TomAiello

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    12,507

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

  • Feedback

    0%

Everything posted by TomAiello

  1. TomAiello
    We're celebrating our right to keep and bear fireworks! -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  2. TomAiello
    So what you're saying is the ONLY way the Second Amendment can be interpreted is the one you have decided is the correct one? An interpretation that supports eviscerating private rights to the point that would find outright confiscation legal? Yeah, I'm going to go with "that's a smokescreen for opposing that right." There's certainly room for various views (both in support and opposition) but calling your opposition "suport" is dishonest at best. For example, there are several 2nd Amendment organizations that disagree with the NRA on specifics (machine gun ownership, for example). That doesn't make the NRA anti-2nd Amendment. It just means they have a more restrictive view than some others (like me) -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  3. TomAiello
    You're misinterpreting what they've written. You assume that because they don't agree with ALL of what you believe with that they don't support the 2nd. That's not the case at all. Come on Quade, that's pure double speak. It's a bit like the government of Iran saying that they support free elections and respect the will of the people. It's true, so long as you agree with their interpretation of "free" and "will of the people." Even the KKK clothes their bile in lofty rhetoric about how it would be "better" for ethnic minorities. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  4. TomAiello
    The issue is whether it will (a) be more efficient, (b) provide healthcare to more people, and/or (c) provide quality healthcare, without (d) reducing the quality of healthcare for others. It's likely that it will do (b) provide care to more people, but at the expense of (a) less efficiency and hence greater expense, (c) lower quality and (d) reductions in care level currently provided to some people. Is it worth the trade off? Well, that's the issue under debate, isn't it? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  5. TomAiello
    For health, sure there are no guarantees. But anyone can purchase healthcare with sufficient work (to earn the money), same as anyone can purchase food and shelter with sufficient work. The question is: Why Healthcare? Why not Food and Shelter? Food and shelter are obviously more vital to human survival than healthcare. Why aren't we addressing those priorities first? How many people could be fed and housed with the trillion dollars we're looking at spending on healthcare? Wouldn't it be wiser to spend it on food and shelter? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  6. TomAiello
    ACLU defends the entire US Constitution. In much the same way that censorship protects the First Amendment? Here is the ACLU's official position on the 2nd Amendment: The ACLU filed an amicus brief in favor of the DC gun ban in Heller. Calling that a pro-2nd position is either a huge stretch or a blatant attempt at misinformation. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  7. TomAiello
    Where in the article did it say he pointed in anywhere? He didn't. It started as a "joke" comment on my part. The reason is that there was a well known US political figure who once swept her audience with the muzzle of an AK-47 variant. I had assumed that everyone would be aware of that--hence it was a joke. When it became clear that people weren't aware of it, I started to become curious as to what people might think if they were asked the question without the personalities involved. edit: here and here are some photos of that incident. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  8. TomAiello
    Why are we not providing food and shelter before thinking about healthcare? An interesting follow up question: if food and shelter are more important than healthcare (and for basic survival they obviously are) should we prioritize health care for everyone in our country above food for everyone in the world? Shouldn't all the hungry be fed before we start providing healthcare for anyone? BTW, there's a huge difference between "not providing" and "denying." Do you really think of yourself as denying food to the 800 million hungry people in the world? That's quite a chunk of personal responsibility you've chosen for yourself. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  9. TomAiello
    Also that socialism is responsible for every war ever fought by nation states
  10. TomAiello
    Wrong analogy. Republicans are to be compared with Hitler. Democrats are to be compared with Stalin. Hence, in a discussion about Palin, the correct analogy would be "if Hitler had been more like Ghandi..." If Obama had been the subject of discussion, then the Stalin analogy would be used. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  11. TomAiello
    He's saying that foreign wars can be a great way of getting the public to forget real issues. Ever see "Wag the Dog"? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  12. TomAiello
    Why are there still people living on the street, then? Clearly the system, if it exists, is failing. Well, "national defense" (as, from your quotes, I'm sure you realize) is more about pushing people around in other parts of the world than it is about actually defending the nation. We could defend the nation quite effectively on a tenth of the current "defense" budget--but then we wouldn't be able to go out and force other people in other countries to live their lives in accordance with our wishes. Wouldn't that be a crying shame? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  13. TomAiello
    ...why not food and shelter? It seems odd that we argue about whether the government ought to provide healthcare for all, yet we've never faced the issue of food and shelter. Food and shelter are both far more essential to survival than healthcare. Why aren't we providing them first, before we even consider healthcare? Shouldn't we have food stations set up in every neighborhood, where people can pick up their government issued 1000 calories per day and a multivitamin (or whatever)? Why don't we have free bunkrooms for those without shelter? Why aren't food and shelter higher priorities for government spending? Seriously, why are we looking to address healthcare, when these much more important human needs are left to the whims of the marketplace? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  14. TomAiello
    Would you characterize someone who swept their audience with the muzzle of a firearm as an idiot? Sorry...this started out as a joke, and now I'm just having too much fun. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  15. TomAiello
    Robber Barons did it with their own money. They didn't ask for a trillion dollar government subsidy to do it. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  16. TomAiello
    Do you think there's anything wrong with sweeping the muzzle of a firearm over your audience? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  17. TomAiello
    I think you're right. I bet a Presidential bid (even perrenial bids) would tie into that pretty well. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  18. TomAiello
    Charlie Crist...Tim Pawlenty...Bobby Jindal...Tom Ridge...Colin Powell...Kay Bailey Hutchison... I can probably dig up a dozen real possibilities without even resorting to re-running people from last year (Giuliani, for example, pretty much killed himself by failing to play the early game--I bet he'd do well if he really tried from the outset). The real question is "who wants to take a chance getting steamrollered by an incumbent Obama?" It's a losing proposition for most career politicians, unless their real goal is not the white house. Pawlenty, for example, could probably turn the exposure from a failed white house bid into a pretty good "Senator for life" gig. At this point he's pretty much the only guy with his hat clearly in the ring, since Sanford has nuked himself. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  19. TomAiello
    Does such a system exist anywhere in the world? Even the most socialist nations I've visited tried to recover costs from international visitors. It's a serious question. Is there an example we could look at to check such a thing out? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  20. TomAiello
    I could argue FDR stuff ad infinitum. But I won't. Adding bureaucracy to complete the same task is bad for the economy. Otherwise, we'd want to smash all those new fangled machines and go back to planting crops by hand with sticks. Imagine all the jobs we'd create if we outlawed tractors! -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  21. TomAiello
    In this case I think that "hitting bottom" is likely to involve a debt default, which will be cataclysmic, but possibly essential to shocking us into actually addressing the real issue (that our government spends far more money than it has). -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  22. TomAiello
    It used to be on the opening screen, back when it was first released. As noted, it's nice, but pricey. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  23. TomAiello
    In order to be a "real" woman or minority, it's mandatory that you subscribe to a certain set of political beliefs. Sarah Palin can't "really" be a woman. Clarence Thomas can't "really" be black. People like that blow the whole mindset of group politics, so it's essential to immediately demonize them as somehow not actually of their gender/ethnicity. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  24. TomAiello
    I'm actually curious why people think that the "Obamer" monicker is racist. I hear the President's name very clearly as "Obamer" every day, because I spend about 30 minutes in the car listening to BBC news. -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com
  25. TomAiello
    I don't really read it that way. I kind of see her either becoming a full time issue lobbyist (SarahPAC?), or gearing up for a presidential run in 2012, where I expect she'll get stomped. The timing of the announcement (right there with Tim Pawlenty, who is a viable Republican candidate for 2012), tends to make me think its the latter. Wouldn't it be funny if she ended up as the VP on the GOP ticket in 2012 again? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com