gpatt0n

BS back at you. I never once mentioned the drunk off-duty copy arresting the female soldier. As far as the Ferguson allegation that I judged the officer guilty, I was not judging him guilty, I was stating the implications of the eyewitness testimony from multiple sources that you so totally discounted and suggested that there ought to be a very public inquiry - even so much as a required indictment when an officer shoots an unarmed person to death ... which I can state with certainty represents a common phrase amongst officers ... which is simply, "tell it to the judge." pubby P

There will always be those who abuse our trust and they must be discovered and rooted from public service. Because there will always be weak and immoral people, the only way for a system to retain trust is to blow the whistle and insist on facts as the arbiter of truth. Loss of trust is the natural outcome of adopting a strategy of polarization. Let me share my thinking. It is not that say polarization destroys trust instantly. It doesn't. What polarization does is attempt to cast any act, error or wise policy and no matter how innocent or appropriate, as a part of a vast conspir

The fallacy in this entire debate is the notion, basically presented by the right, that all things are either perfectly good or perfectly bad .... the whole black and white conundrum. That grossly oversimplified reality is behind the notion that if a cop shoots a person like in Ferguson Mo. it must have been a good shooting because cops are perfect. I don't see folks like TP asserting, for instance, that all cops are corrupt ... only that some are and you take can't take the assertion that they are always right to bank. Frankly, it is just as bad, for instance, to think that all

I see that is a theme and one possible angle you could take with the article which is a broad brush approach which, as stated, opens the door for broader discussion. Your treatment of the topic in the opening post is to defend the Army directly but not so much the other branches of the service. I see this as a common exhibition of loyalty to the service branch from which you come and IMO, your statement of statistics did seem to throw the Navy, Marines and Air Force under the bus. I saw it was a particularly strong criticism of the other services in part because of the success of fol

Zorro: We both know that the purpose of this post, like so many from both the left and the right here, is to support the meme promoted by the poster. The idea is that only a portion of the readers will actually view the topic post ... rather the reader gets the short, distorted message from the title and go no further - usually accepting the 'reinforcement' that message gives to the readers existing point of view. Hence, the legitimate question posed by CC stating he didn't understand what your post had to do with the topic title either. pubby

Contemporaneous unsolicited comments in this case taken within ten minutes of the incident - long before anyone could charge collusion in generating a story - have relevance in the public discussion because they may be predictive of what their sworn testimony of additional eye witnesses may say in front of the Grand Jury but also in open court if the issue is ever prosecuted. Its importance in the 'court of public opinion is this public utterance by someone who may also have been an eye witness seems to corroborate the public accounts of the dead youth's compatriot and a couple of black w

Got a complaint from the OP regarding the inclusion of the video highlighting the actions of a police officer. The OP opened the door to this post being relevant, IMO, by the broad nature of the topic's title: How The Flames of Racism Continue to Be Fueled By Those In The Liberal News Media Had the topic title been more restrictive - i.e. Army accused of racism in USA Today - bogus charge ... which is the obvious intent of the OP's post, his complaint would be justified. But given the broad-brush of the title offered for the topic, the notion that the topic is or should be limited to

PS: Guard dad ... I've been insulted by your posts in the past as well. Indeed, your posts in this topic I find insulting and I've been insulted by TP's posts as well. If I start denying one posting privileges because of me being insulted, there is actually a pretty long list of folks that would lose the privilege. The vast majority of people who have been banned - and there a some - were actually saying LOUDLY that they wanted to be 'banned' because they had been warned many times and decided to jump right in my face. And as far as groups ... there is ample proof - written proof - t

This reply was copied from another topic that was closed by a mod while I was posting it. It seems appropriate in this topic. to put it into a little context, below is the closing scene to the movie Judgment at Nuremberg. The scene is between Bert Lancaster, who played Ernst Yanning and Spencer Tracy who played the chief justice in the war-trial movie. The brass in America was interested in 'letting' folks like these off having dealt with the really brutal beasts. Janning was a widely published and respected jurist whose service preceded the descent of Germany into nazism. Tracy had ren

Yes, the topic in question was closed while I was posting to it. This topic was closed before I decided to post to it. I'll sell anyone a membership that will allow them to post in closed topics for $200,000 ... which is what bought me the privilege. pubby

It was during the civil war that the profit of war became a purpose for war. Americans were for the longest time pacifists and really had no desire for saw no benefit of war. The profits from the Civil War did start with its end and the result was the extended time of reconstruction, which lasted about a decade (and for all practical purposes was an occupation.) There was a lull and then progressive reform which included the civil service system (to replace the spoils system) of the 1829-1880 period. The growing influence of monied interests, trusts, etc. also put us in to wars in the

We knew that Zimmerman was a stupid jackass who wants to be a badass ... who chose Trayvon as his victim because he figured he could get away with killing a black... so he did choose him because he was 'black.' pubby

So you agree with the airport, (you said transportation is one of the functions you recognize) but not the movie studio. So let me ask you this, are you also against the tax subsidies that the conservative Republican Deal Administration and overwhelmingly Republican General Assembly have given to the movie industry? What good would those subsidies if there were no local facilities to encourage that activity the state Republicans have made such an effort to attract? So I guess all you folks are going to vote against Gov. Deal because of his effort to bring the movie business to Geor

Well Glassdogs ... if I were to start limiting speech as you suggest, where would I stop? to put it into a little context, below is the closing scene to the movie Judgment at Nuremberg. The scene is between Bert Lancaster, who played Ernst Yanning and Spencer Tracy who played the chief justice in the war-trial movie. The brass in America was interested in 'letting' folks like these off having dealt with the really brutal beasts. Janning was a widely published and respected jurist whose service preceded the descent of Germany into nazism. Tracy had rendered his judgment on Lancaster and g

Actually, that started back 200 years ago when the folks in NY looked at the maps and saw they could dig a 60 mile trench, design a new-fangled thing called locks, fill it with water and cut the Canadians out of the trade route from the midwest. It was called the Erie Canal. The government, BTW, also funded the railroads in the 1860s and 70s by granting them wide swaths of land around the rail road tracks. Heck the government, to improve transportation even fomented revolutions (Panama) in order to steal land to build canals so shipping companies could get goods to market from the Pacifi

The attorneys from Delta who made all sorts of allegations that the meetings were violations of open meeting laws, that the decision to let the bond for the expansion of the taxiway was 'a gift to a private company' ... and all that kind of jazz that was repeated as fact and proof that the whole airport project was somehow corrupt to its core. You didn't have to Tundra... all you had to do was point to the court case where the attorneys from Delta made the allegation for you. That was the 'beauty' of the disinformation campaign because they sounded like they knew what they were

Published on Sep 12, 2014 Smithfield Foods, the world’s largest pork producer, was acquired by a Chinese firm in 2013 for nearly $5 billion -- more than the company’s market value. The surprising purchase caused some lawmakers to wonder if there might be a hidden player. As part of the series Food for 9 Billion, Nathan Halverson of the Center for Investigative Reporting examines how the Chinese government is involved. Published on Sep 12, 2014 Airbags are a major defense for car passengers in an accident. But airbags supplied by the Takata Corporation to several

You have to know I cried when you moved ... Seriously, your contribution in those was great. I don't type fast enough to do it and I don't think with the current radio system that it can even be done. pubby

I think it would be helpful to remember that from 2008 through roughly 2013, Georgia has not been the location of rapid economic growth that we all had become accustomed in the period from 1990-2007. For an analogy of a sort, did you know that the Empire State Building didn't fill enough of its office suits to break even from its opening in 1932 until 1952. The tallest building in the world in one of the largest cities in the world ... Timing has more to do with the lack of jobs generated at that facility than anything else. The 'new reality' that happened as a result of the 2007-2010 wor

Author and motivational speaker John Delves spoke about the importance of getting and maintaining trust in a presentation that highlights his latest book: Believe Me Trust Works. Click for RECENT TOPICS click for RECENT TOPICS click for RECENT TOPICS

Troutman-Sanders huh? So we'll be going from $185/hr to $500-$750/hr for our legal help. Oh, and they'd have to pay mileage too! Brilliant ... absolutely brilliant plan (not) ... or to borrow Whitey's term ... bonehead So who promised the tony law firm the contract ... Todd or Tony? and are they already being wined and dined how many times a week? pubby

There is an effort to make medical marijuana available in Georgia. There are currently hearings under the Gold Dome. While nothing like the regime in California, the effort here would be highly restrictive in terms of the aliments that would be covered. Here is a press release from the Georgia House of Representatives. Notably, our own Micah Gravley is on the joint house/senate special committee conducting hearings into the issue. pubby PS: I actually didn't grasp until I checked this email release closely that Rep. Gravley is on the committee. May have to contact hi

This is generally true. But why? Why? Why didn't the Brits and French not keep their word? Could it be they coveted the oil laying beneath the sands. No, the British or Americans are not, as a nation, covetous people. But wait, corporations that contribute heavily to campaigns and have established themselves at the top of the trough are not so noble. pubby

Actually, I think you're not terribly clear on the history. For instance, the Arabs were our allies in the war against the Axis. The Brits and the US rewarded them by giving into our domestic political issues in the wake of the holocaust by taking a part of Palestine and giving it to the Zionists telling them they can have it if they can keep it. That was in 1947 and it solved the problem we had with the Jews in our respective countries; particularly in light of the Holocaust. BTW the Brits; who are complicit in this whole 'Imperialistic' fiasco, also engineered the overthrow of the

Obstructionist Democrats? I thought they all lost in 2010. pubby