Community > Posts By > daniel48706

 
daniel48706's photo
Wed 03/10/10 08:41 AM

I mean...what was he thinkin'?.....:tongue:
Some people just flat-suck!!!!


Only if she says it is ok first ;-)

daniel48706's photo
Wed 03/10/10 08:34 AM


so noone has figured this out that political talk TV/radio host defend their party and insult the other party,it's what they get paid to do ..

doesnt that line include ANYONE for whom the shoe fits,,are NAMES really necessary?


Are names really necessary ... ? Damned right they are - when ONE person is specifically TARGETED for an attack, it's not only FAIR to use the name(-s) of those participating in the attack, it is MANDATORY. How else can the rebuttal be directed to the right people? Anonymity is for cowards.


United States law dictates that the accused has the legal right to know who their accuser is, unless it can be proven that knowing the accuser can put the accuser in harms way.

daniel48706's photo
Wed 03/10/10 08:30 AM


It is also very difficult to find out if you are even on "the List." And if somehow, you discover that you are on it, it is extremely difficult to be taken off of it. It can take years, and some hefty legal fees, to remove something that should have never been there in the first place.


Valid points, all. I'm still in favor of the 'P' word ... that's right: PROFILING. And for the benefit of those who may think this is 'racist', I'm not talking about racial profiling - I'm in favor of CRIMINAL PROFILING. There's a difference. The techniques used by the Israelis for everyone boarding an El Al flight are easy to use AND effective. When's the last time you heard of an Israeli airplane being blown out of the sky or hijjacked? Answer: Never. Air Marshals also need to be placed back on flights AND have their numbers increased. But it won't happen in the prevailing political climate with the other multiple agendas that are running now.


So very true and sad. I agree that we need to profile, and not by race or ethnicity, but by criminal profiling. I also agree that if you can be directly associated with known terrorists, etc. then you should be put on the no fly list. Plain and simple, you wanna fly in the US, then you need to be upstanding and law abiding, and not have anythign to do with criminals or terrorists.

daniel48706's photo
Wed 03/10/10 08:27 AM
This was taken directly out of the Watertown new York's newspaper today.

personally I find it disgusting and a blatant example of where our money is not supposed to be going. Don't get me wrong, I understand and agree it is a major employer in the area; however, what that means, is that if htey can not meet the requirements to remain operational, and it is a major necessity to the economy, then someone should see about either replacing it with an American owned company, or having America take ownership of two percent of the stock, so that America becomes the primary owner of the company, thus making sure it complies to all requirements for the loan.

daniel48706's photo
Wed 03/10/10 08:22 AM
Edited by daniel48706 on Wed 03/10/10 08:23 AM
WASHINGTON - Sen. Charles E. Schumer will ask Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to help see that Newton Falls Fine Paper receives a loan guarantee from the Agriculture Department, working around a snafu tied to the company's Canadian ownership.

Newton Falls applied for the loan guarantee through the USDA's Business and Industry Loan program. It plans to use the money to buy a cellulosic ethanol boiler, which would reduce the plant's carbon footprint.

An initial review at the USDA indicated that Newton Falls would not be eligible, despite having a good chance at winning a $2.9 million loan guarantee, Mr. Schumer's office reported.

Officials at the Agriculture Department cited the company's majority ownership by Canadian and Scotia Investments, meaning it does not meet a requirement that the recipient be at least 51 percent U.S. owned.

Mr. Schumer, after meeting with Newton falls representatives and Canadian officials last week, said he would ask Mr. Vilsack next week to ask for "creative solution" to make Newton Falls eligible. He expects to meet with Mr. Vilsack next week, said Mr. Schumer's spokesman, Maxwell Young.

Although the company has Canadian ownership, Mr. Schumer's office makes the case that it is a major employer in St. Lawrence County, with about 120 workers.

The Senator is counting on the fine print in USDA programs that would give Mr. Vilsack some flexibility in determining an applicant's eligibility.

"We need more jobs here in Northern New York and Newton Falls is a great company that would create jobs right here in the North Country, with access to the proper resources," mr. Schumer said in a press release.

daniel48706's photo
Wed 03/10/10 07:18 AM

True, that all high officials have protection in place. It comes with the job. The DIFFERENCE is having a corps (or body) of armed protectors who have sworn a PERSONAL LOYALTY OATH to an INDIVIDUAL rather than who exist to preserve a Representative Republic. Case in point: The Secret Service exists quite separate and apart from whoever the 'president du jour' is. A 'personal bodyguard' exists ONLY to protect ONE particular individual. There's a HUGE difference in those two concepts.


Also, the Secret Service is not there ONLY to protect the current President. They also provide protection for all FORMER Presidents and their families, as well as other Government dignitaries as needed.

daniel48706's photo
Wed 03/10/10 07:16 AM
there is a difference between freedom of speech, and being able to outright make a claim that something is true. for example:


"I believe that President Obama is going to lead this Coutry into the worst times it has ever seen." This is an example of free speech as you are giving your opinion (dis: I do not hold to the belief stated about president Obama, I actually like the guy).

"president Obama is going to kill all the Christians in the Country, as he is a Muslim loving freak". This sentence is NOT protected by free speech as it is stating something to be factual when it is not, and it ALSO is capable of causing dissension and legal problems, when nothing in it can be proven to be true.

daniel48706's photo
Wed 03/10/10 07:09 AM
Well quoted QM, and might I add that with this being the case, an argument can be made to abolish the two party system, as it is absolutely non-productive and will not be productive in any foreseeable future. Both "parties" have grown in size and personal caring, as to be willing to let the people suffer in order to prevent the other party from doing something, simply because of the fact that it is the other party doing it. This holds true for both the Democrats AND the Republicans.



people like Rush thrive on controversy and publicity and left wing hyperventilators aid them by making threads just like this one.


as for as secession goes, this might be relevant,


when in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

daniel48706's photo
Wed 03/10/10 07:04 AM

Celebrities saying they will move to other countries is no biggie either way.

Some of the celebs do live elsewhere and keep their dual citizenship.

Sending Rush the raunch of this country to another country though could cause us diplomatic problems. He is such scum that they would definitely feel put out for us letting him out of his cage.



After all the fuss we have made about other countries sending their trash (specifically Canada)over to our trash dumps, I would have to say, Rush going to another country would make us look rather hypocritical to say the least!

daniel48706's photo
Tue 02/23/10 01:13 PM
(((((((((((((((((msteddy)))))))))))))

I've missed ya hun, how ya been?drinks

daniel48706's photo
Tue 02/23/10 01:09 PM
Although I don't normally agree with you brother, and I don't share your enthusiastic vernaculum (sp?), I have to say I agree with you completely. People need to mind their own darn business, and make sure they are not standing in a glass room.








The pervert Michael Jackson didn't get this much airtime and he was screwin' kids.slaphead



never proven or admitted,,, a bit different than tiger

Payoffs to families to STFU about the rapes is admission of guilt as I see it.

Just like the Catholic Priests that rape kids. Pay enough out and it all goes away.



sounds like guilty until proven innocent to me,,,,,but to each their own

And I suppose OJ is innocent as well.rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl rofl


This is the kind of ignorant, bigoted, racist, narrow-minded, and dangerously delusional mental construct that lead to the WWII genocides.

Notice, with the exception of the recent mention of Catholic priests, every single examples brought up to justify the opposing camp 'unfounded attacks', happen to involve a darker skin tone person.

WTF kind of incurable disease are some folks plagued with. What the heck is this 'monkey court' turning into.

A golfer, whom has committed no crime whatsoever, is now being compared and associated to several darker skin toned public figures and some ALLEGED crimes of MURDER and UNDER AGE SEX!!!

Hey People!!! Freedom of speech is one thing. But have you no shame???

How can anyone lend credibility to anything said by people whom do just that: SAY ANYTHING!!!

Things unfounded, unintelligent, irrational and senseless, written by otherwise intelligent individuals, hide ugly and malevolent motives.

Tiger is a decent and upright human being like most of us. And like most of us, he comes with his share of imperfections.
Also like millions of other US citizens, males and females, whom project a 'whiter than white image' (thought that expression was appropriate) in their lives, Tiger has had sex with partners other than his spouse.

Well, just like those millions of other 'whiter than white' folks, whom are having sex with partners other than their spouses, and from whom we never hear, CAUSE IT'S NONE OF OUR G'DARN BUSINESS,
... the opposing camp must let go of the filth they are generating around this monkey trial.

The only evidence gathered here, is evidence of bigotry, racism and narrow-mindedness committed by the spreaders of such on this forum.

The man is the world's greatest golfer.
In the public domain, that's all he is to us folks.

Just like your private lives are none of other people's business,
... jealous that you are of the individual rights, protection and freedoms afforded by the Constitution for ALL,
... well so is Tiger's private life; none of our business PERIOD.

This basic instinct and primitive witch hunt has gone way beyond the inescapable rights of freedom of speech we must afford for the insistent bigot and racist sentiments sleeping at the ready in our society.

Enough is enough. Tiger is a golfer!!! As for the rest, put a sock in it!!!

If some must absolutely 'denounce' adulterers, as some sort of bad habit, at least switch to some 'whiter-than-white' ones. It will at the very least, have the merit of balancing out the bigotry and narrowmindedness.

As my 'grampa' use to joke: '... if only those bigots could spread their venom to all, evenly!!!...'

daniel48706's photo
Tue 02/23/10 01:06 PM
my question here is why is it any of your business (or mine or anyone other than his esteemed wife and mistress(es) ) business about any of this? And don't give me any of the crap about him being in the public eye or anything, he still has his personal life and rights.





I think it took a lot of courage to get up there and make that speech.




Courage? He has everything to lose if he didn't get up there and make that speech. Giving the speech was the easy part. Actually fixing his life and reputation will take time and commitment.


Considering his "speech" was weak and pathetic, you bet it was easy. I think he needs a follow-up conference, because this one was terrible. Maybe an interview on NBC Nightline or Larry King.

daniel48706's photo
Tue 02/23/10 01:02 PM
case by case basis. In most circumstances, if the lady was not right for my brother to continue dating I would not be interested in seeing her either. This is kind of surprising considering he and I lead such drastically different lifestyles, but it is true.

daniel48706's photo
Tue 02/23/10 01:00 PM
I also confess I tend to actually SAY LOL, instead of laugh, ocmes out like this:

el oh el...

I have had this problem for over five years now and it is progressively getting worse. Can anyone help?

daniel48706's photo
Tue 02/23/10 10:45 AM
Manners, my friend, are not something that can be taught at home and only at home. They can not be taught at school and only school either. Manners are taught by everybody a person comes in contact with, whether it is their parents, a teacher, a peer.....

From what I have seen of your responses so far, you are a good example of someone having learned "bad" manners from those around him. But then again, I am not in your area so I do not know what is acceptable manners for your location.

I was raised to open doors for a lady, never spit where a lady can see me, hold her chair for her as she sits (in order to make sure it does not slide back and land her on her derriere). I was also raised that it is only POLITE to pick your date up for the first time with a bouquet of flowers, or a box of candy, something small as a token of your affection.

I still do all these things today, and I raise my children the same way. I do not open the door because she can't; I do not hold her chair because she is incapable of holding it herself. I do so to be polite. Just this afternoon, while I was checking on a job application, I excused myself from the boss to hold the door open for a customer that had her arms full. You know what? The boss told me point blank to expect a call next week when interviews are scheduled. Was i thinking about that when I excused myself? No. I was thinking the lady might appreciate someone getting the door for her so she didn't have to try and hold three people dinners in one hand and arm while pulling on a heavy door.

Even with my ex-wife, who a lot of people on ere can tell you I hold NO respect for, I hold the car door for her, or a building door. If we take the children out to eat together I pull her chair out for her, even though I do not like being near her, and can not stand her half the time. I still SHOW respect, especially around my children.

So as I said in the beginning, Manners are not something that is taught exclusively at home, or in school or even at church, etc. they are taught by all those around you; by those who look the other way when a man tells a lady to go to blazes, or refuses to give up his seat for a lady or the elderly, just as much as they are taught by those who show better manners.

Just food for thought.





A lost art?

Women want equality why should the boys treat them different than the way they treat other boys?


What does equality have to do with manners and respect... there sure are some confused and misguided ideas about equal rights and the treatment of women. No wonder so many men are still single. whoa

Maybe you didn't read what you wrote before you hit the button..you may want to re read and think about it! dohslaphead



I know what I wrote!

School isn't the place to learn manners and respect! That's for reading, writing, math, science, and history etc....

Somewhere along the lines manners and respect got lost at home where it should be taught!

daniel48706's photo
Tue 02/16/10 11:06 AM



http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/15/colorado.mistaken.identity.arrest/index.html?hpt=Sbin

This story just broke this morning, but the actual event happened over two years ago.

"(CNN) -- Three police cars pulled into Christina FourHorn's front yard one afternoon just before she was supposed to pick up her daughter at school. The officers had a warrant for her arrest.

"What do you mean robbery?" FourHorn remembers asking the officers. Her only brushes with the law had been a few speeding tickets.

She was locked up in a Colorado jail. They took her clothes and other belongings and handed her an oversize black-and-white striped uniform. She protested for five days, telling jailers the arrest was a mistake. Finally, her husband borrowed enough money to bail her out.

"They wouldn't tell me the details," she said.

Later, it became clear that FourHorn was right, that Denver police had arrested the wrong woman. Police were searching for Christin Fourhorn, who lived in Oklahoma.

Their names were similar, and Christina FourHorn, a mother with no criminal record living in Sterling, Colorado, had been caught in the mix-up.

FourHorn went public about her case more than two years ago, filing a lawsuit that alleged the arrest violated her constitutional rights. The Fourth Amendment protects citizens from arrest without probable cause."


Click the link and read on for more. This is simply outrageous that this sort of thing is going on in this country. We are becoming a police state, and the cops have all the power. The cops arrest the wrong person, and after a lengthy letigious fight in court, they say "whoops, our bad."??? They can come into your home and snatch you away for whatever reason or for no reason. They find clever ways of getting around warrants, the 4th Ammendment, and Miranda rights. I would guess that citizens are getting pretty damned fed up with sort of wreckless irresponsible and unethical behavior by the police.




unfortunately,, cops will make mistakes,, but even MORE unfortunate is so many believe that they don't to the point that they won't LISTEN to any theories but the ones they already decide upon.


Oh God, I am so tired of hearing that "Cops will make mistakes." Nonsense! They are trained in criminal justice, and swore an oath to the truth and to protect the general welfare of the community. There is absolutely no excuse for a police officer not upholding the true nature and expectations of excellence in performance and duty to the law. When it comes to the police, I'm sorry, there are absolutely no tolerances for mistakes, too much is at stake when it comes to freedom. And yes, they rush to judgement, or they're doing what their superiors told them to do. The police need to put the law first above all else, not their own emotions or agenda. And you mentioned that the cops won't listen. This is true, except they will try to trick you into saying things that will get additional charges piled against you. Better off to never say anything to them, do not let them into your home, and never go out to talk to them without physical proof of a warrant, and you and your attorney read and understand this warrant. The days of cop-loving are over, and sad to say, they did it to themselves.


I suggest you watch an old 80's movie entitled robo-cop. Also one entitled Judge Dredd with Sylvester Stalone. both will show you that what you just finished saying is nothing but pure and utter nonsense. NOBODY is perfect, and NOBODY can be held accountable to perfection and nothing else. Mistakes DO happen. What needs to change is the public's attitude of going for the fast buck when a mistake does happen so that those who make a mistake are not afraid to come forward and admit it.

daniel48706's photo
Tue 02/16/10 11:03 AM

As similar as the names are... this should have been an easy catch. They had to have taken fingerprints. Those wouldn't have matched the suspect, and she should have been set loose then and there.
Furthermore, her identification should not have matched the suspect. The initial arrest might have been valid, but any time spent in jail, and not just at the local police station for identification, was a violation of her rights.
Sorry to say it, but this doesn't classify as a mistake. This classifies as negligence on the part of the police. A close or same name should in no way cause you to be locked up for 5 days.



Just on the information posted here (did not read the attatchement), I have to say I agree that the police would have been justified in taking her in for questioning AND verification of identity; the questioning would be in line of identifying her. After that, fingerprints, DNA, etc would have proved her identity and such, and then she would have been released to go back home, with absolutely nothing on her record, false or not.

daniel48706's photo
Thu 02/11/10 10:51 AM

It's hitting NYC at the moment. This time we didn't dodge it.


Send it up my way, 10 miles west of Gouverneur!!!!!

daniel48706's photo
Wed 02/10/10 09:20 AM

Okay, let's take a look at this here. First; she asked you to show her your dick while she had her hand down your shirt...in front of her 'boyfriend', okay, second; she didn't cut it off with her now ex-boyfriend before jumping on the 'I wanna **** you' bandwagon...so to speak.

Now, after all of that, what, do you think, will stop her from doing the same thing to you?


took the words right out of my head there. iw as going to ask why he owuld even want to have anything to do with someone who he had hear nothing but complaints of, then WATCHED FIRST HAND cheat on her boyfriend.

daniel48706's photo
Wed 02/10/10 09:05 AM


A vacation to someplace warm sounds really good right now..


Big Bend National Park in Texas is hitting about 80 degrees right now




It can stay there!!!

2 4 5 6 7 8 9 24 25