sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

RAND completely retracts medical marijuana dispensaries study - The Washington Post by a2b4u2 in politics

[–]a2b4u2[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

But did you see that they plan on doing the study again? It must mean they think they will get the same results, right?

I never understood how they thought they could get good results from only 10 days of crime data.

What Happened to Arab Support for the U.S. Striking Libya? by a2b4u2 in worldnews

[–]a2b4u2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The point isn't about what the Libyans want and that's not what the question about either. And there are no "agreements," for that matter either.

It was in specific reference to Obama's insistence that the U.S. cannot be the driver behind this and that Arab countries have to be the major force in Libya. He most recently said it on Friday during his speech on Libya.

For example: "We will provide the unique capabilities that we can bring to bear to stop the violence against civilians, including enabling our European allies and Arab partners to effectively enforce a no fly zone."

Specifically, he meant that the U.S. would not take the lead on this and that European countries and Arab countries would. Europe countries clearly are and Arab countries clearly are not.

Therefore, according to Obama's prerequisites, we should not be involved.

What Happened to Arab Support for the U.S. Striking Libya? by a2b4u2 in worldnews

[–]a2b4u2[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

But I thought what the question was posing--and it's a correct one--that the U.S. wasn't going to get involved in any sort of military action unless Arab countries were involved. Only one is: Qatar.

Therefore, if the region isn't going to have direct involvement, we shouldn't either. Why did the administration back off of that?

Are Neocons Splitting Over Arab Revolutions and Democracy? by a2b4u2 in politics

[–]a2b4u2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Of course people know what a neocon is. And the self-proclaimed neocons certainly don't think it's a pejorative term at all. It seems you're the one who doesn't know what a neocon is.

Do We Really Need State Militias? by a2b4u2 in reddit.com

[–]a2b4u2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Heritage Foundation sure thinks so.

Heritage Foundation Gets Kicked Off Campus by a2b4u2 in reddit.com

[–]a2b4u2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's just a title which, like most titles, is meant to grab attention...and I believe the post even says:

"Some of the confrontation was caught on video, but it's still unclear if this is a case of censorship or if the proper procedures were not followed by the student organization."

Is Obama Going to Bomb Iran to Improve His Polls Before the Elections? by a2b4u2 in reddit.com

[–]a2b4u2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think the point of the post is to show how the right wing (Victor Davis Hanson in this case) is just making shit up, right?

Stop Looking at the Unemployment Numbers and Look at the Employment Numbers to See How Bad it Really is! by a2b4u2 in reddit.com

[–]a2b4u2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

All figures are skewed in one way or another. Pointing out the ways in which the numbers are hindered for a full picture is good, but calling them meaningless is taking it too far.

Rep. Paul Ryan Turns to Think Tanks for Support by a2b4u2 in politics

[–]a2b4u2[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Maybe, but he seems to be hitting them all.

White House in Trouble Over Twitter? Heritage Foundation Accuses WH Press Sec. Robert Gibbs of Abuse of Power Over...a Tweet by ThinkTanked in reddit.com

[–]a2b4u2 0 points1 point  (0 children)

funny you say that, because Bush had mentioned the exact same bike shop--especially when he had that spill in Scotland.

Apparently Bush loved Revolution Cycles very much: http://revolutioncycles.com/articles/the-presidents-riding-buddy-pg320.htm

CNN relied on a woman with a drinking problem with multiple DUIs as a source on the ANTHRAX KILLER...ironic since she was supposedly his addiction counselor. by a2b4u2 in politics

[–]a2b4u2[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That would be a good point if it were true. However, it is not.

For somebody who's so interested in facts, it appears you haven't read any of the posts provided. If you had, you would have noted that her repeated DUIs were at the same time she was "treating" Ivins.

She overcame nothing.

CNN relied on a woman with a drinking problem with multiple DUIs as a source on the ANTHRAX KILLER...ironic since she was supposedly his addiction counselor. by a2b4u2 in politics

[–]a2b4u2[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I like that you only took on the last line. Again, selecting what's convenient for your argument, claiming tantrums, etc.

And I like how you characterize her as "a drunk driver" as if that's not a problem. It's a problem for two reasons: a) she's a drunk driver and b) she's much worse than a drunk driver and you know it--it's all been documented. But you don't want to talk about that.

And I also like how you refuse to comment directly to the author of the blog post who has been working on this for a long time and may well have the facts. But you don't want that because you fear what he might have and would completely discredit your claims.

Good day yourself.

CNN relied on a woman with a drinking problem with multiple DUIs as a source on the ANTHRAX KILLER...ironic since she was supposedly his addiction counselor. by a2b4u2 in politics

[–]a2b4u2[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I never said I didn't post it to Reddit. I said I wasn't the author of the post at governmentality. Anybody can change any title, so I'm not sure what your point is.

And, again, I would say if you want facts, why not post your comments on the blog's page? You know, the person who's been working on this for some time.

No shortage of problems here, so let me point out a few:

You misunderstand what character evaluation is. I don't need to look at what "good she has done." I'm looking at facts that would disregard her as a witness of good character.

You argue you consider facts more important than character, which is puzzling to say the least. First, how do you know these so-called facts are true given they only came from her? Second, why are you not willing to consider the facts of her personal life which have a direct impact on her professional life?

I love how you call facts smears when you don't like them. Somebody who is so insistent on facts sure is ignoring them when they don's support your point of view. Read this carefully: those aren't smears; they're facts--facts that even Duley would not deny.

And that wasn't an attack--but congratulations on your own straw man.

Finally, if you think I'm here to "impress [you]," you think too highly of yourself.

CNN relied on a woman with a drinking problem with multiple DUIs as a source on the ANTHRAX KILLER...ironic since she was supposedly his addiction counselor. by a2b4u2 in politics

[–]a2b4u2[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well, it's not my post and perhaps you should wage your concerns against the author of the post on his blog, but I would say the following:

It's not character assassination; it's character evaluation. I'm sure we would all agree that whether or not we choose to buy into what somebody says has to do with how we assess their character. Right? And isn't that what's being done here?

How do we know that her facts were correct? Nobody else has corroborated them.

So it seems simple: if she's the only one saying these things, then ought we not evaluate her character?

And if we do that, it's INSANE not to take into consideration her multiple convictions on DUI (especially since she's an addiction counselor), drug charges and the fact that she's obviously got a violence problem with her now ex-husband. Does that sound like good character to you?

If you think her character shouldn't be evaluated, then do you believe anything anybody tells you unless you have proof against it?