Previous -2 - 4
In response to:

Let Obama Play the Iran Hand

Stephen37 Wrote: Nov 29, 2013 3:49 PM
They currently have 220 kg's of 20% uranium. The jump from that to 90% is a matter of days, hours in some cases with the new centrifuges that they are currently installing. That is enough for about 1/2 dozen bombs.
In response to:

Let Obama Play the Iran Hand

Stephen37 Wrote: Nov 29, 2013 3:47 PM
Apparently you simply have not been paying attention. Virtually everything in their nuclear program is intended for military use, including the billions they have spent hardening their facilities and building air defense systems around them. They have already begun testing ICBM's, and can currently target all of the capitals of Europe (not to mention of course, Israel and Saudi Arabia). They went to solid fuel rocket systems several years ago, which means we can no longer locate their missiles with satellites or heat signatures. Always good to have the facts.
In response to:

Let Obama Play the Iran Hand

Stephen37 Wrote: Nov 29, 2013 3:45 PM
Or North Korea?
In response to:

Let Obama Play the Iran Hand

Stephen37 Wrote: Nov 29, 2013 3:44 PM
Wait, Pat Buchanan expressing his antisemitism again? Phew, I can set my watch. It must be the half hour.
I don't generally disagree with stuff you write but "Hunters have done more for animals than any animal rights group ever has" is absolutely absurd on it's face and destroys the credibility of anything else in the article. Why taint what seems to be a valid point with ridiculous, easily, quantifiable hyperbole? Talk to the Wildlife Conservations Society, or the National Geographic Society, or any of the dozens of other conservation groups who work specifically and WITH the preserves in Africa and elsewhere before making that kind of statement.
You really are confused about just about everything, no offense, although I'm sure you'll take it anyway, but your whole military budget rant has the intellectual depth of a 3rd grader. Far and away the largest problem we have now is servicing our own debt, and that is growing daily. The fact that interest rates are being kept artificially low simply hides the problem as does the fact that the NATIONAL (not federal) debt is now over 60 Trillion and the Federal unfunded liabilities are 113 Trillion, more money than currently exists on the planet. Which is why your government is trying to inflate its way out of the situation by printing money. A unique ability that you or I do not have. As for "Wall St." you might want to take a gander at the donations to each party. Barack Obama's "average" contribution was the largest in history, and he received more money from Wall St than any candidate in history. "Wall St" is not dumb, they donate to both parties to cover all bases. But nice try.
In response to:

None Dare Call It Fascism

Stephen37 Wrote: Nov 17, 2013 12:05 AM
Do you even understand the illogic of your statement? If they "pander" to millionaires and billionaires (just how many do you think there are of either?) who don't pay income taxes, why would the party want a reduction of income taxes? The hard cold facts are curious things, they don't lie. Government receipts, (tax money from you and me and the millionaires and billionaires) sets records every year. That's right, the government is getting MORE money. Now, those receipts have shown to expand MORE when taxes go DOWN. However, for now, that's not the point. The point is if government income is going up, why is the debt still rising and why are we running massive deficits every year (which would also be setting records if not for the mandatory slowing of growth brought by "sequestration")? THAT is the issue. A better question might be, why, if Obama and other Progressives who believe in "social justice" do they seem to contribute so little to charity? Because in their warped view, they thing the government can do it better. Any 3rd grader knows, the more levels of bureaucracy is involved in a decision (and not just government bureaucracy, but any) the less efficient it becomes. So, they are choosing more expensive, less efficient ways of helping people. And more importantly they are telling you, me and everyone else who to help, and how to do it, rather than letting us all make our own choices.
Previous -2 - 4