are some times when you need that bigger vehicle. http://media.ebaumsworld.com/cartrailor.wmv

Congratulations on the first jump! I mean the skydive, not the jump into this forum. You may grow to regret one of those decisions

Awww, c'mon. You folks used to love David Brock when he wrote hit pieces for the right using hearsay and unverifiable sources. Now that he's swinging from the left and he provides citations he's a bad guy?!?!?!?

First off, your "Rush" is showing. Secondly, when was the last time that the media wrote a story about all the successful commutes to work? They're so focused on the accidents I'd swear they have a bias against cars!!!!