TexasCHLforum.com

TDDude wrote:
The point is evil like that is still around and the 2nd is the only thing that keeps it in check. The 2nd has absolutely nothing to do with duck hunting with that high tech 20 gauge or plinking cans with your P22. It has everything to do with the citizens being able to keep evil at bay, whatever its source may be.

Well said - the hunting and plinking is an added bonus.

[/quote]
That would be the 16 year old. I've never even tasted the 12 year old. Does the Laphroag have the same pronounced smokiness as the Lagavulin?[/quote]

The Laphroag definitely has a pronounced peat aroma, very strong alcohol hit with a lingering smokey burn. A true pedigree. Peaty, smoky, sweet... and warm. My bottle of 15 yr.old doesn't have the medicinal taste that some tasters complain of. It is smoky. The 15 is smoother, sweeter, and a little less peppery then the 10 yr. old. Definitely worth a try.

Both Lagavulin and Laphroag have my vote! The peppery, beyond smoky taste is the closest thing to enjoying eating a campfire you'll ever do..... if that makes any sense?

[/quote]

I think the medicinal taste comes more from the blends than from the single malts (no offense to the Famous Grouse poster earlier). Give me a good single malt anytime - Highland, Lowland, Isley or Speyside.

dicion wrote:

Pete92FS wrote: Print Share Del.icio.usDiggTwitterYahoo! BuzzFacebookStumbleUponWASHINGTON — The Obama administration plans to order companies that received huge government bailouts last year to sharply cut the compensation of their highest paid executives, according to a person familiar with the decision.

That's what they get for begging for Uncle Sam to bail them out. They gave away their freedoms in how the companies were run, and how people got paid, and how the capitalist system worked for them in exchange for some 'security'.

"Those who would sacrifice freedom for temporary security deserve neither." -Ben Franklin

Yet that is exactly what these companies did. I feel no remorse for them. I feel sorry for their employees that had nothing to do with it and are getting slammed, but the management that was directly responsible for the situation they got themselves in, and the acceptance of the 'bailout' funds, I feel absolutely no pity for. Oh, you guys messed up, ruined a company, and had to beg for money to keep it afloat? And now you're complaining about paycuts? Too freaking bad. Cry me a river.

Don't get me wrong; I wasn't complaining about them taking pay cuts - my point is that I don't think "ANY" president has the right to regulate salaries. Some of these clowns need to be fired without the benefit of their golden parachutes but that should be up to the stock holders and board of directors; not the POTUS.

Mr.72 said "The "progress we so desperately need" is not the same thing as an overreaching federal government taking over the formerly-free market one piece at a time. The "progress we so desperately need" is to stop Obama and congress from further destroying this country's economy and undermining the very purpose of our Republic's form of government.

The "progress we so desperately need" would have been to let banks that took bad risks fail. Let the car companies that can't figure out how to make a profit fail. Those who made this country great did so by finding a better way to do things, not by begging the taxpayers to bail them out when their plans and businesses failed. "

Below is the latest from the Houston Chronicle. I guess this is what these guys deserve for taking the bailout money but I think Obama is stepping way out of bounds demanding people take pay cuts.

Administration plans big pay cuts at bailout firms
By MARTIN CRUTSINGER Associated Press
Oct. 21, 2009, 3:29PM
Share
Print Share Del.icio.usDiggTwitterYahoo! BuzzFacebookStumbleUponWASHINGTON — The Obama administration plans to order companies that received huge government bailouts last year to sharply cut the compensation of their highest paid executives, according to a person familiar with the decision.

The seven companies that received the most assistance will have to cut the annual salaries of their 25 highest-paid executive by an average of about 90 percent from last year, said the person, who spoke on condition of anonymity because it has not been announced.

This person said today that the Treasury Department will announce the deep pay cuts within the next few days.

Kenneth Feinberg, the special master at Treasury appointed by Obama to handle compensation issues at the seven firms getting exceptional assistance from the government's $700 billion financial bailout package, is making the pay decisions.

The seven companies are: Bank of America Corp., American International Group Inc., Citigroup Inc., General Motors, GMAC, Chrysler and Chrysler Financial.

Total compensation for the top executives at the seven firms will decline, on average, by about 50 percent, according to the person familiar with the administration's decision.

At the financial products division of AIG, the giant insurance company which has received taxpayer assistance valued at more than $180 billion, no top executive will receive more than $200,000 in total compensation, the person familiar with Feinberg's plan said. The administration also will warn AIG that it must fulfill a commitment to significantly reduce the $198 million in bonuses promised to employees in its financial services division, the arm of the company whose risky trades caused its downfall.

The pay restrictions for all seven companies will require any executive seeking more than $25,000 in special benefits — things such as country club memberships, private planes and company cars — to get permission for those perks from the government.

Feinberg's decisions on pay come after administration officials voiced sharp criticism in recent days of the plans of Wall Street firms to pay huge bonuses at a time when the country is still coping with rising unemployment and the effects of the recession.

Obama senior adviser David Axelrod called the bonuses “offensive” on Sunday.

“They ought to think through what they are doing and they ought to understand that a year ago a lot of these institutions were teetering on the brink and the United States government and taxpayers came to their defense,” Axelrod said in an appearance on ABC's “This Week.”

Abraham wrote:frazzled,

My drug of choice is the occasional single malt scotch at home and hookers don't tempt me in the least.

Single Malt beats blended hands down IMHO. As far as the hookers go I think Mrs. Pete92FS would have something to say about that!

USA1 wrote:TAM , that was a powerful post . i share the same feelings that you expressed .

Great post - I could not have said it better.

Personally I feel that in order to be Commander in Chief one pre-requesite should be prior military service.