Forums » Off-Topic
Indeed. o.o
A few blocks north, sure
Uh, no, unless you mean tribeca, to the north and west. Straight north from, say, broad and water is nothing but tourist city. The southern tip of manhattan, around financial below wall street and battery park is pretty sweet.
Uh, no, unless you mean tribeca, to the north and west. Straight north from, say, broad and water is nothing but tourist city. The southern tip of manhattan, around financial below wall street and battery park is pretty sweet.
Maybe I just get to see it at the wrong times :| I get in at 9am, get out by 9pm.
It's pretty dead late nights and weekends, since most of the bankers, traders, and lawyers aren't in financial then. I like it because when it is open, there's fewer people. If I really want to deal with crowds, there's always east village/alphabet city bars and midtown.
That's news? Every election a story like that comes up on one or another of the candidates. Do you know the price of gas? It changes every other day. The only reason I know is because I filled up ten minutes ago. 16 gallons at $4.06 is $65. Ask me tomorrow and I won't know what the price of gas is, not for sure.
Past elections it's been things like milk, etc. It's not a sign of being out of touch, though McCain surely is (so is Barack Hussein Obama). Focusing on something stupid like this is counter-productive. The price of gas = high, that's all that matters on that topic. The debate should be what is the plan, not who knows the price. The only plan that will work (and no one has a short term plan, period) is drilling in the gulf/continental shelf/ANWR, plus building more refineries, and also reducing the taxes on gas.
Government price gouges, not "Big Oil." In fact, Exxon-Mobile is getting out of the retail gas business, because high prices make it unprofitable. Indian reservations, being tax-exempt, can afford to sell their gas for five to ten cents less per gallon, yet make 30 to 40 cents profit as opposed to the typical three cents at a typical station. That should tell you who's really price gouging: Big Government.
Past elections it's been things like milk, etc. It's not a sign of being out of touch, though McCain surely is (so is Barack Hussein Obama). Focusing on something stupid like this is counter-productive. The price of gas = high, that's all that matters on that topic. The debate should be what is the plan, not who knows the price. The only plan that will work (and no one has a short term plan, period) is drilling in the gulf/continental shelf/ANWR, plus building more refineries, and also reducing the taxes on gas.
Government price gouges, not "Big Oil." In fact, Exxon-Mobile is getting out of the retail gas business, because high prices make it unprofitable. Indian reservations, being tax-exempt, can afford to sell their gas for five to ten cents less per gallon, yet make 30 to 40 cents profit as opposed to the typical three cents at a typical station. That should tell you who's really price gouging: Big Government.
"(so is Barack Hussein Obama)" I really hope that's you attempting irony. If so, you actually kind of impress me (in that at least now I know you're not a total sucker for Right is Right)!
If you're commenting on my use of Obama's middle name, I use it and emphasize it because he hates it so much when people do that.
I go with conservatism every time, but my supposedly conservative Republican party thinks it's a good idea to nominate a liberal, to capture some of those votes. That really pisses me off. There is no conservative candidate.
What really scares me about this is what it means for the supreme court. Since we just came so close to five people ruling part of the Constitution "unconstitutional," it's more important than ever to have justices who read the Constitution and don't try to speculate on the intent of the authors (since we can't exactly ask those guys, can we?). It used to take two-thirds of each house of Congress and three-quarters of state legislatures to change the Constitution, now it only takes five guys. I don't trust McCain or Obama to nominate anyone not an idiot, so look out for a liberal supreme court who rules the U.S. in the near future.
Yes, I pretty much believe Right is Right if by right you mean conservative is right. Unfortunately there's no conservative to support.
I go with conservatism every time, but my supposedly conservative Republican party thinks it's a good idea to nominate a liberal, to capture some of those votes. That really pisses me off. There is no conservative candidate.
What really scares me about this is what it means for the supreme court. Since we just came so close to five people ruling part of the Constitution "unconstitutional," it's more important than ever to have justices who read the Constitution and don't try to speculate on the intent of the authors (since we can't exactly ask those guys, can we?). It used to take two-thirds of each house of Congress and three-quarters of state legislatures to change the Constitution, now it only takes five guys. I don't trust McCain or Obama to nominate anyone not an idiot, so look out for a liberal supreme court who rules the U.S. in the near future.
Yes, I pretty much believe Right is Right if by right you mean conservative is right. Unfortunately there's no conservative to support.
k never mind. :(
It's almost a moot point now, since Hillary has supposedly dropped out and is now campaigning for 2012, but the choice between Hillary and Obama was a choice between a conniving, evil, power-hungry woman who believed herself to be entitled to the presidency so she can push her agenda; and a man who is a tool of Democrats who saw in him a way to escape the grasp of the Clintons, and have pushed him out there in a so far successful attempt to put Hillary out of the picture. Obama's name would not even have been heard if there weren't so many Democrats who hate Hillary. A vote for Obama is really a vote for Pelosi/Reid/Leahy/Kennedy/Frank/every other crazy liberal senator who will be pulling the strings in an Obama presidency. It's also a vote for judges who want to rule the Constitution "unconstitutional."
So is a vote for McCain, but hopefully to a lesser extent. I was not one who thought that voting for Bush was voting for the lesser of two evils, but I definitely believe that's exactly what a vote for McCain is, and only barely. Blech.
So is a vote for McCain, but hopefully to a lesser extent. I was not one who thought that voting for Bush was voting for the lesser of two evils, but I definitely believe that's exactly what a vote for McCain is, and only barely. Blech.