RV ME

Dude seriously, stop digging. Unless your goal is to make a complete fool of yourself, you are failing miserably. I am not sure I have seen anyone more in need of Preparation H because their butt burned so bad from being wrong. Attacking me when I responded to Shabs probably wasn’t the wisest thing to do, but intelligence does not seem to be your strong suit. So please, try to pay attention. In your continued quest to attack me for the simple fact of pointing out you were wrong, you respond to something I did not even say, to you or to Shabs for that matter. I said you made a contradictory statement, which means the first part of what you said was diametrically opposed to the latter portion of your statement. That being said, I assume you know the difference between contradictory and controversial. If not, my bad for the assumption. I should remember the old rule about assumption, “it makes an ass out of you and umption”. So if past performance is indicative of future results I am sure this will cause you to respond. When you do you might try to remember a basic rule of good humor in that is there needs to be a basis of truth for the humor to work, without that you just appear to be bitter and vengeful. Not sure how you exposed me as a “vehement Democrat in Republican clothing”, but somehow in your mind you did so you should feel proud of yourself. The humorous part about that is, to everyone else, it just makes you look like an imbecile in intellectual clothing, but you do wear it well (see how it works ).

No, I am vehemently defending EVERY word. What I find humorous is that we both know if I had said something as contradictory as what NYK said, you would be all over me like stink on a turd. But since we can’t agree on which direction the sun comes up, you had to recuse yourself and stay on the sidelines Gotta check out now, getting ready for the first leg of a long road trip.

Well, your attempted defense of the indefensible worked about as well as your attempt at humor. Failure on both counts. You do realize that when my response quoted you, that means that you did say what I quoted, that is why it is called a “quote”. There is no “perhaps” regarding what I referred to. The only perhaps has been your inability to accept the fact that you were wrong blinded you to what you actually said. If you had not said that the Gals “can’t” say something I never would have responded. You also said you did not want to be arbiter of what can be said, yet here you are again setting yourself up as the speech police. What written rule are you talking about? The one that says you can’t use the N word? Who wrote that rule that you are trying to enforce? The only written rule I know of regarding the subject is in the Constitution. So my diminutive free speech supporter, do you realize how much your latest response has in common with the Perverted Islamic Terrorists? Sounds like it could come from any PIT since they state (just like you did) that people can not say anything derogatory about their religion, lest you be beheaded. Totally acceptable to the religion of peace, but not to those of us who actually do support free speech.

You were the only one making the claim that someone else could not say something. Not should not, but could not. Big difference there and I am surprised you can’t see that difference. You can decide for yourself and for whatever reason that you can’t say something. That is your right and does nothing to stifle free speech. But when you say that someone else can’t say something (which is exactly what you did) then you are promoting the antithesis of free speech. Not really any more complicated than that.

You could not be more wrong on this one. Freedom of speech does indeed give a person the right to denigrate, or appreciate, another based on their race, or looks, or nationality, left handedness, or any other thing a person can think of. Political correctness does not allow such things but free speech does. The PC crowd has taken the famous phrase “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”, stood it on it’s head and now are more than willing to incarcerate speech offenders. Sorry for the bad things that happened to you earlier in life, but that does not set you up as the arbiter of what freedom of speech is or is not.

Thanks HD, and a blessed day to you and yours as we celebrate our Nation’s birth.

Maybe there is a third option Have a good and safe 4th my friend

Did not realize you could have a conscious that could be so compartmentalized to only include the specific scope of your work and ignore the entire organization you are a part of. Your attempted support for Chen really does not hold up to scrutiny when Chen tweets For those who truly care about #ethics, ignoring our current #conductatthetop requires abandonment of conscience. No, it appears that Chen has a problem with ethics and conduct at the top. I see nothing about the ethics or her conscious being limited in scope to corporate corruption, and since Chen had no problem working in the previous corrupt to the core administration, her stated objections make one question where her conscious has been since starting in 2015.

I guess Chen was hard of hearing the last two years. If not, her conscious was AOWL while working for the previous administration. Since Chen obviously had no problem working in the Obummer (UN)Justice Department I believe her current contempt is more on a personal level rather than professional. If the complete lack of ethics displayed by Obummer and Lynch was not cause for concern at the time, then this is just another example of TDS .

If I and my wife die in a tragic car crash and my children are all adults, what happens to all the earnings I was forced to send to Washington? I will agree that Social Security was sold as your individual earned investment retirement account, but every polytick who has come down the pike knew it wasn’t so. Even SCOTUS has ruled you have no right to those funds other than what Congress grants you, and that is subject to change with the polytickal winds. The “pact” made with the polyticks (devil?) has been revised and amended multiple times in order to keep up the charade, and always to the detriment of those who actually earned it. The “bonds” used as markers are unlike other bonds in that they have no market value, again other than what Congress ways they are worth. And since the cost of paying off those bonds are not included in the budget / debt, does anyone really believe they will be repaid? I will somewhat agree that you pay into the “retirement fund” through payroll taxes, but your employer does not pay half. Again, the polyticks success in framing the terms. As someone who is self-employed I do pay both halves of the tax for myself. But as an employer must calculate the total cost of an employee including SS and Medicaid (and insurance, 401K match, unemployment insurance). The employee may not look at these taxes as part of their salary, but in effect the polyticks just have the employers paying half of your taxes without you ever touching the money. As an employer I would rather pay this money to the people working for me, not send it to Washington. As NS pointed out, the “retirement” program has morphed into a “disability” program ripe for the scamming. Obummerphones has a 40% fraud rate, at minimum. I submit that would not be unusual for any government “giveaway” program, and that is now what SS has become. Just another wedge the polyticks can use to keep us divided / in line. Once given it can’t be taken back. Proof being every election cycle one polytick accuses another of taking away your social security. When my father and I were cleaning out my grandfathers basement after he passed, I found a photo of FDR signing the SS bill he had framed and saved. I asked my father if I could keep it and he asked why. I told him it is a great hope of mine to have this picture displayed alongside a picture of the President who signs the bill ending SS and bringing an end to this error. I really have no expectation of this happening, but it is genuinely what I want.

The Polyticks have learned and learned well that once "The Government” "gives" someone something it can’t be taken back. Never mind if it is unsustainable (Social Security, Obummercare, welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, ET. Al.), a polytick can’t risk being thrown off the gravy train by doing the right thing. Even though every one of these “giveaway” programs are wrought with fraud and abuse, they must continue. Worse than the bad parents that give their children everything (except perhaps discipline), the polyticks 0use oth0er people’s money for the same purpose. With the same results. And I find it quite telling that the polytick McCaskill can’t blame the citizens that are defrauding all of us who actually pays a phone bill, but rather blames the blames the phone companies. RV ME Massive Fraud In Obamaphone Program By Rick Moran The scandal-plagued program initiated by President Obama that provides phones and internet service to poor people is beset with massive waste, fraud, and abuse, according to a three year study by the General Accountability Office. The government watchdog conducted the review at the behest of Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill. They found that 36% of participants were probably not eligible to recieve the benefit. Breitbart: GAO investigators sampled the program’s population and found that it had been paying for nearly 6,400 phones for people whom the government has listed as deceased; another 5,500 people were enrolled for two phones, and another group of people couldn’t prove they were eligible to receive their free phone. “A complete lack of oversight is causing this program to fail the American taxpayer — everything that could go wrong is going wrong,” McCaskill said in a statement. “We’re currently letting phone companies cash a government check every month with little more than the honor system to hold them accountable, and that simply can’t continue.” Originally conceived during the Reagan administration, Lifeline was initially meant to provide poor people with a phone in case of an emergency or, as time went on, to apply for a job. Administered by the Federal Communications Commission, Lifeline requires telecommunication companies (At&t, Verizon, Sprint) to pay a percentage of their voice service revenues into a pool called the Universal Service Fund that is administered by an independent nonprofit company called the Universal Service Administrative Company. Telecom companies pass on the cost of their contributions to consumers, whose monthly bill includes a “universal service fee” charge. The three-year GAO investigation found that the program has put away more than “$9 billion, as of September 2016 outside the Department of the Treasury in a private bank account.” A spokesman for FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, who had already put the dubious program under review, said the “GAO report confirms that waste, fraud, and abuse are all too prevalent in the program.” “Chairman Pai looks forward to working with his colleagues to crack down on the unscrupulous providers that abuse the program because every dollar that is spent on subsidizing somebody who doesn’t need the help by definition does not go to someone who does,” Pai’s spokesman added. President Reagan started the program at a time when there were no smart phones and few cell phones. The idea was to get the big telephone companies to supply land line phones to the poor for emergency use. Since no taxpayer money was being used for the phones themselves, it seemed to be an acceptable partnership between the government and private businesses. But like almost all government programs, this one got out of control. The explosion in wireless communications made it ridicuously easy to defraud the companies until today, nearly 2 in 5 participants in the program are not eligible. Ultimately, the government is responsible for the administration of the program. The FCC has been lax in the past in oversight, but with a new chairman dedicated to rooting out fraudsters, that's going to change. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2017/07/report_massive_fraud_in_obamaphone_program.html

What exactly do you mean by life saved by breast cancer screening? As always, just my enquiring mind wanting to know.

When I saw the headline I thought it was from one of the drivebys. Headline should be SCOTUS slaps down 9th Circus AGAIN and rules Trumps immigration policy legal and Constitutional.

Their strategy was exposed in the East Anglia U email hack which shined the light of truth on these cockroaches. Unfortunately, the True Believers have been successful in their indoctrination over these many years in convincing their followers to suspend critical thinking and place their faith in the Church of AGW. These brain dead followers will not consider, let alone allow, any information that runs counters their faith. But since they are incapable of intellectually defending their faith, they must attack anyone who strays from the flock. Worse yet, they must destroy anyone attempting to lead their Believers from said flock. The True Believers have already floated the idea of jailing us knuckle draggers if we will not join the flock, so what harm could a lying peer review paper do?