>Such as it isn't perjury because of why perjury was committed and/or because it was Clinton, yet Scooter gets hung for trying to answer the interrogator's questions.
Dude, legally, if someone lies about something immaterial to a case, it isn't perjury.
Fitzgerald knows who leaked Plame's name to the media before interviewing Libby.
> Scooter would have been better to have used the Hillary defense: "I cannot recall".
Isn't that the Reagan defense, and the Gonzales defense too?
Again, Fitsgerald's "investigation" for whoever leaked Plame's name was already over before it started.
>Or Exxon is bad because President Bush and Cheney are oilmen.
That's not the reason Exxon is bad.
Then you should buy Citgo products. Why is Exxon bad? Because, as in the hate for Walmart, they are bad because they are the biggest?
>Or Walmart is bad because they have successfully blocked unions, while at the same time, driving some of their unionized competitors out of business.
Yeah, that's pretty bad.
I think you would have a problem at defining "badness".
<i?>Yet Microsoft gets a free pass while gouging customers at 30% margins.
I'm not giving them a free pass. The DOJ certainly went after them in the '90s... how quickly we forget.
Yes, Microsoft is not anywhere near the giant they were 10 years ago having been destroyed by Clinton.
>I cannot seriously consider any politician justifying tax increases by saying the government is broke.
Looking at your examples of waste, they pale in comparison to the hundreds of billions of dollars going down the tube every year in military spending.
Besides, while I don't like some of the waste that does go on, the existence of some waste, or even a lot of waste, doesn't justify not funding important social programs.
The politicians here are "spending like drunkard sailors". The people here have had enough and have rejected every proposed tax increase since. Nationally, I'd say 24% pork is not pale. The discussion should be cutting wasteful programs before taking more of my money and giving it to the same people who thought their waste was more important than your important social programs. You're more engaged with raising my taxes than cutting the waste are you not?
>The democrats' solution with their $124 billion military spending bill is "well, if Mr Bush is going to blow money, we're going to join him and blow the peoples' tax money too" by adding 24% unnecessary pork to it.
IIRC, most of the extra money was to pay for reconstruction in New Orleans, something really important that can't seem to get funded any other way. And no, I don't like the peanut stuff, either.
New Orleans? Haven't heard that one. It may be that there is money for the Corps of Engineers to upgrade New Orleans. The Corps of Engineers are part of the military falling under the Department of the Army.
>The choice for me today is Bush cutting taxes and fighting terrorism or the democrats raising taxes and funding their special interest projects, in addition to cutting our security needs.
And it's a false dilemma.
Not in the majority of Americans' view considering the democrats are afraid of stopping the war in Iraq.
>Corporations that have employees benefit society.
When properly regulated, and when they don't leave those employees and their families without healthcare and a proper education.
When you hire someone to mow your yard, we should hold you responsible to the same standard. You do remember Maryland requiring special rules for Walmart only in their state? Walmart isn't holding a gun to any employee's head to work for them. They are more than welcome to work at McDonalds for less money without benefits.
>Walmart here pays about a buck more an hour than any burger flippin joint.
But waaaaay less than the kinds of jobs that the people who work there would've thirty years ago.
I grew up pumping gas at a service station after school. That job no longer exists. There are a few left in a couple of states where unions have convinced the government that they need rules to prevent people from pumping their own gas. That sucks. At what point is government protected jobs unnecessary? Subsidizing mole hair farms? Farm subsidies? Teacher tenure?
>If the efforts to destroy Walmart were focused on decreasing outsourcing, I think the benefit to Americans would be greater.
Destroying Wal-mart isn't necessary; we just need to keep them from destroying our Main Streets and wage scales. And yes, as I said earlier, outsourcing is bad for us and we need to do something about that, too.
Again, you're not concerned about McDonald's or other companys' pay scales that are lower than Walmarts? The "Robinhood" mentality of portraying the largest as the worst is another example of the end justifies the means as I perceive liberals projecting. I don't know what business you are in, but if your company could underbid a competitor, would you want the government keeping you from winning? I think the devil would be in the details of nuancing government protected jobs.
>I've noticed over the past few months Walmart has been raising prices, so I start my errands by going to Dollar General first.
And if Wal-Mart manages to put Dollar General out of business?
I'll shop at Walmart. If Walmart's price is not what I expect, I'll not shop at Walmart.
>I don't recall your suggestion for what Israel should do.
I'm not sure why Israel exists in the first place, but now that it does, I'd like it to either decide to give every inhabitant of the West Bank and Gaza the vote or to give both territories up, and I'd like it to not leave a million people homeless because a militant group captured two soldiers.
Where are those two soldiers today? Iranian sponsored "militants" must not be allowed to operate at will. If I was Israel, I would have already been lobbing a few at Tehran and asking Tehran "when would you like this to stop?"
>I propose that if Israel would disappear tomorrow, the Muslims in the middle east would continue fighting and hating the west. If Scotty or Geordi would show up with power converters for everyone, violent Islam would continue to grow.
I think that's false. Israel isn't the only reason we're disliked over there. Dude, the West has been screwing with the Middle East for a thousand years. You don't think that has anything to do with the problems there?
No I don't. The middle east was peaceful before the West started screwing with it? There bad people everywhere. Look at the "problems" in the US. The problems of crime in Detroit is not your fault is it? No, it's the fault of the bad people perpetrating those crimes. Society is growing more violent because the violent are allowed to continue being violent by leaders making excuses dismissing responsibility for their behavior.
Do you think a "timeout" in the corner for Timmy really is punishment? |
