A Milf For Vp?

[JustDoIt 10]

We all what's really going on here....Please.

How do you put the picture on the bottom of your post?

[copernicus 0]

How do you put the picture on the bottom of your post?

my controls>edit signature>insert image

[nutzbuster 7]

Come on... you don't find that clip a little bit funny?!

I chortled

Make sure to watch Saturday Night Live this weekend, Tna Fey is the host.

word

[JustDoIt 10]

Cross posted from challenge thread. lol liberal media bias.http://ccinsider.comedycentral.com/cc_insi...tewart-ann.html

Good Post, this goes on all day long on cable TV on both sides. Nauseating!!!

[mhoward29 0]

Havent looked at a single page in this thread, but is anyone else thinking what Im thinking about this pic?

[copernicus 0]

Havent looked at a single page in this thread, but is anyone else thinking what Im thinking about this pic?

dont know but if youre on a Megan's Law list Id be careful about what you say.

[mhoward29 0]

dont know but if youre on a Megan's Law list Id be careful about what you say.

what's that?Edit: Nevermind, wiki ftw

[copernicus 0]

what's that?Edit: Nevermind, wiki ftw

[Nimue1995 1]

I asked him questions and got his answers which is all I'm asking for.

Please, tell me you didn't just call me a HIM

Oops sorry about that.

[Ron_Mexico 4,219]

It seems to me many Democrats do not realize that the majority of voters for President support some combination (perceived or actual) of lower taxes, pro business, strong defense, gun rights, pro life, anti illegal immigration, anti increasing welfare state..etc, than a combination that opposes these.I probably butchered that in trying to write it out; but in any event as soon as Liberals realize that it's not the divisive speeches that helped Republicans win 7 of the last 10 elections, and it's certainly not the media, its their PLATFORM.

lower taxes, sure, but you gotta pay for stuffpro-business - depends, huge subsidies for multi-billion dollar companies ain't rightstrong defense- defense being the key word, not offense, which is what our military is being used for currently. And our military doesn't need to be huge anymore, imogun rights - I'm not a gun guy, so I'm probably extremely liberal on that one. pro life - um, noanti illegal immigration - sure, illegal immigrants suck, but how can you fix it? Not a wall? Not packing em up and shipping em home. tough one, and I live in South Florida, where they run wildAnti welfare state - I don't believe in flat out handouts, but some people need assistance. Not everyone has the means or ability to just pick themselves up by the bootstraps and makes $60k. Just not real life.

[jmkiser 0]

lower taxes, sure, but you gotta pay for stuff but we already collect more then enough in federal taxes... it's how we allocate them and for what projects that is the problem. we have plenty of room to cut taxespro-business - depends, huge subsidies for multi-billion dollar companies ain't rightstrong defense- defense being the key word, not offense, which is what our military is being used for currently. And our military doesn't need to be huge anymore, imo /agreegun rights - I'm not a gun guy, so I'm probably extremely liberal on that one. You don't have to be a gun guy to realize that society, in general, is safer by allowing LEGAL citizens to carry. i also think that legislating against "accidents" is bullshit pro life - um, no /agree with you thereanti illegal immigration - sure, illegal immigrants suck, but how can you fix it? Not a wall? Not packing em up and shipping em home. tough one, and I live in South Florida, where they run wild /agree on the wall and deportation... terrible ideas that don't work and cost taxpayersAnti welfare state - I don't believe in flat out handouts, but some people need assistance. Not everyone has the means or ability to just pick themselves up by the bootstraps and makes $60k. Just not real life. the only problem with this is that the government hasn't been too efficient on the systems that are set up. I understand helping people that need assistance, but the welfare system is quite corrupt at this point... i could live with a good system but we definitely need a major overhaul

[copernicus 0]

lower taxes, sure, but you gotta pay for stuff 1. you only have to pay for stuff if you "buy" it. 2. raising tax rates doesn't raise revenues, thats been shown several times.pro-business - depends, huge subsidies for multi-billion dollar companies ain't right right on, and neither is singling out companies or industries for "excessive profits"strong defense- defense being the key word, not offense, which is what our military is being used for currently. we disagree And our military doesn't need to be huge anymore, imo disagree againgun rights - I'm not a gun guy, so I'm probably extremely liberal on that one. then work to change the Constitution. As it is there is a clear right to bear arms, and unreasonable impediments to doing so are unconstitutional. Restricitons such as banning felons from owning guns, background checks, waiting periods and registratoin are not unreasonable impediments though.pro life - um, no agree, though we might not agree on when "choice" should endanti illegal immigration - sure, illegal immigrants suck, but how can you fix it? Not a wall? Not packing em up and shipping em home. tough one, and I live in South Florida, where they run wild A wall will go a long way to helping the problem. It wont totally stop entry, but, liken it to a leaking pipe. You can mop up the floor and keep the leak from ruining the carpet a lot more easily if the leak is minimized. The "mopping" up side is not all that difficult. Deport felons as soon as their jail time is up, and fine businesses that hire illegals, which will result in self-deportation. The slowing economy has resulted in over a million illegals returning to their countries, its ridiculous to claim that self-deportation cant be achieved by shutting down those who pay them to work.Anti welfare state - I don't believe in flat out handouts, but some people need assistance. Not everyone has the means or ability to just pick themselves up by the bootstraps and makes $60k. Just not real life. Agree, but assistance can't be open ended for the able bodied, and assitance should not be designed in a way that it is self-perpetuating and discourages work.

BTW it should be obvious why raising tax rates doesnt necessarily raise revenues, but many people dont get it. This may deserve a separate thread but this analogy should work well on this forum:Taxes are "rake". Someone who makes their living at poker playing only games where he has a positive expectation over and above the rake. He is happy to pay a reasonable rake because he recognizes that it pays for maintenance of the site and a place where everyone can gather to play and he can ply his trade.Now what happens if all sites raise the rake on all games? The professional will abandon those games where he has insufficient edge over the rake, or where variance of the games makes profits over the rake too large for his bankroll. That reduces the volume in those games, eventually to the point where there arent enough tables to justify the expense of servers dedicated to dealing the game. You also have a group of players that are small winners or breakeven against the current rake. You lose their action even in the low variance games. Finally players will ultimately start to look for "rakeback" which are really just rake reductions for high volume players, even if they get less action at the rakeback site.Now what happens if PokerStars, in pursuit of the revenue that they lost (and attributing the loss to reasons other than the rake increase) decide to raise the rake more than other sites, and above where it is profitable for someone to play at Stars. Players will abandon Stars and move to more favorable sites further reducing their revenues.These are precisely the behaviors that have been empiracally shown to occur when you raise tax rates. Low expectation/high variance games = high risk investments in innovation and technology that further drive the economy rakeback = tax shelters more favorable sites = states or countries with lower costs of doing business net of taxes

[akoff 0]

[copernicus 0]

add a couple of more for my edit adding the tax analogy, please.

[Ron_Mexico 4,219]

Cop,I meant pay for stuff, in regards to roads, police, govt services, etc. That's what I meant by taxes and paying for stuff.I don't disagree with a large portion of your red text in regard to my post. As far as the gun issue, as I stated, I'm not a gun guy, but I also don't think that the govt should just start collecting all guns either. If legal, legitimate people want to own a handgun for home protection or a hunting rifle (even though I don't like game hunters) , I don't have a real issue, but it starts to go wrong for me with people feeling they need to carry a gun everywhere they go. I guess they feel a need because we have no control over illegal guns. I think the penalties for carrying an unlicensed gun should be waayyyyyy stronger, but if you have a society where guns are legal, you'll never be able to keep them out of the criminal elements hands. Like I said, they aren't for me, but I get why some people feel the need to have em. I don't like it, but I get it. I'd prefer we were like England, but I don't expect people to agree. I'm almost indifferent. I'm rambling.also, I really hate poker/political analogies, even though yours was done better than most.we can agree to disagree, but I really do believe that we are on the offense in regards to our military, at least originally. It's the age old argument, but 18 hijackers on 9/11 were Saudi, yet we attacked Afghanistan, searching for OBL, then Iraq. I'm simplifying, of course.cmon, a wall? Maybe in theory, but you don't think Mexico has ladders, shovels, pick axes. A wall isn't the solution. I agree with shipping criminals out, and self deportation. Although, even though I agree in theory about fining businesses for hiring illegals, if we do that, I think the prices of things will skyrocket, fruit, sugar (here in SoFL) all kinds of services, restaurants. Any place that hires illegals. Sadly, Americans don't want those jobs for the money currently being paid and those companies won't pay a living wage to have them done by americans. If they did, it would cost $6 a pound for tomatoes. Once again, I'm simplifying, but I think the point is valid. pro choice? I think 3 months from conception is the latest for an abortion unless there are severe complications and severe ramifications for keeping the fetus.welfare - oh, I think we agree quite a bit in regards to assistance. It shouldn't go on forever. You have to take some responsibility for yourself ultimately. You can't keep having kids and stay on welfare. If a mother has three kids, then uses up her welfare, she shouldn't just be able to have another kid and hop back on. But, where do you draw the line? Let the kids starve because of the stupidity of the mother? That's my dilemmaI don't clarify myself well when I discuss this stuff on the board because I don't have your patience, but I have found that we may agree a little more than I first imagined.

[copernicus 0]

Cop,I meant pay for stuff, in regards to roads, police, govt services, etc. That's what I meant by taxes and paying for stuff.pro choice? I think 3 months from conception is the latest for an abortion unless there are severe complications and severe ramifications for keeping the fetus.welfare - oh, I think we agree quite a bit in regards to assistance. It shouldn't go on forever. You have to take some responsibility for yourself ultimately. You can't keep having kids and stay on welfare. If a mother has three kids, then uses up her welfare, she shouldn't just be able to have another kid and hop back on. But, where do you draw the line? Let the kids starve because of the stupidity of the mother? That's my dilemmaI don't clarify myself well when I discuss this stuff on the board because I don't have your patience, but I have found that we may agree a little more than I first imagined.

Pay....yes thats why I put "buy" in quotesI go further than 3 months, but not as far as RvW. I draw the line at viabiity outside the womb WITHOUt extradordinary measures, while RvW draws it at viability outside the womb WITH extraordinary methods. A law obviously needs a bright line to be fairly enforceable so Id probably set it at 5 months or so to err on the side of caution.Welfare moms and starving kids....I'll incur the wrath of many here, but I would require mandatory birth control to receive your welfare check. If you cant afford the kids you have, preventing more is in the best interest of the kids she already has, the potential future kid, and society as a whole. I would also vigorously pursue fathers who abandon their wives/girlfriends and garnish their wages for child support.Many would agree with me more than they expect, since internet discussions are focused on Iraq and the economy. In fact some idiot accused me of lying about being an atheist, because based on those two issues he stereotyped me as religious right.

[Denny Crane 0]

I go further than 3 months, but not as far as RvW. I draw the line at viabiity outside the womb WITHOUt extradordinary measures, while RvW draws it at viability outside the womb WITH extraordinary methods. A law obviously needs a bright line to be fairly enforceable so Id probably set it at 5 months or so to err on the side of caution.Welfare moms and starving kids....I'll incur the wrath of many here, but I would require mandatory birth control to receive your welfare check. If you cant afford the kids you have, preventing more is in the best interest of the kids she already has, the potential future kid, and society as a whole. I would also vigorously pursue fathers who abandon their wives/girlfriends and garnish their wages for child support.

Ron Mexico can get behind both of these lines of thinking

[Ron_Mexico 4,219]

Ron Mexico can get behind both of these lines of thinking

You're always right Denny, you're always right.Before you know it, me and Cop will be running through a meadow, holding hands.

[copernicus 0]

You're always right Denny, you're always right.Before you know it, me and Cop will be running through a meadow, holding hands.

I would prefer walking along the beach, pants rolled up to our knees, giggling when a large wave still gets them wet and splashes musky ocean surf into our glasses of Pinot Grigio.Gratuitous DN comment removed

[hblask 1]

I love (or is it hate, I'm not sure) it when people who generally understand economics and supply and demand lose their head when the supply is "labor" and the skin color is "light brown". Suddenly, when those conditions meet, free marketeers believe that central planning is feasible and desirable.

[Franchise632 0]

This may have been posted already but it is certainly of interest. It is one lady from Wasilla's breakdown of Mrs. Palin. A resident from Wasilla, AK ABOUT SARAH PALINI am a resident of Wasilla, Alaska. I have known Sarah since 1992. Everyone here knows Sarah, so it is nothing special to say we are on a first-name basis. Our children have attended the same schools. Her father was my child's favorite substitute teacher. I also am on a first name basis with her parents and mother-in-law. I attended more City Council meetings during her administration than about 99% of the residents of the city.She is enormously popular; in every way she's like the most popular girl in middle school. Even men who think she is a poor choice and won't vote for her can't quit smiling when talking about her because she is a "babe".It is astonishing and almost scary how well she can keep a secret. She kept her most recent pregnancy a secret from her children and parents for seven months.She is "pro-life". She recently gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby. There is no cover-up involved, here; Trig is her baby.She is energetic and hardworking. She regularly worked out at the gym.She is savvy. She doesn't take positions; she just "puts things out there" and if they prove to be popular, then she takes credit.Her husband works a union job on the North Slope for BP and is a champion snowmobile racer. Todd Palin's kind of job is highly sought-after because of the schedule and high pay. He arranges his work schedule so he can fish for salmon in Bristol Bay for a month or so in summer, but by no stretch of the imagination is fishing their major source of income. Nor has her life-style ever been anything like that of native Alaskans.Sarah and her whole family are avid hunters.She's smart.Her experience is as mayor of a city with a population of about 5,000 (at the time), and less than 2 years as governor of a state with about 670,000 residents.During her mayoral administration most of the actual work of running this small city was turned over to an administrator. She had been pushed to hire this administrator by party power-brokers after she had gotten herself into some trouble over precipitous firings which had given rise to a recall campaign.Sarah campaigned in Wasilla as a "fiscal conservative". During her 6 years as Mayor, she increased general government expenditures by over 33%. During those same 6 years the amount of taxes collected by the City increased by 38%. This was during a period of low inflation (1996-2002). She reduced progressive property taxes and increased a regressive sales tax which taxed even food. The tax cuts that she promoted benefited large corporate property owners way more than they benefited residents.The huge increases in tax revenues during her mayoral administration weren't enough to fund everything on her wish list though, borrowed money was needed, too. She inherited a city with zero debt, but left it with indebtedness of over $22 million. What did Mayor Palin encourage the voters to borrow money for? Was it the infrastructure that she said she supported? The sewage treatment plant that the city lacked? or a new library? No. $1m for a park. $15m-plus for construction of a multi-use sports complex which she rushed through to build on a piece of property that the City didn't even have clear title to, that was still in litigation 7 yrs later--to the delight of the lawyers involved! The sports complex itself is a nice addition to the community but a huge money pit, not the profit-generator she claimed it would be. She also supported bonds for $5.5m for road projects that could have been done in 5-7 yrs without any borrowing.While Mayor, City Hall was extensively remodeled and her office redecorated more than once.These are small numbers, but Wasilla is a very small city.As an oil producer, the high price of oil has created a budget surplus in Alaska. Rather than invest this surplus in technology that will make us energy independent and increase efficiency, as Governor she proposed distribution of this surplus to every individual in the state.In this time of record state revenues and budget surpluses, she recommended that the state borrow/bond for road projects, even while she proposed distribution of surplus state revenues: spend today's surplus, borrow for needs.She's not very tolerant of divergent opinions or open to outside ideas or compromise. As Mayor, she fought ideas that weren't generated by her or her staff. Ideas weren't evaluated on their merits, but on the basis of who proposed them.While Sarah was Mayor of Wasilla she tried to fire our highly respected City Librarian because the Librarian refused to consider removing from the library some books that Sarah wanted removed. City residents rallied to the defense of the City Librarian and against Palin's attempt at out-and-out censorship, so Palin backed down and withdrew her termination letter. People who fought her attempt to oust the Librarian are on her enemies list to this day.Sarah complained about the "old boy's club" when she first ran for Mayor, so what did she bring Wasilla? A new set of "old boys". Palin fired most of the experienced staff she inherited. At the City and as Governor she hired or elevated new, inexperienced, obscure people, creating a staff totally dependent on her for their jobs and eternally grateful and fiercely loyal--loyal to the point of abusing their power to further her personal agenda, as she has acknowledged happened in the case of pressuring the State's top cop (see below).As Mayor, Sarah fired Wasilla's Police Chief because he "intimidated" her, she told the press. As Governor, her recent firing of Alaska's top cop has the ring of familiarity about it. He served at her pleasure and she had every legal right to fire him, but it's pretty clear that an important factor in her decision to fire him was because he wouldn't fire her sister's ex-husband, a State Trooper. Under investigation for abuse of power, she has had to admit that more than 2 dozen contacts were made between her staff and family to the person that she later fired, pressuring him to fire her ex-brother-in-law. She tried to replace the man she fired with a man who she knew had been reprimanded for sexual harassment; when this caused a public furor, she withdrew her support.She has bitten the hand of every person who extended theirs to her in help. The City Council person who personally escorted her around town introducing her to voters when she first ran for Wasilla City Council became one of her first targets when she was later elected Mayor. She abruptly fired her loyal City Administrator; even people who didn't like the guy were stunned by this ruthlessness.Fear of retribution has kept all of these people from saying anything publicly about her.When then-Governor Murkowski was handing out political plums, Sarah got the best, Chair of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission: one of the few jobs not in Juneau and one of the best paid. She had no background in oil & gas issues. Within months of scoring this great job which paid $122,400/yr, she was complaining in the press about the high salary. I was told that she hated that job: the commute, the structured hours, the work. Sarah became aware that a member of this Commission (who was also the State Chair of the Republican Party) engaged in unethical behavior on the job. In a gutsy move which some undoubtedly cautioned her could be political suicide, Sarah solved all her problems in one fell swoop: got out of the job she hated and garnered gobs of media attention as the patron saint of ethics and as a gutsy fighter against the "old boys' club" when she dramatically quit, exposing this man's ethics violations (for which he was fined).As Mayor, she had her hand stuck out as far as anyone for pork from Senator Ted Stevens. Lately, she has castigated his pork-barrel politics and publicly humiliated him. She only opposed the "bridge to nowhere" after it became clear that it would be unwise not to.As Governor, she gave the Legislature no direction and budget guidelines, then made a big grandstand display of line-item vetoing projects, calling them pork. Public outcry and further legislative action restored most of these projects -- which had been vetoed simply because she was not aware of their importance -- but with the unobservant she had gained a reputation as "anti-pork".She is solidly Republican: no political maverick. The State party leaders hate her because she has bit them in the back and humiliated them. Other members of the party object to her self-description as a fiscal conservative.Around Wasilla there are people who went to high school with Sarah. They call her "Sarah Barracuda" because of her unbridled ambition and predatory ruthlessness. Before she became so powerful, very ugly stories circulated around town about shenanigans she pulled to be made point guard on the high school basketball team. When Sarah's mother-in-law, a highly respected member of the community and experienced manager, ran for Mayor, Sarah refused to endorse her.As Governor, she stepped outside of the box and put together of package of legislation known as "AGIA" that forced the oil companies to march to the beat of her drum.Like most Alaskans, she favors drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. She has questioned if the loss of sea ice is linked to global warming. She campaigned "as a private citizen" against a state initiative that would have either a) protected salmon streams from pollution from mines, or B) tied up in the courts all mining in the state (depending on who you listen to). She has pushed the State's lawsuit against the Dept. of the Interior's decision to list polar bears as threatened species.McCain is the oldest person to ever run for President; Sarah will be a heartbeat away from being President.There has to be literally millions of Americans who are more knowledgeable and experienced than she.However, there's a lot of people who have underestimated her and are regretting it.CLAIM vs. FACT:Hockey mom: True for a few years. PTA mom: True years ago when her first-born was in elementary school, not since. NRA supporter: Absolutely true. Social conservative: Mixed. Opposes gay marriage, BUT vetoed a bill that would have denied benefits to employees in same-sex relationships (said she did this because it was unconstitutional). Pro-creationism: Mixed. Supports it, BUT did nothing as Governor to promote it. Pro-life: Mixed. Knowingly gave birth to a Down's syndrome baby BUT declined to call a special legislative session on some pro-life legislation. Experienced: Some high schools have more students than Wasilla has residents. Many cities have more residents than the state of Alaska. No legislative experience other than City Council. Little hands-on supervisory or managerial experience; needed help of a city administrator to run town of about 5,000 Political maverick: Not at all. Gutsy: Absolutely! Open & transparent: ??? Good at keeping secrets. Not good at explaining actions. Has a developed philosophy of public policy: No. A "Greenie": No. Turned Wasilla into a wasteland of big box stores and disconnected parking lots. Is pro-drilling off-shore and in ANWR. Fiscal conservative: Not by my definition! Pro-infrastructure: No. Promoted a sports complex and park in a city without a sewage treatment plant or storm drainage system. Built streets to early 20th century standards. Pro-tax relief: Lowered taxes for businesses, increased tax burden on residents. Pro-small government: No. Oversaw greatest expansion of city government in Wasilla's history. Pro-labor/pro-union: No. Just because her husband works union doesn't make her pro-labor. I have seen nothing to support any claim that she is pro-labor/pro-union. WHY AM I WRITING THIS?First, I have long believed in the importance of being an informed voter. I am a voter registrar. For 10 years I put on student voting programs in the schools. If you google my name (Anne Kilkenny + Alaska), you will find references to my participation in local government, education, and PTA/parent organizations.Secondly, I've always operated in the belief that "Bad things happen when good people stay silent". Few people know as much as I do because few have gone to as many City Council meetings.Third, I am just a housewife. I don't have a job she can bump me out of. I don't belong to any organization that she can hurt. But, I am no fool; she is immensely popular here, and it is likely that this will cost me somehow in the future: that's life.Fourth, she has hated me since back in 1996, when I was one of the 100 or so people who rallied to support the City Librarian against Sarah's attempt at censorship.Fifth, I looked around and realized that everybody else was afraid to say anything because they were somehow vulnerable.CAVEATS: I am not a statistician. I developed the numbers for the increase in spending & taxation 2 years ago (when Palin was running for Governor) from information supplied to me by the Finance Director of the City of Wasilla, and I can't recall exactly what I adjusted for: did I adjust for inflation? for population increases? Right now, it is impossible for a private person to get any info out of City Hall--they are swamped. So I can't verify my numbers.You may have noticed that there are various numbers circulating for the population of Wasilla, ranging from my "about 5,000", up to 9,000. The day Palin's selection was announced a city official told me that the current population is about 7,000. The official 2000 census count was 5,460. I have used about 5,000 because Palin was Mayor from 1996 to 2002, and the city was growing rapidly in the mid-90's.Anne Kilkennyannekilkenny@hotmail.comAugust 31, 2008

[nutzbuster 7]

BTW it should be obvious why raising tax rates doesnt necessarily raise revenues, but many people dont get it. This may deserve a separate thread but this analogy should work well on this forum:Taxes are "rake". Someone who makes their living at poker playing only games where he has a positive expectation over and above the rake. He is happy to pay a reasonable rake because he recognizes that it pays for maintenance of the site and a place where everyone can gather to play and he can ply his trade.Now what happens if all sites raise the rake on all games? The professional will abandon those games where he has insufficient edge over the rake, or where variance of the games makes profits over the rake too large for his bankroll. That reduces the volume in those games, eventually to the point where there arent enough tables to justify the expense of servers dedicated to dealing the game. You also have a group of players that are small winners or breakeven against the current rake. You lose their action even in the low variance games. Finally players will ultimately start to look for "rakeback" which are really just rake reductions for high volume players, even if they get less action at the rakeback site.Now what happens if PokerStars, in pursuit of the revenue that they lost (and attributing the loss to reasons other than the rake increase) decide to raise the rake more than other sites, and above where it is profitable for someone to play at Stars. Players will abandon Stars and move to more favorable sites further reducing their revenues.These are precisely the behaviors that have been empiracally shown to occur when you raise tax rates. Low expectation/high variance games = high risk investments in innovation and technology that further drive the economy rakeback = tax shelters more favorable sites = states or countries with lower costs of doing business net of taxes

Wow...that is actually pretty good cop.

Cop,I meant pay for stuff, in regards to roads, police, govt services, etc. That's what I meant by taxes and paying for stuff.I don't disagree with a large portion of your red text in regard to my post. As far as the gun issue, as I stated, I'm not a gun guy, but I also don't think that the govt should just start collecting all guns either. If legal, legitimate people want to own a handgun for home protection or a hunting rifle (even though I don't like game hunters) , I don't have a real issue, but it starts to go wrong for me with people feeling they need to carry a gun everywhere they go. I guess they feel a need because we have no control over illegal guns. I think the penalties for carrying an unlicensed gun should be waayyyyyy stronger, but if you have a society where guns are legal, you'll never be able to keep them out of the criminal elements hands. Like I said, they aren't for me, but I get why some people feel the need to have em. I don't like it, but I get it. I'd prefer we were like England, but I don't expect people to agree. I'm almost indifferent. I'm rambling.also, I really hate poker/political analogies, even though yours was done better than most.we can agree to disagree, but I really do believe that we are on the offense in regards to our military, at least originally. It's the age old argument, but 18 hijackers on 9/11 were Saudi, yet we attacked Afghanistan, searching for OBL, then Iraq. I'm simplifying, of course.cmon, a wall? Maybe in theory, but you don't think Mexico has ladders, shovels, pick axes. A wall isn't the solution. I agree with shipping criminals out, and self deportation. Although, even though I agree in theory about fining businesses for hiring illegals, if we do that, I think the prices of things will skyrocket, fruit, sugar (here in SoFL) all kinds of services, restaurants. Any place that hires illegals. Sadly, Americans don't want those jobs for the money currently being paid and those companies won't pay a living wage to have them done by americans. If they did, it would cost $6 a pound for tomatoes. Once again, I'm simplifying, but I think the point is valid. pro choice? I think 3 months from conception is the latest for an abortion unless there are severe complications and severe ramifications for keeping the fetus.welfare - oh, I think we agree quite a bit in regards to assistance. It shouldn't go on forever. You have to take some responsibility for yourself ultimately. You can't keep having kids and stay on welfare. If a mother has three kids, then uses up her welfare, she shouldn't just be able to have another kid and hop back on. But, where do you draw the line? Let the kids starve because of the stupidity of the mother? That's my dilemmaI don't clarify myself well when I discuss this stuff on the board because I don't have your patience, but I have found that we may agree a little more than I first imagined.

The wall scenario, built here at least here in Arizona (coupled with a new aggressive law that punishes businesses that knowingly hire illegals) is working. And more will be length of it will be built soon.It seems like those two things together have seriously hampered the ability and the desire to come to Arizona. That, and dying in the desert as they walk through 120 degree heat. All a wall needs to do is slow down the border crossers, and let predetermined gaps in the barrier funnel the groups down those areas and then aggressively monitor those gaps. So far so good here, but I agree that building an actual, say, 30 foot high Berlin-esque type wall along the entire border does not seem practical.

[copernicus 0]

yes its been posted and dismissed as the unsubstantiated rant of someone with an ax to grind.Most of what she says has already been addressed in other supposed "revelations" about SP and found to be spin.If your knowledge of candidates come from emails from those with an ax to grind, without further research into the specifics I dont know what to say.

[El Guapo 8]

Here is a revlation for you all.....You are never going to agree with every thing an elected official believes. And a couple of those points in that letter if they are true are good things.Such as, she may be against gay marriage but didn't vote to deny rights (thats good right?)She is very religious, but does not promote it in schools.This shows to me (if true) that she has a certain set of values, but understands that it is not her place to force those values on others.

[Ron_Mexico 4,219]

I would prefer walking along the beach, pants rolled up to our knees, giggling when a large wave still gets them wet and splashes musky ocean surf into our glasses of Pinot Grigio.

I live 5 minutes from the Atlantic Ocean. I'm digging out my khakis as we speak.So, a wall works in AZ, what do we do in South FL? Maybe we should surround ourselves with water...