So was I. Hint: look for quotation marks.

I'll be sure to pass your comments to NPR and the Washington Post where the excerpts came from.

I thought Breathed tended to be both more good natured and fairly even handed in poking fun at people. Doonesbury, not quite so much in either respect.

Or use night vision devices, or counter-air drones with sensors. You're a few options short.

Naturally you don't consider Basque separatists or Islamist terrorists, both of which have a history of terrorist attacks in Spain.

There are indeed various flavours of correlation, many of which I doubt you intend to reference:

Stupid thugs intent on rape, robbery, and mayhem that run into armed octogenarians.
Antigun nuts.
Nutters that think that guns are magic and are capable of turning honest, decent ordinary citizens into thugs, murderers, and thieves.

Do you think it is stupid to protect yourself with a gun from the powerful and violent, or packs of predators?

Indeed. I find there is much powerful magic in:
#!/bin/ksh or #!/bin/bash or even: cc
In the arcane tongue:
#!/bin/perl

Women and various flavors of handicapped don't tend to make the best general purpose infantry. Most countries that have tried it end the practice as soon as possible. There are also drawbacks of their employment in some related fields.

Your statement seems to be a little confused. Were you on the 57 state tour with the President?

These problems were created over a period of years, exacerbated by poor and uneven budgeting, congressional pork and mandates, and red tape. The only way this could have been averted in some fashion would have been if some company had offered for sale:

Robert Byrd Office
Robert Byrd Antivirus
Robert Byrd Internet
Robert Byrd Web Proxy
Robert Byrd Total Security

Fixing it will likely take years.

I'll ask the same of you.

Report: Iran developing nuclear bombs

Yes indeed, that is a mightly "blip" there.

Defense Spending Since WWII

Not sure why you bothered with those charts.

You think you've been proven correct? I'm pretty sure that hasn't happened, quite the opposite. The issue here isn't you not "falling into the mud" but rather avoiding the nitty gritty.

Thanks gary, good night.

I'm pretty sure that the corporations in question don't control the borders. But of course the government never engages in abuse, does it? Both corporations and government can be abusive, but only one of them seems to raise your ire. I'm against abuse from both.

Disney deserved the smackdown, and so do many other corporations pulling that. But the whole immigration policy of this administration is a mess, a criminal mess in some cases. (I see Sec of Homeland Security has been ordered to appear before a judge in the near future for some 'splanin') I can't imagine them being interested in this issue unless they thought it would cost them votes or donations, or maybe hurt diversity somehow.

I'm content to be the Dean Martin to your Jerry Lewis. Can I get a, "Waaaahhh!!" out of you?

Yes indeed, it is, sadly for you.

In jam, Romney tries not to make new Iran policy

And that is just with Yahoo's coverage from AP. Imagine what even handed reporting would do for the story.

As to the US going to war on Israel's say so, I don't think you quite got that right.

You have cause and effect backwards. The cause of buying the equipment was needs from the war, the war wasn't created to sell equipment. Afghanistan was a result of the attack on 9/11, remember? Iraq was a result of Saddam's long term actions, evasions, and aggression. Combat and the conditions of war often lead to new requirements since the equipment you have may not be suitable for all environments or every form of combat under every condition.

Frankly I find the idea of anyone throwing Major General Smedley Butler at me as laughable itself. I would be inclined to follow him anywhere on the battlefield, but nowhere near a voting booth. He was among the bravest and most gifted warriors the US has had, but also a political crank of the highest order who even worked to keep the US out of WW2 and associated with Communists. You're a fan, huh?

I didn't suggest that, you did. What I suggested is that there are still equipment sales in war and peace, and that is correct. You may recall that the US developed the M1 tank and deployed it in large numbers during peacetime? What about the F16, A10, and F15? The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq didn't produce a new tank, just an armored truck (MRAP) that isn't going to be kept in large numbers due to its specialized application.

If you keep trying you'll probably improve to at least bordering on rational.

"Perpetual war" driven by business is a load of bull. Eisenhower's words, though wise as a warning, only serve to underline the failure of the "MIC" as an explanation for events. All you have to do is look at military spending as a portion of GDP to see that. The long term trend is decline. If the portion of the economy devoted to military spending is in long term decline (which is even sharper if you go back to 1945) then it is hard to argue that the "MIC" is a powerful agenda driving force.

Do you have any other frame of reference, any other analytical framework to view the confrontation with the Communist bloc / Warsaw Pact / Soviet Union other than as a selling opportunity for the defense industry? If not I suggest you have a highly deficient view of events.

Mere bombs and tank offensives aren't sources of lasting change. Perhaps you should look into the events of the Allied occupation of Germany following its defeat in WW2. It wasn't completely "trouble free." The difficulties in Iraq and Afghanistan were multiplied by exactly the mindset you seem to have - only do tank battles and bombs, not interested in anything else. You don't always have much say in the wars that are inflicted on you. As to the tolerance of the American people, it was manipulated by the news media with the whole "another grim milestone" narrative. How do you think that would have played out in WW2? The total combat deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan represent a minor battle in WW2, not an epic tragedy.

I'm not surprised about your beliefs about Romney and his advisors given the limited perspective you have about the conflicts in general, and the whole "perpetual war" as business opportunity meme. It is nonsense.

You do realize that it is the government that created, enabled, and permits the situation as is, right? Do you think Obama is responsible for any of the policies of his administration yet? Yes, I'm willing to see some irony here. Obama: "I deplore what has been happening as policy under my administration. We must organize to stop it." It is a relief that the Obama administration can finally find something related to immigration that it doesn't like that might actually benefit the US.

Of course what's even "better" is that many of those same businesses give generously to the sorts of causes that are probably near and dear to your heart, and support Obama.