I've got a bridge to sell you up in Alaska!

Kaldaur · Post by **Kaldaur** » September 21, 2008, 10:53 pm

Billy Madison, Modified! Three points for style.

miir · Post by **miir** » September 22, 2008, 11:41 am

Ive had one business and 6 years of my life (Becoming a Dr.) took away by the Federal government and healthcare hoops they made me jump through (I pray they don't get there hooks into Healthcare anymore). We'll have Doctors making the pay of teachers, but they have to pay 200k to be educated???(And people wonder why so many doctors are becoming foreigners they can't even understand.)

Do teachers in the US make 150-250k?

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » September 22, 2008, 11:59 am

Sirton proves his epic stupidity yet again, and clearly demonstrates for the world that literally anyone can get a DC. Fortunately, the standards remain somewhat higher for real doctors.

Aardor · Post by **Aardor** » September 22, 2008, 12:03 pm

WTF, when I used that quote to flame Noys after he claimed H2O was a gas, all I got was a post from Midnyte about how I was an asshole and Noys was entitled to his own opinion....

Fash · Post by **Fash** » September 22, 2008, 12:05 pm

Well, he did make a few coherent thoughts, Keith...

Sirton, may I inquire about your nationality/heritage and schooling? Is English a second language? Surely you understand there are a ton of grammar hawks here and you make nearly every possible infraction.

miir · Post by **miir** » September 22, 2008, 12:08 pm

Yea, I have to read Sirton posts 2-3 times before I can actually comprehend them.

Xatrei · Post by **Xatrei** » September 22, 2008, 12:28 pm

He's a Texan.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » September 22, 2008, 1:13 pm

Xatrei wrote:He's a Texan.

Ohhhh, so English is indeed a second language.

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » September 22, 2008, 1:13 pm

miir wrote:Yea, I have to read Sirton posts 2-3 times before I can actually comprehend them.

their they're Miir, it'll be otay.

laneela · Post by **laneela** » September 22, 2008, 1:46 pm

Sirton wrote:And people wonder why so many doctors are becoming foreigners they can't even understand.

I do! I do wonder. It was the strangest thing: one day in the middle of consult, my doctor, Dr. Harris started acting a little fishy so I asked him - I said "Dr. Harris, are you ok?" but he didn't want me to call him Dr. Harris anymore. He told me to call him Dr. Rami from Punjab and his accent started changing and was offering me a srurpee and a shawarma but all I wanted was for him to take a look at my bunion.

Is that Obama's fault? =(

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » September 22, 2008, 4:00 pm

No...but it will be Obama's fault that you are paying twice as much for your visit because you are also paying for the lazy fat fuckers down the street to have their bunions looked at for free.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 22, 2008, 4:47 pm

Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:No...but it will be Obama's fault that you are paying twice as much for your visit because you are also paying for the lazy fat fuckers down the street to have their bunions looked at for free.

You just reminded me of something.. If I see another person with a handicapped permit that is FAT and nothing else.. I'M GONNA SCREAM. Being fat is nothing you should get a handicap permit for, hell, you should have to park your fat fucking ass as far as possible from where you are going to do something about your weight.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » September 22, 2008, 4:50 pm

You should spit on those fat, lazy fucks.

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » September 22, 2008, 4:50 pm

How do you know being overweight is their only issue? Are you a fucking doctor with xray vision? I'm going to say the answer to that is a big fat NO.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 22, 2008, 5:09 pm

Aslanna wrote:How do you know being overweight is their only issue? Are you a fucking doctor with xray vision? I'm going to say the answer to that is a big fat NO.

I don't know for sure on a case by case basis, however I do know based on talking to doctors, and from friends who have handicap permits that shouldn't, that there is definitely an issue with doctors being far too liberal about giving out handicap parking permits.

What could be wrong with someone that required them to have a handicapped permit if they appear to be able to walk just fine and have nothing else visibly wrong with them? I'm guessing you'd probably argue that the "expecting mothers" and "parents with children x months old" parking spots are also not ridiculous too?

IMO, handicapped spots should only be for extreme cases (the person cannot walk at all, basically) and the number of handicapped spots in most places should be greatly reduced.

laneela · Post by **laneela** » September 22, 2008, 5:28 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:
Aslanna wrote:How do you know being overweight is their only issue? Are you a fucking doctor with xray vision? I'm going to say the answer to that is a big fat NO.
I don't know for sure on a case by case basis, however I do know based on talking to doctors, and from friends who have handicap permits that shouldn't, that there is definitely an issue with doctors being far too liberal about giving out handicap parking permits.

What could be wrong with someone that required them to have a handicapped permit if they appear to be able to walk just fine and have nothing else visibly wrong with them? I'm guessing you'd probably argue that the "expecting mothers" and "parents with children x months old" parking spots are also not ridiculous too?

IMO, handicapped spots should only be for extreme cases (the person cannot walk at all, basically) and the number of handicapped spots in most places should be greatly reduced.

Fuck that... I say those cripples shouldn't be going out anyway. If you can't walk, what makes you think you have the right to be in my vicinity?! They make people uncomfortable anyway. I pay my taxes and it's fucking stupid that I should have to walk an extra 20 feet because those assholes don't want to pay for someone to deliver.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » September 22, 2008, 5:29 pm

There's nothing I hate more than cripples and retards.

Canelek · Post by **Canelek** » September 22, 2008, 5:37 pm

It's their fault that they are crippled or tarded anyway. You people keep saying that there are K number of retards and Y number of cripples. I call bullshit. Not one of my suburban neighbors is tarded. Not one of my suburban neighbors is crippled. So, that means you people are just piling on numbers and big words. I'd do some research on this, but you people are not worth my time and I need to yell at protestors.

cadalano · Post by **cadalano** » September 22, 2008, 5:39 pm

I don't know for sure on a case by case basis, however I do know based on talking to doctors, and from friends who have handicap permits that shouldn't

made up

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 22, 2008, 5:42 pm

The fact that you guys are using this as an opportunity to make jabs at me instead of admitting I'm right makes you look so pathetic I almost feel bad for you. I don't think I've ever met a single person outside of this message board that would disagree that handicap permits are given out far too liberally.

Maybe instead of being assholes, and discouraging me from actually arguing with you like I am now, you could tell me why you think it's ok for anyone other than someone in a wheelchair to have a handicap permit?

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » September 22, 2008, 5:52 pm

The fact is you are WRONG not right. If that makes us assholes I know I can live with that. Enjoy your Bizarro world though if that gets you through the day.

Post by **Sylvus** » September 22, 2008, 6:02 pm

Funkmasterr wrote:Maybe instead of being assholes, and discouraging me from actually arguing with you like I am now, you could tell me why you think it's ok for anyone other than someone in a wheelchair to have a handicap permit?

Let me answer your question with a question. You obviously feel that it's reasonable for someone in a wheelchair to have a handicapped permit, why is that?

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 22, 2008, 6:07 pm

Sylvus wrote:
Funkmasterr wrote:Maybe instead of being assholes, and discouraging me from actually arguing with you like I am now, you could tell me why you think it's ok for anyone other than someone in a wheelchair to have a handicap permit?
Let me answer your question with a question. You obviously feel that it's reasonable for someone in a wheelchair to have a handicapped permit, why is that?

Because they clearly have serious issues with mobility, and they very often will have a vehicle that has a ramp that comes out of it in order for them to get out in their wheelchair which requires a larger spot than usual.

I feel a lot of people are just lazy and looking for an excuse, and handicapped spots is just one of many places this is displayed. If you are capable of walking, and doing so doesn't cause you extreme pain, there is no reason you need a dedicated front row parking spot.

Post by **Sylvus** » September 22, 2008, 6:56 pm

Okay, so we've established that it's reasonable for someone who has mobility issues to be issued a handicapped permit. Would you say that a really fat person might have mobility issues? Let's skip the "fat people should lose weight" argument for now, and assume it's someone with a medical condition that causes them to be fat. Since I believe they probably look the same to you as someone who is just lazy and fat. What about people who are in wheelchairs because of choices they made that caused them to be paralyzed, should they still get to park there? What about someone with really bad arthritis in their knees that doesn't require them to be in a wheelchair, but makes it terribly painful for them to walk. How about a respiratory or circulatory issue that you can't quite see under someone's clothes. At what level of pain or discomfort do we say "okay, these people are suffering enough that they should be able to park closer to where they're going than other people, but the rest of you can pound sand?"

And why is it such an issue for you? Why do you care if someone gets to park 2 spaces closer than you? Or 25 spaces closer than you? In the grand scheme of things, what are you missing out on? The extra 15 seconds it takes you to walk those few extra spaces?

Sure some people abuse the system, but I'll use my made up field research statistics to say that more people who have handicapped permits need them than are just cheating the system.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 22, 2008, 7:05 pm

Sylvus wrote:Okay, so we've established that it's reasonable for someone who has mobility issues to be issued a handicapped permit. Would you say that a really fat person might have mobility issues? Let's skip the "fat people should lose weight" argument for now, and assume it's someone with a medical condition that causes them to be fat. Since I believe they probably look the same to you as someone who is just lazy and fat. What about people who are in wheelchairs because of choices they made that caused them to be paralyzed, should they still get to park there? What about someone with really bad arthritis in their knees that doesn't require them to be in a wheelchair, but makes it terribly painful for them to walk. How about a respiratory or circulatory issue that you can't quite see under someone's clothes. At what level of pain or discomfort do we say "okay, these people are suffering enough that they should be able to park closer to where they're going than other people, but the rest of you can pound sand?"

And why is it such an issue for you? Why do you care if someone gets to park 2 spaces closer than you? Or 25 spaces closer than you? In the grand scheme of things, what are you missing out on? The extra 15 seconds it takes you to walk those few extra spaces?

Sure some people abuse the system, but I'll use my made up field research statistics to say that more people who have handicapped permits need them than are just cheating the system.

The reason it bothers me is when I go to a parking lot and can't find a spot to park, but their are 20-30 handicapped spots (at the grocery store down the road there are probably 15-20 in a relatively small lot) that no one is parked in.. I realize that the state or local government probably regulates that, but it's obnoxious.

Then you add on the layer of people abusing it, and it's just more frustrating.

I'd love to be able to give you statistics, but I doubt I'd be able to find any numbers or it likely wouldn't be an issue. All I'm saying, is I personally know a good handful of people who do have, or have had at one point a handicap permit they by no means should have had. It's about as easy to get one as it is for people to get prescription drugs they don't really need.

I also know that I notice a lot of perfectly healthy looking people that hop out of their car in a handicap spott and wiz along into the mall or wherever, and I just have a hard time believing they really need it.

Plus, if you are going to go walk around a shopping mall, how could you possibly argue that you need to park a few spots closer because you have issues walking?

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » September 22, 2008, 7:16 pm

I have no problem parking at the far end of a parking lot. It's just another way to sneak a little exercise into your day

Spang · Post by **Spang** » September 22, 2008, 7:21 pm

I always park at the far end of parking lots. It's more convenient for me. I walk fast. I can usually get into the building faster than someone driving around the parking lot looking for a closer spot.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 22, 2008, 8:05 pm

Similar to Spang, I never have to drive around a parking lot as I grab the an empty spot at the back. People barely get any exercise as it is these days.

The fatter you are, the farther from the front you should have to park by law. In fact, if you have fat passengers, they should have to exit the vehicle right as you pull into the back of the parking lot. They should also age code parking lots. Seniors get the front rows along with the handycappers, middle age peeps would get the next few rows and then the teeners and twenty year old crowd could fight it out for the last rows along with deal drugs and stuff back there.

Truant · Post by **Truant** » September 22, 2008, 11:58 pm

Funk, you obviously have great disdain for people who have handicap status that you don't feel they should have.
You state in your next post that you have friends that have handicap status that you don't feel they should have.
If you harbor such feelings for these people, why are they still your friends?

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 23, 2008, 1:14 am

Truant wrote:Funk, you obviously have great disdain for people who have handicap status that you don't feel they should have.
You state in your next post that you have friends that have handicap status that you don't feel they should have.
If you harbor such feelings for these people, why are they still your friends?

Oh trust me, I've expressed to them how I feel about it. And there's not much you can say when someone calls you out on something like that.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » September 23, 2008, 9:05 am

Funk is not all that incorrect. We have several people that work here, including some of my coworkers, that have handicap parking permits simply because they are fat and can't walk because of being fatasses.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » September 23, 2008, 9:14 am

Where should fat fucks that can't walk park their vehicles?

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » September 23, 2008, 10:44 am

Obviously they should just shove them up their fat ass. It's not like anyone would notice. amirite?? roflmaocopter!!!

Kilmoll the Sexy · September 23, 2008, 12:58 pm

If your "handicap" is being fat, then you should park where everyone else does.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 23, 2008, 1:12 pm

That's the point I'm making... It's not because I'm mad that I want to park in the close spot, it's the absurd number of spots and the abuse of the permits to park there.. It irritates me. It's just another issue on the long list of issues I have with Americans and their disgusting lack of personal responsibility.

Bubba Grizz · Post by **Bubba Grizz** » September 23, 2008, 1:31 pm

Somewhat on what you guys are talking about with personal responsibility. I have been seeing commercials about getting out of credit card debt. They say that you will pay less than you owe and it is completely legal. Now that bothers me. How can you rack up 10k in credit card debt and not expect to pay that amount?

It hardly seems right. Sure you can talk about how the credit card companies are gouging you with the interest but you agreed to it when you signed up for the damn card. You made the purchases knowing that you would have to pay back more than the items cost. Take some responsibility for that.

Spang · Post by **Spang** » September 23, 2008, 1:33 pm

We should just kill all the fat people. Especially fat Mexicans.

Funkmasterr · Post by **Funkmasterr** » September 23, 2008, 1:34 pm

Bubba Grizz wrote:Somewhat on what you guys are talking about with personal responsibility. I have been seeing commercials about getting out of credit card debt. They say that you will pay less than you owe and it is completely legal. Now that bothers me. How can you rack up 10k in credit card debt and not expect to pay that amount?

It hardly seems right. Sure you can talk about how the credit card companies are gouging you with the interest but you agreed to it when you signed up for the damn card. You made the purchases knowing that you would have to pay back more than the items cost. Take some responsibility for that.

I agree. Those things are generally scams, or don't work the way they say they will (unless you look at the fine print) anyhow.

They try and talk to your credit card companies and make them lesser offers than what you owe to pay off the balance all at once, the thing is, a lot of the credit card companies won't deal with them anymore. So what ends up happening is they get some of your debt consolidated, but not all of it.. Then you end up paying them a bunch of interest, and you still have other monthly payments to make, too.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 23, 2008, 2:02 pm

Bubba Grizz wrote:Somewhat on what you guys are talking about with personal responsibility. I have been seeing commercials about getting out of credit card debt. They say that you will pay less than you owe and it is completely legal. Now that bothers me. How can you rack up 10k in credit card debt and not expect to pay that amount?

Consumer Credit Counseling, etc will negotiate with your creditors and set up a single monthly payment that you pay CCC and then they distribute it to your creditors. Your credit is still screwed but you stop paying interest. The most important thing to remember here is that your credit is still screwed. All you're doing is getting the harassing calls to stop.

Personally, it'd be better to just blow off your debts (if you have a lot) and wait seven years for the charge offs to fall off your credit report and not pay anything. Times may have changed but not many credit card companies would subpoena you over credit card debt (Sears/Discover Card being the exception)

They may have cracked down a it on this. Back in the early 90's, when I had the horrific job for a year in collections, there wasn't much that could be done by creditors to get their money.

Sucks to have debt. I maintain zero debt and that's why I'm such a cheery person! Imagine waking up every morning and being able to say, "I don't owe jack shit to anyone!" and then call in sick and go back to sleep.

Rich or poor, debt will kill you with stress.

Truant · Post by **Truant** » September 23, 2008, 2:28 pm

Consolidation/Counseling has the same effect on your credit as bankruptcy as far as lendors and credit companies are concerned.

Kilmoll the Sexy · Post by **Kilmoll the Sexy** » September 24, 2008, 3:16 pm

In regards to the original topic of this thread

AHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Biden, Obama helped keep 'Bridge to Nowhere' alive

Although Democratic vice presidential candidate Joe Biden routinely mocks his Republican counterpart, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, for her onetime support of the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere," Biden and his running mate voted to keep the project alive twice.

Democratic vice presidential candidate Sen. Joe Biden campaigns in Washington on Tuesday.

Both Biden and Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama voted to kill a Senate amendment that would have diverted federal funding for the bridge to repair a Louisiana span badly damaged by Hurricane Katrina, Senate records show.

And both voted for the final transportation bill that included the $223 million earmark for the Alaska project.

An amendment offered by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Oklahoma, would have stripped the money appropriated to connect the Alaskan coastal city of Ketchikan to its airport on sparsely populated Gravina Island and diverted the money to Louisiana.

But Biden andObama and 80 of their colleagues rejected the measure, an amendment to a massive 2005 transportation bill that funded thousands of projects across the country. Watch how Biden has blasted Palin »

"That is probably the most disturbing element of this and the campaigning on the Bridge to Nowhere," said Bill Allison of the Sunlight Foundation, a taxpayer watchdog group. "Because, yes, they had a chance to vote specifically against the Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska to redirect the money to people, to bridges and infrastructure damaged by Hurricane Katrina going in to New Orleans, and they chose not to."

The final version passed the Senate 93-1. Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who has made his opposition to congressional "pork-barrel" spending a cornerstone of his campaign, did not vote on either the Coburn amendment or the final bill.

Palin, whom McCain chose as his running mate in August, has regaled crowds at the Republican convention and on the campaign trail with her declaration of "Thanks, but no thanks" for the bridge. But her conversion came after she became Alaska's governor in 2006 and after the bridge became a national symbol of congressional waste.

The record shows that she supported the bridge as a gubernatorial candidate, and Democrats have seized on the flip-flop, perhaps no one with as much relish as Biden.

"I got also a bridge I got to sell you here, and guess what, it's in Alaska, and it goes nowhere," Biden mocked Palin on the campaign trail last week in Maumee, Ohio. And in Canton, Ohio, he tied it to McCain.

"If you look at it John McCain's answers for the economy, and we're in such desperate shape, is the ultimate bridge to nowhere. It's nowhere," Biden said. "It takes you nowhere."

But while the applause line appealed to the Democratic faithful, it could come back to bite the Delaware senator.

This year, Delaware has requested 116 congressional earmarks through Biden, its longtime senator, at a cost to taxpayers of $342 million. In an appearance on CNN's "American Morning" with anchor John Roberts, Biden said that he had been open about those requests and that they all can be justified.

"Everyone has seen them, and we have no Lawrence Welk Museums and have no bridges to nowhere in Delaware. It's all straight up," Biden said.

Among his requests: $1 million for renovation of an opera house in Wilmington, another million for the construction of a children's museum and thousands of dollars for a water park renovation in Lewes.

"I think opera patrons generally can afford to -- you can raise money for an opera house; you can refurbish things a lot of different ways," Allison said.

"To have federal taxpaying dollars -- which is coming from people all over the country; low-income, middle-income people, as well as the wealthy -- to go to pay for the renovation of something that is really a luxury for Wilmington ... There are far more vital projects that anyone could think of that needs money. You got health care. You got education. You got all other types of things. Instead, we are redirecting money to refurbish an opera house in Wilmington or to build a children's museum."

And Biden's request includes a bridge that even the head of the Rehoboth Beach-Dewey Beach Chamber of Commerce says is not crucial at this juncture.

The Indian River Inlet Bridge is a vital link between two popular beachfront towns: Dewey and Bethany. Without it, the estimated 30,000 summer visitors would have to travel an additional 35 minutes to get to the towns.

"We need a new bridge, and we are fortunate to be at a place where it is finally going to happen," said Carol Everhart, the chief of the Chamber of Commerce.

The existing bridge has some erosion problems, and if it ever collapsed, Everhart said, it would cause an economic disaster in the community. But it's safe for now.

"The bridge, as it is, is perfectly safe," she said.

Still, Biden asked for $13 million to help shore up the existing bridge and begin construction of a new one. And that's what troubles the Sunlight Foundation's Allison.

"This bridge is not in any danger of collapse, and essentially what Sen. Biden is doing is saying, 'My state bridge gets the priority dollar even though it is not a priority project,' " Allison said.

He said the Department of Transportation, rather than U.S. senators, should be deciding which bridges get priority funding in the country. That way, the bridges in the U.S. that need immediate repair would be first in line for the dollars needed to do the work.

As he embarked on his presidential bid in 2007, Obama said he would no longer ask for earmark projects. McCain, who has been a longtime critic of the process, does not seek any for his home state of Arizona.

CNN asked Biden's campaign whether it could ask the senator about his earmark requests and his votes on the Bridge to Nowhere.

In response, a staffer e-mailed, "You've interviewed Gov. Palin re: her completely made up position on the Bridge to Nowhere right?"

Forthe · Post by **Forthe** » September 24, 2008, 4:01 pm

They aren't mocking Palin's one time support of the bridge, they are mocking Palin's continually lying about not supporting the bridge. It isn't the crime, it is the coverup.

When Biden starts claiming that he killed his own bridge project in his stump speech or when Biden and Obama start claiming they voted against the bridge then you may have a legitimate issue. As it stands your post\GOP meme is simply obfuscation.