Election 2010: Teabaggin' the Ds & Rs

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Adder

You think he wants to spend $84+ billion on simple maintenance? Also, since when has any member of congress said "modernization" and not meant "build a bunch of new stuff to replace what we have now?"

Adder, Hank isn't going to talk about this, because he's already told us he's dumb where this issue is concerned.

[Adder]

Conservatives' unshakeable faith in infallability of the executive branch leads to more outrage over those pesky other branching disagreeing.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Adder, Hank isn't going to talk about this, because he's already told us he's dumb where this issue is concerned.

In fairness to Hank, none of us have defined "modernization."

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

You think he wants to spend $84+ billion on simple maintenance? Also, since when has any member of congress said "modernization" and not meant "build a bunch of new stuff to replace what we have now?"

Since when has replacement of any significant number of warheads cost a sum as petty as $84 billion? That's stealth bomber money... pocket change. Senator Kyl is seeking the money to modernize facilities. No doubt some arm of Halliburton with the exclusive capability to perform such overhaul has donated a pissload of money to this arsehole, and he's making good on the quid pro quo. Just in time for us to sign a new treaty and mothball all the shit being "modernized."

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

In fairness to Hank, none of us have defined "modernization."

Unless English is your third language, the synomyms for "modernizing" in this context do not include "replacing entirely with new ones."

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

again, the senator wants to build new nukes or maintain the current ones?

Apparently he can't figure it out either. Are you suggesting that there hasn't been any discussion or any hearings in the Senate in the past two years about this? Why does Kyl need more time?

Everyone who is not completely blind recognizes that this is just another R effort to prevent Obama from accomplishing anything. Politics as usual.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Unless English is your third language, the synomyms for "modernizing" in this context do not include "replacing entirely with new ones."

It also doesn't mean "redecorate the silos."

But that's not really the point. Holding up our right to inspect Russian facilities (not the mention the possible follow on effects on Russia's interst in cooperating on counterterrorism) so that Halliburton can accelerate its opportunity to pocket $84+ billion is bad enough.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

Adder, Hank isn't going to talk about this, because he's already told us he's dumb where this issue is concerned.

Hank isn't going to talk about it because it's fucking stupid argument. Here's a study from the Brookings Institute outlining some of the costs of nuclear weapon development and deployment:

http://www.brookings.edu/projects/ar...eapons/50.aspx

A lot of them are in 1945-1990 dollars, so you'll have to run the inflation yourself, but I think we can all agree, $84 billion isn't buying shit in terms of new nuclear weapons.

Additionally, I believe we're party to a few treaties under which we've agreed not to build any new warheads, which would provide anther kind of important basis on which to ignore this stupid goddamned debate.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Apparently he can't figure it out either. Are you suggesting that there hasn't been any discussion or any hearings in the Senate in the past two years about this? Why does Kyl need more time?

Everyone who is not completely blind recognizes that this is just another R effort to prevent Obama from accomplishing anything. Politics as usual.

18 hearings and 900 questions to the record from any Senator who wished to offer a question.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

It also doesn't mean "redecorate the silos."

But that's not really the point. Holding up our right to inspect Russian facilities (not the mention the possible follow on effects on Russia's interst in cooperating on counterterrorism) so that Halliburton can accelerate its opportunity to pocket $84+ billion is bad enough.

I agree, but that wasn't your point. Make that point next time and I won't insult you about the dumb point you attempted to make instead of it. These boards get dull enough the way it is. Your insistence on flogging Hank with an obviously dead wrong argument for an entire page of posts is fucking maddening. I've been out of the picture for a couple days and was trying to play catch-up and here I am stuck reading the sort of disingenuous argument I'd expect from Sean Hannity.

Hank owned you from the start on this one and you knew it. You could have easily read the same shit I just did about what Senator Kyl was requesting, but instead you chose to demand Hank provide you with a cite to what everybody knew were the facts. That's not debating. That's being annoying. And that kind of shit is part of the reason we have no real dialogue in this country among reasonable people anymore. Some asshole always wants to play "advocate."

I commit the sin myself, a lot, and I hate that part of my character. It's douchey.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

18 hearings and 900 questions to the record from any Senator who wished to offer a question.

The NYTimes said it was 21 hearings.

Maybe that's the problem -- Kyl really needed those extra three hearings. Hank must be right.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I agree, but that wasn't your point. Make that point next time and I won't insult you about the dumb point you attempted to make instead of it. These boards get dull enough the way it is. Your insistence on flogging Hank with an obviously dead wrong argument for an entire page of posts is fucking maddening. I've been out of the picture for a couple days and was trying to play catch-up and here I am stuck reading the sort of disingenuous argument I'd expect from Sean Hannity.

Hank owned you from the start on this one and you knew it. You could have easily read the same shit I just did about what Senator Kyl was requesting, but instead you chose to demand Hank provide you with a cite to what everybody knew were the facts. That's not debating. That's being annoying. And that kind of shit is part of the reason we have no real dialogue in this country among reasonable people anymore. Some asshole always wants to play "advocate."

I commit the sin myself, a lot, and I hate that part of my character. It's douchey.

So you don't think Kyl is holding this up for a little pork and the pleasure of embarassing Obama?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I agree, but that wasn't your point.

Uh. Yeah it was.

but instead you chose to demand Hank provide you with a cite to what everybody knew were the facts.

Um. When did I do that?

Perhaps you were having a different conversation in your head or something.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

The NYTimes said it was 21 hearings.

Maybe that's the problem -- Kyl really needed those extra three hearings. Hank must be right.

I got my number from the undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, but maybe there were more.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

So you don't think Kyl is holding this up for a little pork and the pleasure of embarassing Obama?

I know you often are fucking around here, but I'm not sure of when it ends. This started with me saying "isn't it possible the money is needed for upkeep of some sort."

then the mob started attacking me since 1) he wants the money to buy new nukes, OR 2) I hadn't linked to articles that detailed how the money was being spent.

is it possible the guy is fucking with Obama? sure, although those are some big fucking stakes right there if he is- he's willing to fuck up our ability to reach a treaty ever for political reasons?

is it possible he's trying to use this as a lever to fix something that will never be fixed if he doesn't move now?