Conservative Sites for Non-Bomb-Throwers

I realize I'll get bomb-throwers, but I could care less. I will probably just ignore it. These people are literally drunk on Kool-Aid!There are other forums for overall conservative thinkers. If you go to activitypit.com, it's for RedEye fans (like me). The show itself is very funny in my opinion. Of course, they do have some libs on there, but they don't behave anywhere near like these people. I've become very good friends with a couple people from there. I found out one of them lives in the same city as me. Talk about a small world! Here are a couple links from RedEye's Activity Pit:

Here are some others: breitbart.com, http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/, townhall.com,

The other friend, who lives in a very liberal state, was thrilled that she and her husband met ONE conservative couple.

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu

Here are some others: breitbart.com, http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/, townhall.com,

The other friend, who lives in a very liberal state, was thrilled that she and her husband met ONE conservative couple.

Check thsi out..I hope it works, if not check out Crooks and Liars website and watch it there. People are asked which country we should bomb next and they actually name other countries!! And their knowledge of geography is frightening. If I was asked..what country should be bomb and invade next I would say NONE, LEAVE THE WORLD ALONE! Amazing.

... a grassroots political force into extinction will be about as effective and trying to bomb Iraq into democracy," reminds me very much of a quote by Michael Corleone in Godfather II, where they're in Cuba trying to "do business" while in the midst of unrest and rebellion of the people.

Michael Corleone: I saw a strange thing today. Some rebels were being arrested. One of them pulled the pin on a grenade. He took himself and the captain of the command with him. Now, soldiers are paid to fight; the rebels aren't.
Hyman Roth: What does that tell you?
Michael Corleone: It means they could win.

Although Israel has very sophisticated American-made weapons, maybe, as above, that won't be enough.

I realize I'll get bomb-throwers, but I could care less. I will probably just ignore it. These people are literally drunk on Kool-Aid!

There are other forums for overall conservative thinkers. If you go to activitypit.com, it's for RedEye fans (like me). The show itself is very funny in my opinion. Of course, they do have some libs on there, but they don't behave anywhere near like these people. I've become very good friends with a couple people from there. I found out one of them lives in the same city as me. Talk about a small world! Here are a couple links from RedEye's Activity Pit:

Here are some others: breitbart.com, http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/, townhall.com,

The other friend, who lives in a very liberal state, was thrilled that she and her husband met ONE conservative couple.

(Almost five years after 9/11, just how committed is Bush to keeping Americans safe?)

By JOHN SOLOMON, Associated Press WriterFri Aug 11, 5:56 PM ET

While the British terror suspects were hatching their plot, the Bush administration was quietly seeking permission to divert $6 million that was supposed to be spent this year developing new homeland explosives detection technology.

Congressional leaders rejected the idea, the latest in a series of steps by the Homeland Security Department that has left lawmakers and some of the department's own experts questioning the commitment to create better anti-terror technologies.

Homeland Security's research arm, called the Sciences & Technology Directorate, is a rudderless ship without a clear way to get back on course, Republican and Democratic senators on the Appropriations Committee declared recently.

The committee is extremely disappointed with the manner in which S&T is being managed within the Department of Homeland Security, the panel wrote June 29 in a bipartisan report accompanying the agency's 2007 budget.

Rep. Martin Sabo, D-Minn., who joined Republicans to block the administration's recent diversion of explosives detection money, said research and development is crucial to thwarting future attacks and there is bipartisan agreement that Homeland Security has fallen short.

They clearly have been given lots of resources that they haven't been using, Sabo said.

Homeland Security said Friday its research arm has just gotten a new leader, former Navy research chief Rear Adm. Jay Cohen, and there is strong optimism for developing new detection technologies in the future.

I don't have any criticisms of anyone, said Kip Hawley, the assistant secretary for transportation security. I have great hope for the future. There is tremendous intensity on this issue among the senior management of this department to make this area a strength.

Lawmakers and recently retired Homeland Security officials say they are concerned the department's research and development effort is bogged down by bureaucracy, lack of strategic planning and failure to use money wisely.

The department failed to spend $200 million in research and development money from past years, forcing lawmakers to rescind the money this summer.

The administration also was slow to start testing a new liquid explosives detector that the Japanese government provided to the United States earlier this year.

The British plot to blow up as many as 10 American airlines on trans-Atlantic flights was to involve liquid explosives.

Hawley said Homeland Security now is going to test the detector in six American airports. It is very promising technology and we are extremely interested in it to help us operationally in the next several years, he said.

Japan has been using the liquid explosive detectors in its Narita International Airport in Tokyo and demonstrated the technology to U.S. officials at a conference in January, the Japanese Embassy in Washington said.

Homeland Security is spending a total of $732 million this year on various explosives deterrents and has tested several commercial liquid explosive detectors over the past few years but hasn't been satisfied enough with the results to deploy them.

Hawley said current liquid detectors that can scan only individual containers aren't suitable for wide deployment because they would bring security check lines to a crawl.

For more than four years, officials inside Homeland Security also have debated whether to deploy smaller trace explosive detectors � already in most American airports � to foreign airports to help stop any bomb chemicals or devices from making it onto U.S.-destined flights.

A 2002 Homeland report recommended immediate deployment of the trace units to key European airports, highlighting their low cost, $40,000 per unit, and their detection capabilities. The report said one such unit was able, 25 days later, to detect explosives residue inside the airplane where convicted shoe bomber Richard Reid was foiled in his attack in December 2001.

A 2005 report to Congress similarly urged that the trace detectors be used more aggressively, and strongly warned the continuing failure to distribute such detectors to foreign airports may be an invitation to terrorist to ply their trade, using techniques that they have already used on a number of occasions.

Tony Fainberg, who formerly oversaw Homeland Security's explosive and radiation detection research with the national labs, said he strongly urged deployment of the detectors overseas but was rebuffed.

It is not that expensive, said Fainberg, who retired recently. There was no resistance from any country that I was aware of, and yet we didn't deploy it.

Fainberg said research efforts were often frustrated inside Homeland Security by bureaucratic games, a lack of strategic goals and months-long delays in distributing money Congress had already approved.

There has not been a focused and coherent strategic plan for defining what we need ... and then matching the research and development plans to that overall strategy, he said.

Rep. Peter DeFazio (news, bio, voting record) of Oregon, a senior Democrat on the Homeland Security Committee, said he urged the administration three years ago to buy electron scanners, like the ones used at London's airport to detect plastics that might be hidden beneath passenger clothes.

It's been an ongoing frustration about their resistance to purchase off-the-shelf, state-of-the-art equipment that can meet these threats, he said.

The administration's most recent budget request also mystified lawmakers. It asked to take $6 million from Homeland S&T's 2006 budget that was supposed to be used to develop explosives detection technology and instead divert it to cover a budget shortfall in the Federal Protective Service, which provides security around government buildings.

Sens. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., and Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., the top two lawmakers for Senate homeland appropriations, rejected the idea shortly after it arrived late last month, Senate leadership officials said.

Their House counterparts, Reps. Hal Rogers, R-Ky., and Sabo, likewise rejected the request in recent days, Appropriations Committee spokeswoman Kirsten Brost said. Homeland said Friday it won't divert the money.

___

Associated Press writer Leslie Miller contributed to this story.

than an "anything goes" liberal. Yeah, we make mistakes sometimes, and we're not perfect, but at least we have a goal we're striving for. And for every conservative you ridicule, I could name 5 liberals that did the same thing but the media doesn't make a big thing about it. Of course, if it's a conservative, it's broadcast 24/7 - like Sanford - but the Edwards affair was actually covered up by the mainstream media and got no attention until the National Enquirer forced it into the open. Selective outrage, anyone?

I try not to visit the bog of eternal stench. Funny though...sm

or else you'd have mastered the art of "twisting" and wouldn't have such high regard for the truth.

You apparently have issues that are not going to be solved by endless bashing on a liberal board.

Although I may not like the rules on this board I am mature and courteous enough to at least try to follow them.

icon, declares McCain temprament unfit for presidency. You don't get any more conservative than George Will. Meanwhile, Sara P has pictures taken with foreign leaders but absolutely no questions allowed. Photo op.

"Smaller government and lower taxes" is one of those slogans that our side slings around but doesn't have any real meaning that allows us to defend it.

You can't just say such things without defining your terms. How small should government be? How low should taxes be? Government - at every level - DOES have a critical role to play in the life of this nation. We could never defend ourselves from foreign enemies, create a nationwide system of roads, or even coordinate interstate commerce among the states if not for federal government. You'd be paying tariffs on everything produced in other states, for instance.

We need law enforcement agencies that operate at every level of government. We need coordinated programs to help deal with problems like unemployment. We need to know that our food and our drugs are safe.

A better slogan would be "Only as much government as needed to do the relatively few things that government does well, and only the taxes needed to support it."

where we are free to talk about the extreme hatefulness coming from this board. However, when some people wish the president dead...well that's bordering on a THREAT to the president. I actually be afraid to post things like that. You might receive a friendly knock on the door from the FBI.

Again, There were trolls on the liberal board (no consistent moniker that's the first thing that gives trolls away) posting VERY NASTY replies anytime a conservative posted anything on THEIR OWN BOARD. It takes a lot nerve to argue with the administrator of this board who can delete you and ban you for any reason. It is a private board BTW no public doman. Many of you have been stalking on the conservative board for weeks. You have been posting near threats on the president....what do you expect the administrator to do!? Start talking about real subjects and quit having a hate fest over here and you might find the administrator a little more sympathetic to your plight....