Culture of corruption: Murtha’s nephew got $4 million in defense contracts
WaPo has the story:
The headquarters of Murtech, in a low-slung, bland building in a Glen Burnie business park, has its blinds drawn tight and few signs of life. On several days of visits, a handful of cars sit in the parking lot, and no trucks arrive at the 10 loading bays at the back of the building.
Yet last year, Murtech received $4 million in Pentagon work, all of it without competition, for a variety of warehousing and engineering services. With its long corridor of sparsely occupied offices and an unmanned reception area, Murtech’s most striking feature is its owner — Robert C. Murtha Jr., 49. He is the nephew of Rep. John P. Murtha, the Pennsylvania Democrat who has significant sway over the Defense Department’s spending as chairman of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee.
This nepotism-stained pork brought to you by the most ethical Congress ever.
Sponsored by the letter “C” — for Culture of Corruption.
***
More from Ed Morrissey: This screams for an investigation.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Report: Solyndra Sold Assets Cheap to Entity with Close Ties to Investors
February 9, 2012 10:08 AM by Doug Powers
49 Comments
Fast and Furious showdown: Holder/Obama defend bloody culture of contempt; Update: Fortress Holder, Stonewall City; vid clips added, Dems advise, “Don’t answer”
February 2, 2012 09:16 AM by Michelle Malkin
158 CommentsThe SIGA scandal: Calls for investigation mount
January 27, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
58 Comments
Obama’s Green Robber Barons
January 25, 2012 09:13 AM by Michelle Malkin
89 CommentsThe trial of the last Haditha Marine: SSgt Wuterich takes plea deal
January 23, 2012 03:25 PM by Michelle Malkin
59 Comments
Attention: Obama’s coming to Arizona, Ground Zero of his Fast and Furious debacle
January 23, 2012 02:08 PM by Michelle Malkin
58 CommentsObama’s “Razist” Lobbyist Moves Up
January 13, 2012 06:29 AM by Michelle Malkin
233 CommentsThe last Haditha Marine: Wuterich trial update
January 5, 2012 06:19 PM by Michelle Malkin
26 Comments
Categories: Corruption,John Murtha
Pundit & Pundette
» Obama's war on conscience, cont'dRedstate
» Media MattersHot Air
» National Review to Newt: Get outAmSpecBlog
» Explosion Near Israeli Embassy in India
Demacrooks.
I am shocked!!!!
When can WE expect charges…10th day of NEVER! Culture of Corruption and yet not a peep from Republicans! SICKENING!
According to Maryland’s corporate website, Murtech’s corporate status was forfeited for over 2 years from 2002-2004.
I wonder if they were getting government contracts during this time.
Rope, Tree, Politician.
Some assembly required.
Hanging’s too good for him!
I thought Billy Bulger was a grasping thief! He’s got nothing on Murtha.
And therein lies the problem. The GOP should be demanding an investigation. Calling for hearings, appointing a special prosecutor.
That’s why we have more than one party.
I had the same thought with the White House bullying the Chrysler bond holders. Where is the GOP call for investigations and hearings?
Come on MConnell and Bohener , do your job or step down.
murtha is a pork meister, another way of saying he’s a crook, thief, unethical, corrupt, shyster, and those are his good qualities.
If Murtha can get reelected after what he did to the marines in Haditha, he is essentially untouchable. The democrat congress will support him no matter what treason, theft or corruption he is involved in. Past history shows this to be true.
And to think the nitwits who voted him in again. My God, what has this country come to?
I don’t understand why Dems always get away with this stuff.
I am imagining a Soprano like scene, where you sneak in past the unmanned reception area and peak into the warehouse. There sit five hairy guys on lawn chairs reading porn and watching sports on a giant flat screen TV. Each one has his hard hat placed neatly beside his lawn chair. What a deal, Can I get in on that?
This isnt strictly true there has been a Florida Republican congressman who has been pushing for an investigation for over a year. Its Pelosi and Murtha who keep blocking it.
Maybe they have. How would you know? 10,000 angry republicans could be demonstrating outside Murtha’s door every day and it would get no coverage in the media unless he called a press conference about it. Even then, the numbers would be reported as small and the issue would be described as a political disagreement.
Pennsylvania is the new Illinois.
What?!? And risk being arrested by the Obama administration as a Right Wing Extremist Terrorist?!? You crazy?!?
I’ve always felt that when Democrats point fingers or call names, it actually applies to themselves. Culture of Corruption; Bush’s failed policies – the Democrats personify those monikers and any others they collectively heap on conservatives.
When Democrats point fingers, watch the three that are pointed right back at them.
Murtha has always been a snake in the grass and has slithered through the halls of congress for far too long. They should have kicked him out when he was caught redhanded in the Abscam fiasco.
Something is really not adding up on this one. The WaPo article says that Murtha-jr. started the company in 2004, but Chap found records that indicate it was in existence in 2002 (or before). This website pulls information from public records. Here is the info for Murtech. It shows ~$3.5M in 2006 – 2008 (not $4M as stated in the WaPo article). Aside from the fact that this is more sleeze from the ex-Marine from PA, there are some oddities here.
The citizens of PA had their chance… They dropped the ball on this piece of DOGGIE DOO DOO, and re-elected him… You get what you pay for… QUEEN NANCY better hurry and get the AG involved to make it “MORE DIFFICULT” to investigate CONGRESS…
Lan Astalem,
Cool site.
The only explanation was they were formed in 2000, revoked in 2002 and reinstated in 2004. So maybe they kinda sorta formed in 2004. But in any case, I was curious to see whether they had received any contracts during that period. Appears not. But still pretty sick nepotism. I understand that sometimes no-bids are necessary. But these guys don’t appear to offer anything unique.
More proof the PA voters aren’t so smart. Obama, Murtha, Rendell, and Bob Casey? Yep…not so smart. If I didn’t live in NC and know a lot of former PA residents living here I’d be shocked, but they vote the same way down here, too! They (and other transplants) made NC go for Obama, Hagan, and Gov. Perdue. God help us all.
We can thank the people of PA for this scumbag. They can’t say they didn’t have a decent alternative.
I understand that the media and Nancy/Harry tend to block these things. but I see republicans speaking on the floor of the house and the senate, where I understand they can say whatever they want, and yet nothing being said. If it were being said, I’m sure Michelle at least would let us know about it.
I realize that there are a couple of true conservatives as the proverbial cry in the wilderness, but I’m not convinced that the party leadership is doing all they can.
Junior is also a founder and the Chairman of Ocean Energy Systems, Inc., which has been around for at least three years and has yet to develop a business plan. I guess if you can rake in $4M in no-bid contracts, you don’t need a steenkin’ business plan for your other endeavors.
Here’s some more info on Murtha Senior and his benevolent brother in Washington from The American Spectator. Several years old, but well worth reminding ourselves how these incestuous relationships work.
Don’t you all think if a Democrat was crooked, Pelosi would ask for his or her resignation immediately?
Nothing to see here. move on.
Compared to Murtha’s other actions this is a parking ticket in a sea of treason. I would serve in Heaven, let him rule in Hell.
The GOP leadership seems to be gobsmacked and paralyzed by recent events such as landslide victories for democrats in both houses and the White House. Also, the GOPs seem to have been caught with their knickers down as they watch the headlong rush to oblivion by Obama and his henchmen (and henchwomen). Don’t expect the GOP senators and congress critters to launch serious investigations into Murtha’s (and other democrat’s) activities. They know it would make the MSM angry. They would turn against the cheeky GOPs, digging into their garbage cans and otherwise searching high and low for any sign of corruption, the smallest of which would be magnified way out of proportion. Then too, many of the GOPs probably have their own scandels to hide and would not like their Democrat colleagues to turn on them in retribution. Nepotism, little porky things, corruption, scratching each other’s backs, and pay for play are likely to be far more pervasive among our politicos than meets the eye. They have a good thing going for them and they don’t want their shipmates, democrat or GOP, to rock the boat.
No jail, not even a simple investigation or audit. And now we have remoras and hyenas like Little Murtha to contend with. How much more insult do the American people have to bear? Plenty more apparently.
Democrats – led by Barack Obama – steal middle class savings to the tune of trillions, look to tax business into bankruptcy for the sake of a few billion, spend and print taxpayer money in the trillions, and there are absolutely no negative repercussions for them. Can’t even get a lame joke out of Leno or Letterman. This criminally incompetent government looks more and more like escaped schizophrenic patients from a state mental ward. Who’s policing these people?
The district in Penn that voted this crook in again is a disgrace to this country.
Oldtrooper. Amen Amen Amen.
Have you ever seen a map of his district. Jeez Louise. It’s like an octopus with tentacles reaching out to every (presumably) stupid voter in that quarter of the state.
Nuss #28: Everything you posted has merit and I agree with you. This is why I have been trying to get a grassroots movement going on term limits. If the current crop of Republicans are “in bed” with the Democrats and/or they are hiding their own corruption, we will never hear a word from them regarding serious scandals by Democrats. What a complete cesspool our Congress and Presidency has become!!
Ocean Energy Systems? Ya think he’s lining himself up for a piece of the windmill pie? And doing so.. WITH NO WINDMILLS WHATSOEVER!
This is unbelievable. Murtha should spend be investigated for this. Then both Pelosi and Murtha should be hit with obstruction charges as well?
Not windmills. Wave energy, at least from the looks of the site.
Kind of like the district the SCOTUS drew up for West Texas. It stretches from El Paso to San Antonio, a distance of over 500 miles, with just enough of the south side of SA to ensure that a Hispanic Democrat wins the seat – disenfranchising everybody else in an area bigger than a lot of states.
That’s how congress insures it’s re-election and why Obama wants control of the census. He wants to control redistricting in the next round. But I suspect you’re aware of that already chapoutier.
You should see my district in NJ. You would think the boundaries would be drawn in such a way that would define an area that tended to have similar interests. Not so. My district contains rolling hills of horse farm, crop farms… and big chunks of urban downtown Trenton more than 30 miles away.
Ridiculous. But republicans do it too.
Or like the time Delay tried to snake the 15th district up from McAllen (350 miles) to take out a chunk of Travis County and Austin to dilute Democratic voting power there?
Thanks. No matter though. I suspect he can adequately fake some research or production in that area just as easily.
State legislatures make the district boundaries, don’t they?
Yes, equally reprehensible. They’ve turned a necessary element (proportional representation) into a vice.
This is what Americans voted for. Hope they are enjoying the chit sandwich they ordered.
Not so much they’re in bed, but that they have enough dirty laundry of their own that they don’t want some reporter retaliating by digging too deep. I don’t know what the solution is. Pretty much everybody that gets to that level has something in his background that he doesn’t want public. Term limits are OK in theory, but that involves throwing out the baby with the bath water – no way to keep the few good ones, and the bad ones will just steal that much faster.
Influence would have been a better choice of words on my part. By controlling the results of the census… including more illegals in urban areas for example. He can insure that there are more representatives in the house for those areas.
He’s beloved in his district. The voters get what they deserve. They do not seem to mind this at all. They love it.
Disgusting.
The Golden Creed of Liberalism: “Keep the bucks coming and you can do or say anything you want. Just keep the bucks coming”!
See anything contradictory here? BTW, the answer to your second question (in Texas at least) is yes, unless the Democrats go crying to SCOTUS, in which case the court draws their own. Strange that they never complained about gerrymandering for the 130 or so years that they controlled the lege.
(Excuse any errors in this, preview isn’t working
Contradictory? No. I understand the influence people in the federal government can have, and Delay had a huge role in the 2003 redistricting of Texas.
The purpose of my query to NJ Aviator was distinguishing between the census and congressional districting. Related, of course, but not the same. Which is what I had orginally thought NJ was implying.
Chap, you asked the right question.
As I said, my intention was to point out the influence the census would have on the redistricting that would follow. Though I could have been more clear.
And although the northeast is tending to lose representatives to the south and west, the carving up that the state legislatures do can be more “creative” with more of population existing in traditionally blue areas of the state. Pieces of these areas may be able to be carved out to bolster the chances of a democratic challenger unseating an incumbent repub.
The same could be said in reverse. It goes both ways. Given the chance, both parties will carve as they see fit. I don’t know what a fair alternative would be. I just know I don’t like the way it’s done now.
At large elections with each voter given a number of votes equal to the number of representatives for the state, to be used and divided among candidates in anyway they see fit. Like a cumulative voting scheme in corporations.
Just a suggestion.
Michelle, watch that “C” word stuff; you should realize that it’s reserved for the exclusive use of women-hating, gay entertainment/gossip columnists. (Gee, and they told us it was a genetic thing, not a psychological disorder.)
Just checking to make sure it was a lie and not a mistake.
Good description of the most honest and ethical Congress yet.
What the hell are you talking about? Even NJ acknowleges my question was legit. Tell you what, why don’t you go root around somewhere else and stop following me from thread to thread.
God, you’re almost as bad as WarEagle with your unhealthy obsession with me. I don’t want no boiled rabbits, ‘kay?
Just your slander at Delay, thought you could figure it out – should have known better. I don’t follow you around, not many libs post on this board. Besides, it’s fun reducing you to a gibbering fool.
Slandering would indicate there was no truth. Do you really want to tell me he was not heavily involved in the Texas redistricting? Or are you saying that such redistricting was not gerrymandering? Because you would be an idiot to believe either. Which leads me to suspect you believe both.
I have founded my own AlohaGuy to Mammogram research center, in collaboration with the Shave Ice Medical Center, in a multi-million dollar project to detect breast cancer using Shave Ice Technology. Like Murtha’s nephew, I am not at liberty to dicuss this in any detail. “Giving more details could provide important clues to terrorist plotters”
Just can’t help those ad homs, can you? Poor substitute for actual knowledge and thought.
Ah, the joys of jerrymandering. No logical geographical, county or municipal boundries used as a rule. Twists and turns around and around to make a district safe for the incumbant or turn the current demographics to win it for the side in power.
Happened in my district here in KaliforniaSSR. Once was moderetely conservative overall, switching here and there from R to D to R, etc. Once the Dems in Sacramento could change it, it was reshaped to make in virtually impossible for anyone other than a Dem to win. We now have one of the Sanchez sisters who may make it her lifetime caeer to represent this district….unless she gets a better offer.
Don’t avoid the question. Do you dispute that Delay was very involved in the redistricting or that it was gerrymandering?
Come on. Put some of your vaunted actual knowledge and thought into your response.
OK. At no time did I ever claim that it wasn’t gerrymandering. Your inability to comprehend that is your problem. Nor did I at any time deny that Delay was influential in the redistricting. You stated:
Unless you can provide me with an authoritative source for the claim that Delay designed that particular district, I stand by my statement that it’s a lie. And given your retrenched position:
I think you realized you had overstated your case.
Now recommence your ad hom attacks and I’ll catch you on another thread so we can play again.
Hmmmm….maybe that is WHY I ASKED FOR CLARIFICATION. You claimed I “slandered” Delay yet didn’t tell me how. I was trying to get to the heart of the matter.
Please. He was the face and the leader of that effort. I have no problem attributing the results to him, whether or not he was the one that layed pen to paper and drew it himself. That is a stupid standard for accountability in leadership.
I doubt that the members of the lege would be all that pleased with your view, but then you’re just repeating the standard Democrat line. You managed to blame “the Hammer” for everything from swine flu to global warming. (OK, I exaggerate a little). The fact remains that Delay wasn’t a member of the lege at the time, he didn’t get a vote, and to the best of my knowledge had little or nothing to do with drawing that particular district, which was your claim. For that matter, I doubt if any particular member of the lege had that much to do with it – too much coolie/staff labor. And besides, it took them months to nail the Democrats’ feet to the ground long enough to even get a vote. I don’t think Delay was anywhere around most of the time – he had another full-time job.
In any event, it didn’t make much difference in the end. The court ended up redrawing the districts to suit themselves, which brought about the situation I mentioned originally.
Soros has never been elected to one office or held one position in the democratic party, yet how many times do I hear here how he is the evil genius (or at least evil leader) behind the Democrats?
That Soros has bought and paid for the Democratic Party is an opinion that has a strong circumstantial case behind it. But you’ve never seen me claim that he ever wrote any legislation, because it would be a foolish thing to say. Nice strawman, anyway. Just admit you overstated your case, and be done with it. A good lawyer should know when to cut his losses.
I’d really rather not get started on Soros. I suppose he is a genius, at least at making money from others’ troubles, and there’s no doubt in my mind that he’s evil. But I think the Democrats are no more than pawns to him and that he would cut them loose or destroy them in a second to get what he wants – whatever that might be. You dance with the devil at your own peril.
Where else we gonna put dem thousand-dollar hammers and ten-thousand dollar toilets?
You’re kidding, right? Look at who benefits from his foundation monies; look at what he has proposed and said in speeches, and measure that against the platforms and agendas of many of the leading Democrats in power – from abortion to gov reg, they’re in perfect alignment; look at the company he keeps and the friendships he fosters! And for a topper, read his history and interference w/ British currency.
An analogy is not a strawman. I hardly ever see that term used correctly here.
Yeah I got my definition from a liberal college professor. You just can’t trust those people. That’s not on point, though.
You need to read back for context.
An analogy can be used in the making of a straw man argument and can easily be a useful tool of those who make straw man arguments.
I think that was a quiet bailout move to avoid admitting a mistake. Not worth an argument.
Perhaps. But they are cerainly not synonymous. And I was not purposely misstating texvet’s argument to an easily attackable form, which is what a strawman is. I was saying that he should believe x because he believes y, and I claim that x and y are the same. There are actually probably a lot of things wrong with that argument, but it is not a straw man.
I hope you don’t mind that I clarified your statement. You say you hardly ever see “that” term used correctly hear. I have not had that experience. I have also seen many analogies misused in the act of straw man arguments. Being that the left’s favorite tool in arguing a point is the straw man, I think it is important to clarify it’s usage (usually against my interests).
traveler,
Well, here is a classic example between me and emjem in which she tries to tell me that the argument I myself am trying to make is a strawman.
I did not know one could strawman one’s own argument.
I am not saying that there has never been the misuse of that term on this site. I am saying that as the favorite tool often used by the left, it bodes us (conservatives) well to fully understand how it is used against us and to be able to recognize it when used and call it out for what it is. It was an act of clarification for “my people”. Watch for bad analogies. Watch for straw man arguments. Watch for the bad analogies often used in straw man arguments.
Well, if it’s going to become an issue: From Random House College Dictionary, revised edition (not the best, unfortunately):
In other words, yes, your own argument can be a strawman, and your statement about Soros could be interpreted that way. I suppose there are other meanings in law, but I don’t have a legal dictionary.
txvet2, when I get a chance I will go back and review your discussion. I have to admit that I had only seen the straw man correction by Chap. I do know that they are sometimes very subtle and hard to see. They tend to come fast, furious and often times we can only hang on for a chance to rebut. A straw man argument can also be a very broad definition as you just pointed out.
Hardly worth the effort. It’s an unimportant attempt to divert attention from the original debate, which was a silly little point to begin with.
Let me get it back on track…Murtha should be tarred and feathered and carried in a cart. Seriously, he should. No, really, he should be. I hate the man. I don’t use that word often or lightly either. I really hate the man.
Personally, I think the Marines should officially disown him and he should be publicly stripped of his rank and brass like the good old days. But there’s no accounting for Pennsylvania voters. Given that they write their own rules, he didn’t do anything illegal in slandering a bunch of good Marines, but he should still burn in hell. That’s water over the dam, and in the meantime, Bill Russell is still planning on running against him again next election. I’m sure he’d be happy to accept any campaign contributions.
The last I heard was that Lt. Col. Chessani was still under the threat of prosecution by the Navy. The same Navy that gave Murtha an award recently. It just sticks in your craw.
No, wait, I mean Army. Prosecution by Army, award by Navy.
No, wait, I mean Marines, which are the Navy, so my original stands. I should know this as I was in the Navy myself. Probably a side effect from my swine flu shot I got in boot camp in 1976.
Meanwhile John Murtha’s spokesman said that Murtha has never heard of the company run by his Nephew
Also that its all a witch hunt
Wow, can’t let go that conversation all these months later. It’s interesting that you never responded. Why is that, Chaps?
It’s also interesting that you don’t let traveler in on the ENTIRE conversation (which I’m sure he can scroll throughout). The conversation was more about your belief that I had somehow misrepresented Obummer’s take on terrorism and its root causes, not on a a straw man per se.
While we’re on the straw man argument, I think I did reference a statement that you had made regarding prevention. I didn’t know you were making an argument seeing as that you were propping up misrepresentation of Obummer as the ultimate stopgap in fleshing out what the hell he stood for in the first place.
Anyway, you content yourself thinking that that whole CONVERSATON was in anyway an ilustration in how not to apply a strawman argument. I simply pointed out that your view of social work/monetary aid as prevention was a strawman (meaning weak theory or argument).
So, yes, you yourself did present a strawman (which happens). Thanks for reminding me. I think you actually need a better example. Try again.
Oh, and Chaps, one more thing:
I would say that this is a rather unsupported and broad comment to make, wouldn’t you Chaps? How ’bout you Traveler? Chaps seems to think I need to be schooled on strawman arguments so I wanted a finding on this statement that Chaps himself has made (in the same conversation he linked).
I find it quite curious that one has the confidence to make such a statement without regards to the following:
1. Religion
2. Economic aid already given to said region
3. Who would be counted among the socially and economically disaffected? Could it be those upper middle class and wealthy members of Al Qaeda?
4. Is there anything to back up this assertion? Any evidence to suggest that this is a norm?
5. Which countries within the Middle East can you attibute such economic and social factors to increased/decreased terrorism? Rich Gulf States? Saudi Arabia?
6. Are those who are more socially/economically disaffected more prone to terrorism than those who aren’t?
If I had made such a broad statement in any of my college or graduate school papers, I would have been critiqued for it as I’m doing now to Chaps. I also find it quite interesting that social and economic factors that Chaps attributes to terrorism in general doesn’t necessarily equate to the elite leadership of Al Qaeda.
I daresay, Chaps, you did make your own strawman argument. Nicely done.
/back to regularly scheduled programming
And this surprises anyone? Murtha is so dirty pigs avoid him. Think anything will come of it? Never. All we have to look forward to is the fact that Murtha is fairly old and over weight. Time is on our side.
emjem,
Never responded? To what? That thread was certainly long enough.
Because the substance of the argument (which was a good one, looking back on it) was absolutely irrelevant for purposes here. I said you used the term strawman incorrectly. Which you did. I don’t care what Webster’s online, third choice definition says. A strawman, when criticizing an argument, means deliberately distorting an opponent’s position. You said I was setting up a strawman when I claimed Obam thinks that the underlying roots of terrorism is socio-economic conditions. You are more than welcome to disagree with my opinion, but it is not a strawman in any conventional sense. What was a classic case of a strawman, was when you took this:
and claimed Obama’s argument was this:
See. That is a REAL straw man.
I do.
It isn’t. Unless you use the lazy definition.
You still don’t get it.
I thought it was perfect.
Who said I made that statement without regard to the following? I said socio-economic are a contributing factor. That means there can be other underlying causes. One can point out/describe one piece of a jigsaw puzzle without making mention of the others on the table.
Oh please. let’s not start on that whole “you didn’t write a dissertation on an internet message board so you’re wrong” crap. Happens to be that we are not turning in a paper for college or graduate school. Funny that standard of excellence is only thrown out against the lib posters here.
Whatever, this is stupid. I am sorry your feelings were hurt because I pointed out your error. I didn’t mean to pick on you. It was actually the first good example I came across when I google searched the site.
And if want to keep using the term at best lazily and at worst incorrectly, by all means. I have no doubt you will continue to be in good company.
In any case I am not so sure about txvet’s definition. I am curious how many different links txvet had to click on to find a source that would marginally back up what definition he was trying to say. I tried to find his “Random House Online Dictionary” (not Websters as I had incorrectly stated before). The only thing I can find is this:
a fabricated or conveniently weak or innocuous person, object, matter, etc., used as a seeming adversary or argument: The issue she railed about was no more than a straw man.
This is attributed to Random House’s Dictionary. And is not the same as txvet’s purported definition. And in fact is quite different. It is not saying it is simply a bad argument. it is stating that it is “fabricated” or “conveniently weak” i.e., an intentionally bad argument that is set up as an adversary, i.e., YOU CANNOT CALL SOMEONE’S OWN ARGUMENT A STRAWMAN!
And, if you look at all the other definitions there, you won’t find any that say a straw man is simply a weak argument someone is making.
I am done with this. Accept that you used the term wrong. Or don’t. I don’t care enough to continue trying to explain it to you.
Could be because it wasn’t an “online” dictionary. I keep trying to avoid using derogatory terms for your apparent inability to read and comprehend even the simplest text, but it’s getting harder. And my transcription was exact. Your interpretation is what is at variance.
chapoutier said:
I just noticed something interesting. You tacked on the word “contributing.” Can you link where you said this? I know that you like to put on your sociological hat on in times like this but I’d rather see such assertions backed up with actual facts (you know those pesky things you accuse me of not having). Could you possibly either link or provide actual examples of these contributing factors?
Ummm… dude…stop being so silly. You’re not sorry about anything and really don’t seem the type. You’ve said some very generalized things in the past and think they are FACT. Just like your theory about the causes of terrorism. Man, is this a past conversation with Rusty?
This is why, at best, I never take anything you say at face value. I don’t use any term “lazily” (I grew up with academics) and I don’t appreciate the condescension. Is it possible that you can actually stop for a second and just realize that your broad/general statements are either unsubstantiated or unsupported?
I admit I don’t know it all but having dealt with academics (and not amateur ones on the net) I’ve learned not to take one’s theories as facts.
No, you simply haven’t the patience to actually understand that some of your broad, generalized statements, be they strawman or NOT, are not well estimated or fleshed out. If you really want to understand the socioeconomic implications of terrorism (or the factors of such) perhaps, you should actually read a journal and see what experts actually say.
Or you can spout off some generalized theory to your heart’s content over a good bottle of your favorite wine to make you feel good about how much you don’t know about the things you talk about.
It was a nice attempt, txvet2. I applaud your effords. I really do. I did the unthinkable which triggered this chain- I “distorted” Obummer by using a strawman argument. I used an “illustration” of what the state department and the Peace Corps have been doing in the past and what will be done again, no matter the president.
Oh, well, honest engagement doesn’t always suit Chaps’ purposes or those of other liberals who like to think themselves “evolved” because they post their errant musings on conservative blogs.
Just remember: facts don’t matter.