DanG
-
Content
6,580 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Feedback
0%
Everything posted by DanG
-
Well, rest assured. The rest of us have no trouble seeing your hypocrisy. - Dan G
-
Really good post Andy, thanks. Do you know what the Supreme Court has said, if anything, about the current stop and identify laws? If that's been asked and answered, I'll withdraw the question. - Dan G
-
For argument's sake, let's assume that they lied like you claim. Their lie was after the four men were already dead, and it had to do with the cause of the attack. You think that should be an impeachable offense. But you're okay with Bush and Cheney's lies before the Iraq invasion which led to American deaths because it satisfies your desire for vengence against people who had nothing to do with 9/11. Do you really not see the hypocrisy? - Dan G
-
As if anyone is going to click on your links blindly again. Grow up. - Dan G
-
Thanks, that explains why most of your responses are so immature. So how about you, was your military service in vain? - Dan G
-
Keep in mind that the attack on the last Mohammed drawing contest didn't come from local Muslims. A couple of guys drove for hours to get there. - Dan G
-
In order to save the village, you want to destroy it? You would be killing thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of innocent people. You think ISIS will just let civilians leave? They will hold them hostage, then we have to decide if we want to commit a worse atrocity that ISIS could ever manage. And after you've dropped a couple nukes, you think everyone over there is going to love America? Your plan is the best recruiting tool ISIS could ever hope for. - Dan G
-
I'll remember that next time you get all butthurt over someone insulting your silly religion. - Dan G
-
For someone who claims to respect a person's religious dogma if it is sincerely held believe derived from God, you sure find it easy to insult the same dogma. Hypocrite much? - Dan G
-
Why do you people think the pork jokes are funny? Are you 12? - Dan G
-
Yours is not to question why... If anyone deployed overseas thinking they were going to change the world, then I suggest they watch fewer superhero movies. My service was exactly that, service. The world isn't safe for goodness and light because I served, but I had no preconceived expectation that it would be. The wheels of war have always turned, and they always will. All we can do is serve honorably and to the best of our ability. - Dan G
-
Heavy sigh. The article you linked says the attack was planned ten days in advance. It doesn't say that the Administration was warned about the attack ten days in advance. - Dan G
-
You might want to read the article again. The attack was reportedly planned 10 days in advance. Obama was not in the plannning session with the terrorists, as much as you'd like that to be true. - Dan G
-
Question way too broad. In vain in what way? Politically, personally? What are you really asking? - Dan G
-
Yeah, and the permit should include some kind of basic intelligence/education test. Pertinent questions, like which church will the child be raised in, how did you vote in the last election, and how much money to you regularly give to (approved) causes. I know this is not a serious proposal, but can you imagine how something like this could be abused? - Dan G
-
How do you know what they did? Did you pay to read the actual paper? Yes, so is statistical manipulation used by the "alarmists". Again, how do you know what the author really did? That word can't look right even to you. I've yet to see any evidence that the trend has been fabricated. I understand, but the devil is in the details. Do you understand, or have some insight into the details beyond a two sentence abstract? - Dan G
-
Um, why aren't you upset that the raw data was manipulated? - Dan G
-
The story I read said the police asked the bar to cancel the event, and the bar refused. It also said the police claim the bar is not cooperating with the investigation. - Dan G
-
The state should not be in the business of creating martyrs, either. - Dan G
-
Rip off the visor/ditch the helmet. You still gotta fly your canopy and land. - Dan G
-
No, that part of my post was reality. We live in a partially controlled economy. Perhaps you don't know what that means. It means that the government has a partial say in what does and doesn't get made, or what services are or aren't available. In a pure capitalist economy, the government would have no say in what people do economically. Want to sell arms to Iran, go for it! Want to sell cigarettes to kids, go for it! In a completely controlled economy, the government distates all economic activity. They tell you where to work, what to make, and how much you get paid. The United States has always been somewhere between the two. Much of the debate between left and right is how close to either side we should be. It was a statement of economic reality, nothing more, nothing less. - Dan G
-
None. I addressed your later post of another study. If you didn't want to discuss it, you shouldn't have brought it up. - Dan G
-
I'm not sure I buy that argument. No company is in the business of developing products that are beneficial to the consumer. All companies (ones that wish to succeed at least) develop products that consumers will buy. Whether or not the product has any great societal benefit doesn't matter. The government's role (in a partially controlled economy) is to help make those products which do have a great societal benefit more attractive to the consumer. Hence the tax on cigarettes, and the incentives for buying a non-polluting car. You can argue (and I'll agree to a limited extent) that the government shouldn't be doing that. But it isn't just with "green" companies, or even "liberal" companies that this is happening. The largest subsidies go to farmers and traditional energy companies, not to mention big box stores like Walmart. Subsidies to companies like Tesla are a drop in the bucket. You can't complain about Tesla subsidies, while turning a blind eye to subsidies of oil, gas, and coal companies. - Dan G
-
So, you take back what you just said about AGW proponents shutting the fuck up if they can't prove that one point? I don't want to have that part of the debate since it was never part of the debate to begin with. Although the word gets thrown around here too often, on this one point you're arguing against a strawman. - Dan G
-
Perhaps, I don't live in california. Perhaps the thinking is that raising the tax by X cents caused a Y% reduction in smoking, so if we raise the tax even higher, more people will quit. Maybe you're right. I don't know a lot of the details about their tax incentive structure. I doubt they are reallyu making $30-40k per car from the government. Do you have a source for that? No, but in your rhetorical passion you sometimes head that way. - Dan G