Lucky...

I think that people are too anxious about this. The committee always lists the accomplishments of the recipient. People need to calm down a little. A feeling of calm and a general consensus of direction are part of the list. Let's not undermine an accomplishment. Feelings are important. He took office on Jan 20th. He was nominated before the Feb 1st deadline. As well I would think an American would be proud of another American's victory. I guess some Americans have a different idea of patriotism.

California, for one. You pay 2% of the car's value each year, plus the fixed fees. This 2% gets discounted gradually over the life of the car, but it's certainly a property tax. If you don't register the car, is the tax still applied? How is the tax termed? Is it vehicle license fee, excise tax, property tax? Either way, as I stated, money is taxed when it moves and for things like property tax, tolls, etc. The idea is that tax is applied when money moves and for property tax, as opposed to just appluting tax in 1 area, which would dissuade that activity. Taxes also mold societies behavior, if 1 act was taxed then the gov couldn't do that.

Why would we refresh your memory when you already know the whole story about how the Jessica Lynch mission was filmed in Hollywood somewhere? On a serious note though Jessica Lynch is no hero, she is a failure. The fame she received was pathetic. She was rewarded for failing to do her job. Far greater soldiers have accomplished much more and received much less gratitude than she received. I didn't see the story - no interest, but she was slamming the whole mess for the story being misrepresented by the military last I heard.

Right, during the war, but what was it before the war?

The unemp rate in the us was 25% at the peak.

Yes and no. Interest rates don't really define a recession, they might be acessory to one tho. I don't have the rest of the world's data, altho it could be seondarily relevant.

I just want to get an idea of what people think, then drop my data. It will probably surprise people, but I want to see what they think now.

That's the question, what brought us out of the Great Depression?

TWICE in less than 3 hours!!!

So official reports are always the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? Bridge for sale! Yeah... and there's a study out there that says carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed. But... guess what? People lie. I'd be wary of making that specific claim in a public forum if I were you. You are saying certain research workers are liars. All I claim is that "official reports" are not always truthful when someone or some organization has something to cover up. So you feel more comfortable implicating someone of a intentional cover up on an official government document on a public forum? I think that "claim" could have more of an impact on someones life than showing that the final conclusions of a study were not as accurate nor as well supported as was claimed. This reminds me of the recent flag burner thread. I'm sure this article has some truth, then there's McCain's side, then there's the truth. Just like the FB, if we heard his side we could then measure the thruth inbetween somewhere.

It's not true! It's not even close to what happened. I've heeard he was a songbird, but a lot of guys probably were.

Impressive! Now go and figure out how to post a clickable link. I had to ask to learn how. And some of us read the instructions. Come on, Kallend, a Chia head has 1 moving part.

So, you are saying that 98% of the world has lifted the societal burden, which has been placed on women, for centuries, that people are free to pursue a life that pleases them, and seek that, which is best, for their personal welfare? Yeah, I can see how the rest of the world has come to despise America. You're talking intra-country, I'm talking international. Apples/oranges. I get your point, you're flag-waving, but my point was that the world is sick of American conservative values.

And that's a reasonable assumption based upon your assertion that Obama had just been a continuation of Bush, when I have posted evidence of the opposite after only 9 months. I don't recall him saying he wasn't going ot bail them out, but to say he didn't want to bail them out is normal and admirable. He never said he wouldn't bail them out, but hypothetically if he did and flipped as they were crumbling then so what? Again, Obama has strongly suggested closing GITMO but has received harsh criticism from the R's in congress. He would have to ship prisoners here, which I believe he did some already. So because it hasn't been done in 15 minutes then you call him ineffective. The real problem in this conversation is that you act as tho these major issues can be accomplished in a day. And he wants a transparent gov too. Right now the big issue is HC, the economy / recession, then the ME, increasing taxes, etc. Having to let the public comment is important, but not like these major issues. I took a girl on a tandema while back, I knew here since she was very young. We had a vid guy and a lurker, as well we did a tumbling exit and she wanted to pull. All this out of a 182 @ 12k. Not a huge deal, but a busy jump and after I tossed teh drogue I was looking for everyone so I didn't give her the tap and she left her arms in other than when the camera guy docked up. She was almost upset that I didn't give her the tap, but I told her it was not neccessary for the jump, you may just not like it for the vid, but be glad you listened to everything I told you to do. When I hear you worried about Obama not putting issues before the public for 5 days, whether he did or not, so what? Look around: - Great recession - almost double diget unemp - M.E. AFU - US auto industry almost dissapeared - Iran and NK working on nukes - on and on Keep things in perspective. I support much of it too. It is too far-reaching in some areas, but if we plan on beingthe ugly Americans meddling in people's business, we have to have it. I do to, by a longshot. But that won't happen under any pres, at least not until our dollar collapses. It's his Justice Dept, not him. Also, that's from < 3 weeks after he took office. Welcome to recent news, it's so much more current. http://www.democracynow.org/2009/8/24/headlines Justice Dept. Advises Reopening Prisoner Abuse Cases The report’s release comes as the Justice Department has recommended reopening nearly a dozen prisoner abuse cases that the Bush administration had closed. The move could open the door to prosecuting CIA employees and contractors for torture and other abuses that in some cases led to the prisoners’ deaths. First you want to crucify him after 9 months, now it's < 3 weeks. Wonder where I get the idea you are predisposed against him? And you complain about me thinking you're partisan? Firstly, that's ridiculous, secondly, why not just pick out every Democrat and blame them....Oh, I see you have. You have no credibility with me as far as objectivity. There wasn't even a Clinton recession, as advertised, as there weren't 2 consecutive quarters of neg GDP. I'm just dying to here this, and if not maybe you can look to Carter. Again, the only borrowing he's done is for Bush's Great Recession. No, I mean the Obama stimulus, you're talking the bank bailout; get your HR's straight. I think both were needed. http://uspolitics.about.com/od/economy/tp/2009_economic_stimulus_bill.htm The 3 main indicators: Unem rate GDP Market 2 of 3 have flipped around from being in the toilet, the 3rd is rounding off and all that in 9 months and you're still critical of that Democrat...uh, who is it? Oh yea, doesn't matter, you hate em all. Remember teh 1990 recession, the 1980 if you're old enough, they were waaaaaaaay worse for longer, this Great Recession is worse GDP and market-wise, but seems to have come out faster as now we don't have Republicans in office saying, "LET THE MARKET CORRECT ITSELF." But he's not, his stimulus ahs undone a lot of Bush damage and he wants HC BADLY, how canyou say he's another Bush; he's polar opposite. It is, the R's would rather keep teh shit stirred over there, he's trying to repair that; polar opposite. That's real loyalty sticking up for your guy Bush, but Bush taking a great economy and mishandling a set of disasters, going into an unwarranted war and cutting taxes all teh while so he drives up a 5+T debt increase is very tangible, Obama has already after just 9 months started undoing some of these and you want to blame him and call him the same. Like you, we all miss Bush for different reasons. You miss his stelar leadership, we miss his comedic blunders; thank god for youtube Ah, a disgruntled Republican. No wonder you defend Bush so much, you're 3 degrees off full-on Republicanism. Oh and BTW, he never will be. We've become more peaceful individually and relatively. A lot has changed, but as for data, it's a small sample size, hence not yet statistically significant inteh big picture. Things could turn south, so you can't brag until after 2 or 3 years, I'm being realistic, you're being pesimistic. Things have really changed for the better. Yea, in response to me quoting Bush on it taking 50 years to fully realize a president's legacy. Uh, that was his quote and if you posted more that I wrote you would find that it doesn't take 50 years to realize Bush butchered pretty much everything. In 50 years we'll talk and see what we think, but until then I'm good by understanding the mishandling of the Bush presidency and am willing to acredit him for what traspired under him. If you couldn't read what I was saying, Bush made that assertion so as to say, 'Hey, you'll see that I was right. It might be 50 years.' No double standard, just reading his acts for what they are and for what they created. A good example of that 50-year rule of Bush's is Reagan. When Reagan left office I think he was right behind Wash and Lincoln, now he's 10 and sinking. After we got thru with all of the grandfatherly love he could impart, we've realized teh mess with this debt that he proliferated. It took his 2 successors 12 years to stop the bleeding and the debt was 5.5T by then. Then baby Reagan came in and extorted another 5.5T. I think the country will figure it out and he will be at 20 within a decade. Yet all you do is to protect him. I see you're easing off. First it was that they were the same, now it's, "not much better." Which is it? The instant GPI rating, the instant GDP jump and the quick turnaround of the market is all I need to establish how wrong you are. And that's 9 months. Wait for 2 years, unemp s/b down to 6 or 7 and shrinking, we should all have HC and things will be repairing. ...but of course Bush and Obama will bethe same guy to you

Woaw!!! I was unaware of that. McCain’s most horrendous loss occurred in 1967 on the USS Forrestal. Well, not horrendous for him. The starter motor switch on the A4E Skyhawk allowed fuel to pool in the engine. When the aircraft was “wet-started,” an impressive flame would shoot from the tail. It was one of the ways young hot-shots got their jollies. Investigators and survivors took the position that McCain deliberately wet-started to harass the F4 pilot directly behind him. The cook off launched an M34 Zuni rocket that tore through the Skyhawk’s fuel tank, released a thousand pound bomb, and ignited a fire that killed the pilot plus 167 men. Before the tally of dead and dying was complete, the son and grandson of admirals had been transferred to the USS Oriskany. I ran B-52's in the AF and we would do that too, for fun. Of course they weren't loaded w/bombs, but you do it 2 ways: 1) Spin the motor and before advancing the throttles @ 15% or 20% I forget, chop it off and let the motor spool down. Do it as many times as you want and then finally advance the throttle and watch out. 2) Just advance the throttle at 10%, it won't have the air flow to blow the burned mixture out and a lazy flame will hang on the aft wing for a few seconds. I would never do #1, but #2 on occassion. We had turbine power carts we would do #1 with and shoot a big flame. I read the entire article, if true, what a mess.

Probably, other than his dellusion that tax cuts actually help the overall economy.

I'm not arguing with myself, I'm pointing out a clear notion that it's about anti-Obama; we'll figure out why later on. You wrote that you didn't see the differene between Bush and Obama to these: What part of the Bush agenda has he not allowed to continue? Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? The situation with Iran? Patriot Act? Closing Gitmo? Torture? Massive borrowing and debt? http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/21/obama.speech/index.html Obama wants out of GITMO an plans to close it. The situations with Iran....what does that mean? He hasn't solved the ME probs in 9 months? The patriot act? OK, so can it? There are element I didn't like with it, but the TSA and others just need tobe there, sep if we're gonna be in everyone's business. Torture? He isn't anti-torture? He's closing GITMO due to that. The only borrowing he's doing is to pay for Bush's Great Recession. He may borrow for HC, but that's it, the rest is a very effective stimulus that has most of teh money left to continue programs. He has 9 months and you say he's the same; are you 15? 9 months isn't anything and he's made strides, let's tally in the end of his term(s). Someone said he contacted a ME leader as his first calls into the WH. You say not enough; you'll just have to wait for more than 9 months to draw a reasonable conclusion. The world loves him, the GPI went from 97 to 83, he was given the Nobel, the GDP has made a shocking turnaround. These were the worst times since the GD, FAR worse than the the 1980 and the 1990 recession, yet a far quicker recovery and you are pissing your pants after 9 months? Sorry dude, it just doesn't work that way. Oh, did I say the market recovery from 6kish to almost 10k, a healthy number? The immediate numbers are there, you can be selectively blind to them if you wish, probably as you were under Clinton. Sure, I would rather factor in what he received and where we are now contrasted with where we would be if your guy was still in office. It would the genius....TAX CUTS MY FRIENDS. We would still be under McHoovernomics and headed for the GD II and waiting for the, uh, "MARKET TO CORRECT ITSELF." Waiting for the market to correct itself is like waiting for an ill patient with kidney disease to heal themselves. It's an indication, basd upon their criteria, that the US became more peaceful. I did, plenty has changed and 9 months isn't enough time to measure anything. Hell, your hero said it takes 50 years to fully understand a president's legacy, give him his 4 or 8 years and then tally. But I have illustrated the: GPI Stock Market GDP immediate trunaround World's reception of a peaceful leader Shitting down the missle program Efforts to give gay's rights Efforts to bring HC to everyone Look at your boy after 9 months; he had 911 under his belt, started cutting taxes in the midst of a fabricated war. I realize not a scale from which to compare, but a real breath of fresh air to not have a guy doing the same. Again, necks, many on the left too, can't deal with wholesale change, so he has so spoon-feed them a little at a time. As soon as HC gets done, whetehr it passes or not, you will see real changing.

What part of the Bush agenda has he not allowed to continue? Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan? The situation with Iran? Patriot Act? Closing Gitmo? Torture? Massive borrowing and debt? Really, I'm curious. What's the difference? And if he pulled out of Iraq/Afghanistan you would be saying he's being true to his Muslim brothers. No win. He's keeping the failed messes going to pass his HC, once that's done, tax increases and bailout of the ME. Also, lots has changed: http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdp_glance.htm The GDP went from -6.4 to -1.0 the following quarter that Obama took office; still say it's the same? And then there's this: http://www.visionofhumanity.org/gpi/results/rankings/2009 97 to 83 in 1 year. WHat a difference a year makes.

Well, I don't think it makes sense to give someone a Peace Prize based on what they are promising to do. But I don't think it was a bad move to nominate him nine months ahead of time. The Nobel committee knows the timeline, they knew there would still be another nine months for Obama to prove himself. Maybe in the eyes of the rest of the world, not being Bush as CinC of the world's most powerful military is ample justification for the award. Just as GWB had big shoes to fill, and didn't even fill the little toe, Obama has tiny baby shoes to fill and he is trying to stuff his toes in and cannot. You know he's wishing he and Harris didn't rob the 2000 election; he could just have gone down as a failed governor, now he has failed president to go with it.

You wrote: Idiotic comment...money is not taxed. Grow up. Bill told you to quit it. The movement of mioney is taxed. If a billionaire rolled all his gains back into his business, took no paycheck, he would not be taxed because he didn't move any money out of anything. For the most part, when money moves, it's taxed. I thought that was moot. Property tax is for real estate. Where are cars taxed as property tax? A dealer might have an inventory tax, but a car's tags are not considered property tax. So that's my point, property tax, tolls and other like areas are taxes that require no movement of money, other than that, when money moves it's taxed. This is just a parroting of what I wrote above, you're just repeating and agreeing with me. The movement of money is taxed by way of sales tax, employment-related taxes, etc. Other than property tax and a few others, taxes are colleccted when money moves, therefore money is taxed. You buy something new (and many used), sales tax. You earn pay, it's taxed. You sit on your ass and do nothing, no taxes. Oh, with welfare and job training programs, HC, etc? I see we agree once more.

That was my quote, and the second time you called me an idiot. Do you think putting Kallend's name on it will fool anyone? Can you not even address people without calling them names and personal attacks? So I guess, capital gains, sales tax, property tax, excise tax, tolls, and all other assignments like that are not taxes. It's hard to legitimately move money w/o a tax attached. And with property tax, you're not even moving money and you get taxed. Taxes are many and dynamic.

I understand, all or nothing. Of course low income people should still pay some taxes, but higher income should pay more and close the gap a little. The FairTax Act (HR 25, S 296) is nonpartisan legislation. It abolishes all federal personal and corporate income taxes, gift, estate, capital gains, alternative minimum, Social Security, Medicare, and self-employment taxes and replaces them with one simple, visible, federal retail sales tax administered primarily by existing state sales tax authorities. Talk about trying to slow sales. Geez, I think taxes are best when distributed in type throughout many areas. I wrote the same before I read that. Of course it would. I think it's a bad idea to lump taxes anywhere, it would cause a slump in that area. Taxes are best distributed in type throughout everywhere.

http://i174.photobucket.com/albums/w94/Get_Organized/Funny%20pix%20and%20signs%20off%20the%20web/crock-of-shit.jpg Ahhhh, now that's a crock of shit. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_compromise Sorry, my friends, a black person was 3/5th of a man. The Three-Fifths Compromise was a compromise between Southern and Northern states reached during the Philadelphia Convention of 1787 in which three-fifths of the population of slaves would be counted for enumeration purposes regarding both the distribution of taxes and the apportionment of the members of the United States House of Representatives. The three-fifths ratio was not a new concept. It originated with a 1783 amendment proposed to the Articles of Confederation. Yea, your opinion, just not the writings and practices. I'm not projecting this on you, just defining the founding principles. Why apologize for agreeing, I was right on the issue about and am on this one too. Bush and teh neo-con agenda is poop; the world knew it, they're just telling us via an award. Yep, it's a shame the American electorate was so unable to choose a better president for 8 years that the world had to let us know when we got it right. It's not the prize, it's the meaning, the message behind it. I see some Republican politicians figuring it out. They are stopping the vile hatred, the denial the unwillingness to compromise. Of course others are just jumping ship.

So you'd prefer bureaucrats in Washington get Bill Gates's $58 billion dollars instead of him donating it to his foundation? You'd like Chris Dodd to decide what to do with it as opposed to having it go towards HIV research, or Education? Don't you care about the children? Or do you just prefer to use the pretext of charity as a means to further your own agenda? I prefer all taxes be higher, esp for the rich so we can close the gap a bit and decrease the debt one day. Either do it on our own or it will be done for us. So that's a Yes on the last question? I don't ever recall making a statement that creates a pretext for charity. I assume you're calling social svs charity, I do not.

Kinda hard to tax the poor. Remember, money is taxed, not people. Don't like taxes, don't move money. so it really is all about arbitrary lines then. No, it's all about 'follow the money.' How can you tax the lower 80% when 93% of all cash is above them? Isn't that like trying to milk an Elk? Did you mean to say "milk a bull"? No, I let you milk all the bull we can handle. I meant that you cannot milk an elk and collecting taxes from the poor is like doing so.