Trent

Are you sure that you're all for that? The last time several armies with equivalent hardware attacked Israel, they got their asses handed to them in the end. Would you be "all for it" if Israel fought a legitimate Palestinian army, won, then decided to keep the lands that some view as Palestine? For whatever reasons the people voted in Hamas, it looks like it'll be a dicey situation. While I truly think that Israel was hoping a moderate government that would talk out the issues would get elected, I think that electing a Hamas-run government could actually play right into Israel's hands. Now that the "people" have spoken in free and fair (Jimmy Carter says so, so it's okay) elections, you have a legitimately elected government for the Palestinian people. If this government persues their old tactics of hate, terrorism, and extremism... they might actually convince themselves to keep going after Israel. Now that these acts of terror would have an elected government behind them, Israel would be justified in defending themselves on a larger scale. I'm sure that would get ugly fast, but now there is an elected government to point the finger towards. But that's just one way things might go. Oh, hello again!

What does that get you? Is it because it's a highly skilled position, or because you just have to jump through the union hoops to get work in your industry? What if you weren't a union member, but had worked in the field as long as you have, would you be worse at your job? Look, I respect the job that the MTA workers do, but if what they offer isn't enough for people, they should look for more lucrative options. Not that driving a subway or bus isn't frustrating and difficult, but does it take 5 years of training and higher job requirements that other professions? $47K a year is a decent wage for an entry level position in most fields, why shouldn't we ALL go on strike. SOMEONE owes us, well... because we're us? Doesn't float with me. Or how about you stop buying things from countries that do? Or how about the "morally superior" rest-of-the-world put sanctions on goods manufactured with child and slave-like labor? OR how about we let the market dictate what people get paid for certain jobs, instead of the union? If we're allowed to pay whatever global prevailing wage is for a job, and that's not enough for people in the US... the jobs will move to where people WILL take them. Kinda like the way it is now, but the market is dictating "fair" pricing, not the unions or government. Sorry to hear that. I know from experience that you can live in NY with $47K/yr. When I decided to get into "less lucrative" endeavors... I moved somewhere where life is MUCH cheaper than NY. If I want to live in a SoHo loft in NY later, I'll have to find a job that will pay me what I feel is necessary to afford that lifestyle. It's not the job's fault. Good luck getting those bastards in court. Just because I don't agree with the union concept, doesn't mean I think that people in them deserve to get shit on. At this point, how is a union really out for their members' interests anymore than their own (as an organization)? A lot of times, it really seems that the union is acting on its own behalf rather than on that of its membership. Oh, hello again!

Just had a new though... I know... exciting... The businesses affected by this strike should file lawsuits against the union for revenues lost due to the strike, which is illegal to begin with. While I hate to advocate lawsuits, it'd be a nice addition to having all those not willing to come back to work fired. The union is fucking it's members and NY, NY should fuck it right back. Oh, hello again!

True, but is that how it's being passed off? Is he saying that he thought it was a good idea at first, but now he doesn't because it's politically advantageous to him to be against it? If he'd been against it from the start, it'd be different. He must be one of the other responsible officials who didn't read it before they voted FOR it. Either way, he looks like a chump. Oh, hello again!

I thought you guys supported diplomacy? Do I need to post pictures of other presidents with Arafat, Hitler, Stalin? That picture is such a lame argument. Now if Dick Cheney said he never met Saddam, it'd be something. Kinda like Reid "never" supported the PA... well the picture shows differently. Oh, hello again!

HAHAHAHAHA... and the rest of the post is now rendered nonsensical!! Good one though. I'm no fan of management from my days as a corporate rat in NY, but when I realized I didn't like what was going on.... I LEFT!! Get it? I didn't feel that I was ENTITLED to a job where everything had to be my way. They offered me a salary, I took it. 3 years later it got silly, I left. Funny thing was, the biggest raise I got was about 6%, and 3% of that was performance based. Not to mention I didn't qualify for my job by going through a week-long training course... I went to college and spent a lot of time and money. YES, I have the "gall" to insult unions. You want a good example of the mismanagement and greed you accuse the "management class" of? Look at the unions. Workers work, I don't blame them for that... unless they REALLY do not want to work because 10% raise in 3 years isn't enough when they start a job at $47000/yr with a highschool diploma and weeklong training course. You know why we get our asses kicked in manufacturing? Because we can't pay the low wages that China or Latin America does. There's more to it than that of course, but to blame it solely on the evil management and greedy stockholders is stupid. And to everyone who STILL says $47,000/yr in NY isn't enough. BULLSHIT. BULLSHIT. BULLSHIT. Do all the calculating you want. I did it. My friends are still doing it. It isn't really all that hard. Especially if there are 2 wage-earners who are living together, married, whatever. Oh, hello again!

I bet the people in LA hate getting stuck in traffic too. What's the point? You live in NY, you deal with what you have to do. I lived in Jersey, 4 MILES from Manhattan, it ALWAYS took 45 minutes to an hour to get to work. It's just what I did to save some cash. It's not a big deal, and millions of people in NY do it every day. Lots of them even make less than $47,000. You REALLY think this issue is about "security training"? The drivers are already locked in a metal room. Were they going to get hand-to-hand combat training? This is about the 1 billion dollar surplus that didn't translate into the workers getting more money and bonuses. Follow the money. And as for the top-union-dogs forcing people who want to work to strike... well, that's just one of MANY reasons that unions suck. That's why I think the MTA should give people the opportunity to work through the strike and keep their jobs. If enough people did it, it just might destroy the union to the benefit of EVERYONE. Oh, hello again!

You CAN make it on $47,000 a year in NY. You can find good, cheaper apartments... it just requires a commute. Trust me, I did it for years. These guys are NOT in a position to DEMAND a bigger raise than they're getting. Oh, hello again!

When I was in NY last week, this was the talk of the town... I said to my friends, "Make a statement that says any striking workers will be fired. If you want to keep your job, work and we'll work with you. Otherwise, we'll hire people who want to work." It's NY, they can bring in retired workers or managers to run the trains... sure, it'd suck for a week, but it's better than letting the union gain more power. As for $47,000 being a living wage. Sure it is, even in NY. You don't have to live in Manhattan. Now if you have 7 kids, it might not be enough. I know a lot of people at or below that salary level and they're making it fine in NY, some even in Manhattan. By the way, it IS illegal for these guys to strike, just like the ATC people back in the 80's. Fire 'em. Oh, hello again!

Fire their asses and give the starting salary ($47,000) jobs to people who WANT to work and don't think they deserve more just because they're in a union. These guys make respectable wages and are pissed that they'll only get a 10% raise over 3 years, and new guys will have to wait till they're 60 or 65 to collect pension. Ridiculous. Oh, hello again!

You must have missed my first couple of posts. So far so good, it was hard getting people who were anti Patriot Act to understand that there still was judicial oversight in most cases. From my reading of the PA and FISA, this is not true. There are circumstances where it can be approved by the intelligence comittee. But then again, I've read the whole act and could have gotten lost in the back-and forth. I'd suggest people go read BOTH the PA and FISA, then come back to bitch. Oh, hello again!

That is besides the point to this whole conversation. People were screaming their heads off about how Bush (not the NSA or federal gov't, but Bush himself) violated all these rights by authorizing the NSA to conduct secret wiretaps on individuals and groups within the US. They cried about how they never knew anything about it. They cried that Bush broke the law. Evidently, they are wrong here. The law as they've voted for it, seems not to have been broken. They seem to have been briefed. They seem to have had their agenda exposed by LYING about not getting any information about it. These chumps got caught with their pants down. They tried to use this "story" to help end the Patriot Act provisions that were political hotbuttons. The "scandal" they'd hoped for has backfired on their ass, but I suppose that means it'll disappear as soon as possible. Whether or not you agree with the Patriot Act, it IS law until it expires. Any issues about whether or not the Patriot Act should "be", is another discussion. Oh, hello again!

Well, since the FISA and PA still require that the Security Comittee get the breifing... we still have a bunch of politicians crying over something that was technically legal and approved by THEM. Not to mention that if they never wanted it to happen in the first place, they'd be more credible if they hadn't voted for the Patriot Act in the first place. Oh, hello again!

Whether or not you like it, it would appear that you should take it up with your elected representatives... YES, even the one's that are badmouthing the administration on this very issue. They voted for the ability for our law enforcement agencies to do just what they're bitching about. Remember the Patriot Act? It appears they're legal as of now. Either people can't read or are hypocrites. Oh, hello again!

For the people that say straights aren't subject to discrimination by gays, as a couple of people here have.... what planet do you live on? The very existence of a commonly understood slang term like "breeder" is evidence. Want first hand experience? I walked into a gay bar with a lesbian friend from college, and was pretty much harassed the whole time. Some of the bars tried to keep straight people out at the door. Granted, this was just a few places... but in the bastion of open-mindedness, NYC and the "most open minded" community... it DID and probably DOES happen. Most groups shun those not conforming to their behavior pattern, gays are not immune. As far as the movie's concerned... if the entire film is as corny as the previews... it'll win oscars for sure. The very facts that it is a movie about a "taboo subject", that some will appreciate it because it is "about" their lifestyle and others will love it to make themselves feel openminded/PC/progressive guarantees awards... even if it really sucks. You have to admit that the "jacket sniffing" in the previews is fucking stupid. Oh, hello again!

You don't want it read by anyone? Don't put it on the internet. Simple. Want to make threats? Don't be surprised when someone calls you on it or comes knocking. It's amazing that these kids actually think that their ON-LINE journals are private when they're posted to sites for everyone to see. Oh, hello again!

I do not think that it is the job of the "administration" to know the needs of every single apartment or housing block in the country. That is why congressmen and senators are there... and in this case, they did what they should have and asked for help for some of their constituents. If it were me, I would have put more pressure on our own oil companies before accepting Chavez's offer, because I do know what that fuckstick is up to. I'm sure there's some saying about it being dangerous to take handouts from the devil... Oh, hello again!

While it is outrageous that our own oil companies haven't done anything, do not mistake Chavez's motivations behind this to be anything but a shot to the US and a bid to make himself look like a "man of the people", even when crime is out of control and people are starving to death in his own country. I said it before about his last heating oil thing... Schumer, Clinton, and Serrano just made themselves bitches to Chavez's propaganda. Oh, hello again!

Oh thank you, great one, for putting me in my place!! It must be satisfying to change the entire discussion to allow yourself to get some "points". Congrats. Like I just said *sigh*. This conversation was about paying Iraqi papers to print some articles that were positive, and factual (according to the posted article's quotes of people involved), NOT about troops and who does or does not support them. But you needed to feel like ya really got someone I guess. Bravo. It must be as annoying as being hypocritical, eh? Aren't you always saying how one should not lower themselves to their opponent's tactics? Too bad I can't remember ever accusing you of hating our troops. Even if I did, see the point about lowering yourself. Nice try. Oh, hello again!

Well, I was illustrating that not anywhere on there do you see anything good, even though there must be some news about the elections or successful operations. Now for this piece of shit you wrote: Although cleverly throwing in "if", I can't see this statement as being anything but inflammatory and pretty much among the lowest shit ever posted here in SC. I'm sure you'll weasel around and try to make yourself look misunderstood here, but you know what you were trying to do. You assumed that since I pointed out the lack of positive news on the front page of CNN that I'm someone who doesn't care about military deaths. Nice. Just shows how low someone will stoop to misdirect the actual conversation at hand. I was gonna throw in some clever "if-then" comments of my own, but you'd probably ban me for turnabout. Oh, hello again!

I wasn't comparing CNN to anything, just pointing the news on the front page today, and almost every day. Oh, hello again!

I did ask some, and they said... "remember the fake bush military records scandal?" I remember how media clung to it after GLARING evidence that it was false was pointed out. Only after they couldn't deny it, did they admit anything. I never said it was okay with me that that is how the news business is. But since it IS like that, I don't see a problem with playing by their rules. Those rules are: SELL PAPERS. I have the luxury of looking at this from the outside because, knowing what I know... I wouldn't work for a paper. If I were to run a paper, it'd probably go out of business since no one wants the drab and boring truth. http://www.cnn.com What do you see? What DON'T you see? And this is the day after the 1 big story to the contrary that you pointed out. Oh, hello again!

The Journal can do whatever it wants. If the story is true and not just propaganda, then what's the problem. Of course, I'd be pissed that a business journal was getting rid of business news to print what I could read in the Times. And, Bill, newspapers DO get paid to print bullshit that panders to their audience. Look at the Times. Just because someone doesn't say, "hey, print this and I'll give you $10000" doesn't mean that the newspaper doesn't profit from printing the BIG STORIES, that turn out to be BS in the end. If a few bucks gets them to willingly print something we want to tell the readers, they're still free. If we tell them to print what we want or we'll kill them... that's different. You can see that, can't you? OUR media rarely reports that in comparison to the negative and opinion pieces!! Do you think it's completely different in Iraq? Oh, hello again!

Ahhh, that takes too much time. Just pay 'em. I'd imagine that grassroots movements are tough to start when there is a history of people getting killed for that in Iraq. Now they have to worry about terrorists coming after them for wanting some good news to be published. Yeah, I've read a lot of that stuff... it's cool for sure. Oh, hello again!

If the articles are really factual and not just "GI's Are Your Best Friends, Submit!" articles, then the people will not have been "had". If they're articles reporting the progress that people feel is going unreported because the papers are stacked with the opinions and "reports" of people who don't want any good to be seen, then there's no problem. Now, granted, the papers should report that anyway if they want to be honest and constructive... but good news doesn't sell papers, right? The only bad thing about this situation is that people (evidence on this forum) are gonna make it into a huge "US Pays for Lies" deal because someone let it out that they did have to use cash to persuade papers to publish their stories. With a media that neglects to report the GOOD things that are going on... how would you suggest that happen? Oh, hello again!