TMF

Nope, just not willing to pay the excise tax.

[quote name="JayC" post="1025632" timestamp="1378137222"] And where do you think the government is getting all that money for "unsustainable subsidizing"? I'll give you a hint, they're stealing it from successful businesses and individuals who are having to compete on an international stage :) [/quote] Your point requires a bit of thought. It is way easier to demonize businesses that move offshore and the consumers who buy their products than to identify the root problem which is our own government. You can't fit your logic on a bumper sticker, but you can fit "Buy American" on one. Drive by activism at its finest. And who benefits at all this squabbling.... Or rather, who is the villain who avoids the finger being pointed at them? How masterful that our government f**ks everything up yet gets us to point the finger at one another? Our ruling class is right; we really are that stupid.

Have one for me, I'm in a dry county right now.

I know. The only ones keeping distilleries in the black are us raging alcoholics who will pay just about any price. Lucky for them that as the economy goes down alcohol consumption goes up.

They al Qaeda guys in Iraq were doing this a decade ago. The tanks were filled with either home made explosives or explosives they extracted from conventional munitions. Wanna take a guess where these guys learned this from? Once again, why we don't need to be supporting them.

  Since alcohol is going to be the libs next target after trans fats and tobacco, I worry about this one.  They were shut down by Tennessee's facist prohibition laws so I figure it'll be just as easy for the libs to target them and make them pay extra for all liver disease and drunk related crimes until they decide to distill from Canada.

How many kids a year die in swimming pools?  Why not open your home up to warrantless search so the government can make sure safety measures are met so that no one drowns in your pool?

  I agree with most of that, but I still think that this is an ego thing more than a distraction.  He is trying to save face and there isn't a good way to do that; just bad options and worse.  Since he is just an arrogant screwhead, he feels like launching some missles is the bad option, whereas I would classify it as the worse option.  The reason for the difference of opinion is that he is worried about what is worse for him, not the country.  Saving face for him is more important than keeping America out of an open ended conflict.  Of course, if Congress says "no" he can still seem like he's saving face because he can blame Congress for why he didn't follow through on his "red line" nonsense.   Mark my words, if we drop ordinance on Syria we have made an implied committment.  I don't see it ending there.  Congress needs to shut him down on this one.

  In Myrtle Beach I was threatened with arrest on "drunk in public" though I hadn't had a single drink.  I'm pretty sure they can arrest you for anything; doesn't matter if the charge sticks.  I haven't been back to Myrte Beach since.  Their city is a cesspool run by thugs.

  When they finally force Jack Daniels overseas I'm starting a new country.

That was one hell of a storm. I was on Gulf side and caught the weaker end of it. We had family friends in Homestead. Their story is unbelievable.

[quote name="The Itis" post="1025472" timestamp="1378105566"] Despite your insistence on ridicule, I'm going to be nice and just say I didn't say whatever it was you thought you read. I'll try to say it very simple language so you can maybe understand. American businesses cannot compete globally without help from the US government. Many industries are merely getting by with the help of unsustainable subsidizing. This is not news. I mean, I sense that you are not happy with the current administration, and even though I'm agreeing that they are not using sustainable practices, you somehow think it's a joke? Yes the government is not doing well, but who called for their help? The very same American businesses that couldn't make it without the government padding their earnings. That was a point you seem to have glossed over. American businesses can charge less for their products to be globally competitive only if they make up the price difference in the money they get from the government. That is the problem. Go on and talk about being an American while extrapolating a "let Detroit fail" attitude to "let America fail"[/quote] Sweet baby Jesus, the reason US business can't compete globally is because the government punishes them financially and regulatory. They can't produce a product cheaper than other countries because of how expensive we have made it for them to operate; minimum wage, crushing taxes, OSHA, EPA, Obamacare, unemployment, and about 20 other government regulatory agencies that so many businesses have to be in compliance with. The game is rigged and the answer IS NOT MORE GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT!!! It never is the answer. Try to start a business in any kind of manufacturing. It is almost impossible. Ad let me just add: do you know what overhead is? I'm not trying to be insulting, I'm serious. If you know what it is then you know that overhead has a direct correlation to the retail cost of any particular item. You have to agree with that. It is a solid fact. If you agree to that I suggest you attempt to calculate the amount of overhead a manufacturer has to deal with that is solely related to government regulations and taxes. It costs money. That cost is passed on to the consumer. The consumer is not willing to pay that extra cost when there is a cheaper alternative. The cheaper alternative doesn't have as much overhead because they live in countries with less regulations and taxes. The choice for both the consumer and the business is simple; the consumer will buy cheap and the manufacturer will move overseas. When it becomes cheaper to manufacture it here, then you would see less jobs go overseas and more domestic growth, but the artificial overhead created by the government must be eliminated. Raising taxes on imports so that domestic products are more competitive does not solve the problem. It only causes consumers to pay more, which causes them to buy less. That is where the economy comes into play. Less spending equals less revenue for retailers and related businesses which equals less jobs which equals less spending which equals less jobs which equals less spending which equals less jobs which equals less spending which equals less jobs..... The answer isn't to fix problems with domestic production by punishing consumers, it's to stop the endless cycle of regulations that has chased all our manufacturing jobs overseas. The government can't create jobs. That has been proven how many hundreds of times now? How could anyone still believe that?

So the government creates an unsustainable system for domestic production and the solution is to punish imports, thus raising costs to the consumer in order to encourage support for domestic products that are overpriced due to over regulation? Yeah, paying three times the market cost for everything sounds like a great idea that will have no negative impact on our already failing economy and dollar. Once again, you must be kidding.

Dear Lord, you must be joking.

Ever think its cheaper to manufacture this stuff elsewhere because US business has been regulated into the ground? Why make it here and go out of business instead of making it else where and turning a profit? Seems like a no brainier. That isn't the manufacture selling out; that is the result of an over regulating government.

Just because a person doesn't support checkpoints means they automatically support drunk driving. Every argument you use to support checkpoints can be used to support anti gun legislation. I hate drunk drivers just as much as I hate a person who recklessly shoots a firearm or kills someone with a firearm, but the libs will say that I support dead kids because I believe in the 2nd Amendment. That argument is invalid and dismissive, just like the argument that those who don't agree that checkpoints are constitutional somehow support drunk driving. I have no problem answering a few questions. I also have no problem with someone choosing not to answer any. It is, supposedly, a free country. Before you are obligated to hand over your "papers", be detained, required to be questioned a crime must have been committed or suspected of being committed. Saying that I can be stopped randomly any time I'm in public and subjected to search, detainment and questioning when no crime has been committed or suspected of being committed is the exact thing that are fore fathers DIDN'T want. When you say it is okay because there might be drunk drivers out there is to invite a slippery slope. It never ends there. If it did, cops wouldn't readily admit that checkpoints have nothing to do with DUIs... they have to do with catching folks on other charges unrelated to DUI.

As usual, The Onion nails it. http://www.theonion.com/articles/so-whats-it-going-to-be,33662/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=Status:Week2:Default

I dunno what it is... it's like their tempo is too slow or the vocals don't appropriately match it to give me the violent rage I need sometimes. I grew up on Pantera. It has affected me.

If you go to the Middle East they have chocolate moon pie thingys labeled Sambo. I wish I took a picture of the packaging. The cartoon graphic about made me piss myself.

  You're right, but just because driving isn't a "right" endowed to us by our creator doesn't mean the rights that are go out the window as soon as we get on the highway.   "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."   The answer is right there in plain English.  No, I don't have a problem with a DUI checkpoint.  I do have a problem with that checkpoint being an automatic expectation of handing over my "papers" with no PC.  If cops are just hanging out at a checkpoint one must drive through and are only stopping cars that appear to be operated by a person who is impaired I don't see a violation.  Stopping everyone or even random stops are a different story.  I don't see how that is different than a cop just pulling over random people who have committed no offense and demanding their papers.  Please tell me how that is different.

  Actually I think I'm getting my bands mixed up.  FFDP was a year after this event, and it was a larger show, not private or anything but not more than a few hundred.  I think the band was Sevendust where stuff got out of hand.  There is video evidence that I don't want to link myself to; there was some kind of videographer following these guys around, recording their exploits.    I've never been a huge fan, but the cover of Bad Company is pretty awesome.  It's actually the only song from them I own.  They're not a bad band at all, it's just that when I listen to metal I want to listen to the kind of metal that makes me want to break sh**.

I've met these guys before.  They did a private concert for us... things got... out of hand.

I think our government did get the memo.  Both Dems and Reps are running and hiding over this thing.  Doesn't seem like they want to touch this with a 10 ft pole.  Obama and Kerry seem to be the only people that keep deleting the memo out of their inbox.    If it wasn't so sad to watch our country become the laughing stock of the world again, I would find this whole monkeyscrew to be very entertaining.

  We wouldn't need gun control laws if people chose not to shoot people.

Huh, I guess someone there at Campbell got in trouble for sending it in.  It was a damn good vid in terms of seeing what these young guys go through.    Pretty much the vid depicts a coordinated ambush initiated by a mortar attack.  Looks like an 82mm within 50m; the fish eye camera makes it look further, but the way it knocked the leaves off the trees they were standing under shows just how close.  It's then followed by effective machine gun fire coming from the LZ they were overwatching... probably within the 100m range since they were popping claymores.  Several RPGs were fired at their position as well.  Video ends with them calling in a fire mission to keep the enemy locked down until CAS can get on station.   This was a small scout element of what looks to be no more than 6 guys.  With the fire they were taking they could have easily been overrun, and surely that was the intention of the enemy.  That's a bad day.  Now imagine it through the eyes of a teenager.