CAFTA
 

I don't think there was anything partisan about my censoring of your pictures. I think there is general agreement that pictures should be safe for work, and there was at least some consensus that the charred bodies in your pictures were revolting. To be fair, you posted them because you wanted everyone to see what the Islamists had done.

Notwithstanding that I said I believed I censored DK's posts but do not recall doing so, I think you are taking unfair advantage of my poor memory.

Liberal hunt.
 

Yes. But I am for funding stem cell research. One of the governments major responsiblities is to protect us from foreign attacks. Humans aren't the only species that attack humans - viruses etc. In addition, diseases cause a terrible strain to the economy. One of the government biggest priorities should be combatting disease. And that includes stem cell research. If there is one place, besides SDI, I want my tax dollars spent it is in fighting these diseases.

Bush is neglecting his duty to the American people by not vigorously funding stem cell research.

CAFTA
 

Nice try, oath or no oath? the Board is watching.......

CAFTA
 

For the love of God. You should only respond to my posts when you have ABSOLUTELY nothing else to do.

Liberal hunt.
 

We are funding it. There are limits. My taxes only go so far.

Liberal hunt.
 

You sound like liberals with SDI. For a high priority budget item what percentage of the total budget do we spend on Stem Cell Research? I bet it is not even one tenth of one percent.

CAFTA
 

Well, he was also a good Democrat that kept on bringing home great things for his constituancy. And he hated Commies. You have no idea how much that will forgive being an alcoholic pussyhound in East Texas. I miss Charlie Wilson.

CAFTA
 

I don't think so either, and it's a moot point because the moderation of this board isn't going to change unless one of you guys wants to voluntarily step down. I can see the temptation of wanting to do so from time to time.

Liberal hunt.
 

It's a fucking pain in the ass (and expensive as hell), though, to build and fund separate floors/policies/personnel for embryonic stem cell research in larger research facilities for fear that NIH funding will be adversely implicated.

California, New Jersey, Massachusetts are on the right track. Texas and Florida aren't too far behind. We're losing research dollars to foregin countries on a fairly regular basis because of the ban on new lines, and more importantly, without OHRP jurisdiction over any embryonic stem cell research in this country, any research that does go on will not have the rigorous ethical oversight that most human subject research in this country must undergo before the protocol is approved.

I guess outsourcing cutting edge medical research, though, is par for the course in this administration. Free trade and all that, right Spanky?

CAFTA
 

Why do Republicans whine so much about bias? Especially in this context - I don't see a whole lot of post deletion going on, so what's the big deal?

Seriously - why?

As for PP, with all due respect to her post count, c'mon - if I want to read about her Spanky lust, Bing's, the trendy drink du jour, or shoes, there's the FB.

CAFTA
 

How nice! You are taking an interest in history and contemporary events.

You seem surprised that our casualties were low. Well, now, Spanky, perhaps you could write a short essay for the class highlighting when the Taliban were defeated and when the first American boots hit the ground in substantial numbers. It is very interesting, but I don't believe casualties happen very often before troops are in the line of fire.

You also indicate this was military genius. I'd like an essay from you explaining how US strategy and tactics in Afghanistan differed from the basic military strategies that had been developed and deployed during the first Iraqi war and in the Balkans. We will all be very interested in this new bit of military genius. Then perhaps you could also explain how the strategy and tactics developed and applied successfully over the prior twenty years were changed in Iraq by the genius civilian commanders.

Spanky, it's so good to see you taking this interest in history and contemporary events, but I'd like to see more substance in your future posts and I'd like you to show a bit more understanding of the actual history of events. I'm afraid I can only give you a C+ for this post, but I will consider raising the grade if you can provide some additional support.

CAFTA
 

Oh wow, man !"
"Wait a second man. Whaddaya think the teacher's gonna look like this year ?"
"My butt, man !"

T-T-Teacher stop that screaming, teacher don't you see ?
Don't wanna be no uptown fool.
Maybe I should go to hell, but I'm doin' well,
teacher needs to see me after school.
I think of all the education that I missed.
But then my homework was never quite like this.

Got it bad, got it bad, got it bad,
I'm hot for teacher.
I got it bad, so bad,
I'm hot for teacher.

"Hey, I heard you missed us, we're back !"
"I brought my pencil - Gimme something to write on, man !"

I heard about your lessons, but lessons are so cold.
I know about this school.
Little girl from cherry lane, how did you get so bold ?
How did you know that golden rule ?

Got it bad, got it bad, got it bad,
I'm hot for teacher.
I got it bad, so bad,
I'm hot for teacher.

"Oh man, I think the clock is slow"
"I don't feel tardy"
"Class dismissed"

CAFTA
 

Now, Mr. Pensky, I've decided to grade all your work as fiction so that I don't have to flunk you in social studies. But, really, I'm concerned and want you to check in with the school nurse every morning until we figure out what is causing these hallucinations.

As fiction, I'll give this a "C".

CAFTA
 

I've always liked you Sexual Harrassment Panda. I'm not quite sure what to make of the last stanza, though. A-

CAFTA
 

2. she hardly posts here.

Why aren't Ty and Penske in ideological equipoise here? Seems sufficient to me.

And, Spanky, if you want a book board go start one. But politics is politics, FB is a free-for-all, and both have been well established for quite some time now. No need to go changing. Just get a faster scroll wheel.

CAFTA
 

Beats talking about Iraq or what this government is doing to the federal budget.

CAFTA
 

It is pretty common knowledge that Bush I had proof of clinton's affairs (photos) and was too classy to use them.

Query:

did Bush I screw up by not giving Osama the photos once it became clear Bill was going to win?

Postulate:
If Osama had possesion of the photos Bill would have had insentive to kill Osama. The survival rate for those in possesion of evidence of Bill's cheating is small.

CAFTA
 

3. We were tweaking RT. Do you really think we expected her to make P the moderator?

CAFTA
 

Mr. Chinasky,

Please join Mr. Pensky at the nurse's.

Where does the hypocrasy of the left come from?
 

Why the hate on Hannity? I'm sure he's well qualified. Where did he get his undergrad degree?

CAFTA
 

It is also common knowledge that visitors to the White House are presented with a comemorative mirror and razor blade.

Furthermore, it is common knowledge that when Condi gets drunk at State Dept. functions, she is likely to jump onto the table and exhibit her belly dancing prowess. I've heard she's quite good.

CAFTA
 

If by "classy" you mean found important not embarrassing his wife by having his own affairs disclosed in response.

Liberal hunt.
 

1) This sort of pithy comment is beneath you.

2) As if outsourcing hasn't been going on in every administration since Lincoln.

3) Outsourcing was going on during Clinton. What do you think could be done to stop outsourcing? And why didn't Clinton do it.

4) To say that medical research being conducted in other countrys is caused by the administrations lack of action on outsourcing is like saying that the murder rate in the United States is caused by the lax atmoshere for where life is concerned because of legal abortion.

CAFTA
 

I return to my observation that you keep repeating the mantra "free trade" in a way that is unclear. When you talk about non-tariff trade barriers, that can include a whole bunch of different things that prevent companies in different country from competing on an equal footing. When I talk about "free trade," this is what I am talking about -- trade across borders. The way you're using the term, in sounds like anything that departs from an anarcho-libertarian fantasy of a straight common-law regime without any other form of government regulation is a "free trade" problem. You are welcome to use the term that way, but it's getting in the way of meaningful conversation.

Government can subsidize industry by giving it money. Or, by permitting it to pollute the air. Or, by ostensibly barring it from polluting the air, but by establishing really, really flimsy fines for doing so. (I recognize that you would use the word "subsidy" to refer only to cash payments, but an economic perspective requires you to think about it more broadly, and surely business understands that being permitted to pollute is worth money, e.g. the money saved by not having to upgrade equipment.) If you're in an industry -- say, chemicals -- where worrying about air pollution is a very important part of the business, and you are forced to compete with foreign companies whose governments wink and look the other way when they pollute the air, you've got a free trade problem in my book.

So-called free trade agreements can be used to weaken this country's environmental laws (or other laws, but for the sake of simplicity, I'll stick to the environment), directly or indirectly. (E.g. directly, by containing provisions that, when the treaty is adopted by Congress, trump our laws.) I take it from your response that you are in favor of this. If so, please don't pretend that it has anything to do with "free trade" as that term is usually used by other people -- what you are advocating is not levelling the playing field for U.S. companies and workers and their foreign counterparts, but weakening the environmental laws in the name of economic growth. We can have that conversation, but it's not a conversation about "free trade."

Not at all. Free trade can be a win-win, if you improve another country's situation by both eliminating tariffs and by improving environmental and workplace protections.

Since you have a Democrat who has supported every other free-trade pact for twenty years saying that this is a bad one, perhaps you ought to be wondering why.

CAFTA
 

You idea of a level playing field is an unatainable goal. It simply can't happend.

Please answer this directly?

1) By your definition there is not a level playing field between California and Alabama (Alabama has lower minimum wage, less environmental regulations and less workplace protection).
and therefore, there is no free trade between California and Alabama.

2) And following your line of reasoning (if it was possible) shouldn't California institute tariffs against Alabama until they "level the playing field".

CAFTA
 

But businesses support this, so it must be good.

Liberal hunt.
 

I dissent. SDI is part of national defence. National defence is something we all benefit equally from and which is difficult/impossible to pass to the marketplace to be allocated (other than via the exercise of our second amendment rights). There is an inherent and absolute market incentive to engage in R&D for diseases, including via stem cell, so I say let the market go at it. If there is a such a potential benefit for Alzhiemers patients, there should be a huge market incentive. Let lil Ronnie Reagan gather up some of his loudmouth pals in the media and pool their seven figure salaries and fund some research, in exchange for some patent et al rights to future medical techology/drugs.

In the absence of the above, if Japan and China and Europe and all the other places who are allegedly doing so much more than us in this area, actually are doing it, fantastic. We can be freeriders off their R&D later on, much as they have free-ridden out coattails in so many areas since WWII.

CAFTA
 

I'm Not Ty, but I play him on TV.

Short answers.

1) Correct in the theoretical sense. (Of course, there is no such thing as pure free trade, but whatever.)

2) If they weren't in the same country, they could and probably would. This very situation, by the way (bewteeen the 13 original states, of course), was one of the major reasons why the Articles of Confederation went the way of the do-do bird.

I was tempted to respond (again) to your earlier post's comment about the workers being free to choose to take or reject a lowpaying with the picture of the child laborers from 1900. We haven't had free trade here since those little bastards got out of honest labor and into the 3rd grade.

CAFTA
 

And yet, as Richard Epstein is my witness, we don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

The Commerce Clause not prevents California and Alabama from taxing goods crossing their boundaries, it also gives Congress the power to regulate interstate commerce on a national basis, including by preempting inconsistent state laws. This power is located in the federal government instead of state governments in order to realize a national economic union, because the alternative set forth in the Articles of Confederation didn't work so well.

[eta: Sweet, Not Bob.]

Look, one of Cardin's objections to CAFTA had to do with the enforcement mechanism -- or lack of an effective one -- for terms in the treaty. You can argue all you want about whether this subject is "free trade" or not, however you mean that term, but Cardin's objection relates to what the treaty actually does (or fails to do).

Liberal hunt.
 

I defer to RT on this stuff, since her little finger knows more about it than I do, but I thought Bush's policy was to prevent institutions which do stem cell research of certain types from receiving any federal funding at all.

CAFTA
 

Alas, I can resist anything but temptation. Here goes:

Spanky, don't let them take away my freedom of contract!

http://cbae.nmsu.edu/~dboje/images/n..._labor_big.jpg

Thank goodness my employer doesn't have to worry about pesky OSHA inspectors!

http://www.wwnorton.com/college/hist...ge/bgchild.gif

Not letting me work is anti-free trade!

http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/ath/libr...%20factory.jpg

CAFTA
 

My point of saying (if it was possible) was so you wouldn't blather on like this. I not asking what the consitution says. I am asking, if you believe that if it was possible - should we institute tariffs on Alabama? Shouldn't we try and level the playing field so our workers are not exploited by what is happening in Alabama? (again, I know it is not possible, but if it where).

Enforcement of the labor provisions not the free trade provisions. Again focusing on the nonfree trade aspects.

CAFTA
 

I am not asking if they would. I am asking if Ty thinks that would be a good thing? Would it be better for California to institute tariffs on Alabama. A-g-a-i-n I AM NOT ASKING IF IT CAN HAPPEN OR WOULD HAPPEN. I AM ASKING FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT IF CALIFORNIA INSTITUTING TARIFFS ON ALABAMA WOULD BE GOOD FOR CALIFORNIA.

I am not saying that we should not have labor laws. I never said that. What I am saying is that economic growth does more for workers than any regulations. India has worker regulation up the Yin Yang but it is much better to be a worker here than in India.

CAFTA
 

I'm not sure what you're asking. If Alabama and California were able to erect trade barriers like tariffs or (say) rules requiring the makers of, say, wine to use an in-state distributor instead of shipping directly to a customer, I would favor trying to reach a deal that benefited consumers by removing these barriers. But as Not Bob is pointing out, some things that can be called barriers to trade are good things.

You, I, and Rep. Cardin all think tariffs are bad, as a rule.

Whatever. Cardin and the rest of the universe -- pending repair of the Hubble Space Telescope -- understand that what he's talking about is within the subject of free trade. If you want to attack him for not using your own peculiar terminology, go ahead, but now that I understand that this is what you're arguing about, I'm less interested in pursuing it. I'll stick to law and policy.

http://amazing-space.stsci.edu/captu...hstlitho60.jpg

OK, but perhaps the question is not whether to have CAFTA at all, but whether to have CAFTA with the flaccid labor law enforcement provisions, or CAFTA with the sort of provisions that were a feature of previous trade agreements. The Administration could have gotten the votes of people like Cardin if they had followed those precedents, so why did they water them down?

edited to try to keep up with the above

CAFTA
 

I find the middle photo disturbing. Can we please have it removed? Penske you can remove can't you? please Get that off- it offends me for some personal reasons.

CAFTA
 

Hmm. Your "No Pink Frame" rule is an interesting one.

CAFTA
 

We'll remove images (or rather, edit to link to them) if they're not safe for work. Spanky assures me that no children will be harmed by the machinery in the middle picture, so it's work-safe. If Not Bob wants to show me some evidence that the machinery really wasn't safe for children, I'm willing to reconsider.

CAFTA
 

Actually I was trying to force Ty out to consolidate my own manaical powerbase.

Liberal hunt.
 

Yes.

CAFTA
 

with this being the exception to the rule, I don't converse with my socks.