Sequestration - good, bad, or indifferent?

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by firstdown

One thing I don't gat is that the National Flood Insurance Program now falls under Home Land Security.

If our guns get wet we won't be able to shoot anyone. Duh!

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I disagree about the Superbowl though. I get that it is a privately sponsored event, but it is an international spectacle, and a giant target of US opulence and excess. So I can understand some level of federal assistance in the security. Protecting the population one of the reasonable duties of the federal government.

If you end the Blue Angels, fly overs, you have to end this as well. A terrorist can do the exact same damage at any college, NBA, NHL game my friend. Our tax payer money doesn't need to be spent on the NFL, the NFL needs to spend that money. If you are in favor of spending the money for this, then by default, you have to agree to spend it at EVERY single event that has a large assembly. (concerts, NBA games, college games, NHL)

It's a HUGE waste of spending.

[Alvin Walton]

Tons of money to be had for Blue Angel fuel right here.

Foreign Assistance Fast Facts

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Alvin Walton

Tons of money to be had for Blue Angel fuel right here.

Foreign Assistance Fast Facts

ok, but sure seems still like you are willing to take money out of the hands of others that could use a hand up, rather than make a small sacrifice of something that you yourself acknowledged was a pride issue, not defense of the country. (I could argue that many people find great national pride in the compassion and help the US is known for, ie after the Haiti earthquake).

[Alvin Walton]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

ok, but sure seems still like you are willing to take money out of the hands of others that could use a hand up, rather than make a small sacrifice of something that you yourself acknowledged was a pride issue, not defense of the country. (I could argue that many people find great national pride in the compassion and help the US is known for, ie after the Haiti earthquake).

Thats because I'm not a bleeding heart liberal.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

ok, but sure seems still like you are willing to take money out of the hands of others that could use a hand up, rather than make a small sacrifice of something that you yourself acknowledged was a pride issue, not defense of the country. (I could argue that many people find great national pride in the compassion and help the US is known for, ie after the Haiti earthquake).

At this point when we give foreign aid we are giving away money we have to borrow or easier said we don't have. Its time we stop this crap. I don't have a problem providing man power to places like Haiti for a period of time but it stops there.

[CRedskinsRule]

FD and AW why do you two insist on calling posters and those who disagree with you names? Can't you make your case without resorting to that?

Just curious.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

FD and AW why do you two insist on calling posters and those who disagree with you names? Can't you make your case without resorting to that?

Just curious.

Please find post where I call people names. I just called NC a loom joking around. I guess I should have put JK after it but find another example. If anything I get called the names but you seem to miss that.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by firstdown

Please find post where I call people names. I just called NC a loom joking around. I guess I should have put JK after it but find another example. If anything I get called the names but you seem to miss that.

Well, my comment was directly following the loon comment(which I didn't see as a joke), and if you don't normally I apologize for the generalized statement.

That said, one of the worst parts of our political society now, imo, is the lack of respectful discussion, instead turning to name calling, or partisan demagoguery. I just wonder if at the discussions of the Federalist papers, if the politicians and civil society of that day were as disrespectful as we as a rule are now.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

Well, my comment was directly following the loon comment(which I didn't see as a joke), and if you don't normally I apologize for the generalized statement.

That said, one of the worst parts of our political society now, imo, is the lack of respectful discussion, instead turning to name calling, or partisan demagoguery. I just wonder if at the discussions of the Federalist papers, if the politicians and civil society of that day were as disrespectful as we as a rule are now.

Apology acepted. I have said the same as you in the past about the name calling. After I read my post again I can see how calling him a loon may not have come across as a joke. I figured it sounded like a joke because who calls someone a loon now days.

[CRedskinsRule]

I don't agree that the SB is equivalent to a college football game or other large event. But I will compromise, any event that draws over 100Million viewers and over 5000 world journalists, on US soil, the government will help address security issues, anything less and they are on their own.

On the other hand, if it was announced that the NFL was required to fund security, or even reimburse govt expenditures, I would be ok with that as well.

[NC_Skins]

Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule

I don't agree that the SB is equivalent to a college football game or other large event. But I will compromise, any event that draws over 100Million viewers and over 5000 world journalists, on US soil, the government will help address security issues, anything less and they are on their own.

Stop buying into this whole "Al Qaeda" boogeyman.

These Guantánamo files undo the al-Qaida myth machine | Jason Burke | Comment is free | The Guardian

The media and our government love using fear as a tool to continue their stupid spending in the military.


Answer this, when has a terrorist ever attacked a highly viewed event? The Super Bowl doesn't need to be covered. Period. End of story. Why? Because it's the highest rated show in the world? Who cares? Why is this deemed a "level 1"? Because a bunch of rich assholes and celebrities are attending? Meanwhile, the same attack can be done at any other venue I suggested.

Spending this type of money is beyond foolish, it's reckless. These people are just playing on the fears and ignorance of its people.

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Stop buying into this whole "Al Qaeda" boogeyman.

These Guantánamo files undo the al-Qaida myth machine | Jason Burke | Comment is free | The Guardian

The media and our government love using fear as a tool to continue their stupid spending in the military.


Answer this, when has a terrorist ever attacked a highly viewed event? The Super Bowl doesn't need to be covered. Period. End of story. Why? Because it's the highest rated show in the world? Who cares? Why is this deemed a "level 1"? Because a bunch of rich assholes and celebrities are attending? Meanwhile, the same attack can be done at any other venue I suggested.

Spending this type of money is beyond foolish, it's reckless. These people are just playing on the fears and ignorance of its people.

I think we can agree to disagree. You always look for high value targets, why were the twin towers attacked, why were the Olympics targeted in 72, why did we hit Hiroshima, why did Washington cross the Delaware. The answer is always, the target would make a statement and an impact. Hitting a mid level college bowl might cause a stir, but not worth the retaliation it would bring, but pulling off an attack at the US's grandest stage, which the SB surely is, would show a level of sophistication of the enemy attack and question the US' vulnerabilities.

Don't get me wrong, I understand that politicians and media drive law and legislation by fear mongering. We are truly living in the Orwellian state right now, where once our enemy was our friend, and that whether there is a war to left or a war to the right, just don't look to closely at the political machine that continually shuffles the target.

[Daseal]

Originally Posted by NC_Skins

Stop buying into this whole "Al Qaeda" boogeyman.

These Guantánamo files undo the al-Qaida myth machine | Jason Burke | Comment is free | The Guardian

The media and our government love using fear as a tool to continue their stupid spending in the military.


Answer this, when has a terrorist ever attacked a highly viewed event? The Super Bowl doesn't need to be covered. Period. End of story. Why? Because it's the highest rated show in the world? Who cares? Why is this deemed a "level 1"? Because a bunch of rich assholes and celebrities are attending? Meanwhile, the same attack can be done at any other venue I suggested.

Spending this type of money is beyond foolish, it's reckless. These people are just playing on the fears and ignorance of its people.

NC_Skins. This is the issue with a lot of our spending. For the most part, worrying about security is useless. However, it only takes one breach for it to become a big deal and to have a massive effect on our country.

Overall, I do agree with you. However, I also understand how it is a difficult decision to make. If you leave these events wide open, and something happens, what do you do then?

[That Guy]

how much could we save by canning the F-22 and half of the military software contracts that are outdated before they even get completed?