I'm buying beans again... and guns.

[SkinBasket]

I knew this Obama fellow was bad news. And now I have proof:

Russian Professor Predicts Fall of U.S. in 2010
Monday, December 29, 2008
Wall Street Journal

MOSCOW -- For a decade, Russian academic Igor Panarin has been predicting the U.S. will fall apart in 2010. For most of that time, he admits, few took his argument -- that an economic and moral collapse will trigger a civil war and the eventual breakup of the U.S. -- very seriously. Now he's found an eager audience: Russian state media.

In recent weeks, he's been interviewed as much as twice a day about his predictions. "It's a record," says Prof. Panarin. "But I think the attention is going to grow even stronger."

Prof. Panarin, 50 years old, is not a fringe figure. A former KGB analyst, he is dean of the Russian Foreign Ministry's academy for future diplomats. He is invited to Kremlin receptions, lectures students, publishes books, and appears in the media as an expert on U.S.-Russia relations.

But it's his bleak forecast for the U.S. that is music to the ears of the Kremlin, which in recent years has blamed Washington for everything from instability in the Middle East to the global financial crisis. Mr. Panarin's views also fit neatly with the Kremlin's narrative that Russia is returning to its rightful place on the world stage after the weakness of the 1990s, when many feared that the country would go economically and politically bankrupt and break into separate territories.

A polite and cheerful man with a buzz cut, Mr. Panarin insists he does not dislike Americans. But he warns that the outlook for them is dire.

"There's a 55-45% chance right now that disintegration will occur," he says. "One could rejoice in that process," he adds, poker-faced. "But if we're talking reasonably, it's not the best scenario -- for Russia." Though Russia would become more powerful on the global stage, he says, its economy would suffer because it currently depends heavily on the dollar and on trade with the U.S.

Mr. Panarin posits, in brief, that mass immigration, economic decline, and moral degradation will trigger a civil war next fall and the collapse of the dollar. Around the end of June 2010, or early July, he says, the U.S. will break into six pieces -- with Alaska reverting to Russian control.

In addition to increasing coverage in state media, which are tightly controlled by the Kremlin, Mr. Panarin's ideas are now being widely discussed among local experts. He presented his theory at a recent roundtable discussion at the Foreign Ministry. The country's top international relations school has hosted him as a keynote speaker. During an appearance on the state TV channel Rossiya, the station cut between his comments and TV footage of lines at soup kitchens and crowds of homeless people in the U.S. The professor has also been featured on the Kremlin's English-language propaganda channel, Russia Today.

Mr. Panarin's apocalyptic vision "reflects a very pronounced degree of anti-Americanism in Russia today," says Vladimir Pozner, a prominent TV journalist in Russia. "It's much stronger than it was in the Soviet Union."

Mr. Pozner and other Russian commentators and experts on the U.S. dismiss Mr. Panarin's predictions. "Crazy ideas are not usually discussed by serious people," says Sergei Rogov, director of the government-run Institute for U.S. and Canadian Studies, who thinks Mr. Panarin's theories don't hold water.

Mr. Panarin's résumé includes many years in the Soviet KGB, an experience shared by other top Russian officials. His office, in downtown Moscow, shows his national pride, with pennants on the wall bearing the emblem of the FSB, the KGB's successor agency. It is also full of statuettes of eagles; a double-headed eagle was the symbol of czarist Russia.

The professor says he began his career in the KGB in 1976. In post-Soviet Russia, he got a doctorate in political science, studied U.S. economics, and worked for FAPSI, then the Russian equivalent of the U.S. National Security Agency. He says he did strategy forecasts for then-President Boris Yeltsin, adding that the details are "classified."

In September 1998, he attended a conference in Linz, Austria, devoted to information warfare, the use of data to get an edge over a rival. It was there, in front of 400 fellow delegates, that he first presented his theory about the collapse of the U.S. in 2010.

"When I pushed the button on my computer and the map of the United States disintegrated, hundreds of people cried out in surprise," he remembers. He says most in the audience were skeptical. "They didn't believe me."

At the end of the presentation, he says many delegates asked him to autograph copies of the map showing a dismembered U.S.

He based the forecast on classified data supplied to him by FAPSI analysts, he says. He predicts that economic, financial and demographic trends will provoke a political and social crisis in the U.S. When the going gets tough, he says, wealthier states will withhold funds from the federal government and effectively secede from the union. Social unrest up to and including a civil war will follow. The U.S. will then split along ethnic lines, and foreign powers will move in.

California will form the nucleus of what he calls "The Californian Republic," and will be part of China or under Chinese influence. Texas will be the heart of "The Texas Republic," a cluster of states that will go to Mexico or fall under Mexican influence. Washington, D.C., and New York will be part of an "Atlantic America" that may join the European Union. Canada will grab a group of Northern states Prof. Panarin calls "The Central North American Republic." Hawaii, he suggests, will be a protectorate of Japan or China, and Alaska will be subsumed into Russia.

"It would be reasonable for Russia to lay claim to Alaska; it was part of the Russian Empire for a long time." A framed satellite image of the Bering Strait that separates Alaska from Russia like a thread hangs from his office wall. "It's not there for no reason," he says with a sly grin.

Interest in his forecast revived this fall when he published an article in Izvestia, one of Russia's biggest national dailies. In it, he reiterated his theory, called U.S. foreign debt "a pyramid scheme," and predicted China and Russia would usurp Washington's role as a global financial regulator.

Americans hope President-elect Barack Obama "can work miracles," he wrote. "But when spring comes, it will be clear that there are no miracles."

The article prompted a question about the White House's reaction to Prof. Panarin's forecast at a December news conference. "I'll have to decline to comment," spokeswoman Dana Perino said amid much laughter.

For Prof. Panarin, Ms. Perino's response was significant. "The way the answer was phrased was an indication that my views are being listened to very carefully," he says.

The professor says he's convinced that people are taking his theory more seriously. People like him have forecast similar cataclysms before, he says, and been right. He cites French political scientist Emmanuel Todd. Mr. Todd is famous for having rightly forecast the demise of the Soviet Union -- 15 years beforehand. "When he forecast the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1976, people laughed at him," says Prof. Panarin.

http://s.wsj.net/public/resources/images/P1-AO116_RUSPRO_NS_20081228191715.gif

[Partial]

Fuck that. Whyoming and Ohio are useless. Someone else can have them.

[MJZiggy]

Looks like you hometown folks are gonna be part of Canada. Enjoy the free healthcare.

[Joemailman]

Now Sarah Palin won't have to look out her window to see Russia. She'll be in Russia.

[red]

theres was a game for the old xbox called shattered union that had a civil war scenario where the us split into groups

and it was damn close to being split up the same way with even the same names

this guys just ripping off a game

[Freak Out]

The Ruski is a dumb fuck.....China already owns it all and will end up with all of the lower 48...but Alaska will go independent as it should have a long time ago.

[MJZiggy]

You mean you don't get free healthcare and Royal Mounties? :cry:

[red]

i see it playing out more like this

the south is convinced by their christian nazi leaders to split again. and we let them go, because what are they really good for? they drag our school stats down, they drag our average iq down, and they do nothing but preach at us.

so we let the south go this time, and celebrations begin on both sides of the border

the south then invades mexico, and enslaves the population, forcing them to build the bowie knifes, and tobacco they will need to invade canada.

they invade canada in the late fall, not smart enough to bring warm cloths or 4-wheel drives, and their invasion quickly bogs down( much like the french and germans in russia). the starving, and freezing army of the south crosses the southern border of canada looking for warmth and more wiskey.

some hillbilly walks into a bar in milwaukee and begs for a bottle of coors and a pack of winstons, and all hell breaks loose

thus the start of the second war between noth and south

[texaspackerbacker]

A big Yeah Right to that (the original)--yours has some possiblities, red.

This guy is some refugee from the old KGB, and thus, got his stinking Soviet ass kicked almost a generation ago.

The rest of the story, as Paul Harvey would say, is that the Texas Republic portion of this little Risk Game scenario takes over Mexico, takes the southern half of the Atlantic Republic (let the Eurowimps have the rest), recaptures the rest of the west--nuking China in the process, liberates the upper midwest, and goes on to take Canada too, negotiates the return of Alaska, obtaining the mineral rights to Siberia in the process, and agrees not to take military action against the Japs for their temporary occupation of Hawaii in return for reparations of one trillion dollars and turning over controlling interest in Toyota, Honda, and Nissan to GM, Ford, and Chrysler respectively.

[SkinBasket]

You know Tex has a good point about being American. As much as we may hate each other, we, for the most part, hate everyone else more. Civil war or no, the country isn't going to be divvied up between the rest of the world. Well, maybe the other regions would agree to nuke the "euro" coast and start over, but otherwise I don't think Americans are going to instantaneously stop being American.

[Freak Out]

Good book if you are so inclined to this kind of published history....

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=yFa4anGH6U0C&dq=battles+of+sitka+1802+and+1804&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=wFaPZV-2Zd&sig=0fcsIY8hNIB5wEYyyij51KpTS_Q&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPP1,M1

If these battles turn another way the Hudson Bay company probably ends up with Alaska and it ends up part of Canada.

[The Leaper]

When was the last major world power that fell off the face of the earth in the matter of one year?

Granted, the US certainly could become much weaker in terms of global influence...think France in 1700 and France in 2008. However, the country is not going to break up and become parts of Russia, Canada...and Mexico?!?!

That is just fucking hilarious. :P :P Someone needs to get a new supply of vodka...the current batch must be tainted.

[swede]

Anarchy is more likely than a realignment.

Rich white people will hire Mexicans to riot for them, not knowing how to do it themselves.

[Harlan Huckleby]

anybody read "The Man in the High Castle" by Phillip K. Dick? It is about the United States being ruled by Japan and Germany after WWII. A little hard thinking about the 1950's being "the future". The Axis powers weren't so bad, certainly no worse than America during the Reagan years.

[Partial]

You mean you don't get free healthcare and Royal Mounties? :cry:

Nothing is free in this world. The health care in Canada is "free" of talented physicians and quality drugs, if anything.

[Partial]

Now Sarah Palin won't have to look out her window to see Russia. She'll be in Russia.

You guys do know that that was Tina Fey that said that, not Pailn, right?

[BallHawk]

The health care in Canada is "free" of talented physicians and quality drugs, if anything.

Bullshit. You've got nothing to back that up.

[BallHawk]

theres was a game for the old xbox called shattered union that had a civil war scenario where the us split into groups

and it was damn close to being split up the same way with even the same names

this guys just ripping off a game

Nice. I thought I was the only one thinking that it was similar to Shattered Union. Good job, Red. :D

Map below for those that didn't play the game.

http://www.deafgamers.com/05screenshots_b/supic2.jpg

And Wiki link

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shattered_Union

[Freak Out]

Now Sarah Palin won't have to look out her window to see Russia. She'll be in Russia.

You guys do know that that was Tina Fey that said that, not Pailn, right?

It was Palin dude......but I know you are joking.

[digitaldean]

The Axis powers weren't so bad, certainly no worse than America during the Reagan years.

Yeah, if the Master Race, racial purity, Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere and vivisection and medical experimentation on the untermensch is your cup of tea.... :o

[retailguy]

Now Sarah Palin won't have to look out her window to see Russia. She'll be in Russia.

You guys do know that that was Tina Fey that said that, not Pailn, right?

It was Palin dude......but I know you are joking.

Actually Freak, Palin said that Alaskans could see Russia from an Outlying island, which I guess is true. I've never been there so I'll take her word for it. Since you live there, you may know?

Partial is right. Tina Fey coined that phrase on Saturday Night Live, but it's been reported through the mainstream media as a direct quote, which it isn't, but, that doesn't matter to the mainstream media in their quest for destruction.

[Partial]

Now Sarah Palin won't have to look out her window to see Russia. She'll be in Russia.

You guys do know that that was Tina Fey that said that, not Pailn, right?

It was Palin dude......but I know you are joking.

Actually Freak, Palin said that Alaskans could see Russia from an Outlying island, which I guess is true. I've never been there so I'll take her word for it. Since you live there, you may know?

Partial is right. Tina Fey coined that phrase on Saturday Night Live, but it's been reported through the mainstream media as a direct quote, which it isn't, but, that doesn't matter to the mainstream media in their quest for destruction.

Yep.

[retailguy]

Well, if it matters, I found the quote. Here it is:


"They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." --Sarah Palin, on her foreign policy insights into Russia, ABC News interview, Sept. 11, 2008

http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/sarahpalin/a/palinisms_2.htm

And it must be true. I took the website from one of PIP's posts where she claims that she has never said a "hateful" thing about Palin, and then posted a "link" to the top "palinisms" where the site ridicules her "many" gaffes.:roll: But, well, she didn't say it, did she? She implied it, then posted the link, but clearly that doesn't count. :twisted:

Therefore, even the liberals will have to accept that this quote is correct. :D

[packinpatland]

Well, if it matters, I found the quote. Here it is:


"They're our next door neighbors and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska, from an island in Alaska." --Sarah Palin, on her foreign policy insights into Russia, ABC News interview, Sept. 11, 2008

http://politicalhumor.about.com/od/sarahpalin/a/palinisms_2.htm

And it must be true. I took the website from one of PIP's posts where she claims that she has never said a "hateful" thing about Palin, and then posted a "link" to the top "palinisms" where the site ridicules her "many" gaffes.:roll: But, well, she didn't say it, did she? She implied it, then posted the link, but clearly that doesn't count. :twisted:

Therefore, even the liberals will have to accept that this quote is correct. :D


You creep. I posted the site, yes. You have to admit some of that stuff was priceless. As were some of Biden's blunders, which you all documented pretty well. Still doesn't mean I hate the woman.
I find her gaffs humerous.

[Freak Out]

Talk about splitting hairs....give me a break. I saw the tortuous interview with Couric or whatever her name is. I know what she said. Could she even name the island? Did she give a spiffy talk about how Alaskan natives were separated from family in "Russia" for generations because of laws they didn't understand even though they could see the island they lived on? Sure you can see big Diomede from little Diomede but that sure as hell didn't make her an expert on relations with Russia or anyone else.

[retailguy]

You creep. I posted the site, yes.

:shock: I'm a creep? :lol: At least I can admit when I hate someone. :wink:

I'll be the first one to admit that I've been really hard on you and Ziggy about Palin. Quite honestly, I couldn't care less whether you like her or not, but this "act" of first being impartial, and second making decisions on the "facts" was ridiculous.

You both hated her out of the gate. You saw the move as "pandering" to the Clinton dems (something that has been speculated but never confirmed). If it was true, and I doubt that it was, McCain didn't deserve to win the election. I just happen to think that McCain decided he wanted her because of the whole "Maverick" theme and I don't think it was deeper than that.




You have to admit some of that stuff was priceless.

Provided it lasted 24 - 48 hours, I'd suppose it was. But this whole Palin thing got "personal". It really has been a vendetta, the likes of which we haven't seen since Dan Quayle and Robert Bork.

On that basis, please believe me when I tell you that I find it nothing but sickening. Today, I find ZERO humor in it. None. And I'm not even a "Sarah Palin" fan. I just don't believe that ANYONE should be subject to the intense criticism that she has seen. It is pathetic.

I believe to an impartial person, it truly shows that the mainstream media can be "biased". No one who has the ability to be elected Governor could be as stupid as she has been portrayed (and that includes Arnold, and Jesse Ventura, too).

The twisting of the comment in question is proof of that.



As were some of Biden's blunders, which you all documented pretty well.

Yeah, Biden's blunders were funny, and they lasted the typical 24 - 48 hours and then went away. They were stupid comments, kind of like Kerry's "Lambert Field". But, we're still talking about "Potatoe" 20 years later. We won't be talking about either Biden or Kerry's screw-ups in 20 years.

Palin's remarks have that "long standing" possibility too. we'll see.



Still doesn't mean I hate the woman.
I find her gaffs humerous.

I think you do hate her, or better said, what she represents. I question where the "real" hatred lies for her. Pure speculation on my part, but I think that a "pro-life" woman, who hunts and fishes, is somehow threatening to the whole equal rights crowd. I don't know you, so I can't possibly know how you feel about that, but she doesn't fit the stereotypical woman who is being pushed in society. I could see Sarah showing up at a church bazaar with a home baked pie (that she did herself) and having a heart to heart discussion about things that us "little people" do. I could never see career politicians or the elitist education crowd (whom I live next door to), relating to these things. I personally believe this is where the hatred stems from.

What I saw in Sarah Palin was real. Real gaffes, is true, but real personality too. I respect that, even though I'm not a fan. I was, and remain a Rudy Guliani fan. But he ran such an inept campaign, he didn't deserve to be elected. Even I voted against him in the primary, because he ran the worst campaign I've ever seen. I couldn't see myself voting for Palin in the primaries in 2012, however, I still have respect for the way she conducted herself in this campaign. I guess the belittling really still pisses me off. It was uncalled for, but, necessary for the "liberal agenda" (my opinion!).

[MJZiggy]

Retail, do me a favor. Read you last post, but replace the name Sarah Palin with Barack Obama and read it again.

The guys in this forum have been just as hard on him (if not harder) and if you don't believe me, read back into the RR for a few pages and tally the hatred and the number of articles posted. You may be surprised.

And twice, TWICE I have enumerated for you exactly the reasons I dislike her and the reasons that I believe she is not well received by successful women. Is it just that you don't listen? Or are you that stubborn as to ignore them?

Read Sheep's comments comparing her reception to that of Ronald Reagan when he first came on the scene.

[retailguy]

Ziggy, I understand the comparison you're trying to make, but it doesn't hold water. Yes, the guys HERE have been tough on Obama, but, the difference is you have virtually the ENTIRE mainstream media, combined with the bulk of the late night comedians doing the "tough" stuff with Palin vs. a few unknown people in a football forum. You can't compare the Obama reception with the media, to Palin's reception. Unless you're illustrating polar opposites.

When you compare Obama's "background" of accomplishments to Palin's "background" of accomplishments, they are actually quite similar. Yet, the media judged "Obama" qualified to be President, but Palin "unqualified" to be Vice-President.

Your comparison won't work for me, ever, on that basis. There was, is, and always will be a difference in how they were portrayed by media and the elite.

You keep enumerating the same thing Ziggy that's been "espoused" in the press. In fact, in the other thread, you even used the exact phrase in question in this thread about "seeing her house". I don't care whether you like her or not, I've been making the point that you got your knowledge from the media (you didn't research it yourself), and that the "impressions" you received could be (and were) distorted.

Say it all you like. I see what I see, and you've backed up a lot of what I see. You now refer to her as "irrelevant" and not worth your time to research. But, for me, the point is, it wasn't worth your time to "research" BEFORE the election. You knew all you needed to know.

I live next door to the "liberal education elite". They are all college professors... I get invited to dinner with them. I'm the "token" conservative in the room. We discuss all this crap. In this pathetic little town (you know where I live), these guys WERE the guys on the street corners. I understand how they think. I know what they believe. I see the conceit. I see the hatred. And Ziggy, you and PIP sound EXACTLY like them. You give the same talking points. You hold the same ideals. You forgive the same flaws in Obama. Hell you even use the same sentences sometimes.

Could you be different? Sure. But it isn't really likely. I "get" this better than you think I do. These guys around here wanted CHANGE and they didn't care where it came from and it was all out WAR against anyone or anything that got in the way. Palin, "got in the way". And she was dealt with.

[BallHawk]

The health care in Canada is "free" of talented physicians and quality drugs, if anything.

Bullshit. You've got nothing to back that up.

Bump.

[texaspackerbacker]

Strange how another thread got side-tracked to the bashing of Sarah Palin. Yes, Ziggy, we've heard what is it, four times now why you think "successful women" don't like Palin? That leads me to wonder what you consider a "successful woman". I can think of several categories that to most objective observers would be successful that would support her. One of these would be women doing well on their own in business or professions--those with a stake in America remaining the wonderful place it is, wanting lower taxes, toughness against terrorism, criminals, and illegals, etc. A second category would be the wives of men in that same situation. A third category would be women with nice normal families and relationships--caring more about normal Judeo-Christian values and morality than about abortion, the gay agenda, social welfare programs, etc.

So what does that leave? What categories are YOU referring to as successful women? Female media members? Yeah, I've got to give you a solid majority of those; Women in the entertainment industry? Yeah, there are probably more Rosies and Whoopies and Ellens than there are Elizabeth Hasselbecks. Women working for government agencies? Yeah, you probably get that one too. Teachers? Maybe, but I bet by not near as big a margin as you may think.

If by "most successful women" you mean a majority, I'd say the "pro" Sarah categories have it by a wide margin over the "anti"s.

[packinpatland]

RG.......just out of curiosity............(my New Years Resolution hasn't kicked in yet) name me one other govenor that has a budget whose revenues come from 90% oil? How can she not fail? How difficult is it to please the poplulace, when you send them a nice check each year? No taxes....

Look at the other tangibles........highest high school drop out rate, highest in drug producing (Wasilla...the meth capital), highest in spousal abuse, among the highest in alcholism, high unemployment, high teen suicide, above national average in teen pregancies.
Granted, she's only been there a year and a half......who knows, by the end of her term, instead of being highest in all the above, perhaps they'll be second or even third......let's wait and see.

Once again........I don't hate the woman. Granted, I don't like her much. I don't hate anyone.....even you RG :wink:

[MJZiggy]

Ziggy, I understand the comparison you're trying to make, but it doesn't hold water. Yes, the guys HERE have been tough on Obama, but, the difference is you have virtually the ENTIRE mainstream media, combined with the bulk of the late night comedians doing the "tough" stuff with Palin vs. a few unknown people in a football forum. You can't compare the Obama reception with the media, to Palin's reception. Unless you're illustrating polar opposites.

When you compare Obama's "background" of accomplishments to Palin's "background" of accomplishments, they are actually quite similar. Yet, the media judged "Obama" qualified to be President, but Palin "unqualified" to be Vice-President.

Your comparison won't work for me, ever, on that basis. There was, is, and always will be a difference in how they were portrayed by media and the elite.

You keep enumerating the same thing Ziggy that's been "espoused" in the press. In fact, in the other thread, you even used the exact phrase in question in this thread about "seeing her house". I don't care whether you like her or not, I've been making the point that you got your knowledge from the media (you didn't research it yourself), and that the "impressions" you received could be (and were) distorted.

Say it all you like. I see what I see, and you've backed up a lot of what I see. You now refer to her as "irrelevant" and not worth your time to research. But, for me, the point is, it wasn't worth your time to "research" BEFORE the election. You knew all you needed to know.

I live next door to the "liberal education elite". They are all college professors... I get invited to dinner with them. I'm the "token" conservative in the room. We discuss all this crap. In this pathetic little town (you know where I live), these guys WERE the guys on the street corners. I understand how they think. I know what they believe. I see the conceit. I see the hatred. And Ziggy, you and PIP sound EXACTLY like them. You give the same talking points. You hold the same ideals. You forgive the same flaws in Obama. Hell you even use the same sentences sometimes.

Could you be different? Sure. But it isn't really likely. I "get" this better than you think I do. These guys around here wanted CHANGE and they didn't care where it came from and it was all out WAR against anyone or anything that got in the way. Palin, "got in the way". And she was dealt with.

Question: Where did the guys in here get all their ammunition?

I am in no way comparing their backgrounds. This is what you don't get. Quiz time: why don't I like her? What was that thing that set me off? I've said it a number of times. I did decide long before the MSM got hold of her. Maybe all those educators are not so elite, but they just saw the same problem I did. Can you figure out what that problem would have been?

[texaspackerbacker]

Back to the original topic, none of this silly shit is ever gonna happen. That Commie relic is simply off his rocker.

A scenario like that, however, just might be an opportunity for America--right-thinking pro-America go out an kick some ass factions to do some much needed harm to the forces of evil in the world unfettered by eastern liberals and the whole "oh no, that wouldn't be nice" crowd in general.

The "Texas Republic" sector presumably would end up with the bulk of our nuclear and conventional military might, as well as the motivation to use them to intimidate our enemies into the concessions I spoke of in my earlier post, and if any of the assholic portion of the world decided not to be intimidated into submission, fine, nuke 'em 'til they glow in the dark, as somebody once said. I could see reducing the number of Chinamen by a billion or so, and what are there, 600 million Muslims? Cutting that down to 15 or 20 million seems a lot more manageable. I think the rest of the world would get the message and not give us any trouble.

[retailguy]

RG.......just out of curiosity............(my New Years Resolution hasn't kicked in yet) name me one other govenor that has a budget whose revenues come from 90% oil? How can she not fail? How difficult is it to please the poplulace, when you send them a nice check each year? No taxes....

Look at the other tangibles........highest high school drop out rate, highest in drug producing (Wasilla...the meth capital), highest in spousal abuse, among the highest in alcholism, high unemployment, high teen suicide, above national average in teen pregancies.
Granted, she's only been there a year and a half......who knows, by the end of her term, instead of being highest in all the above, perhaps they'll be second or even third......let's wait and see.

Once again........I don't hate the woman. Granted, I don't like her much. I don't hate anyone.....even you RG :wink:

Bush sent you a check, TWICE. Didn't help... You still hate him. :wink:

Alaska builds it's budget around it's available revenue streams as do the other 50 states. Washington has high business taxes and no income tax too. Texas does pretty well with oil revenue also. No state taxes there either.

All states have problems. Always have, always will. I'm with you on one thing. I'm curious what happens in Alaska over the next two years. We'll see. From what I read, her record isn't bad. Not world beating, but certainly not bad. In any event, she does have accomplishments. And, by a lot of standards similar accomplishments to our new President.

I guess we could have the same debate about Obamas district whom he represented for 3 terms in the Illinois Senate. I'd rather live in Wasila than 90% of that district. Hell, I'd rather live in certain parts of South Central LA than in that district. Those problems equal or dwarf any that Palin will face. I wasn't in Illinois in the late 90's to judge the difference, but if this is better... well, there is still a lot of work to do.

As for hatred, I believe you, to a point. But, I still question whether or not you hate what Palin represented. I don't know you, so I don't know, but I do know the educational elite in this little crummy town I live in DESPISED what she represented. And, just to be on the safe side, when we wind up together at a PR game, I'll make sure to stay out of the middle of the road, just in case. :wink:

[MJZiggy]

All states have problems. Always have, always will. I'm with you on one thing. I'm curious what happens in Alaska over the next two years. We'll see. From what I read, her record isn't bad. Not world beating, but certainly not bad. In any event, she does have accomplishments. And, by a lot of standards similar accomplishments to our new President.

And, pray tell, where did you read that?? :wink:

[packinpatland]

HAH!!!! Gottcha!...........We never got a check... either time. And for the record, I don't hate GWB, pity would be a better description..........and I think I've mentioned it before, I voted for him twice. Independent that I am.

And about the PR game.............thank the Lord none of us will be driving.....that is what you meant, right? :lol:

[retailguy]

The health care in Canada is "free" of talented physicians and quality drugs, if anything.

Bullshit. You've got nothing to back that up.

Bump.

Well, I'm not Partial, but what I do know is that there are a lot of Doctors in private practice in Northwest Washington that make their living charging Canadians for routine surgery because they don't want to wait the lengthy waits that they have to get some things "fixed".

I'm not sure they are "devoid" of talented doctors, so much, as they are overworked. When something is "free" or better phrased, "perceived as free", people line up.

I have many co-workers in Great Britian. They say the same thing about their medical care. LONG waits for simple things.

[retailguy]

HAH!!!! Gottcha!...........We never got a check... either time. And for the record, I don't hate GWB, pity would be a better description..........and I think I've mentioned it before, I voted for him twice. Independent that I am.

And about the PR game.............thank the Lord none of us will be driving.....that is what you meant, right? :lol:

LOL. How is that a "gotcha"? I didn't get one either. Point being, the simple act of sending a check works with the "poor", I'd think, but the rest of us? Heck to be honest, I'm still incensed at the last round of "giveaways". I do like the idea of returning a surplus though. Of course, we've got 11 trillion and counting to go before we see one of those out of the Feds! God, what a screwed up mess (I blame both parties for that)

About the game - yes I was referring to you "running me down". :wink: Eliminate the competition. :D

[retailguy]

All states have problems. Always have, always will. I'm with you on one thing. I'm curious what happens in Alaska over the next two years. We'll see. From what I read, her record isn't bad. Not world beating, but certainly not bad. In any event, she does have accomplishments. And, by a lot of standards similar accomplishments to our new President.

And, pray tell, where did you read that?? :wink:

I'm not sure what you mean, however, I read every Alaskan news story I could find in their archives when she was announced as McCains running mate. I spent 4 or 5 evenings reading stories on the wasilla newspaper website alone, researching her time as mayor. You can find it here:

http://www.frontiersman.com/

Additionally, I spent a lot of time using wayback to look at her campaign websites as they existed when she ran for Governor. I read her "issues" page, and tracked how it changed as the campaign moved along. I used some of her issues to search for news stories, both before and after the election to see if she did what she said she was going to do.

I did as much research as I could related to that "stupid bridge to nowhere" and think I understand what was really going on.

I could go on, but I think you get the point. BTW, if you really want, I can post links to the wayback site for the campaign website archives. If you want to understand who Sarah is, that's a good place to start.

[MJZiggy]

Soooo.....what you're telling me is that you got your information from her by the MEDIA???

You judged her issues claims by how they were followed in the MEDIA?????

If you want info on the Bridge to Nowhere, start with Engineering News Record. It's a nice start.

[retailguy]

Soooo.....what you're telling me is that you got your information from her by the MEDIA???

You judged her issues claims by how they were followed in the MEDIA?????

If you want info on the Bridge to Nowhere, start with Engineering News Record. It's a nice start.

So, let me see. You're comparing the Wasilla newspaper to NBC and the New York Times? You forgot the term MAINSTREAM. It makes a difference. A big one. All media is not bad, and even if they are, if you understand the inherent bias, you can still glean information.

The ENR is a subscription based website. We get it at work, but don't keep all the copies. I wasn't able to find anything in the copies I did find around the office.

But, I've read plenty about it. I think I've got the basic idea.

[MJZiggy]

And you don't think that the Wasilla paper's not gonna print a little feel good fluff about their hometown girl? I hardly think they're going to be asking the tough questions. And I'm still waiting for an answer to my other post. Or don't you have one?

[retailguy]

And you don't think that the Wasilla paper's not gonna print a little feel good fluff about their hometown girl? I hardly think they're going to be asking the tough questions. And I'm still waiting for an answer to my other post. Or don't you have one?


Of course, but again, you should just read it for yourself. Lots of editorial articles that disagree with what happened. Again, I stick with my basic point, READ IT FOR YOURSELF.

You know, I have no desire to play "20 questions" with you. When you're ready to tell me, you'll tell me. Meanwhile, I remember days of bitching about the "real reason" why McCain picked Palin, and how you were "convinced" that he was trying to sway Hillary voters. I already stated that, several times over the last couple of days, so it is no secret that is what I think.

[Freak Out]

Did the wacko Russian predict his country's collapse?

[MJZiggy]

And you don't think that the Wasilla paper's not gonna print a little feel good fluff about their hometown girl? I hardly think they're going to be asking the tough questions. And I'm still waiting for an answer to my other post. Or don't you have one?


Of course, but again, you should just read it for yourself. Lots of editorial articles that disagree with what happened. Again, I stick with my basic point, READ IT FOR YOURSELF.

You know, I have no desire to play "20 questions" with you. When you're ready to tell me, you'll tell me. Meanwhile, I remember days of bitching about the "real reason" why McCain picked Palin, and how you were "convinced" that he was trying to sway Hillary voters. I already stated that, several times over the last couple of days, so it is no secret that is what I think.

No, that was my theory for why he chose her. I've already told you what made me not like her. More than once. You made up your mind about it and applied it to me rather than going by what I actually posted about it. Quit making assumptions about how I think.

[retailguy]

And you don't think that the Wasilla paper's not gonna print a little feel good fluff about their hometown girl? I hardly think they're going to be asking the tough questions. And I'm still waiting for an answer to my other post. Or don't you have one?


Of course, but again, you should just read it for yourself. Lots of editorial articles that disagree with what happened. Again, I stick with my basic point, READ IT FOR YOURSELF.

You know, I have no desire to play "20 questions" with you. When you're ready to tell me, you'll tell me. Meanwhile, I remember days of bitching about the "real reason" why McCain picked Palin, and how you were "convinced" that he was trying to sway Hillary voters. I already stated that, several times over the last couple of days, so it is no secret that is what I think.

No, that was my theory for why he chose her. I've already told you what made me not like her. More than once. You made up your mind about it and applied it to me rather than going by what I actually posted about it. Quit making assumptions about how I think.

Judge, The defense rests.

[MJZiggy]

Finally. Even though the defender doesn't even know what the case is about... :taunt:

[retailguy]

Finally. Even though the defender doesn't even know what the case is about... :taunt:

I think you missed my point.

But thats OK, I'm still sticking with my answer.

[BallHawk]

Well, I'm not Partial, but what I do know is that there are a lot of Doctors in private practice in Northwest Washington that make their living charging Canadians for routine surgery because they don't want to wait the lengthy waits that they have to get some things "fixed".

I'm not sure they are "devoid" of talented doctors, so much, as they are overworked. When something is "free" or better phrased, "perceived as free", people line up.

I have many co-workers in Great Britian. They say the same thing about their medical care. LONG waits for simple things.

Canada and the UK definitely have their fair share of healthcare problems, long waits for simple procedures being one of the biggest, as you mentioned.

My entire family lives in the UK and those that can afford it go the private healthcare route, especially the older members. If you don't get sick very often the national healthcare system is great, but if you have multiple problems the wait for certain things can get out-of-hand. In general, though, the NHS is successful. The big problem there is that the doctors are largely foreign and do not speak the language well and their work experience is questionable.......I have enough horror stories to back that up.

Canada, on the other hand, does not have that problem. Does Canada have some of the same problems that England does? You bet. But to say Canada's doctors are devoid of talent is baseless scrutiny.

[retailguy]

Well, I'm not Partial, but what I do know is that there are a lot of Doctors in private practice in Northwest Washington that make their living charging Canadians for routine surgery because they don't want to wait the lengthy waits that they have to get some things "fixed".

I'm not sure they are "devoid" of talented doctors, so much, as they are overworked. When something is "free" or better phrased, "perceived as free", people line up.

I have many co-workers in Great Britian. They say the same thing about their medical care. LONG waits for simple things.

Canada and the UK definitely have their fair share of healthcare problems, long waits for simple procedures being one of the biggest, as you mentioned.

My entire family lives in the UK and those that can afford it go the private healthcare route, especially the older members. If you don't get sick very often the national healthcare system is great, but if you have multiple problems the wait for certain things can get out-of-hand. In general, though, the NHS is successful. The big problem there is that the doctors are largely foreign and do not speak the language well and their work experience is questionable.......I have enough horror stories to back that up.

Canada, on the other hand, does not have that problem. Does Canada have some of the same problems that England does? You bet. But to say Canada's doctors are devoid of talent is baseless scrutiny.

Yes, this is largely what I hear from my friends.

But, something to ponder. No insurance, or high deductibles ALSO work for those who don't get sick. Herein lies the problem.

If you don't need medical care, you are less willing to pay for it. You are more willing to accept a system that has significant "flaws" because you don't need it.

NHS works if you don't need it. Think about that.

There is no panacea. The US healthcare system also works if you don't need it...

And for the record, I didn't say that the Canadian doctors were devoid of talent. I don't know. I do believe the Canadian system is just as hopelessly flawed as you think the US system is....

[Harlan Huckleby]

I do believe the Canadian system is just as hopelessly flawed as you think the US system is....

You can criticize any and all countries. The U.S. "system", such that there is a system, is a disgrace. Maybe it works ok for many, but far too many people are screwed.

[HowardRoark]

I do believe the Canadian system is just as hopelessly flawed as you think the US system is....

You can criticize any and all countries. The U.S. "system", such that there is a system, is a disgrace. Maybe it works ok for many, but far too many people are screwed.

The more the Government “gives” us, the more we become enslaved to the government. We are no more than cattle; given our feed and a barn in which to live. Please pass the oats.

[retailguy]

I do believe the Canadian system is just as hopelessly flawed as you think the US system is....

You can criticize any and all countries. The U.S. "system", such that there is a system, is a disgrace. Maybe it works ok for many, but far too many people are screwed.

Harlan, my basic point was every system has flaws. My basic belief is that Government should stay out of the Health care business. They've proven themselves inept at managing all forms of commerce that they touch. They're expensive, inefficient and slow. There is no government program that you or I can point at that suggests they can adequately manage health care better than what we have now.

That's my point.

As to our system being a "disgrace", I guess I'd point to those very Canadians that would rather pay for US health care than get their care for free in Canada. That says more than anything else I could say.

[BallHawk]

And for the record, I didn't say that the Canadian doctors were devoid of talent.

Sorry, I should of included the previous quote box. I was referring to Partial when I made that comment, since he DID say that the Canadian doctors were devoid of talent.

[gex]

Well, I'm not Partial, but what I do know is that there are a lot of Doctors in private practice in Northwest Washington that make their living charging Canadians for routine surgery because they don't want to wait the lengthy waits that they have to get some things "fixed".

I'm not sure they are "devoid" of talented doctors, so much, as they are overworked. When something is "free" or better phrased, "perceived as free", people line up.

I have many co-workers in Great Britian. They say the same thing about their medical care. LONG waits for simple things.

Canada and the UK definitely have their fair share of healthcare problems, long waits for simple procedures being one of the biggest, as you mentioned.

My entire family lives in the UK and those that can afford it go the private healthcare route, especially the older members. If you don't get sick very often the national healthcare system is great, but if you have multiple problems the wait for certain things can get out-of-hand. In general, though, the NHS is successful. The big problem there is that the doctors are largely foreign and do not speak the language well and their work experience is questionable.......I have enough horror stories to back that up.

Canada, on the other hand, does not have that problem. Does Canada have some of the same problems that England does? You bet. But to say Canada's doctors are devoid of talent is baseless scrutiny.

I think thats how it would work here, those with the means would not have to wait in the lines with the poor and downtrodden. They essentially would be paying extra for their quick pass.

[gex]

I do believe the Canadian system is just as hopelessly flawed as you think the US system is....

You can criticize any and all countries. The U.S. "system", such that there is a system, is a disgrace. Maybe it works ok for many, but far too many people are screwed.

The more the Government “gives” us, the more we become enslaved to the government. We are no more than cattle; given our feed and a barn in which to live. Please pass the oats.

And this is new because....

[HowardRoark]

I do believe the Canadian system is just as hopelessly flawed as you think the US system is....

You can criticize any and all countries. The U.S. "system", such that there is a system, is a disgrace. Maybe it works ok for many, but far too many people are screwed.

The more the Government “gives” us, the more we become enslaved to the government. We are no more than cattle; given our feed and a barn in which to live. Please pass the oats.

And this is new because....

Thanks gex, that says it all......we have passed the tipping point.

[MateoInMex]

Anarchy is more likely than a realignment.

Rich white people will hire Mexicans to riot for them, not knowing how to do it themselves.


Lmfao! What's the going rate for cheap day riot labor anyway?

[texaspackerbacker]

I do believe the Canadian system is just as hopelessly flawed as you think the US system is....

You can criticize any and all countries. The U.S. "system", such that there is a system, is a disgrace. Maybe it works ok for many, but far too many people are screwed.

Who? What people?

Everybody gets everything they need in the line of treatment, and that happens with a minimum of loss of freedom and a minimum of hassle and inconvenience--the two primary drawbacks to the Canadian and other government dominated systems.

The only negative side is the fact that providers absorb the cost and pass it along to other patients/insurance companies. My position, though--which I am well aware is disagreed with by some of our more idealistic conservatives--is that this way of doing it is the lesser of three evils--the others being having people not get treated and having a government dominated system.