 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Oct 10 - 10:33 AM Having any law at all against people smoking or otherwise injesting marijuana if they want to is absolutely asinine. It plays directly into the hands of organized crime, and in no way protects the public. It is repressive, dictatorial, unnecessary, ineffective, and stupid to criminalize the use of marijuana. Anyone in government who supports the criminalization of marijuana use is a damned fool, at least as applies to that particular issue. And I would like to add to that: I do NOT smoke or injest marijuana, and I have no desire to, but I don't believe in stopping other people from doing so, because in a genuinely free society that is THEIR business, not mine or anybody else's. They should also be allowed to privately grow it for their own use, because THAT is their business too. And not anybody else's. If the cops stopped worrying needlessly about people growing or smoking marijuana, they could get something USEFUL done with all the time and money they would save. If it was legal to grow marijuana at home for your own use, the big drug cartels could not make a profit from it, and they'd lose that business! ***** Bobert, you slut, I see you grabbed the 100th post! ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 16 Oct 10 - 10:49 AM Ok Bobert, I apologize for accusing you of being shitfaced and stoned at your Son in law's Maw in law's house. LH: What will the murderous drug cartels do when weed is legalized and their source of income is kicked out from under them? Do they get a job and become Sunday school teachers or what? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Oct 10 - 11:02 AM Sawzaw - They will do what organized criminals always do. They will shift their attention to other profit-making areas such as: prostitution, car theft, smuggling, fraud, protection rackets, crack cocaine, heroine, etc. Your point is a pointless one. I am not trying to protect organized crime....I am trying to protect the civil rights and lives and freedom of the millions of perfectly ordinary, harmless people who use marijuana and who are NOT criminals, and I am trying to HELP the cops fight REAL crime instead of wasting their valuable time on something that simply doesn't matter. Organized crime people can only be dealt with in two ways: 1. deprive them of a lucrative business opportunity (Remember the grand opportunity they were given by Prohibition? They were deprived of that opportunity when Prohibition was ended.) 2. prosecute them and imprison them with the full force of the law...but DON'T prosecute their victims in the ordinary public! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 16 Oct 10 - 11:27 AM LH: If we legalize such and such the crime will go away. Just ask NAMBLA. Pimps will disappear and become staunch members of society if we legalize prostitution. The morally superior Canadian government has that figured out. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Oct 10 - 12:14 PM Sawzaw, you are being a silly man... ;-) Get serious. Number one: I am not a representative of the Canadian government. The Canadian government has NOT legalized marijuana and our police are also stupidly wasting their time persecuting users here. Number two: I speak for ME, not for my government. My opinions are MINE, not Canada's. Rethink the whole thing, okay? You are talking to an individual here, not a nation. Regarding prositution, it is indeed a far better idea to legalize and regulate prostitution than to keep it illegal. That has been done in Nevada and in Holland (but not in Canada) and that legalization has resulted in far less crime in regards to prostitution and far safer working conditions for the prostitutes. It has also resulted in far better medical protection for the prostitutes. It has not benefited the pimps. You cannot eliminate prostitution by bringing in laws, it will always be with us, but you can greatly improve the situation by legalizing and regulating it to protect the workers. The real crux of this matter, Sawzaw, is that you want to force other people to live the way you choose to live...to live by your ideas of what's moral and what isn't. You wouldn't like it if someone tried to force you to live their way, but you want to force them to live your way. That's not freedom, pal, that's a dictatorship according to YOUR personal tastes and your desires. I don't smoke marijuana. I don't want to. But I will not interfere with another person's freedom to do it if they like to. It doesn't hurt anyone else if they do! And I don't want to hire a prostitute. I don't need that. But if another person wants to hire a prostitute, I will not interfer with his freedom to do that or her freedom to do that work either. It doesn't hurt anyone else if they do! Things that don't hurt anyone else and that are done by the free choice of the adult person involved are NOT crimes. They are lifestyle choices. No person has a right to force others to adopt his lifestyle choices....nor to restrict others from adopting their lifestyle choices. It is only fear that motivates you to control others, Sawzaw, and it's an irrational fear....either that or it's just self-righteousness. I refer you to your Bible...Love casts out fear. And self-righteousness is a sin. Jesus showed no prejudice against prostitutes. Neither should you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 16 Oct 10 - 02:43 PM So give us a lecture on self-righteousness. Even better lecture Bobert on self-righteousness. Would it be ok if your daughter was a prostitute? If your son smoked grass? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 16 Oct 10 - 02:53 PM "Everybody got a credit card" So do I. Three of them. I get rebates from mine. I just got one that pays me a 3% rebate from purchases at Home Depot and Lowes. 1% on everything else. I got a $2k rebate on my Chevy pickup and my wife got $3K back on her last Pontiac. 3% on gas. All just by buying things we had to buy anyway, not crap we don't need. The secret is having the will power to not overspend and pay it off every month. Also it is much easier than buying with checks or cash and online. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Oct 10 - 04:55 PM Sawzaw - It wouldn't worry me at all if my son smoked grass. Most of the finest friends (and best people) I've known in my life have smoked grass or do smoke grass, and it didn't make any of them into bad people. I'd be quite disturbed if my daughter became a prostitute, but I'd also be quite disturbed if she did a variety of other things, like... - join the Republican Party - join the Conservative or Liberal parties of Canada - enlist in the roller derby - become a female boxer - join the army - dye her hair green and spike it - get multiple body piercings etc..... So I'd be disturbed. Fine. It would still be her decision once she reached age 18, and it would be her business as a self-governing adult, and I would have to accept it even if I didn't like it. I am not here to avoid all possible disturbances, Sawzaw, I am here to allow other people, including my children, the freedom to be whom they honestly wish to be. And what do I get in return? The freedom to be who I honestly wish to be. You betcha! I am here to govern myself, not to govern you or my daughter or my friends or the guy who lives across the street. If people don't steal, lie, assault others, commit fraud, murder, rape, bully or commit other obviously anti-social acts (most of which are listed in the 10 Commandments), then I have no bone to pick with them. They are free beings who must decide for themselves how to live. If they do not deliberately hurt someone else just to please themselves, then they are not breaking the basic laws of human morality...and civil law should not bother them. There are various collective customs we follow (such as our conventional ideas about clothing and nakedness), and that gets complicated...but it's another discussion. It's not a moral question in that case. It's a question of what people are generally used to, that's all. **** You're absolutely right about the credit cards. I have 4 of them. I get discounts on stuff through all of them, I don't overspend, and I always pay them off right on time, so they get no interest payments from me. All it takes is a little self-control. People need to realize that the power is in their own hands, and they can use these things in a way that benefits them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 16 Oct 10 - 05:30 PM Dear Mr Obama: You should have listened to the American people when you were shoving stimulus and health care reform down their throat. That's what you get for playing tribal politics. Time for the "we know what's best" elitists to wake up. API Analysts in both parties say all major indicators tilt toward the Republicans. President Barack Obama's policies are widely unpopular. Congress, run by the Democrats, rates even lower. Fear and anger over unemployment and deep deficits are energizing conservative voters; liberals are demoralized. Every day brings fresh evidence of Democratic officials virtually abandoning House members whose re-election bids seem hopeless. Republicans are expanding the field to pursue races that once appeared unattainable. In the coming week, Republicans or GOP-leaning outside groups plan to spend money in a 82 House races that they see as competitive or within reach of a last-minute upset. Democrats, desperate to hold their losses to three dozen seats, plan to run TV ads in 59 races in the remaining days. But their chief House campaign committee has recently canceled millions of dollars worth of advertising for struggling Reps. Steve Driehaus and Mary Jo Kilroy of Ohio, Suzanne Kosmas of Florida, Betsy Markey of Colorado and Steve Kagen of Wisconsin. They are shifting some of that money to incumbents once considered safe, such as Arizona Rep. Raul Grijalva. But in a sign of the election's volatility, they also are helping viable incumbents they had expected to be trailing significantly — South Dakota Rep. Stephanie Herseth Sandlin, for example. The Democrats' House campaign committee raised almost $16 million in September and has $41.6 million in the bank. That's a big fund raising advantage over the GOP's House campaign committee. But the figures are misleading because heavy spending by outside groups, which often hide their donors' identities, clearly favors Republican candidates... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 16 Oct 10 - 07:48 PM LH: I have seen people with well behaved, polite and successful children. I have seen people with spoiled, lazy, children that are dead weights on society. I suppose that the children made the choice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 16 Oct 10 - 09:01 PM Yeah, me too, Sawzaw. There have got to be 10 billion different reasons why some kids turn out great and others don't. I can't possibly track them all down, but I think some of them are a result of good parental guidance (or lack of it) while others are a result of the intrinsic character of the child, regardless of the parental guidance or lack of it. Still others may be a result of societal forces around the child. We can all think of examples at either extreme. Parenting is the most complex job and the biggest responsibility in the world, in my opinion. A lot of people have children who probably shouldn't...because they're just not mature enough themselves yet. I don't know what anyone can do about that. It's just the way of the world. People like to have sex... One of the things one has to deal with and learn to accept, not just now but since the world began, is that things aren't perfect out there. Or "in here". ;-) And they never will be. That gives us something to aim for, eh? It's a good motivator. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 16 Oct 10 - 09:43 PM Well, well, well.... So now it's down to more government in our lives that Sawz wants... Hmmmm??? The boy can't seem to make up his mind if it's more government or less that he wants... I mean, what if Boss Hog woke up one day and thought that dock-sider shoes didn't quite fit into Boss Hog's plans for his perfect world??? I mean, then yo got cartels makin' 'um is Chinese seat shop and bringin' them shoes into the country on mules from Mexico... I mean, LH is right... You are being silly, Sawz... But beyond that you have no moral compass as to what government shoudl do or not do... You just and pick and choost from yer own persaonl menu what you like or don't and think that should be enough... Problem is that you don't seem to have a clue waht the word or concept of what "freedom" means if you want to set the rules to yer likin' and screw everyone else... Totally inconsistent philosophy... BTW, I'm home now... Sucked down a couple chilly ones and got reaquainted with Mr. Peace Pipe... But I ain't "shitfaced"... Maybe a little buzz from the hit of pot... As fir crime and cops... The rich stole hundreds of billions of dollars from some rather innocent people with the crappy mortgages they ***sold*** to the working class... Rather than us cops to bust folks doin' stuff where there are ****no victims**** why not spend that money going after the real croooks??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 17 Oct 10 - 01:49 PM "more government in our lives that Sawz wants" How did you twist my words into that? You want government to control your health care and mandate people buy insurance but you accuse me of wanting it. What was Fannie and Freddie's part in that big rich man ripoff? At the behest of the Dodds and Franks in the Democrat controlled Congress they bought every shit smeared scrap of paper presented by the banks. And did they get a bail out? I never hear abut the GSE bail outs from the moral left wingers only the wall street bail outs. I didn't suck down anything except some hot home made soup and I don't own a peace pipe so I am aware of reality. Reality is tough but you need to try it sometime. Reality: The two largest housing GSEs of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac own and/or securitize upwards of 70% of the residential mortgage loans in the United States. In 1999, The New York Times reported that with the corporation's move towards the subprime market "Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980s. In 1995, Freddie Mac began receiving affordable housing credit for buying subprime securities, and by 2004, HUD suggested the company was lagging behind and should "do more." Senior and Executive Vice Presidents at the two organizations will get retention bonuses, most of which have nothing to do with performance. Fannie Mae executives will receive bonuses between $470,000 and $611,000. Freddie Mac has not yet released the exact amounts, or even a range, for their anticipated bonuses. The Freddie Mac plan pays bonuses in four installments with only the final payment having anything to do with performance. The government has invested more taxpayer dollars into the two mortgage-backers than it has into AIG. Last year, the two institutions lost about $108 billion. Unlike AIG, where the CEO has asked bonus recipients to return at least half of their bonuses, there is no such compromise at Fannie Mae. (remember that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have made large political contributions in recent years, and even our president was one of the top three benefactors while in the Senate) The CEO of Fannie Mae, Herb Allison, said in a company-wide email today, that eliminating the bonuses would jeopardize our ability to fulfill the mission the government has given us to address the housing crisis. My moral compass does not include illegal moonshine and smoking illegal pot. I don't lecture people on morality while doing illegal things and bragging about it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 17 Oct 10 - 02:03 PM More reading for the economics perfesser: The Federal National Mortgage Association—FNMA or Fannie Mae was founded as an agency of the federal government as part of the New Deal in 1938. Its function was to create a secondary market for mortgages, meaning that Fannie Mae, rather than originating loans to homebuyers, would buy mortgages (and their expected payment streams) from community banks and thrifts. In 1968 Fannie Mae was transformed into a private-sector company with shareholders, and its official connection with the government was transferred to the Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA or Ginnie Mae). The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) was chartered in 1970 as another government-sponsored enterprise in the secondary mortgage market; it too is owned by shareholders. The ostensible purpose of Fannie and Freddie is to promote homeownership. The two GSEs buy mortgages and bundle them into mortgage-backed securities, which are sophisticated derivatives that slice and dice the incoming monthly mortgage payments such that outside investors can (in theory) limit the risk of their real-estate investments. By providing a huge and liquid secondary market for mortgages, Fannie and Freddie make it more lucrative for others to originate mortgages. Make no mistake about it: The official mission of Fannie and Freddie is to cause banks to lend to applicants who would be rejected in the absence of government meddling. This point needs to be stressed as analysts wonder, "Why did banks make so many bad loans?" All of this raises an obvious question. How exactly do Fannie and Freddie achieve their goal of promoting more mortgage origination than would have occurred in a free market? The answer is that these GSEs enjoyed implicit—and now explicit—government backing. Until quite recently, the official position of the federal government has been that Fannie and Freddie were private companies, earning private profits to be distributed to private shareholders. No taxpayer money stood behind them. However, investors suspected the GSEs were too big and too symbolic to be allowed to fail. Consequently, investors were willing to lend money to Fannie and Freddie—by buying bonds issued by these two GSEs—at lower interest rates than these same investors would have charged a truly private firm that performed Fannie's and Freddie's operations. Because their bonds were presumably guaranteed by the "full faith and credit" of the U.S. government—meaning the IRS and printing press— Fannie and Freddie were able to gain a huge share of their market; they directly owned or guaranteed roughly $6 trillion in mortgages. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: DougR Date: 17 Oct 10 - 06:39 PM Sixteen more days and counting! DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: pdq Date: 17 Oct 10 - 07:03 PM Yes, on November 2 the public will tell Obama what they think of his administration and the Congressional Democrats. I looked at a whole buncha web sites and even Dem-leaning ones concede at least 5 Senate seats. Dick Morris, architect of Clinton's re-election campaign in 1996, says Dems will lose bigtime. The American people are being insulted by the Democrat attack ads that are so vile and so trurthless that we want to send a message to the bastards who are running them. Christine O'Donnell, Meg Whitman, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman and Sharron Angle are all more intelligent than VP Joe "Foot-In-Mouth" Biden and they are being attacked unmercifully by the news media, showbiz activists and even by NOW. The public does not see devil horns when they look at Sarah Palin nor do they see a witch when they look a Christine O'Donnell. All these ladies are normal Americans and most of us would be proud to have any one of them represent us in Congress. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 17 Oct 10 - 07:20 PM Well, Sawz... You want the government to go out and bust pot smokers and protitutes... Right??? I mean, sho nuff sounded like that in yer post... Then I point out that the government does that... And you go "huh"??? That's what I mean... You want lots of government to enforce laws that you ***like***... That is inconsistent with the anti-government crap that you and the rightie bloggers that you post say you want??? What next is it that ya'll want the government to do fir you... Hey, here's one fir ya' to ponder... Close down all government funded schools??? B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Oct 10 - 12:46 AM Sawzaw...the question of legality vs illegality is an interesting and complex one without one simple answer. On the one hand, it's simply unwise to do anything illegal...not because it's necessarily immoral or morally wrong....but merely because it puts you in danger of the forces of the law. Let me explain that. In most societies there are some laws that are stupid, archaic, unjust, and just downright wrong. Why? Well, because human beings are imperfect, and imperfect beings sometimes enact stupid, unjust, archaic laws that don't actually make any sense, but are the result of cultural prejudices or muddled thinking. That, in my opnion, is the case with the marijuana laws...just as it was once the case with the laws banning alcoholic beverages during Prohibition. In both cases you had a stupid, unjust, oppressive, and totally impractical set of laws enacted by people with good intentions, but people having no idea how foolish they were being when they passed those laws...laws which could only make the situation far worse and provide a windfall for organized crime. However....and this is a BIG however....I personally do my utmost not to break even a stupid, unjust, and oppressive law for one simple reason: NOT because I respect that law! No sir. I obey that law because I don't wish to put myself at risk of the forces of the law who are people with little imagination and little mercy. Why should I risk my own freedom by violating their stupid, unjust law???? It's far easier and wiser for me to obey it even THOUGH I know it's a stupid and unjust law. So I obey it. People are foolish to imagine that civil law is the ultimate moral authority in life. It isn't. It wasn't made by God, it was made by men, and men make mistakes. I do not worship the temporal decisions of men nor take them as gospel, but I do realize that I would put myself at unnecessary risk by breaking a stupid law, therefore I obey it even though it is asinine...as in the case of the illegality of marijuana....and also because I'm not interested in getting high anyway. But I don't imagine for a moment that the forces of the law hold any high moral ground in enforcing such an asinine law. They don't, and the law is wrong. Bobert obviously feels that he is willing to risk the illegality of smoking marijuana because he likes the stuff. Fine with me, but he is, of course, risking an entanglement with the law. That doesn't make him immoral, it just means he's facing a legal risk that I am not facing. He's not boasting about smoking grass, he just happens to like it. Fine with me. It's not a moral issue at all, it's a legal issue, and I don't care one way or the other, but I do hope he doesn't get in any trouble for it, because he's not a criminal. The law is a bunch of established cultural ideas and habits that have been written down, and cultures are often very foolish about a number of things they do. To make marijuana illegal is, in my opinion, utterly foolish, and the law that does so is a useless one that helps nobody, but only robs people of free choice in a matter where they should have free choice. It is a bad, undemocratic law, a violation of personal freedom. Period. There are some bad laws in all societies, and it behooves all men of conscience to speak out against them vigorously and work for their repeal. Your American revolutionaries knew that, and that's why they finally revolted against the English crown. Mere technical legality under any regime is not necessarily truth OR justice! Remember that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 18 Oct 10 - 08:16 AM Yeah, LH. but I don't speed anywhere except on the interstate where you have to... If it says 35 I do 35 (or less)... I also don't cheat on my income taxes... I mean, if the law says I can donate some piece of junk car to the Salvation Army and take a big tax deductaion I don't do it... Might of fact, I don't take any tax deductions for charities I give to... I mean, I think everyone breaks some law... Even jay-walking is illegal but people do it but, like you, I walk to the corner and cross when I'm supposed to... BTW, ya'll... Sounds as if California is going to vote to legalize pot... That is a start even if Obama says he'll bust you anyway... This is one area where the Repubs (and some Dems) will be put in an uncomfortable position... But I do undersatnd the Obama administration's position on this... I mean, it would be hypocritical on my part to support states being able to pick and choose from a menu of federal laws to enforce (or not)... I don't believe that states should be able to do that no matter what the law is... That's the kinda thinking that brought us the Civil (which it wasn't) War... Meanwhile, I will continue taking a risk... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Oct 10 - 10:16 AM You're quite right, Bobert, that everyone breaks some law now and then, no matter what their pretensions are. We have all jaywalked or exceeded the speed limit or broken some other law at some time or another. That's life. Like I said, people are imperfect beings....and civil laws are imperfect also. There are cases where a civil law does not properly fit the real life situation, and everyone knows that, but cops STILL feel that they must enforce it because that's what they're trained to do. This can lead to some very silly and unnecessary situations from time to time. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 18 Oct 10 - 10:41 AM Well, back to "unpopular views" of the Obama administartion... Here's one that the Repubs and righties will hate: The Obama administration actually decreased the annual budget deficit for 2010 from the $1.4T that represented the budget that Bush left for 2009 to $1.3T... Now, of course, the righties won't gove Obama any credit for this and will change the subnect to use the national debt figures which don't reflect that progress... Might of fact, the righties will use every concievable accounting trick in the book to twist reality into their usual mythology... But, hey... Facts is what they are regardless of the rightie blogger cut 'n pastes that Sawz will certainly post following this encouraging bit of reality... But then again, Sawz don't do reality... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Oct 10 - 11:01 AM The primary REAL purpose of any political party power structure is to maintain and enlarge its power. That's what wrong with the idea of political parties, and that is what makes them corrupt. They seek power, first and foremost, and they do it by attacking competing parties in any way possible...fair or foul. That's what you see happening. Your media sources and pundits mostly encourage that divisive process. The best thing that could possibly happen would be to abolish all political parties from here on in, have only independents run for public office, and form a legislature from those elected independents after the election. They could then elect from amongst themselves a president, and a vice president...whoever they collectively decided was best for those jobs...in a free vote of all elected members. Legislation could then be proposed by any seated member, discussed and debated by all seated members, and voted upon. This would be a far more honest and responsible system than a party-based system. It wouldn't be immune to corruption...but it would be far less prone to it. Most importantly of all, it would stop dividing the public into 2 hostile factions who detest each other! And that is the major problem with your present system...it is based on hostile divisions. "A house divided against itself cannot stand." I hear Americans endlessly fighting their usual partisan battles and I think, "Yeah, right. It's like listening to people on the Titanic bitching about how to arrange the deck chairs, while the ship plows on steadily toward the iceberg." We have the same problem in Canada. The political parties themselves have ruined our democracy and turned it into an unrepresentative joke that is held in contempt by the vast majority of the voters. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 18 Oct 10 - 11:51 AM Bobert: "You want the government to go out and bust pot smokers and protitutes" You can knock it off with the I sad bullshit Bobert. If somebody did that to you you would be yelling BIGASS LIE. If you want to claim I said or I want something, quote me. Again let's go by facts. Bobert: "Sawz don't do reality" Bobert: "That's what Obama did... He bought a "beater", refurbrished it the best he could and over a hundred people been flyin' on that sumabich ever since" Not your kind of reality Bobert. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 18 Oct 10 - 12:46 PM Leased/bought??? Who cares, Sawz??? Bottom line, it was a used plane... I really don't get yer fascination with this??? As fir pot and prostitution??? Hey,s if you think both should be legal then my apologies... If not, then you think the mean ol' gov-mint should be engaged in enforcing prohibition laws... One or the other... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Oct 10 - 12:59 PM Try to stop seeing each other as the classic "liberal" or "conservative" cultural stereotype that bounces around in your imagination, and you'll do much better at communicating clearly with one another... ;-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 18 Oct 10 - 02:48 PM Anybody who brags on their accuracy should care if what the said was right or wrong. Anybody except a blowhard that is. "no brag just fact" Yer doin' a heckuva job keeping the location of the Lake Pontchartrain Dam hidden from those terrorists that want to blow it up though. "if you think both should be legal then my apologies" Again, I never said anything about what should be. Keep on saying what I want or what I said without quoting me. I can play the same game if you want. You keep slipping farther away from reality. I try to find something I agree with in what you say and I say so when I can find it. However you do the opposite. Apparently think that disagreements are better and more constructive than agreements. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 18 Oct 10 - 05:39 PM You are projecting again, Swaz... I mean, when you get bored you find threads that have long been gone, resurrect them with new and im unimproved Saws-attacks on me... Hey, I'm a counterpuncher... You don't punch at me and you won't get punched back... Pure and simple... Until you quit yer little ballgame then expect incoming 'cause I ain't gonna take yer crap and not fire back... And, LH... You ain't this all knowin', all seein' innocent bystanding sayer of wisdom... You don't mind gettin' on that both side's horse and riding it... Problem is that there are times when standing on the sidelines ain't the right thing to do... Like in Germany in the 30's... I mean, what we have here ain't about Dems and Repubs as much as the wholesale theft of the American democracy... Yeah, in this election that means that money is going to the Repubs in amounts that have never been seen... maybe you think all is fair in love, war and politics and choose not to stand up and say, "Man, this is fucked up... The Repubs have a news network that blairs Repub propaganda 24/7 that is very much not how he "public'airwaves were ever intended to ne used... You have a Supreme Courth that has decided that corporations are no entities but people and are throwing hundreds of millions diollars secretly attacking every Democrat in the country and then you have the RNC... The Dems have the DNC and maybe $10M for labor unions... I mean, given that the candidate that spend the most wins 90% of elections it is wrong for anyone to say "Both sides are guilty and should play nice"... I mean, there are times to sit on the sidelines... This ain't one of them... I don't give a rat's ass if you don't like Dems or Repub or whoever... We have a seriouasly flawed system of financing elections and it has come down to one side getting so much corporate cash that is isn't really an election anymore... It is a purchase... There hasn't been anything like this since maybe the 1890s when the robber barons tried to buy the government... Looks like this time they are going to pull it off... B~ B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Oct 10 - 06:00 PM Sounds to me like you are just clinging negative emtions, searching high and low for something to fight about with Sawzaw (or someone else on the "right"), Bobert, and you are miffed that I'm attempting to be a peacemaker. I am NOT evenly balanced between Right and Left. I'm very much to the Left, as you know, and I do NOT stand on the sidelines, I speak out, but that doesn't stop me from recoginizing some good points that I may share in common with ANY person I'm talking to, regardless of what side of the political line they are on. (I share a great deal in common with you, and less with Sawzaw...but still a goodly amount.) I can see the good in other people whom I disagree with, but you get annoyed when I point it out. Well, I can take that, cos they got mad at Gandhi and Martin Luther King over that too! ;-) And they got mad at Jesus, because he loved EVERYONE! Your experience of love and respect starts with you, Bobert. Just like it starts with me or anyone else. If you wait for the rest of the world to change first and wait for them to extend the first kindness and understanding to you, you might wait for a loooooong time, brother. They might be just as stubborn as you are about it. You might wait forever. I agree wholeheartedly with your final comments about corrupt election financing. Yes, that is the problem. The elections are bought and paid for in advance for by the richest in the land...and that goes for sure regardless of whether it's a Democrat or a Republican who gets elected. Both those parties are bought and paid for, as are all our Canadian political parties...by the richest in the land. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: beardedbruce Date: 18 Oct 10 - 06:04 PM LH, You mean that Canada has the same level of government that the US has- The best than money can buy? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Oct 10 - 06:12 PM Absolutely!!! ;-D Only we have 5 parties to play with up here, which is more fun in some ways, and it spreads the hostility around more ways too, which means we're under less stress over it. The worst possible setup for national stress (short of a dictatorship) is a 2-way party split right down the middle. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 18 Oct 10 - 06:50 PM This has nuthin' to do with Swaz. LH... Heck, he has staslked me from one website to another... He has quoted stuff that I have said on other websites... That is called cyber-stalkin... I mean, this is about policies... I believe that government best represents the interetss of the working class... Right now, the Dems seem to be the only party that has any interest in trying to creat a levl playing field... The Repubs are 100% in Boss Hog's pocket... They have resisted every concievable piece of legioslation that would benefit the working class and are trying to overturn the largest step forward for the working class since Medicare in trying to undo a bill that would deal with 50 million people without health insurance... Is it the best bill??? No... Will it help our country become more competitive and lower health costs??? Yes... That is a policy... Now Obama finally has done something that Bush never did in 8 years and that is lower the annual deficit... He should be applauded by all... But the Sawz think that using the vast cash that the right has to twist and distort is the way to go rather than say, "nice start"... That is policy... Hey, I don't give a rat's ass if it's bb or pdq or Kent ot Sawz... I don't give a rat's ass if a Dem, a Repub, a Bull Mooser does something right they are going to get credit from me for doing it... This year is the year of the lie and the Repubs have mastered it... You should hear the nightly baombardment of Dems on the TV paid for by who knows... Major attacks, too... And 100% lies... Am I angry??? Were the folks angry when the Nazis came for their friends... Heck yeah, I am... The Republican Supreme Court has been involved in the hteft of one elcetion and just so they won't have to be caught in that trick-bag again they have become legislators and opened up a clear path for the corpoartions to own every Congressman or woman out there... This has nuthin' to do with Sawz... Might of fact, I don't give art's as about Sawz... Or the other corportists here except beardedbruce who is my friend... It's all about telling the truth, trying to dispell the myth and the misonformation that Boss Hog is propagating and hoefully gettiong folks to see that it is about policies... If we can't discuss policies then we are indeed lost but Sawz won't do that... He will bring up stupid stuff that I said on another website 5 years ago rather than to get into a policy discussion... Fuck Sawz... In spite of what you think or he thinks, it ain't about either of you... Its about how we create a more just nation where rednecks don't teach their kids to harrass other kids who are different, where people have a right to the "pursuit of happiness' and where the corpoarte pigs don't win 100% of the time... Yes, I'm pissed... I would have been pissed had I been a German in 1933 and my favorite art teacher was fired because he was a Jew... These aren't times for sitting in the middle contemplating rocks... B~ It's about |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 18 Oct 10 - 07:29 PM BTW, that last reference about my favorite art teacher being fired for being a Jew was in reference to one of my favorite painters, Paul Klee, who was indeed fired for being a Jew... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 18 Oct 10 - 07:31 PM BTW, again... Both Dr. King and Ghandi knew when it was time to step up to the plate... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 18 Oct 10 - 10:41 PM What exactly would you like me to do, Bobert? ;-) (Keep in mind that I live in Canada, I am happy to be here, and I have no intention of moving back to the USA...I was living there once for ten years, don't wish to return there again!) Whatever it is you would like me to do, though, keep in mind that I do not do what other people want me to do, I do exactly what I want to do. But I'm just curious if you had something you'd rather I was doing, so I thought I'd ask what the heck it was... I do realize that you are facing a lot of totally aggravating shit down there during this Congressional election, and I sympathize, believe me. I also empathize. It's a pity your election campaigns aren't limited, as ours are, to only a 6 week period (if I remember right...I think it's 6 weeks). There's a lot less time here for the unscrupulous in political parties to promote hatred and engage in dirty politics, cos our campaigns are so much shorter in duration than the American campaigns, and that's regulated by Canadian law. Sawzaw is stalking me too, by the way...on just one specific issue. He keeps pretending that I am representing the whole nation of Canada when I speak and being some kind of official spokesman and defender for it. I'm not. ;-D I represent me, period. My opinions are not the offical or unofficial views of Canada, they are the private personal opinions of me. I regard the Canadian government as a big disappointment and an embarrassment, frankly...but it could be worse!!! Way worse. So I count my blessings that it isn't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 19 Oct 10 - 02:04 AM Hey LH, When ever you get up on your high horse about how much better Canada is better than the US, I remind you about the things you keep forgetting. It seems to me that you are representing Canada with your comparisons. Would you like it if I kept bringing up how Canada is inferior to the US in some respect? I have complimented the things I consider better in Canada. I have agreed with you whenever possible. I have been through Canada to Alaska and back. I have been all around Nova Scotia and the Canadian side of the great lakes Gaspe, Toronto, Monteral Quebec. I would like to go all the way to Inuvik and Moose Factory one day. If you want to claim I am stalking you go ahead. If I go back and find where you have claimed Canada to be superior in some aspect I guess you think that is stalking. To me it is showing someone how wrong they are. At least you don't hurl personal insults at me like Bobert does. I say when I agree with Bobert. I say when Bobert is wrong and how he is wrong and present the facts. He lights up stink bombs like "redn**ks are disgusting little hypocrits" and dares anybody to prove him wrong. Then when someone proves him wrong he gets into an ad hominem attack mode rather than to counter with anything factual. I am not a tribalist. I see the right and wrong things in everybody. I go by facts and things that exist. Reality. Not facts based on scenarios about Cartoon characters or dead actors or movie fiction. Is that a problem? I originally came here looking for lyrics for songs to sing around the campfire and I noticed all this crap about Bush is Hitler which drew me in. I state my opinion and am immediately attacked as being a Bush supporter. A hated individual. Every time I criticize Bush it is ignored. People here just have an agenda and they do not want to hear anything from anybody that disagrees. That is not the way society works. It is the way that society does not work. It is the way society breaks down into "us or them" "there is no wat we are ever going to get along with them so will will just have to fight and overpower them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Sawzaw Date: 19 Oct 10 - 02:21 AM For some reason my last post was cut off: That is not the way society works. It is the way that society does not work. It is the way society breaks down into "us or them" "there is no way we are ever going to get along with them so we will just have to fight and overpower them". Muslims and Jews? Hutu and Tutsi? Bloods and Crips? Everybody can see what senseless conflicts those are but they continue to practice the same thing It is sad that people have forgotten how to get along when we all want basically the same things. We just disagree on how to achieve them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Oct 10 - 09:37 AM Well said, Sawzaw. ;-) You have explained yourself well. Okay, I won't accuse you of stalking me. There are certain good points and bad points about all countries, I think. Well.....most of them! Anyway, both Canada and the USA have certain better points than the other in certain respects. I just sort of freewheel around and comment on what I see happening, so if there's some comparative point I see, then I mention it, and that's really all there is to it. I think, for example, that the American elected Senate is a better idea than the Canadian appointed Senate, because the people should have a say about who gets to be a senator and whether he or she remains one! As it is now, the Canadian political party that is in power just gets to practice patronage by appointing a few new senators who will back THAT party in future votes against the other parties. That's not good. The American system is way better when it comes to that. Another thing that the USA has going for it is a certain kind of brash adventurous spirit that charges out and takes things on. That can be good, provided it's aimed at a worthwhile target. Canadians tend to be less proactive in that sense, so that's another good point for the USA. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: GUEST,999 Date: 19 Oct 10 - 09:38 AM I spent two months in Inuvik one week. The ONE good thing I can and will say about Bush is that he's been quiet about the present administration. I don't hate Bush. I feel he was manipulated. Companies got rich from kids getting killed in Iraq--an ill-defined war the parameters of which the world public has never been informed. The present US debt was caused mostly by that war, and little seems to have changed. People who don't like Obama might wish to cut him a bit of slack. He got stuck with the debt just as surely as did most people. Interesting that Halliburton is still going strong, but wtf. To put some perspective on Canada vs United States: I received this email from a friend this morning and thought y'all might enjoy it. "STEPHEN HARPER was visiting an Ontario primary school and the class was in the middle of a discussion related to words and their meanings. The teacher asked Mr. Harper if he would like to lead the discussion on the word 'Tragedy'. So our illustrious leader asked the class for an example of a 'Tragedy'. A little boy stood up and offered: If my best friend, who lives on a farm, is playin' in the field and a tractor runs over him and kills him, that would be a tragedy. Incorrect,said Harper. That would be an accident. A little girl raised her hand: If a school bus carrying fifty children drove over a cliff, killing everybody inside, that would be a tragedy. 'I'm afraid not',explained Harper, that's what we would refer to as a great loss'' The room went silent. No other children volunteered. Harper searched the room. Isn't there someone here who can give me an example of a tragedy? Finally, at the back of the room, little Jo hnny raised his hand and said: If a plane carrying you and Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Layton and Mr. Duceppe and yourself were struck by a 'friendly fire' missile & blown to smithereens, that would be a tragedy. Fantastic, exclaimed Harper, and can you tell me why that would be a tragedy? Well, said Johnny, it has to be a tragedy, because it certainly wouldn't be a great loss, and it probably wouldn't be a fu**ing accident either!" As a btw, I too have travelled extensively in both the US and Canada. The political map is all wrong. North America is north-south in both a geographical sense and an economic sense. That said, y'all go back to cheering for whatever. I agree with Will: ALL politics is apple sauce. Have a nice day. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Oct 10 - 10:00 AM LOL!!!!!!!!! Great Canadian political joke! For Americans who might not get it: Stephen Harper is the present prime minister of Canada. Ignatieff, Duceppe, and Layton are the leaders of 3 other political parties in Canada. The general public is quite annoyed with all of them most of the time, because they do not serve the general public, they serve a bunch of special interests. ;-D |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 19 Oct 10 - 10:03 AM "Facts", sawz... You wouldn't know them if they bit you on yer ass... No, you don't present "facts"... You present what some rightwinged blogger's so-called facts... It ios a fact that the Obama administartion cut the annual deficit by $100B... Even a very right winged newspaper reported it but rather than give credit you plug into the twisted version that the Republican Party wants you to ***believe***??? And, so, belive you do... I mean, when it comes to sound policy you take the mythological side over and over and over, Sawz... Continuing tax cut to wealthy produces jobs??? No, it won't... Cutting taxes is the way to fight the deficit??? No, it isn't... The list goes on and on where you take the uneducated mythological side??? Facts??? But when this is pointed out to you you find menaingless stuff like what kind of gun it was that Donnie Rumsfeld gave Saddam or what kind of plane Obama used... Who cares??? The country is sufferring the effects of 30 years of a bad economic idea and has brought US to crisis... That is the real issue... Not sideshow BS... You are just playing games to try to keep the real discussions from occuring... But then again that is the entire Republican strategy to get back in power... Blame Obama for ya'll's messes... And when that is brought to yer attention it's sideshow time om ya'lls part... Normal... B~ B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp Date: 19 Oct 10 - 10:35 AM "Facts - You wouldn't know them if they bit you on yer ass" Oh, yeah...what a great way to start a conversation! That's just guaranteed to get things off on the right foot! ;-D Yer a real dimplomat, Bobertz. You oughta come to Chi-town and talk to the local gorillas like that, you'd never have a dull day! No siree. You lookin' for some real aggravation, man? You want some in-yer-face arguin'? Well, I got a little free time next week, see? I'll bring down a set of brass knuckles and a baseball bat and we can talk "politics" all day, bust up the furniture, knock out a few teeth, give the P-vine somethin' to really get ticked off about, and maybe get you kicked out of the house fer a month or so. Ha! Then you and me can go down to the local boozery, kick some redneck ass, and drown our sorrows in cheap hooch till the cows come home. If the cops show up, I'll just flash my badge. No problemo. Can you take noogies, man? I deliver fierce noogies when I put a guy in a headlock, but I bet you can take 'em. Rock on, Roscoe. I'll see you soon, okay? - Chongo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: GUEST,999 Date: 19 Oct 10 - 11:48 AM Here ya go, Chongo. Just received this one from another friend. "HEAVEN AND HELL While walking down the street one day a Corrupt Senator was tragically hit by a car and died. His soul arrives in heaven and is met by St. Peter at the entrance. "Welcome to heaven," says St. Peter. "Before you settle in, it seems there is a problem. We seldom see a high official around these parts, you see, so we're not sure what to do with you." "No problem, just let me in," says the Senator. "Well, I'd like to, but I have orders from the higher ups. What we'll do is have you spend one day in hell and one in heaven. Then you can choose where to spend eternity." "Really?, I've made up my mind. I want to be in heaven," says the Senator. "I'm sorry, but we have our rules." And with that, St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell. The doors open and he finds himself in the middle of a green golf course. In the distance is a clubhouse and standing in front of it are all his friends and other politicians who had worked with him. Everyone is very happy and in evening dress. They run to greet him, shake his hand, and reminisce about the good times they had while getting rich at the expense of the people. They played a friendly game of golf and then dine on lobster, caviar and the finest champagne. Also present is the devil, who really is a very friendly guy who is having a good time dancing and telling jokes. They are all having such a good time that before the Senator realizes it, it is time to go. Everyone gives him a hearty farewell and waves while the elevator rises. The elevator goes up, up, up and the door reopens in heaven where St. Peter is waiting for him, "Now it's time to visit heaven...��� So, 24 hours passed with the Senator joining a group of contented souls moving from cloud to cloud, playing the harp and singing. They have a good time and, before he realizes it, the 24 hours have gone by and St. Peter returns. "Well, then, you've spent a day in hell and another in heaven. Now choose your eternity." The Senator reflects for a minute, then he answers: "Well, I would never have said it before, I mean heaven has been delightful, but I think I would be better off in hell." So St. Peter escorts him to the elevator and he goes down, down, down to hell... Now the doors of the elevator open and he's in the middle of a barren land covered with waste and garbage. He sees all his friends, dressed in rags, picking up the trash and putting it in black bags as more trash falls from above The devil comes over to him and puts his arm around his shoulders. "I don't understand," stammers the Senator. "Yesterday I was here and there was a golf course and clubhouse, and we ate lobster and caviar, drank champagne, and danced and had a great time. Now there's just a wasteland full of garbage and my friends look miserable. What happened?" The devil smiles at him and says, "Yesterday we were campaigning, Today, you voted.." Vote wisely." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Little Hawk Date: 19 Oct 10 - 12:16 PM That is an excellent parable for our times. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 19 Oct 10 - 12:56 PM Well, come on down, Chongz... As for the local redneck joints??? They purdy pitiful... These rednecks 'round here ain't hardly worth kickin' on but... ... maybe me an you can go a couple rounds before retiring to the trailer fir some weed, whites and wine... Maybe invite some of my hillbilly friends over... Sorry, but they ain't got too much redneck in 'um and ain't into fightin'... But they fun to party with even if they don't know the joys that come with bustin' up yer knuckles on someone who is willin to return the favor... Yeah, hillbillies just missed that day in school... B;~) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp Date: 19 Oct 10 - 02:51 PM Sounds like a fun way to spend the day, Bobertz. I'll take a trip down there soon as I clear up a little problem here in Chi-town with a coupla gorillas that are too stupid to take "no" for an answer. Shouldn't take too long. - Chongo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: beardedbruce Date: 19 Oct 10 - 03:09 PM Careful, Chongo. You DON'T want to mess with the Democratic Machine in Chi town- they still have a number of "shovel-ready" projects you could be a part of... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp Date: 19 Oct 10 - 03:25 PM No kiddin'. I know all about it. - Chongo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 19 Oct 10 - 04:16 PM Cool, Chongz... I was just gettin' me a case of autumnal depression and this chears me up... But leave them shovels behind... Brass knuckles okay but hittin' folks with shovels is rude... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp Date: 19 Oct 10 - 05:53 PM Yeah, okay. I would not want to be accused of bein' rude. Now, I had an idea here. For unpoplar views of the Obama Administration, y' know? What I figger we should do is interview all the maples, oaks, cedars, birches, chestnut trees, fir trees, redwoods, and all them other trees that don't get no mention in the poplar press. About time the other trees had their say. We have heard plenty enough from the damned poplars by now. They are just a splinter group anyways, and their bark is way worse than their bite. - Chongo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Unpopular Views of Obama Administration From: Bobert Date: 19 Oct 10 - 06:27 PM I donno about maples, Chongz... I mean, you look at a 6 foot tall maple and what you don't see is that that 6 foot tall tree allready has a root system that goes out 15 feet in all directions... You know, kinda hoggin' all the water from everything else... I kinda think that trees should share but the maple, like Boss Hog, ain't interested in sharin'... Now the cedar is 180 degress from the maples... It has a nice tap root and not much fiberous stuff so it's kinda thinkin' green and not trying to leave too muc of a carbon or root footprint... Yeah, tell ya' what, I'll interview the cedar... Heck I got a couple three of them right here on the farm and we're real tight so reckon thet ain't gonna try to BS me... BTW, I donno about ineteviewing but one redwood 'casue ya' know what Spiro T told us abpout 'um, "ya see one and you seen 'um all" so I reckon that means that they all gonna stick to one story... But poplras suck anyway... They are weed trees... No, not that kinda weed... B~ |
