magley64

Can we send over our surplus tanks the congress keeps ordering and that we are never going to fucking use?

Just get one with a radar detector detector detector... easy peazy

Yes, entirely superficial, no deep down reasons... just seemed to be lacking in charisma and presence, his mannerisms etc...

I thought johnson was kind of a weenie, Huntsman was my favorite of the repub's other than Dr. Paul.

What does deciept mean?

I'd have expected a goat or a camel...lol

I've seen this on a number of nissans and things, one of the bulbs has a bad ground and appears to flash opposite the intended direction because it's grounding through the other bulb's bright filament...

let me get this straight... They killed him, and took a DNA sample, tested it against...(something)... to prove that it was him. Then they tossed his corpse off of a ship, and denied they did any DNA testing... Now Snowden's leak shows a budget record of a DNA test? is that what this story is saying? Also, where did they get his DNA in the first place to match it to the corpse?

I wish more people voted for him, too.... but using the term "false flag"? Really? Cmon man, that's conspiracy nut lingo for stuff like 9/11 and the boston marathon bombings, that's infowars lingo.... Say we don't have enough evidence yet to say who used the chemical weapons, sure, I'd agree with that... but "false flag" makes him sound like a nut job

I'm aware they are 2 different motivations, which is why i addressed them both. 1. doesn't solve the problem 2. costs way more

So why stop at weed? Why stop at welfare? Why not exclude all law breakers from federal and state assistance programs? Ever got a speeding ticket? GTFO and die Parking ticket? GTFO and die Jaywalked? GTFO and die No federally subsidized student loans, no pell grants, no tax deductions...

The main reason given for "drug testing welfare" is for tax payer savings... "tax payers shouldn't have to foot the bill for drug users" The fact that it actually costs more to administer the tests is pertinent because now tax payers are footing the bill for drug tests that are easily cheated AS WELL AS drug users... it doesn't solve the "tax payers shouldn't have to foot the bill for drug users" problem, or even put a big dent in it.

I'm sorry extremist has too many negative connotations for you... sexist and racist probably do, too... doesn't make it wrong, or incorrect to teach that they were in an educational setting.

I'm rather elated that history favored the colonists... but that definition stands... I don't pretend that the founding fathers weren't what they clearly were, racist, sexist, extremists hell bent on skirting their taxes. Their paperwork said otherwise, "all men created equal", when what they really meant was "all rich, white, land owners were created equal." Later, Adams put into place the electoral college, because he felt the common men were far too stupid to govern themselves... Hypocrisy aside, their measures were extreme, and would still be considered extreme to this day... the definition stands. Lincoln was an extremist as well, we all know what happened during the civil war... Now would you stop getting all butthurt because you think the word has too many negative connotations to be applied in an educational setting?

I didn't do ANY calculations, those were done by other entities... and it's not a "high horse" to understand basik maths...

Exactly as I thought... no reponse... where will your children or grandchildren be living in 70 years? Do you care? How long until it fails again? Will it continue to last 70 years before failure or will it start breaking more and more as time goes on? The answers are clear, it's an old pipeline, it will continue to crack and rupture at a faster rate because it's getting weaker over time. as for where we get our oil... only 13% comes from the middle east NOW... If there is a reasonable argument for building a NEW pipeline, it's to replace an old one, but if the keystone gets built, will they drain the pegasus and stop using it? I'm betting not, instead greed will cause them to run both until it ruptures again and needs repair, and ruptures again, they will keep repairing it until it has more repairs than original pipeline.... then the keystone will rupture... thousands of gallons of liquid shit running through suburban neighborhoods, into people's basements, rivers, lakes, and streams... and what do those people get?

Did you ever think that maybe this is the case BECAUSE it's currently illegal? otherwise alcohol would be a gateway drug...

Clinton eliminated welfare back in 96 between beejays

What if i go on vacation and visit my great uncle buck in seattle? or aunt anita twice removed in boulder? The fact that it's legal in some states now is enough reason to give up this stupid drug war... that includes drug testing. full disclosure, i got no skin in this game, never tried any illegal drugs. As others have said: high at work? GTFO, points against you, termination if apropo. Driving while high? busted, jailed, fined whatever.. What you do on your own time should be your own damn business. In a related note... http://news.yahoo.com/feds-wont-sue-stop-marijuana-2-states-173520230--politics.html

what's wrong? No answers to number 40? Is israel an oil rich country? cause the government seems to be kissing their asses all the time...

I think this is the point... most of us who work in the private sector are drug tested as part of an initial screening process for new hires, then randomly based on suspicion or "lottery" type rotation, or if we have a recordable accident at work... Government workers shouldn't be tested any more often simply because they work for the government.... you're not special, you shouldn't have special requirements.

where will your children or grandchildren be living in 70 years? How long until it fails again? Will it continue to last 70 years before failure or will it start breaking more and more as time goes on? as for where we get our oil... only 13% comes from the middle east NOW...

Are we talking about americans or syrians? also how does "saving a couple cents per gallon" equate to "responding in force to war crimes" Is it worth risking the property/health/safety of everyday american people to pump liquid shit under their back yard to make gasoline a "little" cheaper (if at all)? is it worth firing a bunch of missiles at military bases in syria in response to war crimes allegedly committed by that government? Those are 2 completely different issues, to pretend they are the same is absurd.

that's exactly why I was asking, I'd love to see some hard numbers, i really would love to compare the apples to the oranges, but I can't find ANY studies so far that actually say the price will go down by more than 2 cents...

https://www.google.com/search?q=keysone+xl+gas+prices&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=keystone+xl+gas+prices&rls=org.mozilla:en-US%3Aofficial&safe=off page after page after page keystone XL "raises" gas prices, by most estimates 40 cents per gallon... and notice nowhere in the search terms did i put the words raise or lower as to skew the results one way or the other... the first result i could find of it "lowering" gas prices was a quote from a texas politician, wonder where most of his campaign contributions come from... big oil maybe?