LawTalkers - Know new taxes!

It's hard to have a long-term strategy when there are elections next month. Another way of putting this is to say, why bother why a long-term strategy if you're not sure you'll be running things two months.

Hank Chinaski

01-09-2009 02:27 PM

Re: As Willard said to Kurtz.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376904)

Have some respect for GWU! It's not Harvard, but it's not far off, right?

My point was simply that any opinion that speaks to Israel being "clearly wrong," is by definition wrong.

OTOH I did not know that GW'ers wrote any blogs, but i would certainly respect opinions of any such bloggers. As you may know GWLaw is the Harvard of Patent Law, so it is almost like a branch campus for us Crimsons.

Adder

01-09-2009 02:32 PM

Re: As Willard said to Kurtz.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376907)

As I said before, I'm not sure that stopping rocket attacks for the short term is inconsistent with a long term strategy. Israeli's have to want to make peace too, and it is hard to ask them to do that if there are ongoing attacks.

Adder

01-09-2009 02:33 PM

Re: As Willard said to Kurtz.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376904)

Have some respect for GWU! It's not Harvard, but it's not far off, right?

It costs more, so that must be an indication quality, right?

Replaced_Texan

01-09-2009 02:35 PM

Re: As Willard said to Kurtz.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 376910)

Well, and I'm not quite sure what the hell Israel was supposed to do. Return the rocket fragments and say, "Excuse me. I think you accidently hurled these over into my yard. I wouldn't mind but they actually kill people and destroy property."

Penske_Account

01-09-2009 02:56 PM

Re: For Penkse

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 376858)

I understand that dynamic. But let's face it, The Today Show (and shows of its ilk) made her and maintain her and there are 500 other lunatic right wing morons who will say outrageous, made-up garbage to push their books waiting to take her place. I'm just wondering why, after she has spent three days insulting you on other shows and now, to your face, you would continue to put up with her. Sure, it's a symbiotic relationship, but Coulter is more like those little birds who clean the teeth of crockodiles. NBC should just crush her and move on to the next little "helper."

TM

Maybe she blew Matt and Al in the green room......ever think of that?

Secret_Agent_Man

01-09-2009 02:56 PM

Re: As Willard said to Kurtz.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376904)

Possibly, he sees his job as PR, and there is some strategy that he's not describing. Possibly, there is no strategy other than to get people to stop shooting rockets at them for a while. That would be really depressing.

The Ambassador should not be describing Israel's actual strategy in a public forum -- at least not while there are likely negotiations to come.

I think that the "stop shooting rockets" strategy is an acceptable short term goal (of course) -- the tricky part is to use that to set up a longer term strategy aimed at trying to reach some permanent solution. If the strategy is just to change the conditions on the ground to be more favorable to Israel right now -- I don't see why that's so bad.

S_A_M

Penske_Account

01-09-2009 02:58 PM

Re: For Penkse

Quote:

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 376868)

......people who still watch the Today show religiously and consider it an actual source of news and worthwhile commentary. .

Am I on ignore? NWTF?

Penske_Account

01-09-2009 03:03 PM

Re: As Willard said to Kurtz.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 376904)

As a friend of Israel, I would hope that Israel has a better strategy than the ambassador was able to describe. Possibly, he sees his job as PR, and there is some strategy that he's not describing. Possibly, there is no strategy other than to get people to stop shooting rockets at them for a while. That would be really depressing.

It's know it's easy and fun simply to dismiss what some blogger has to say because s/he's posting it on a blog, but dismissing Lynch as "tunnel visioned" or not understanding the reality Israel faces is just ignorant. Here's who he is:

You are, of course, free to disagree with him, but glibly saying he must be ill-informed is, um, ill-informed. Have some respect for GWU! It's not Harvard, but it's not far off, right?

I would put it third tier, at best.

ThurgreedMarshall

01-09-2009 03:33 PM

Re: Madoff

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller (Post 376899)

What I haven't been able to figure out is was the $50B actual client dollars, or was the actual amount less, with the $50B being the amount Madoff claimed to have turned (say) $15B into. (that's a horrible sentence)

In other words (with made up numbers), were there 50,000 investors who each invested $1m (average), or were there 50,000 investors who each invested $500k (average) that Madoff claimed was now worth $1m/investor?

From what I've read, it seems like the latter, but using $50B is easier and makes a bigger impact, even if it's a number based on the credulity of Madoff's marks. But using that standard, I can conduct a gigantic fraud if my "clients" are dumb enough--I promise doubling every two weeks, two of you each give me two-fitty, that's ~$5B before March 1, 2010 . Of course, the actual loss is only $5.00, but since you wanted to believe the highly improbable (hey, one could win 2:1 bets 30 straight times--not that anyone's taking $2.5B in action), it's a $5B fraud.

Interesting. I always thought is was the former. Right before it crashed, wasn't he looking for $9 billion worth of investments to keep the scheme afloat in the short term? If you've only ever actually gotten $15 billion, what's the point in trying to raise a quick $9 billion? That ain't gonna happen even in a great market.

And since he was really just taking new investor money and using it to pay returns on old investor money and he had clients who invested like $4 billion dollars with him, I figured he actually lost the $50 billion of money invested with him. Now I gotta actually look into all this. Thanks a lot.

TM

Tyrone Slothrop

01-09-2009 04:07 PM

Re: As Willard said to Kurtz.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 376908)

My point was simply that any opinion that speaks to Israel being "clearly wrong," is by definition wrong.

I'm not sure what or whom you're quoting there, but Lynch didn't say that Israel is "clearly wrong." He said the Israeli ambassador, upon repeated questioning, was unable to articulate a strategy: "if Ambassador Meridor is taken at his word, then Israel has no strategy in Gaza."

Tyrone Slothrop

01-09-2009 04:11 PM

Re: As Willard said to Kurtz.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Secret_Agent_Man (Post 376918)

The Ambassador should not be describing Israel's actual strategy in a public forum -- at least not while there are likely negotiations to come.

While one can certainly imagine things that the Ambassador should not be talking about in public, it is clearly wrong to say, as a blanket statement, that Ambassador should not be describing Israel's strategy.

Quote:

I think that the "stop shooting rockets" strategy is an acceptable short term goal (of course) -- the tricky part is to use that to set up a longer term strategy aimed at trying to reach some permanent solution. If the strategy is just to change the conditions on the ground to be more favorable to Israel right now -- I don't see why that's so bad.

Of course it all depends on the downsides.

Penske_Account

01-09-2009 04:21 PM

Exit CK, stage left

The notion that I have to take Caroline is not coming from me," Paterson said in an interview in his Capitol office with The Buffalo News. He said "gossip" has become a "greater force right now than my decision."

For the first time in my adult life I may be proud of a NY state politician. Good onya Patterson!

Penske_Account

01-09-2009 04:24 PM

114-1

I wonder how hard it is to get my license reinstated in IL?

LessinSF

01-09-2009 04:28 PM

Re: 114-1