The Crimson Cyclone wrote:Carson spends 55 cents for every dollar he raises on raising more money- quite the burn rate and even worse when you consider that he's hardly put any money into boots on the ground
(btw- Bernie spends 4 cents, what a cheap Jew )

TenuredVulture wrote:

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:Carson spends 55 cents for every dollar he raises on raising more money- quite the burn rate and even worse when you consider that he's hardly put any money into boots on the ground
(btw- Bernie spends 4 cents, what a cheap Jew )

I'm pretty sure Carson is not actually trying to win--he's trying to profit from the campaign. The problem with his plan is that he has turned out to be a leading candidate, and if he keeps it up, he might have a real dilemma if he actually wins the nomination. I wonder if that isn't behind some of his more outrageous statements.

TenuredVulture wrote:

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:Carson spends 55 cents for every dollar he raises on raising more money- quite the burn rate and even worse when you consider that he's hardly put any money into boots on the ground
(btw- Bernie spends 4 cents, what a cheap Jew )

I'm pretty sure Carson is not actually trying to win--he's trying to profit from the campaign. The problem with his plan is that he has turned out to be a leading candidate, and if he keeps it up, he might have a real dilemma if he actually wins the nomination. I wonder if that isn't behind some of his more outrageous statements.

pacino wrote:Exclusive Obama interview with Lest Holt on MSNBC right now. He makes sense 95% of the time and Im with him and then he tries to explain how we don't actually have boots on the ground in Syria because they're not in firefights.

smitty wrote:

pacino wrote:Exclusive Obama interview with Lest Holt on MSNBC right now. He makes sense 95% of the time and Im with him and then he tries to explain how we don't actually have boots on the ground in Syria because they're not in firefights.

http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/08/ ... ss-phrase/

He's correct in my view. We shouldn't use the term "boots on the ground." It's used to cover way too many situations nowadays. The term should simply describe a Desert Storm type operation. Something large scale.

We have soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines all over the world. Special ops and special missions. The boots on the ground description of these types of things isn't really accurate. I think Obama is doing the right thing and folks should just forget about the boots on the ground thing because it's meaningless nowadays.

Hagel made the same point again on Tuesday at an event speaking with U.S. military personnel. “As the president has made very clear, we’re not going back into Iraq in any of the same combat mission dimensions that we once were in, in Iraq. Very specifically, this is not a combat boots-on-the-ground operation,” he said, emphasis added.

Bridget Conroy-Varnis hardly ever misses the chance to vote. In fact, voting is practically part of her DNA: Her father was a South Philly committeeman, and her childhood home even served as a polling place for a few elections. So it was no big surprise to find Conroy-Varnis, a school crossing guard at 10th and Bigler, emerging from her polling place at 4th and Shunk yesterday evening, after casting her ballot in the Mayoral election.

The surprise for Conroy-Varnis came as she was leaving the Murphy Recreation Center: She won $10,000 from The Citizen’s 2015 Philadelphia Municipal Election Voting Lottery.

“I can’t believe this” Conroy-Varnis said. “This is crazy!”

pacino wrote:

smitty wrote:

pacino wrote:Exclusive Obama interview with Lest Holt on MSNBC right now. He makes sense 95% of the time and Im with him and then he tries to explain how we don't actually have boots on the ground in Syria because they're not in firefights.

http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/08/ ... ss-phrase/

He's correct in my view. We shouldn't use the term "boots on the ground." It's used to cover way too many situations nowadays. The term should simply describe a Desert Storm type operation. Something large scale.

We have soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines all over the world. Special ops and special missions. The boots on the ground description of these types of things isn't really accurate. I think Obama is doing the right thing and folks should just forget about the boots on the ground thing because it's meaningless nowadays.

Hagel made the same point again on Tuesday at an event speaking with U.S. military personnel. “As the president has made very clear, we’re not going back into Iraq in any of the same combat mission dimensions that we once were in, in Iraq. Very specifically, this is not a combat boots-on-the-ground operation,” he said, emphasis added.

Yes, I get that, smitty, and it's a good point. However, they are there to assess what should be done; this leaves the door wide open for eventual boots on the eventual ground that are eventually firing guns. We've seen how we get mired in conflicts. I don't think anyone is considering troops at am embassy, but we did just see an American die because of a gut level decision to help the Kurds against ISIS. Maybe they'll wear sneakers next time.

The Crimson Cyclone wrote:guess the scaring people into thinking transgender rights means creepy guys can go into women's bathrooms worked