 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute!
|
|
|
Subject: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Uncle Jaque Date: 28 Dec 00 - 10:42 PM For quite some time now, it has been abundantly obvious that the terms "Conservative" and "Folkie" have been generally assumed to have been mutually exclusive; a contradiction in terms, if you will. As one of a very small minority (if you are a Male of European ethnic origin and ever wondered what life is like as a member of a "minority group", try representing yourself as a Folk Musician - even an amature or "wannabe" one - while espousing pro-Life, Pro- Constitution (especially the very no-no 2nd Ammendment) Christian, Patriotic American "Family Values" Conservative beliefs and post regularly here... it'll come very quickly) of Conservative Mudcatters, it gives me great satisfaction to advise fellow downtrodden and regularly maligned Conservatives and "Dittoheads" that even those of us cowering in the closet afraid to come out and get shredded on a regular basis (as I try to do).... "TADDELAAT-TAADELLAAT-TADDELAAAAAAAaaaaa!!!!" (Virtual Bugle Call): The Cavalry is coming!!! For months I have tried to persuade, wangle, and beg my dear Amigo and Co-Worker "MAV", who is not only an accomplished Blues Musician, but proud GOP operative and RWE (Right-Wing-Extremist) to check out the "Mudcat", and hopefully get matriculated and active. After his spirited but unsuccessful canidacy for a GOP seat in the Maine State Senate (he was beaten 60:40 by the incumbant Democrat machine in his District), he now has sufficient time to do just that. Last night he tried to find us by going to "Mudcat.com" and found a website of the manufacturer of a very interesting deisel dredge, which you might find as amusing as he did... but I set him right today, and we can be expecting his company here any time now. If any of you tender hearts think that I'm "bad" with my controversial ideology here, well let me tell ye, folks; ye aint' seen NUTHIN' yet!!! As much as I try to employ a modicum of decorum and discretion in my rantings, all such window dressing is usually flung with abandon to the wind when MAV lets go, as I assure you he will at the first scent of Liberal "spin"! I have warned him that the flower of Liberal intellect is frequently to be found here; (As tight as I am with compliments to those of oppositional political persuasions, there are a couple of you - you know who you are - out there who sincerely deserve them and have, for what it's worth, my respect) he is decidedly NOT intimidated! Oh, did I tell you?; he's bringing several of his close friends and associates from other Conservative forums along for the fun. Some of them, I understand, are pretty well - connected Lawyers, Educators, Journalists and Conservative Think-Tank contributors, as well as at least one who goes under an anonymous "handle", as most of us do, but we think we know who he is... and it's a name that most of you would recognise (dread?)if you watch or read the news with any regularity. After about one of his posts, I think that even the elite minds in here will quickly realize that some heavy artillery has just taken the field. Oh, sure, there may be a few lumberjack truck-driving cigar-smoking shotgun-toting Limbaugh-loving Bush-Voting NRA Member Hellfire-and-Brimstone Rednecks bringing up the rear, but we'll do what we can to keep 'em under control. It has been my experience on these other somewhat hardcore forums (which I have essentially abandoned in favor of Mudcat) that if there is any rudeness, "flaming", or insults flying about, we (Conservatives) are in nearly all cases the recipients thereof, and hardly ever the initiators. I will do everything in my sphere of influence to assure that the "flame factor" on "our side" is reduced to and maintained at ZERO. I expect that the standards of decency and civility we have come to expect here will be upheld by all participants, and any who get out of bounds will be dealt with promptly and equatably by our Moderators. I can't gaurentee that no one will get "offended" if they choose to stray from the Music topic into the arena of social/political issues... but darn it; we've been "fair game" for general offence-at-will and better-get-used-to-it behavior while at the same time expected to conform to unwritten mores of "political correctness" with robotic, passive submission for the past 8 years now.... but hello: the ball is in another court, dear hearts, (have you noticed?) and another team is poised to play it. With teams a little more evenly matched, and one side no longer getting to create the rules as they go along while only the other is obliged to obey them - things could get appreciably more interesting - at least it should approach the level of a Sporting proposition, eh wot? Stay tuned.. and Stand by! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Sorcha Date: 28 Dec 00 - 10:48 PM Quidditch Teams, look out. The Slytherins are coming after us........ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Barry Finn Date: 28 Dec 00 - 11:04 PM Hi Uncle Jaque, don't give *&%$#@%& about your politics, first hand I gotta say that your music's fine though. Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: paddymac Date: 29 Dec 00 - 06:31 AM Well, spirited debate is a wonderful thing, so long as all parties keep the brain engaged. I find that many ardent philosophisers of differing viewpoints are somewhat befuddled at the suggestion that the so-called political continuum is circular rather than linear. Ah, the joy of it all to realize that you can really get to the left by going far enough to the right. And, of course, the obverse/inverse/converse applies as well. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: John P Date: 29 Dec 00 - 07:15 AM Hi Uncle Jacques, I find it interesting that you use the term pro-life in the same sentence that you claim to support the 2nd Ammendment. Wouldn't it be more accurate to describe yourself as anti-abortion? Or, if you really are pro-life, wouldn't it be better to put down your gun and encourage others (including the Defense Dept.) to do the same? You seem to be crowing about having invited a bunch of political ideologues to join the discussion here on Mudcat. Are they musicians or lovers of folk music? Yes, you said your friend plays the blues. Do his important and scary friends? Are they coming here for any reason other than to have political debates? John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 29 Dec 00 - 07:21 AM Concise Oxford Dictionary, 1964 edition:
Democratic Party (US): opposed to REPUBLICAN & supporting State, local & individual liberty against federal powers.
Republican Party (US): political party favouring liberal interpretation of constitution, extension of central power.
But then it gives Conservative as meaning disposed to0 maintain existing institutions, moderate cautious. I suppose "dog" now means a small furry anumal who says "miaow"... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Midchuck Date: 29 Dec 00 - 08:00 AM The simple fact is that both present-day orthodox liberals and present-day orthodox conservatives are terrified of individual liberty - and of its inevitable concommitant, individual responsibility (but I deny responsibility for spelling of "concommitant). I need a political party that will defend my right to walk down the street with a gun in one hand and a really terrible pornographic novel in the other (I don't want to do that, I just want to have the option), provided only that I don't shoot anyone, or threaten to, with the gun, or give the novel to a little kid or shove it in the face of someone who doesn't want to read it. I need a political party that either says "human life is sacred," and therefore opposes both abortion and capital punishment; or says "human life is only sacred sometimes," and therefore considers both acceptable, if a majority wants them. I need a political party that lets small businesses operate almost totally free of government interference, provided only that they are completely honest in their dealings with customers and others; but considers large corporate businesses to be governments in their own right, for all practical purposes, and is as suspicious of them, and as anxious to restrict their power as much as possible, as it is of any other government. I need a political party that says every citizen has the same freedoms, the same right to access to government services, and the same responsibilities and the same freedom to fail, without regard to race, sex (not "gender." Words have gender. People have sex. Live with it.) I need a political party that defends the right to property, while asking, as a serious question that deserves discussion, whether one person can really "own" more real estate than he/she and his/her family needs for a homestead - and if he can, what are the limits on his right to destroy it, in light of the fact that they aren't making any more? I think adding a few knee-jerk conservatives to the swarm of knee-jerk liberals on this forum will improve the level of interest of the discussion - but it won't produce any better answers until there is really some effort made to meet in the middle. But maybe it doesn't matter what I need or think, as much as it appears to from my viewpoint.... Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: InOBU Date: 29 Dec 00 - 08:24 AM Dear Uncle: The British Army and the SAS with their tanks and guns didn't scare me into a change of politics, I don't find your crowd very scary, in fact, we on the FAR left are much less combative than you on the right, to whom expressing a different point of view is often fighting words. On of my dearest friends and neighbors, to give you an example, is a complete good ol boy from Louisiana. About two days ago, we were standing in the cold, in front of his place, disscussing the impeachment of Bill Clinton. I was quiet and respectful, he on the other hand, was bellowing, calling me a F**king pettyfogger, etc. He yelled so loud the cops came. As I said to him, at the time, and I put forward to you know, if you have a point, you don't need volume and threats to make it. Unlike thouse on the right, we on the left belief in a pulralist society that even includes you. Happy new year, Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,Thom M.still at work Date: 29 Dec 00 - 08:32 AM Hey Jacque, When you say the ball is in another court you must be referring to the Supreme Court???!!!:) Thom. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 29 Dec 00 - 09:06 AM "my right to walk down the street with a gun in one hand ...provided only that I don't shoot anyone, or threaten to, with the gun"
Anyone walking down the street, Midchuck, with a gun in their hand is threatening other people. And I'd imagine that even in the "right to bear arms" State in the USA, that is how they would be seen. In fact I'd imagine they'd be very likely to get shot on the spot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Amergin Date: 29 Dec 00 - 09:35 AM Sorcha, been reading your Harry Potter I see.....just started the fourth one last night.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Troll Date: 29 Dec 00 - 09:57 AM And just WHO would shoot them, Kevin? We are not the trigger-happy society that you seem to imagine and our police rarely "shoot first and then ask questions" unless the other guy(s) are ALREADY shooting. John P, the idea of being "pro-life" has virtually nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. The right to keep and bear arms does not mean the right to use them in an indiscriminate manner. It is both a right AND a responsibility. I happen to be pro-choice, pro-death penalty and pro 2nd amendment. So we aren't all cut from the same bolt of cloth and we don't march in lock-step to the beat of the current ideology. troll |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Midchuck Date: 29 Dec 00 - 10:05 AM Anyone walking down the street, Midchuck, with a gun in their hand is threatening other people. All I can say (after supressing my initial reaction to say something personally abusive) is that you'd best stay well away from Vermont - or any of the northern three New England states - during deer season. Your heart might explode from the sheer terror of it all. (Incidentally, last I heard, Vermont had the "loosest" handgun laws in the Country - no concealed carry permits, because there's no permit requirement at all, in the first place - and the second-lowest per capita violent crime rate, after one or the other of the two Dakotas. We did have a triple homicide in Rutland last week - well, two in Rutland, the third kidnapped and killed over in New York State, where I suppose they figured nobody would notice - but it was all done with blades. That's the great virtue of keeping guns away from people. It makes things easier for the guy who likes a knife. Or the big guy who just likes to beat people to death.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 29 Dec 00 - 11:07 AM It's too bad your friend lost in his bid for the state senate...I know how you feel Jaque. A friend of mine lost his bid for the senate too, the republican machine is too strong right now. Old Maine proverb.."It's a long road that has no turns." That second amendment is very interesting..especially considering that the first part is so unpopular that it is ignored, that thing that says "A well regulated militia..etc" It was on the news the other day that we had the lowest murder count in Maine's history this year. Is that more due to the economy than to the gun ownership? Maine's equivelent to the second amendment says "The right of the people to keep and bare arms shall NEVER BE QUESTIONED! Now, that, to me, is pure lunacy. With that kind of "right" it's a wonder the state isn't full of "gunslingers". |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Rick Fielding Date: 29 Dec 00 - 11:29 AM Great Thread Uncle J.! Gave me my smile for the day. I'm afraid that you'll find your Limbaugh-lovin' friends won't stay around very long though (if they actually DO show up) 'cause it'll simply be too boring for them around here. By about the tenth "Atlantean-Native-Happy Birthday-war sucks-song circle, Tam Lin, Riley Puckett's thumbpick, Catspaw's possum thread, they'll run screaming back to their real world. We're a bunch of fuzzy, sucky, cuddly folkies here......and that's why you love us! Although it would be fun to read Ditto-heads discussing the music of Phil Ochs. Rick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 29 Dec 00 - 11:46 AM Sinsull, here." the third kidnapped and killed over in New York State, where I suppose they figured nobody would notice " Contrary to popular mythology, we New Yorkers notice, Midchuck. Our gun laws are set up so that only the bad guys can carry them. I choose not to simply because I know I could not shoot anyone and consequently would be supplying my attacker with another weapon.But I come from a family of hunters and gun enthusiasts and, Liberal as I am, believe that people capable of understanding the safe and proper handling of a gun should be legally allowed to carry one. Accordians are another matter. And watch the New York bashing! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: katlaughing Date: 29 Dec 00 - 11:55 AM Rick, BRILL! Thank you for saying that!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Midchuck Date: 29 Dec 00 - 12:11 PM Contrary to popular mythology, we New Yorkers notice, Midchuck....And watch the New York bashing! Sorry. I neglected to make the distinction between New York Above Albany and New York Below Albany. Actually, the 'Daks are my favorite place to run away from responsibility to...3/4 hour to the Champlain Bridge, and another 3/4 to the High Peaks...and no one can find me. And you don't need a gun in the Adirondacks, I've never yet met a mean bear...few Frenchmen, tho... Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Amergin Date: 29 Dec 00 - 12:13 PM What's wrong with New york bashing? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Rick Fielding Date: 29 Dec 00 - 12:24 PM Besides, Uncle J, the first time one of the "Conservative Cavalry" come upon a discussion of why Bill Clinton should NOT get the death penalty for oral sex, they'll think we're BEYOND redemption, and run back to the 700 club! Oh hell, maybe I'm wrong, and they'll get a few smiles from Mudcat, like most of us (and you) do. Rick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: InOBU Date: 29 Dec 00 - 12:27 PM Hi troll Just like my old day was a free thinking Marxist, I always apreciate that you are not a cookie cutter right wing thinker. I supose we could call our troll a thoughtful concerative Still waiting for Uncle Jaque's storm troopers of doom, with open arms and an open mind (and a cup of hot cider, cinnimon, nutmeg and rum for them, it is cold here) Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,CLETUS Date: 29 Dec 00 - 01:25 PM Catspaw woant lettus have no guns roundt hiz house senz he doan want the kids a gittin into em ur nuthin. 'Course he woan lettus play "Sink the Cheerios" in his toilets no more either. An ta tell yall the truth, me an Paw an the Reg boyz doan use guns too much now senz thet time a few years back thet we had one uv them huntin axseedents. We hadda few an went out ta git us a deer ur sumpin an we wound up gittin our buddy Buford. We dint report it ur nuthin but Paw said a few words over him. EULOGY FOR BUFORD O Lord, take our good buddy Buford into thy Heavenly Herd. He was a good ol' boy who knew that 27 was his limit, 'les somebody else was drivin'. So you gotta' forgive him for wearin' that brown coat with the white fanny pack 'cause it was about all he had left to wear after his ex sicced that lawyer fella' on him for back child support. And God, please bestow your benediction on me an Cletus. We had no way aknowin' that Buford had fallen into that dead and rottin' sycamore and got that funny lookin' branch stuck in his coonskin hat. 'Sides that Lord, there MUSTA' been sumpin' wrong with them three Head Cheese sandwiches that Buford had with his beers. I mean when he has aretchin', well me and Cletus woulda' swore it was a buck in rut. So long Buford, we'll miss yuh. We're awful sorry, but I know you understand...'specially since you had a kinda' similar thing happen a few years back with your ex-brother-in-law, Hiram. Dear God, please take our friend's soul to your bosom and forgive him his earthly transgressions. Cletus and me are gonna' take his beat up ol' pick-up and his Ithaca and leave his dead ass right here...'cause ain't nobody else gonna' miss him. Plus, the S.O.B. didn't have no money and we can't afford no funeral or any more trouble with the Law. AMEN It all turt out OK tho an it shor wuz lucky whut we dint bury the ol' boy cuz he wuz jest nocked senseless cuz the shot hit him inna backpack whair he wuzza haulin a 12 pack uv Iron City. So we kinda figgered we shud givvup on either the beer or the guns so we figgered weed stick with the beer. CLETUS
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 29 Dec 00 - 01:55 PM Walk down the street with a gun in my hand
The operative words being those in italics. I know there are people who like to go off into the woods and blaze away at anything that moves, including each other. The British Royal Famuily is full of guys like that. But wandering down a street in a city or town with a gun in your hand? Wyatt Earp knew how to deal with that sort of behabviour... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: paddymac Date: 29 Dec 00 - 02:06 PM Kevin - Hmm, I understand that the traditions and thought processes relating to guns are quite different on our respective sides of the pond. I don't know that access of the bad guys to firearms (often illicit) is significantly different in the two systems, but access by the decent folks in lawful fashion is very much different. Generally, citizens here are restricted in the sense of required licensure to carry concealed weapons, but in most jurisdictions it is perfectly legal to carry a lawful weapon that is not concealed. Many states have game laws prohibiting transport of loaded rifles and shotguns in vehicles. Perhaps, in that mythical perfect world, firearms would be inane, but here in the collective real world they are a very utilitarian device. I wonder what Northern Ireland would be like if the innocent families fire-bombed by dunder-headed dolts could lawfully possess defensive firearms, and use them to defend their "castles." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 29 Dec 00 - 02:34 PM Sinsull here. I give up. Bash away. I live below Albany in NYC. But all that gun blasting hasn't left me tone-deaf so I wandered in here. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 29 Dec 00 - 02:53 PM I can assure you there is no shortage of legally owned guns in Northern Ireland! And it's not restricted to "decent folk".
But if you noticed, I wasn't actually sounding-off against that right-to-bear-arms stuff. I was suggesting that there are situations where carrying a gun in your hand is not a reasonable thing to do.
On the occasions I have had to carry a gun (all legal), the only time I would ever have had it in my hand would have been when I was planning to shoot it. Slung over your shoulder, or in the crook of the elbow is one thing, but "in your hand" is something very different. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: catspaw49 Date: 29 Dec 00 - 02:56 PM Ah Sins darlin'....There I was, tryin' to brighten your day by letting Cletus use the computer ...... I'm so sad. So are you and the Cap'n havin' a great time? Hope so.....love you both. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: WyoWoman Date: 29 Dec 00 - 03:02 PM I think poor MAV just read the introductory remarks and bailed. At any rate, if you do end up dropping in, welcome. All Gawd's chillen got a place in the choir, as long as they're prepared to shoulder their share of generally good-hearted b.s. There are some evil wankers here as well, but happily, they are not armed bears, and even if they are, the bullets are virtual and verbal. Welcome, WyoWoman |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,pistol packin' mama Date: 29 Dec 00 - 03:27 PM Actually, in my state (USA) McGrath of Harlow is right. I carry a concealed weapon and have for years. There are specific laws pertaining to carrying a concealed weapon, including that it must be kept completely out of sight because the mere sighting of the weapon by someone can cause fear and dread, and is thus interpreted as a threat. I am a regular here at Mudcat, but have decided to remain anonymous, since I do meet some of you and don't want to make anyone feel threatened or afraid. (Gosh, I hope I logged out properly! I'll be mortified and embarassed if my name shows up) I am conservative, and I love it here. I am not very outspoken, but I love to read it all and take it in. I appreciate being able to see both sides... Pistol packin' mama |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Irish sergeant Date: 29 Dec 00 - 04:47 PM I certainly welcome any intelligent discourse. And Uncle Jaque, I have no doubt you bring that to the table even if i don't agree with everything the conservative sector of our fair land has to offer. I don't reject it all out of hand. I believe in the validity of the second amendment but there should be some limit. After all, why the hell would you need an assault rifle unless you were house hunting in say Bosnia? I am by the way, a gun owner and a Civil War reenactor. Having said that, I have to also point out that I view myself as a middle of the road liberal. I don't agree with sanctioned government school prayer because it is always Christian. Being Roman Catholic myself, I have absolutely nothing against prayer, I am in fact in favor of it personally. However, it is not my right or anyone elses including and especially our government's to force those of Jewish, Islamic, Bhuddist, Wiccan etc. religions to put up with it. That violates their constitutional rights and I spent too long in service to my country and constitution to abide that. The "Religious" Right has an agenda that I personally find frightening to anyone who values their freedom. The government of this country was never meant to be a theocracy. Midchick, Though I am a supporter of the second amendment, I would find someone walking down the street with a gun in their hand threatening. Sorry. Cletus, if you had been using those teflon jobbers that Dick Cheney likes so much you'da been draggin' ole Buford's butt outta them thar woods. Again, welcome to all and a splendid New Year. Neil |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 29 Dec 00 - 04:59 PM Spaw - Sins here. I don't take New York bashing seriously especially when it comes from Midchuck. He is practicing to be our resident curmudgeon but is too likeable to carry it off. The Captain is the perfect host - dragged me to a Maritime Museum in blizzard conditions. Half the exhibits were closed and the other half unheated. We hiked a quarter mile (I had no boots) through drifts and ice to see the Lobsterman exhibit but the "man" (Kendall's voice - really!) was shut down for the season so we hiked back and thawed out in the Museum Shop. The food is good; the setting quiet - I needed a break. And the music is close to perfect but don't let him know I said that. It will go to his head. I was pleased to see Cletus posting again after his Christmas accident. Poor boy gets into so much trouble without even trying. And it's always a pleasure to re-read Buford's Eulogy. Happy New Year. And to those with guns: Remember that if you shoot bullets into the air to celebrate, they can come down and hit people in the head. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST Date: 29 Dec 00 - 05:05 PM Irish S, what the heck do you mean by "However, it is not my right or anyone elses including and especially our government's to force those of Jewish, Islamic, Bhuddist, Wiccan etc. religions to put up with it." Don't they pray too? Pistol packin' mama |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Richard Bridge Date: 29 Dec 00 - 05:21 PM I wonder if we ought to try to find some real left wingers as well, to complement the vaguely pink woolly liberalism that so often goes (including in my case)with the vaguely white arran sweater (and beard). Sort of a bit left of centre is about as hard left as I've seen here, and even InOBU whose views I respect even if I often disagree with them (particularly when Ireland is mentioned) really doesn't seem to be violently left wing. The furthest I've ever seen him go was to advocate a general strike. It's a long way from "Aux barricades!". I used to know a few at university, including a brilliant economist who despite his Marxism got a first from a professor who was somewhere about the Monday Club position in right/left terms. They all thought of me as somewhat right of centre, and I have a hard time staying civil to those of the type this thread invites. Then the rest of us can leave those to whom this thread is addressed, and my invitees, to sort each other out, and go off to talk about folk music or something. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Uncle Jaque Date: 29 Dec 00 - 05:36 PM My goodness; I expected howls of outrage and indignation here after dropping that last grenade in the pool, and am not totally disapointed... but am considerably encouraged by what seems like much more commonality of core humanitarian values between us than our idealogical "labels" parties, or denominational persuasions might superficially indicate to the casual observer. Is that a yearning for Liberty I hear coming from some on the "Left"? Is that a sweet song of Compassion wafting in from the "Right"? Could it Be? Might we hope? I sense a lot of diverse interpretations of common terms, possibly creating tangles of misunderstanding amongst us, but plenty of potential for concilliation, reduction of suspicion/fear and enhancement of mutual trust and respect between participants willing to engage in the proccess. COMMUNICATION is key here, Mates - IMHO, and that's what we're here for. isn't it? I wouldn't worry about an onslaught of Conservative "Slythians" or whatever we're supposed to be troubling Mudcat any more that a troop of Irish Dragoons would be a serious threat to the Austrian Empire... but it might be interesting! And the "game" analogy: not all of us on the "Right" might subscribe to this, but personally, I'm looking for a match where after a spirited play, BOTH teams - as well as the Spectators - come off "Winners" and off to a good Pub to celebrate together. Am I dreaming? Yeah, I do that sometimes. Barry: That's the Spirit, Mate! Thanks for the compliment; your songs are delivered with wonderful energy and spirit, which I very much enjoy and admire. Right up there on the topsl' yard! Hang on tight & hope to see(and hear) you soon at the next one! Paddymac: MAV and I were just discussing that "Circular continuum" concept yesterday - he disputes it, and I'll let you take it up directly with him. JP: That's a loaded one, and I hope to get back to it. We'll talk. Yes, several of MAV's associates are into one form of music or another, and I concurr with a later posting that the "GOBs", if they are not musically inclined, will probably not hang about long... and that's pretty OK by me, too. It is unfortunate that a lot of rude, uncivilized slobs come off or present themselves as "Conservatives"; those are usually the encouters people remember, and as much as we know better than to stereotype, we all do it, don't we? McGrath: Oxford Dictionary you say? I will have to check that out - the descriptions you provide seem to me to be "switched" completely; Even a superficial examination of 20th Cen. American History will indicate that Democratic theory seems to encourage bigger, more intrusive Government, and increasing it's subject's dependance upon it. Conservatisim, on the other hand, encourages free enterprise, personal accountability, and entrepunarial risk-taking as well as local and personal autonomy. Now I read a previous thread where a Subject of the Crown (was it you?) advised us that American and British concepts of "C" and "L" should not be confused, as they are not all that closely related. How about Canada? Perhaps we should examine this distinction more closely before we continue this discussion on an international basis.
MIDCHUCK: TAKE HEART, my friend!!! There IS a political party for you! Or I should say, perhaps, for "us", as my personal proclivities are actually as much if not more alligned with this band as with the GOP - we just realized that if anything of significance is to be achieved in the interest of National integrity (if not survival) that it is best done via the medium of a viable party with potentially electable candidates... at least for now. This Party, dear Heart, is known as the "LIBERTARIAN" Party (although I heard that they are considering a name change to counter the public "Who-the-Hell-are-THEY??" factor). Check out
Kendall: Wanna trade machines? Ours could use a good lube-job, as it seems a bit rusty of late, and there might be a few parts missing, but there are those of us who are workin' on it. Give 'er another pull, MAV; I think we almost got it started that time... As much as I revere your wisdom and insight, Sir, I might question how straight that long road is; seems like a few travellers missed a curve here and there & ended up in the aldar swamp! From what Friend MAV tells me of his experience, the ruts and potholes along the way are a caution!
And on "Organized" Militia; we've also been discussing that very thing - or at least I have been raising the issue - among associates and organizations I belong to. Organization is of equal, if not greater significance than whatever firepower Citizens might have tucked away in the closet in the defence of hearth, home, and Liberty. Look what it's done for Labor. Have you noticed what the NRA has been up to over about the past year? We're slow, but I think we're learning. With the economy here in Maine, I suspect that many of the Working Class cannot afford a gun to sling.
Larry: You flatter us, Sir, by your assumption that we are sufficiently organized as to qualify as "Storm Troopers". I think that you'll find most "Cs" to be about as motley a crew as any. That cider sure sounds good t' me!
Gotta run, but will try to get back to ye later. We've been having a lot of trouble with constipated internet up here (got locked out of Mudcat immediately after posting thread and just got back in) and the Nor'Easter moving in for the weekend won't help things any - so if us Mainers drop out of sight for a bit, it ain't 'cause we're skairt off or nuthin! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: InOBU Date: 29 Dec 00 - 06:14 PM Hi Jaques: Kust kidding ya about the Storm troopers, you were the one who referred to them as calvery, gotta say though, they gotta be the slowest calvery I ever waited for, I think the Indians already won, old sport. Hi Richard, I am a rather open minded, rabble rouser, however, I do carry and IWW union card and organised the first branch of SDS at NYC law school... I even used to have red hair in my beard until it all went grey! Cheers all... I don't even hear hoof beats yet... Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 29 Dec 00 - 06:46 PM "a troop of Irish Dragoons would be a serious threat to the Austrian Empire"
They sure as hell were, if they happened to be on the other side at the time! That wasn't an an English undertsanding of what the words mean - it was an interpretatiin from an English point of view of how the politics of America worked out in the early 60s. And a pretty - plausible one. People forget these things, and politics changes.
Hell, there was a time when the Labour Party in GB was Socialist (and pretty conservative with a small c...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Uncle Jaque Date: 29 Dec 00 - 07:45 PM Meant to insert a link to the Libertarian Party, but it vanished! I could look up the FAQ about rigging blue clickies, or just try www.lp.org so it might be copy/pasted or whatever. Yes, the horses are a little slow this time of year in Maine. The long-eared ones are particularly recalcitrant. We're roundin' 'em up, though! Oh, by the way; MAV is partially decended from the Plains Cherokee... and tough rascals they are, indeed! Put a War Party of Cherokee and a Troop of Irish Dragoons on the same side of an issue, and the bloomin' world had better look out, eh? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: WyoWoman Date: 29 Dec 00 - 07:57 PM I'm descended from the Cherokee as well, and I don't much think the description 'war party of Cherokee' quite works. Maybe Cheyenne, but not Cherokee ... just a thought ... ww |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: SINSULL Date: 29 Dec 00 - 08:42 PM Funny you should mention what the NRA has been up to..tell him Rick..tell him about the fox hunt protesters who were shown as angry gun owners. How about the angry, honest gun owners in Canada who turned out to be neo nazis? Tell him Rick... I wrote to the lying bastards and they never answered...I wonder why? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 29 Dec 00 - 10:36 PM That was me actually. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Uncle Jaque Date: 29 Dec 00 - 10:42 PM WW: There is a strong possibility that I have gotten tribes confused here; MAV has been educating me on Indian heritage and history, but I admit having a lot left to learn. It is fascinating. Sinsull: as soon as I saw "SINSULL" I knew that the stick I've been poking around with just met a landmine! None of those incedents you mention ring a bell with me. Could you elaborate (as soon as you decend from the ceiling fan, that is) or give a link to a credable source? If it's any consolation, they never reply to any of my personal messages either - but I don't take it quite as personally as you seem to. They are a huge organization, and ever, it seems, in the proccess of re-inventing themselves - sort of like Al Gore, only different. I got dissed with the NRA and quit some years ago over what I considered "inflamatory rhetoric" from XVP Wayne LaPierre calling Federal BATF Agents "Jack-Booted Nazi bucket-helmeted Thugs" and the like. Then came Ruby Ridge, and Waco, and Illian Gonzalez... along with a host of relatively "minor" atrocities which the dominant press seems to have overlooked.. and I sent in my letter of appology to Mr. LaPierre along with my dues. Now if you were to conduct a "free-association" test on me and said, as you just did, "Lying Bastard", my probable response would be "WJC". Yours is "NRA". So, we're different. Your bourbon balls still rule, though! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Rick Fielding Date: 29 Dec 00 - 10:49 PM Actually I got over being angry at that Kendall. The NRA infomercial has been shown several times now, and it's quite hilarious. There was substantial response in a number of Canadian Newspapers and phone in radio shows....and guess what? The Australian and British press have had a field day with it as well. I think the capper was seeing (several times now) the Charleton Heston AUTOGRAPHED bullet, as a reward for joining the NRA. Look, it's only a matter of a few years before you take us over for good, but in the meantime, it's hard to take them seriously. Folks who blow away others in the workplace we DO take seriously. Rick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,guestMAV Date: 29 Dec 00 - 11:29 PM Actually I just found out about the thread (11:15 EDT) I'm not as mean-spirited and cruel as you may imagine by now, But I don't take kindly to obvious "big lie" propaganda and ad hominem attacks. I do indeed play on occasion having been in bar bands most of my life ranging from horn bands in the 70s to shaking in my boots on the stage of the Apollo theater in the 90s(we didn't get booed) We represented Maine for several years in the Blues Rumble in Alston MA and were finalists one time but got beat out by Miss Shirley Lewis (but bless her, she deserved a win and the recording contract that went with it) We wound up calling lots of stuff blues including old rock and roll and swing. I think my main awareness of conservativism came as a self employed musician and the issue of self-employment tax. THOSE THIEVING BA$+@RD$!
Laissez les bon temps roulez. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,kendall Date: 30 Dec 00 - 09:18 AM I too pay self employment taxes..how else are we going to support all those deserving weapons manufacturers? I'm just glad I'm in a position to be able to pay taxes. One of the things that griped me was seeing that creep LaPierre bashing Slick Willy for lying, when he was sitting there doing the same thing! I'd hate to have his nerve in a tooth! By the way, Jaque, that was not Sinsull, it was I who posted that info on the National Rifle Assination. Does anyone know if the Michigan congressman won or lost? He was a lifelong NRA supporter, except that he supported trigger locks..then they targeted him for defeat. Can you wxplain what the gun nuts have against trigger locks? Furthermore, I will not buy any weapon that is NOT made by S&W. They had the guts to stand up to the gun lobby, and I admire that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,A concerned citizen Date: 30 Dec 00 - 09:26 AM ...Watch out New Year's Eve Kendall!!!! You might fall over a tree root in a revelous moment and shoot off your nuts!!!! hg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 30 Dec 00 - 10:15 AM This is SINSULL! Jacque - it takes a lot more than the NRA and gun control discussions to get me up to the ceiling fan. I even have an autographed picture of Moses (Heston) from the NRA - a joke given to me by an ex-member. Kendall on the other hand... My problem with the NRA is their need to defend the carrying of ALL arms. Why does anyone NEED to have a weapon designed for mass murder? You would turn a deer into chop meat with one. On the other hand, you could wipe out fifty men in the blink of an eye, couldn't you? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Dave (the ancient mariner) Date: 30 Dec 00 - 10:32 AM Normally I avoid adding to the flames but I would like to make a comment to all this recent US political invective. I actually respect and like many people on here who do not share my political views. We all recognise the importance of balanced, thoughtful, and expressed opinion. However, the threads on the Mudcat have become very political, and very disturbing lately. As a conservative, I have begun to feel very intimidated and unwelcome on this forum... Perhaps you might all lighten up a bit please? It is after all, supposed to be the Season Of Goodwill. Yours, Aye. Dave |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Rick Fielding Date: 30 Dec 00 - 12:15 PM Happy new Year dave. Sometimes I feel a bit like a fish out of water as well, 'cause of my lack of religion, and suspicion of the folks who carry the mantle of liberal leadership. I think that Clinton, Jesse Jackson and NOW demonstrated unbelievable hypocrisy over the last few years. Gore as well. But it's still hard not to see the humour in people like Bush, Rush, Falwell, Dr. Laura and Pat Robertson, having so much influence on so many people. I try to think of myself as a liberal who decides for myself what positions I take on individual issues. Gets ya in deep doo-doo with both sides! Rick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Dec 00 - 12:39 PM So far the thread seems to have stayed reasonably polite at an interpersonal levl, which I see as the first rule of engamgement in thes thing. The second rule being to bring in songs wherever relevant.
Reading what kendall was saying about the NRA reminded me of something that has puzzled me everytime this comes up.
I'm happy to live in a country where guns are seen by most people as not being much fun or much use. But that's beside the point. I can recognise that for millions of Americans it's different, for all kind of reasons. And by and large, whether it's because they want to go out adn shoot wild creatures, or are scared of burglars, they are sane and sensible people.
But how does it come about that they are represented by this bunch of crazies who seem to be opposed to the kinds of sensible limitations that a group representing gun-owners should be campaigning in support of?
It's as if the main motorists' lobby was made up of Hell's Angels. Except that is unfair to Hell's Angels, who don't campaign against brakes on motor vehicles.
I'm pretty sure that if the Automobile Association here, and whatever equivalent you've got over in the States, were inveighing against driving tests and against all speed limits, and in favour of people driving tanks on the road - well, I don't think it would have many members for long.
And in keeping with my second rule here is a song about a shooting accident
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 30 Dec 00 - 01:12 PM I'll tell you how...because fear is the basis of ALL hatred. Hitler was aware of that, so is the NRA. They play upon mans fear, and it works. Now before anyone flames me..I am NOT saying the NRA are Nazis. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Midchuck Date: 30 Dec 00 - 01:15 PM He said "Nazi!" He said "Nazi!" GET HIM! P. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Dec 00 - 01:34 PM Yes, I can see how the NRA might be scared of all kinds of things and full of hate as a result, and try to make use of fear as a way of bringing in the membership fees.
But how come that works? I'd have thought the NRA would scare the socks off most sensible gun-owners, and would end up as a hate object; cf Hell's Angels.
Is there a NASG around that's been kept out of the papers? A National Association for Sane Gun-owners? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: harpgirl Date: 30 Dec 00 - 02:47 PM ...I'll wager that lady who got an eight year sentence for fatally shooting that other lady in the face over driving practices in, where was it? Alabama, was considered to be a sane gun owner. I see no reason for any citizen to carry a hand gun or other firearm off their own property. I think that only currently working peace officers should be allowed to carry guns among the general public!!!!! hg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 30 Dec 00 - 04:02 PM The only reason I can think of is the fact that so many other nuts are doing it. As far as I'm concerned, it is only to level the playing field. Besides, some people think the constitution gives then the right. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: harpgirl Date: 30 Dec 00 - 04:16 PM ...precisely my point, dear one..."all the other nuts are doing it" is the reasoned argument I usually get in rebuttal!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,juju Cobra Date: 30 Dec 00 - 04:52 PM Wow, why all the hate? Why would you want to send policemen to shoot me harpgirl? And Kendell, the Constitution doesn't give anyone "rights" it protects our unalienable rights that we were born with. Please think twice before calling in the Stazi. There are other ways to deal with problems than resorting to violence. Look at the failure of the "war" on drugs, for example. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 30 Dec 00 - 04:57 PM So what do sane gun-owners do if they want to have their voices heard in support of sane gun-policies (while keeping their guns)? Conservative gun-owners for example, who by definition surely can't approve of extremists like the NRA and so forth... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: harpgirl Date: 30 Dec 00 - 05:14 PM ...I wouldn't want to send a policemen to shoot you, darlin!!I don't hate anyone! Just stating my tired old opinion...heck, I'd disarm the peacekeepers as well, if I could! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Uncle Jaque Date: 30 Dec 00 - 06:00 PM 'Bout time, MAV! For those of you who consider the NRA a den of malevolent lunatics to be feared much more than the Islamic Jihadd, perhaps you overlooked some of the educational and public service programs provided by the NRA. Like the "Eddie Eagle" firearms safety course and associated materials provided at no charge to any school requesting it. I'ts main theme is to teach kids who encounter any firearm to "Stop; don't touch it; leave the area immediately and tell an adult". Of course, thanks to Liberal Teacher's Unions and Government School Administrators, this dosn't happen often - except in certain Religious and Private Schools where education seems to have a higher priority than political agendas and indoctrination. (Oh no? Compare SAT scores whydoncha?) And thanks to the Liberal Press, unless you belong to the NRA, you probably never even heard of it. Sort of like all those Pro-Life rallys in Washington, which in some cases I'm told outnumbered the "Million Mom March" considerably; if you wern't there, they didn't happen. "Trigger Locks"? Not a bad idea in some instances - like locking up your vehicle or securing toxic medicines and materials away from children. I think we used to call that "common sense" back in NH. When BigBro decides to force all of us serfs to use them whatever the situation, however, it is a problem to some of us - and the NRA isn't falling for this political scam. Apparantly our initial speculations that such laws would only give criminals another advantage over their victims has been confirmed by more than one (at last count) homeowner having been killed or neutralized by an intruder while fumbling in the dark attempting in vain to unlock their weapon. It seems that predators are not nearly as compliant with these laws as are their law-abiding vicims. Imagine that! How come manditory helmet laws for motorcycle riders were such a horrendous abridgement of personal rights and freedom... but manditory "trigger locks" are a wonderful thing? Have you ever heard of "Operation Exile"? Probably not. It's the legislative initiative of the NRA to encourage the extended incarceration of repeat violent offenders and carreer, predatory vermin who habitually rape, murder, maim and terrorize people. The same crowd which "PC" Judges and Lawyers seem to delight in turning loose on us after minimal stays in country-club (relative to where many of them come from, anyway) "rehabilitation programs". In places where it has been applied, it seems to be working as evidenced by crime rate reductions - but I don't suppose you're going to see that on the 6:00 News either. How many know that Mr. Heston marched with Dr. Martin Luther King for equal rights back in the 60's? Have you read his speech to last year's graduating class at Harvard? (I have a transcript on file). You seem to think that you know this man.. at least enough to judge and condemn him. Do you really, or are you just parrotting the sentiments fed you by those you accept as your authority figures? I find that a little hard to buy given this bunch of independant and critical thinkers.. but in a couple of cases here, I'm frankly beginning to wonder. For those with the courage of conviction to take a peek over No-Man's Land towards the other side, feel free to check out http://www.nra.org/ and see if you discover anything there which Komrade Dan Ratherski may not want you to know. The NRA may not perfect by any means, but they do honor and protect things like the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the principals which have made this Country fairly distinguishable from the Soviet Union or Nazi Germany. And for that we are accused of representing what the NRA essentially stands resoloutly against. And Bush "stole" the election.. O sure; whatever. As to those "Assault" weapons (another Liberal excersize in creative redefinition, akin to "saturday night special" and "pro-choice"); When the Framers wrote the Constitution, arming the working class was NOT about hunting or target shooting. It wasn't even all that much about keeping the bandits away from the door. It was to provide a certain disincentive to an overpowered Government from turning on it's Citizens and enslaving them, as history indicates a powerful predisposition for them to do (they were well read and knew that). There is a reason why slaves are generally kept ignorant and unarmed. Historical precident also indicates that whenever a government succeeds in disarming the workers, weather by force or deception, tyranny is seldom far behind. The weapons Citizens had the right to bear in young America were flintlock Brown Besses, Charlevilles, longrifles, horse-pistols, swords, and even bayonettes! (One of the distinguishing criterion for an "Assault Weapon" is a bayonette lug, by the way. These rampant drive-by bayonettings have just got to stop!). These were the "cutting edge" of military weapons technology at the time. Other than British aristocracy, not many fellows used swords for hunting, and the big Infantry muskets were generally too awkward and heavy to be well suited to hunting. True, a motley Militia was hardly a match for a trained, disciplined army; but it was known then as it had better be known today that sufficient oppression has a way of turning some folks who have tasted freedom at least once in their lives kinda fiesty. And an enraged, highly motivated, and ARMED rabble can be a real pain in the butt to any Tyrant! Just ask King George. Or the Rooskies after about 3 years of Afganistan. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Ebbie Date: 30 Dec 00 - 06:36 PM Uncle Jaque- I agree. I'm aware how easy it is to misunderstand - the KKK also were/are a group of civic-minded grandfatherly types who do a lot of good in their community. Phhhhhttttt... Get real. Ebbie Now I'm outa here. You guys are disgusting. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,Stackley Date: 30 Dec 00 - 07:55 PM I'm breathless with anticipation- just what's most needed. A whole horse troop of Jaqueasses (or is it a Jaquetroop of horses arses?)with verbal diarrhea. Cheers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,Pistol packin' mama Date: 30 Dec 00 - 08:24 PM Dave the Ancient Mariner said "I have begun to feel very intimidated and unwelcome on this forum... Perhaps you might all lighten up a bit please?" I do consider that the previous two posts are the ones that create that kind of feeling (Ebbie and Stackley). I like reading Uncle Jacques posts (I'm in agreement with him largely) as well as opposing sides, but heck! Does it have to degenerate into name calling? I carry a concealed weapon and am licensed to do so. No one ever sees it and I've not needed it. I hope I never do. But I stand for my right to do so. Pistola |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 30 Dec 00 - 08:30 PM That statement about the "Right to bear arms" was tongue in cheek deah...our right actually comes from a gutless congress and a strong gun lobby....a well regulated militia.. Tell ya what harpgirl..if someone comes up with a way to eliminate ALL guns..they can have mine too. Until then.."they will have to pry it from my cold dead fingers"!( Moses) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Ribbit Date: 30 Dec 00 - 09:22 PM "An enraged, highly motivated, and ARMED rabble can be a real pain in the butt to any Tyrant!" They can also be terrifying to any other group that they decide doesn't belong or agree with them. You state that one person was overcome while trying to unlock his pistol. How many children are killed every year handling guns that, had been locked, would have been unable to be discharged. The state of Maine, as you probably know Jacque, currently has a program where gun owners may obtain free gun locks in order to prevent such tragedies. Nothing mandatory just an attempt to prevent such needless tradgedies. It must be really horrible to live in such fear, to feel so constantly threatened, that one feels the necessity to carry weapons. When does the craziness stop? Do we start giving everyone in the country a gun as soon as they turn 18? I don't consider myself a commie or a red as you seem to think those disagree with are but maybe you and Tail Gunner Joe could have had youself some wild ol' times. Thom |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: CarolC Date: 30 Dec 00 - 09:41 PM Hi Uncle Jaque, I've only read your initial post on this thread. I may read more later. I just want to say that if you find yourself to be the recipient of flames, you might want to consider the possibility that it is because you sometimes behave like a Troll (not troll). Trolls attract flames. That's what they do. If you don't want to attract flames, don't Troll for them. And please don't turn the Mudcat into a war zone. Some of us would not be happy if you did that. We want to like you, we really do. Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: CarolC Date: 30 Dec 00 - 09:47 PM Ok, I've read a couple more posts. Dave (the ancient mariner), I hope you know that you are one of the shining lights of reason, sanity, kindness, and compassion in this forum. I hope you never decide to go away. Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Dave (the ancient mariner) Date: 30 Dec 00 - 10:01 PM The NRA trained firearms instructor, ex Yugoslav Olympic pistol champion, and retired Doctor of music, who trained my wife and I in competition pistol shooting here in Canada, do not like being refered to as pistol packin Nazi's and rednecks. Neither do I, and the fireman, retired nurse and psychiatrist, who I share a range with periodically hardly qualify either. Perhaps you can understand how actual members of the NRA are getting a real bad rap from Media and Liberals. WE promote safety and reasonable laws. Thank You for your kind remarks Carol. Yours, Aye. Dave |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 30 Dec 00 - 10:32 PM I have met Jaque, and, even though he is conservative, he is still ok in my book I like energetic exchanges, but, I dont like personal attacks. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,MAV Date: 30 Dec 00 - 11:54 PM < Don't look at us, they were also democRATS. George Wallace (d) Well known racist Fritz Hollings (d) put up Confederate flag in NC Robert Byrd (d) Grand Imperial Wizard of the Senate Boss Hogg (d) Just kidding. mav8 out |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Uncle Jaque Date: 31 Dec 00 - 12:40 AM Dave and PPM: Thanks for your kind words of affirmation; It's good to know that I'm not the only one in here with similar perceptions and concerns. I think that by now even the casual observer to this thread can pretty well determine where the tactics of "personal destruction", flaming, and insults are coming from, and who their intended targets are. This was fully expected, and is totally consistant with past experience on this and other forums - both on and outside of the internet! On the other hand, those who choose to excersize a modicum of intellectual discipline, critical analysis, and civil dialouge have had an opportunity to demonstrate our strategy of choice as well. I'm glad to say that I've seen some of this from both sides of the issue. I have tried to avoid personal "attacks", juvenile name-calling, etc., although I know how to push some buttons, don't I? Surely I have ruffled some feathers here, but my primary objective here isn't, as some conjecture, to spread seeds of discord, hatred and discontent... it is rather(I don't keep secrets very well, do I?) to stimulate folks of whatever opinion or persuasion to THINK! Yeah, OK, myself included. How's it working? Well, it does seem that there are some who would rather "hate" than think, here, for some reason. But ye know what, tender spirits?: They are NOT the NRA; they are NOT George W. BUSH supporters, near as I can tell; and they would probably NOT present themselves as "Conservatives", in OR out of the PC closet! Evidence? Behold; it is before thee. Kendall; I have trusted in your wisdom in that you would not, no matter how much I ruffle your political feathers, take any of this personally; I get the sense that my trust was well invested. Although I've only had limited exposure to ye, it has sufficed to engender considerable respect and esteem. I can't help but like an old Salt with such a sense of humor and a fine hand with a 6-sting. If it's any consolation, my Mom was, I'm told, a registered Socialist in her younger days and as long as she had her senses belonged to HCI, ACLU, "Freedom From Religion", and was an active supporter of whatever Democrat happened to be running at the time. Even in advanced stages of clinical dementia, she makes a horrid face at the mere mention of Rush Limbaugh's name. We still get along just fine! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Uncle Jaque Date: 31 Dec 00 - 01:28 AM This Just in from a local NRA Instructor, and fits in perfectly with an earlier posting about Community Service activities of the NRA - FYI: PINE TREE STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION INC PO Box 373 Yarmouth ME 04096 PRESS RELEASE December 30th, 2000 FROM: Jeff Weinstein, President, TEL 846-3000 FAX 846-0900 E-Mail: PTSR&PA@FirearmSafety.net STATEWIDE NRA AFFILIATE CRITICIZES MCAHV GUN TRIGGER LOCK PROGRAM AS "SUPERFICIAL" While commending Maine Citizens Against Handgun Violence (MCAHV) for funding the distribution of trigger locks to gun owners, Jeff Weinstein, President of the Pine Tree State Rifle & Pistol Association and an NRA spokesman, is quick to point out that trigger locks are only one element of a properly devised personal gun safety program. By themselves, trigger locks are of limited value. "Education is more important than any mechanical device", said Weinstein. "For many decades, the NRA has successfully conducted gun safety courses for millions of Americans of all ages. Trigger locks, in appropriate circumstances, have been and continue to be highly recommended as part of an overall home firearms safety strategy, especially with young children present", he added. "But thinking that simply distributing trigger locks will have a major impact on gun accidents is quite naïve", he added. For many years, the NRA has had two gun safety courses that have proven to be extraordinarily useful in the promotion of gun accident prevention. One is the thorough 4-hour "NRA Home Firearm Safety" course, which is an excellent program for the entire family. The second is the nationally-acclaimed "Eddie Eagle" program, which is a fast-paced presentation geared towards youngsters from pre-school through the sixth grade. The NRA provides "Eddie Eagle" materials upon request to schools, law enforcement, civic groups, and individuals. "I caution Mainers against developing a false sense of security simply because they've installed a trigger lock on their gun", said Weinstein. "For any family's gun safety strategy to work effectively, education must be employed as the key ingredient. Trigger locks are not failsafe and are no substitute for adequate training in the safe handling and storage of firearms." For more information about the many NRA firearms safety courses and their availability in Maine for people of all ages, call the voicemail number 846-3000, or visit the WEBSite www.firearmsafety,net.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: CarolC Date: 31 Dec 00 - 06:12 AM Uncle Jaque, flame wars don't just happen between liberals and conservatives. They happen between people who play traditional music and singer/songwriters. Between people from different sides of the situation in Northern Ireland. Between people who think the Mudcat should just be about music and those who think it should be about whatever we want it to be. The one element each of these scenarios has in common is the desire on the part of a few people to get other people stirred up. You don't "stimulate people to think" by backing them into a corner. I guarantee it. Please think carefully about what you are doing. Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: RedCelt Date: 31 Dec 00 - 06:30 AM Just one more Gun question to chew on from a red meat eating, ccw licensed, firearm packing, proud veteran, former PI/SO liberal pagan democrat... (you oughta hear me argue with myself sometimes...) The strongest argument against "reasonable limit" gun control has always been the "give 'em an inch and they'll take ALLLL the guns" fear. If you look far enough to the left, this fear isn't totally unreasonable. This has been a stated aim of a few groups and people. At the same time, I don't need to own military grade weapons to defend hearth and home, or to chase that ever elusive Bambi. With the loud trumpets blazing from left and right in stereo, can a "reasonable limit" ever be found, and if so where will it lie? Praying for snow in Texas for the new year.... Jeff |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: John P Date: 31 Dec 00 - 07:25 AM Uncle Jaque, I appreciate the fact that the NRA is teaching gun safety courses. Wouldn't it be nice if they were also in favor of a requirement that passing such a course be necessary for gun ownership? If the NRA is really all about gun safety, why aren't they pushing for mandatory safety training, with licensing of those who are properly trained? Do you really think that the fact that lots of people walk around with guns in their pockets is the only thing separating us from being like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union? Do you realize that we have lots of other, more real protections? You have made a lot of noise about not wanting to engage in flames and invective, but then you do things like refer to a highly respected journalist as Dan Ratherski, refer to the government of the United States as a tyranny and as BigBro, and to the citizens of the United States serfs. I am minded of the comment that was made earlier in this thread about there not being much difference between the far right and the far left; you sound as silly as the SDS did back in the 60s, and in much the same ways. You even use many of the same words. I'm sorry -- calling you silly probably sounds like a personal attack, and that wasn't my intention. It's just that you are espousing such an extreme line, in such extreme language (you even said "Rooskies"!!), that it is hard not to laugh at you. Come in from the cold, man. Most of us are living perfectly happy lives without having to get past the level of fear and distrust that you seem to be feeling. I'm still interested in how you (and troll) can fail to see the strangeness of referring to someone who keeps guns as being pro-life. It seems to me that gun ownership implies a willingness to use a gun, which implies a willingness to kill someone, which implies that calling yourself pro-life is inaccurate. I have no problem with someone being anti-abortion and pro-gun. I just have a problem with them describing themselves as pro-life. Just to clarify for myself your level of conservative, keep-government-out-of-our-lives fervor, how do you feel about gay rights, specifically gay marraige? John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 31 Dec 00 - 08:23 AM "How come manditory helmet laws for motorcycle riders were such a horrendous abridgement of personal rights and freedom... but manditory "trigger locks" are a wonderful thing?"
And of course the Hell's Angels were against that. Anybody who rides motor bike without a helmet is crazy. Like anyone who rides a car without set-belts. Or anyone who drives after drinking more than a very moderate amount. And I believe the Hell's Angels are great at fixing bikes, and they've been involved in lots of good stuff at various times, raising mney for charuity and so forth.
But in spite of that, I believe they are considered a little bit extreme by moderately minded people (and if your aren't moderately minded, the word "conservative" is hardly appropriate). Is there really no moderate gun-owners association that campaigns in favour of gun-licensing and training requirements and safety devices and so forth and is supported by sensible who don't like extremism?
We'ver got into a gun-law diversion here, but it's really still in keeping with the initial drift of the thread - which is what appears to be a contrast between people calling themselves "conservative" but espousing a type of right wing radicalism which is antipathetic to the essential chatacteristic of conservatism, which is to resist unnesessary change.
As has been pointed, a reactionary is not the same thing as a conservative. There are times when it may be a good thing to try to move society back to the way things used to be. But someone who seeks to do that has by definition ceased to be a conservative, and should avoid using the expression. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: katlaughing Date: 31 Dec 00 - 08:25 AM Just a few statistics from the website of Frontline:
Rank of the Lorcin 380 in the ATF's top ten most-traced firearms: 1
Number of firearms produced by US manufacturers every minute: 8
Average number of firearm thefts that occur every year in the US: 341,000
Number of guns federal firearms licensees have reported as lost, stolen or missing since Sept. 13, 1994 when the Clinton Crime Bill made reporting a requirement: 23,775
Percentage of Americans who agree that "companies that manufacture guns with no hunting or sporting purpose should be held financially responsible when these guns injure or kill people": 45
Percentage of Americans who feel that "the laws covering the sale of firearms should be made more strict": 62
Number of federal safety standards that apply to the manufacture of teddy bears: 4
Number of firearms in the US: 223 Million
Percentage of L.A. High School students who say they could obtain a gun for less than $50: 25
Percentage of arrestees who say it is easy to get a gun illegally: 55
Percentage of all Saturday Night Specials produced by the "Ring of Fire" companies: 80
Number of murders committed in 1995 in the US: 20,043
Projected year when deaths from gunfire will surpass death from auto accidents: 2001
Year that the NRA supported a SNS importation ban and called the guns "miserably-made, potentially defective arms that contribute so much to rising violence" : 1968
Cost of firearms assault injuries per fatal gunshot wound: $21,700
Cost of a Lorcin .22 handgun at a Pasadena California sporting goods store: $40
Number of people killed by firearms every hour in America: 4
Number of crime victims that were shot in 1994: 32,162
Number of violent crimes reported to police that were committed with firearms in 1994: 544,880
Percent increase in juveniles arrested for weapons violations from '85-'94 : 113
Number of violent crime victimizations committed with a firearm in 1993: 1.3 million Jacques, recently I had really enjoyed a few of your postings; they were thoughtful and well-put. I even agreed with some of what you'd said, but this one is a bunch of crap. You came on like a thug with a big threat, hoping to make us shake in our Birks and it didn't happen. We, none of us, liberal or conservative or in between will countenance some bunch of assholes coming in here and stirring things up with the kind of vitriolic, I- know-better-than-you, presumptious rhetoric you've used. Carol C put it very well, think very carefully what you are doing. Mudcat does not need this kind of crap put forth in order to have a THOUGHT-PROVOKING thread. Your claims of only wanting to get people to think. etc., are specious when coupled with your threats of a takeover. Backoff and enjoy the Mudcat for what it is. I would suggest you do some research by reading this thread. You will see from it that there is no need for the fear you exhibit on the Mudcat by first posting your stance, then threatening us with your friends, as if we are going to gang up and beat you up! I would also urge you and everyone else to go to Michael Moore's website for the Awful Truth and watch a clip of him interviewing "Eddie Eagle"; he shows the program for the surreal absurdity it is. And, lest you make any more assumptions: I have an old single-shot .22 rifle in my house and was raised shooting all types of guns AND have always been a liberal Democrat. kat
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 31 Dec 00 - 08:38 AM If the NRA really is in favor of trigger locks, even on a superficial level, then why did they target that Michigan congressman for supporting that? Why have they started a boycott of Smith & Wesson? Mr Weinsteins comment sounds like deflection to me. Of course education is important..but, this is not an either/or situation. To address another comment..owning a gun does NOT imply that the owner would shoot someone. In my case, it would depend on the situation...I could never shoot someone for stealing my property, but, if they were an immediate threat to my life, you damn well right I would, and that right predates the second amendment! My problem with the NRA (and I am a past member) is that they seem to be against ALL attempts at gun control. I dont know about other states, but, in Maine, the overwhelming majority of homicids were committed by people who knew the victim. There was no forced entry by strangers, and, if they had used a trigger lock, that might not have happened. There were 11 homicides in Maine this year..there are a bit over one million people living here..I'm not good at math, can someone figure the odds that someone I dont know is going to do me in? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: jets Date: 31 Dec 00 - 09:19 AM Your safe with me Kendall and I know you quite well. But as far as defense,you are on your own. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: harpgirl Date: 31 Dec 00 - 09:50 AM ...please take your trigger locks with you tonight folks. I worry about all you armed revelers! I will be gunless, playing my harp in a hotel, sober, hanging out with my son awaiting the Citrus Bowl in Orlando. I hope I don't piss off anyone packing heat! Good luck all! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST Date: 31 Dec 00 - 01:50 PM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: SINSULL Date: 31 Dec 00 - 01:58 PM Abby, you have a God given right to your opinion, and, I will defend it (unless I am obligated to shoot someone) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: juju Cobra Date: 31 Dec 00 - 02:02 PM << |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,pistol packin' mama Date: 31 Dec 00 - 02:06 PM Kat, you forgot the statistics on how many people have sucessfully defended themselves in their homes with firearms. It is significant. My apologies for not having them handy. Perhaps later... Harpgirl, I won't shoot you as long as you don't threaten my life or my children's lives. That's how it works with me. I was reading about why buy back programs are thought not to work: It seems the majority of people who turn in guns for buy back are demographically not the people who do the crimes. Also, some gun toters turn in guns for buy back so they can take the money to buy a better gun. Lots of loopholes there. We don't use trigger locks. We use lock boxes in our house. There's no way anyone who is not supposed to touch one of my handguns will be able to get a hold of one. Gee, I wonder why they NEVER cover the target shooting event in the Olympics. Looks like a definite prejudice there. Any other events not covered? Pistol packin' mama |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: juju Cobra Date: 31 Dec 00 - 02:10 PM oops, no copy and paste here. My post was directed at Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 31 Dec 00 - 05:48 PM The number of people who have successfully defended themselves against burgars is tiny compared to the accidental shootings. And, I say again..lets be civil. When you attack someones belief, the response is totally predictable. I vote to kill this thread, it is getting too nasty. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 31 Dec 00 - 07:43 PM Still seems mostly polite enopugh. juju's was the only post that got within spitting distance of anyone, though I've no idea who, since it was a but gnomic.
But it is going round in circles rather. There seems to be a tendency to blaze away in the direction of the enemy in a rather random fashion, rather than addressing and teasing out points of disagreement and agreement, which seems to me a much more constructive way of going about thinggs. More fun too, I think.
And noone's come up with any songs recently either. Oddly enough, I've just looked at the DT keywords list, and "gun" isn't among them.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,MAV Date: 01 Jan 01 - 01:36 AM John;
<
Do the words "shall not be infringed" have any meaning to you?
<
Uh...yes.
<
Just barely, the Constitution is under constant attack. That is why conservatives are frequently alarmist having seen the liberals trash it on a regular basis.
<
Comrade Dan is rather obvious in his bias and deserves ridicule. I haven't respected him since he insulted then President Bush on camera and his constant clinton/algor rumpswabbery. Judging by his plummeting ratings, neither do millions of Americans.
<
What do you call it when part of your wealth is confiscated at the point of a gun? (the answer is theft) as well as armed home invasions and flagrant violations of private property rights
<
Well, since most WORKING people lose about 45% of their net to all forms of taxation which requires many couples to both work hence denying them the LUXURY of parenting, I'd say he's fairly accurate in that choice of words.
We pay about 700% more in taxes than did our parents.
<
Jaque spent some time freezing while facing down the communist North Koreans during the "cold" war. Keep going laughing boy.
<
This is so convoluted I don't quite know how to respond to it, but that's never stopped me before.
Good guys can own guns, this does not turn them into murderers. This concept didn't used to need explaining (it's often referred to as moral equivalence).
You have the right to defend yourself (shoot back). The fastest growing group of gun owners is single women(perhaps they don't want to get raped or wish to protect their children since cops can't and there is no dad)
Many of those who believe in defense of themselves and their children may also extend the belief of "Right to Life" (see Declaration of Independence) to innocent unborn children.
I'm sure that if a bad guy (or a bad fetus for that matter) was to pull a gun on one of these people, it would be a very solemn situation.
I haven't heard of an unborn packing heat yet so this may explain YOUR paradox for you.
<
Well, you weren't exactly asking me, but while I'm at it, Gays have the same rights as anyone else, I believe in equal and individual rights.
Since marriage is the union between a man and a woman I'd have to say that a gay man has every bit as much of a right as the next guy to marry a woman.
mav8 out
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Amergin Date: 01 Jan 01 - 01:47 AM Personally, I hate paying taxes as much as the next guy, but and that is a big huge but, this country needs those taxes.....our taxes are nothing to many countries out there, but then they also have better social programs, ones that we desperately need.....where would all those people be if there were not enough taxes to pay for their welfare or foodstamps? What about social security? Or socialised health care? I'm applying for socialised health care, because I need it. Where would I be if I didn't have that option? How else would I get the meds that I need to survive? Well? This socialist wants to know.... Amergin |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Uncle Jaque Date: 01 Jan 01 - 01:50 AM Kat/kl.: You sure have done your homework; I'm impressed. And thanks for the link to the previous thread on the "Gun" topic; if anyone wants to go on with this that's probably the place to do it. I think about anything I might have to say furthur, at least subjectively, on the topic was pretty well covered by contributors there. I can't say that all the fire and brimstone generated was particularly worth what little edification might have come out of it, as it seems is the case here - conceding a point to Kendall. It did seem a little more "balanced" then... and I havn't seen those who posted to the "Libertarian" side of the issue then around the Mudcat since. I think I'm starting to get the hint. My initial intent here was to try to encourage 'Catters like Dave who have shared my sense of being occasionally subjected to ideological bullying (and it's not just limited to the "BS" threads where we know we enter at our own risk) and general minority - group status that there might be an option of some idological self-defense at hand. And this is, obviously, seen as an "attack" or attempted coup of some sort by the controlling majority. By the way, Kat/KL; if you ever get me figured out, I'm sure my Wife would like to know how you did it. She's still working on that after over 28 years now. I've gotta give her credit; I think she has me about 48% domesticated. Somehow I get the impression that you might want to send her a sympathy card - and I can't deny but what she might deserve one. John P.: I had, again at my own peril, brushed on the abortion topic - and someone else hit it head-on in that thread from May '99 that Kat/Kl linked to. Thanks for the invitation to address that issue and those of "Gay" "Rights" and Marriage; you are absolutely correct in assuming that I have strong sentiments on those issues, but I seem to have gotten myself sufficiently dipped in enough boiling lard this time around to scald the fleas off o'me redneck hide; if you'll be so kind as to allow me a few moons to cultivate another herd, perhaps I'll be back for another treatment then. No doubt you will have the apparatus ready. As far as I know, Dan Rather is not a member of Mudcat - so he seemed like fair game to me. "Highly respected"? Speak for yourself on that one. Say, by the way; how are his ratings lately? OK, OK,... I'll lighten up on him, and Jennings, and Brokaw... as soon as you lighten up on Limbaugh! American "Serfs" ? Oh sure; like those of us who, unlike Rosie O'Donnell, cannot afford armed goons to keep an eye on her kids for her while she squalls like a banshee for the disarmament of lesser Americans. Or those of us who cannot afford to send our children to competent private schools without non-PC and verbooten vouchers - like Clinton, and Gore, and most Politicians can - while depriving us of that option. Certainly. You seem to take umberage at my use of the term "Rooshkies" for representatives of the former USSR. Ye gads, but some of you folks shure offend easily! Would it be possible to lighten up just a little, here? I just forgot how to spell "Rushinnz"! Sheeesh! And please, don't ever feel inhibited when it comes to laughing at me; chances are you'll be laughing WITH me, as I frequently laugh at myself. particularly when playing (attempting to play) the euphonium. Have you ever tried to play a euphonium and laugh hystericly at the same time? It ain't easy, I'll tell ye! Besides, with the ease with which you seem to get offended, a little laughter could be mighty therapeautic! Harpgirl: I think you should be pretty safe with the harp, Deah: haul out a set of Great Highland Pipes, however, and I'm a'feared that yer on yer awn, Lass! So point well taken; let's get back to music. But if anyone, from whichever side of the ideological tracks, wants to take a political "shot", can we have the civility to take it out back to the "BS alley" on a seprate thread and thrash it out there? ** "Phhht-pt-phhhxt-pzt-pffffffffxt!" (Virtual Retro-Bugle call sounding "Retreat"....*** |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,MAV Date: 01 Jan 01 - 02:07 AM John; "If the NRA is really all about gun safety, why aren't they pushing for mandatory safety training, with licensing of those who are properly trained?" Do the words "shall not be infringed" have any meaning to you? (second amendment) "Do you really think that the fact that lots of people walk around with guns in their pockets is the only thing separating us from being like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union? " Uh...yes. "Do you realize that we have lots of other, more real protections?" Just barely, the Constitution is under constant attack. That is why conservatives are frequently alarmist having seen the liberals trash it on a regular basis. "but then you do things like refer to a highly respected journalist as Dan Ratherski" Comrade Dan is rather obvious in his bias and deserves ridicule. I haven't respected him since he insulted then President Bush on camera and his constant clinton/algor rumpswabbery. Judging by his plummeting ratings, neither do millions of Americans. "refer to the government of the United States as a tyranny and as BigBro" What do you call it when part of your wealth is confiscated at the point of a gun? (the answer is theft) as well as armed home invasions and flagrant violations of private property rights Well, since most WORKING people lose about 45% of their net to all forms of taxation which requires many couples to both work hence denying them the LUXURY of parenting, I'd say he's fairly accurate in that choice of words. We pay about 700% more in taxes than did our parents. "It's just that you are espousing such an extreme line, in such extreme language (you even said "Rooskies"!!), that it is hard not to laugh at you. Come in from the cold, man" Jaque spent some time freezing while facing down the communist North Koreans during the "cold" war. Keep going laughing boy. "Most of us are living perfectly happy lives without having to get past the level of fear and distrust that you seem to be feeling" We think most of you are not paying attention, we just came very close to total destruction of the country. The military would have left in droves under algor. Consumer confidence would have continued to drop precipitously as the clinton/algor regime resumed its attack on business. "I'm still interested in how you (and troll) can fail to see the strangeness of referring to someone who keeps guns as being pro-life. It seems to me that gun ownership implies a willingness to use a gun, which implies a willingness to kill someone, which implies that calling yourself pro-life is inaccurate. I have no problem with someone being anti-abortion and pro-gun. I just have a problem with them describing themselves as pro-life." This is so convoluted I don't quite know how to respond to it, but that's never stopped me before. Good guys can own guns, this does not turn them into murderers. This concept didn't used to need explaining (it's often referred to as moral equivalence). You have the right to defend yourself (shoot back). The fastest growing group of gun owners is single women(perhaps they don't want to get raped or wish to protect their children since cops can't and there is no dad) Many of those who believe in defense of themselves and their children may also extend the belief of "Right to Life" (see Declaration of Independence) to innocent unborn children. I'm sure that if a bad guy (or a bad fetus for that matter) was to pull a gun on one of these people, it would be a very solemn situation. I haven't heard of an unborn packing heat yet so this may explain YOUR paradox for you. "Just to clarify for myself your level of conservative, keep-government-out-of-our-lives fervor, how do you feel about gay rights, specifically gay marraige?" Well, you weren't exactly asking me, but while I'm at it, Gays have the same rights as anyone else, I believe in equal and individual rights. Since marriage is the union between a man and a woman I'd have to say that a gay man has every bit as much of a right as the next guy to marry a woman. mav8 out
PS Sorry about the double post, I guess you can't use
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Penny S. Date: 01 Jan 01 - 06:18 AM Kevin missed this one. Penny |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Jan 01 - 06:24 AM Americans must thank God they didn't have motor cars around back in the 18th century, or presumably they'd have been lumbered with a bit in the constitution about a right to drive that couldn't be infringed - and there'd be no way of having required driving tests, or laws against drunk drivers, or speed limits...
And there are people who actually believe those kinds of things when it comes to cars. The difference is they are seen as being a litle bit off their heads.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 01 Jan 01 - 09:28 AM In my opinion, all this talk of rights is just so much blather..what it boils down to is simply this..WHAT WE WANT, IS WHAT'S RIGHT. Being human, we would rather see a few strangers gunned down in a school yard than to allow any control over our gun ownership. We would rather see an intellectual lightweight in the White House than to insure that ALL voters were allowed to exercise their right to vote. What we want is more important than what is right and just. Flame away..I welcome it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: InOBU Date: 01 Jan 01 - 10:00 AM Kendall: Go to the head of the class for Supreme Court analisis 101. Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Midchuck Date: 01 Jan 01 - 10:01 AM Could we arrange for those who believe that: "Private citizens shouldn't own or possess guns under any circumstances, because we don't need them because we can trust our police and military to take total care of us, and Bambi would rather starve to death slowly when he gets too old to browse, or be chased down and disemboweled and eaten before he's quite dead, by a pack of coyotes, than be taken out instantly and painlessly by a well-aimed high-caliber bullet." and those who believe that: "Every American has the absolute right under the Constitution to own all the weapons he/she wants, without regard to his/her training in using them, and in the legalities of their use; his/her emotional stability or criminal record; or the potential of the weapon in question to take out everyone in the vicinity along with the intended target; and any suggestion that possession of weapons should be subject to training and licensing requirements equivalant to those imposed for driving a vehicle on the public highway is an evil Bolshevik." go away? Then maybe the rest of us could discuss the matter intelligently. Just a thought. P. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,Stackley Date: 01 Jan 01 - 10:15 AM MAV sounds like one of the right-wing storm troopers Unka Jaqueass threatened us with, all right. He seems more paranoid, less intelligent, and more full of himself (if possible) than the original- great phony pseudo-statistics, too. There is a difference between being a conservative (or a Conservative) and a right-wing nutcase. This being a music forum, He's more to be pitied than censured He's more to be helped than despised He's only a poor boy that's wandered Down life's stormy path ill-advised.. Cheers |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: John P Date: 01 Jan 01 - 10:35 AM Uncle Jaque, you say: As far as I know, Dan Rather is not a member of Mudcat - so he seemed like fair game to me. "Highly respected"? Speak for yourself on that one. Say, by the way; how are his ratings lately? OK, OK,... I'll lighten up on him, and Jennings, and Brokaw... as soon as you lighten up on Limbaugh! What are you talking about? I haven't said anything about Limbaugh. But OK, I will say something about him. Rather, Jennings, and Brokaw are all employed by the largest mainstream media organizations. Limbaugh usually only appears on outlets that are generally considered to be far right wing, i.e. not mainstream. Most of the rest of the country views with distrust those, especially journalists, who obviously have an extremist political agenda. And before you tell me about the 'liberal media", please be aware that most folks on the far left wing view the American media establishment as hopelessly conservative. I guess getting yelled at from both sides is part of being in the mainstream. American "Serfs" ? Oh sure; like those of us who, unlike Rosie O'Donnell, cannot afford armed goons to keep an eye on her kids for her while she squalls like a banshee for the disarmament of lesser Americans. Or those of us who cannot afford to send our children to competent private schools without non-PC and verbooten vouchers - like Clinton, and Gore, and most Politicians can - while depriving us of that option. Certainly. Yes, some folks can afford things that other folks can't. It's the American way. Are you suggesting that we go to a socialist system and level the playing field? You seem to take umberage at my use of the term "Rooshkies" for representatives of the former USSR. Ye gads, but some of you folks shure offend easily! Would it be possible to lighten up just a little, here? I just forgot how to spell "Rushinnz"! Sheeesh! What makes you think I was offended or took umbrage? I was just telling you how funny I thought it was that you use such stereotypically extremist language and then expect folks to take you seriously. And please, don't ever feel inhibited when it comes to laughing at me; chances are you'll be laughing WITH me, as I frequently laugh at myself. particularly when playing (attempting to play) the euphonium. Have you ever tried to play a euphonium and laugh hystericly at the same time? It ain't easy, I'll tell ye! Besides, with the ease with which you seem to get offended, a little laughter could be mighty therapeautic! Sorry to burst your bubble, but I really wasn't offended by you. Mystified and amused, but not offended. And yes, I was laughing at you. For your sake, I hope I was laughing with you as well. I've never tried a euphonium, but I have laughed hysterically (at myself) while playing the baritone horn. Does that count? Maybe we have something in common after all? Actually, I'm sure we all have lots of very basic things in common -- the desire for home, food, warmth, security, learning, and the ability and freedom to do good work. I'm sure we both have a strong love of our country. Happy New Year. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: John P Date: 01 Jan 01 - 11:13 AM Midchuck, hear, hear! Of course, the extremists being extreme is what usually sparks these discussions in the first place. Mav, I started to write a point by point response to your last message, but then I realized that you are so far outside the norm that nothing is going to have any effect on you. What's the point of trying? Have a nice life. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Rick Fielding Date: 01 Jan 01 - 12:02 PM Yeah, yeah, yeah, but do you prefer Shubb or Kaiser capos? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Jan 01 - 12:05 PM This being a global community, it's not a bad idea to take that into account when making references to media stuff and media "personalities" who have never made it onto the world stage. It's easily done with a few blue clickies.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: juju Cobra Date: 01 Jan 01 - 02:14 PM As I read through these posts, I notice that the personal denigrations seem to be exclusivly aimed at Libertarians and Conservatives by those on the radical left. Perhaps, their motivation has more to do with indulging their passion for hate than having a civil discussion. It seems that way. Why not just leave out all the "storm tropper" and "KKK" nonsense and have a rational debate over the balance of indivdual liberty and state control ? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 01 Jan 01 - 02:46 PM I'm sorry, but, I have seen too many "Bambis" gut shot by half witted Nimrods who couldn't track am elephant through a snow drift! Nature is not cruel.. nature doesn't care. But then. neither do the assholes who shoot a deer, and, if doesn't drop in its tracks (they almost never do) they are too lazy to track it. Then it dies a horrible death. At least, if a predetor takes it out, it goes into shock and feels nothing. That is the natural way. A bullet in the guts is not. Back when I used to hunt, I have spent quite a bit of time on my hands and knees tracking a wounded deer from little spots of blood. They seldom go more than half a mile, then they lie down to rest, and they dont get up. How about an IQ test to own a gun? that would eliminate quite a lot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Jan 01 - 03:03 PM I got the impression the "conservatives" (who don't seem to be at all conservative to me) were handing it out pretty freely too.
The tone is reasonably civilised. Checking with the "find" facility, it appears that "Storm troopers" only came in in a fairly jocular fashion, used by "both sides". The KKK only came in in when Ebbie made the valid point that the fact that an organisation suppoerts some good projects doesn't tell you too much about it.
Talking about labels, when was it that the term "libertarian" got assumed to mean views from way-out on the right? It used to be that "libertarian" was a label you used if you didn't want to frighten people off by saying you were an "anarchist". Then people started realising that it was possible to have some libertarian attitudes and be rightwing, so the term "libertarian right" was coined.
And now hey presto, the word gets used on its own and everyone assumes it's the right wing version. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Midchuck Date: 01 Jan 01 - 03:32 PM McGrath, I used to call myself a libertarian, but realized I wasn't "pure" enough in my beliefs to qualify. I will support (grumbling and muttering the whole time) a governmental solution to a problem if I'm convinced that the problem is serious enough that something must be done; that there is no effective private-sector solution; and that the proposed governmental solution is as limited as it can be and still hope to work. A good libertarian would oppose the governmental solution in any case. I like the term "rational anarchist," which I got from Heinlein's The Moon Is a Harsh Mistress. The typical liberal, upon hearing me use the term, yells, "oxymoron." I explain, "anarchist" means I think all government is evil. "Rational" means I think that until every last person in society behaves rationally in terms of his/her long term self interest - which will not happen as long as people are human - some government is a necessary evil. IMO, the job of the political process is to determine the exact size and amount of power government needs to fulfill its necessary functions, and keep it just that large and powerful, no more and no less. That doesn't furnish any answers, since there is a tremendous range of opinion as to how large and powerful that is, but it gives a clearer idea of the question. For what that's worth. Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 01 Jan 01 - 03:45 PM "Social Anarchism" is a label I quite like.
But it is a bit paradoxical - at one time you'd have anarchists who would use the term "libertarian" to avoid people thinking they were too extreme. Now you have liberarians who prefer to use the term "anarchist", for the very same sort of reason. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Richard Bridge Date: 01 Jan 01 - 06:46 PM I wonder if we might consider other right/left issues than gun control. WE here in the UK find the US devotion to guns a bit odd, even though my personal view is that the UK govenrment went much too far following the DUnblane tragedy. How about considering the fact that ot one time in the USA the republican right was so devoted to free market ideology that it opposed both abolition oand regulation of the trusts, and comapring that with the demonology of taxation and the welfare state? How about comapring hte way we now laugh at the bowdlerisation of Shekespeare with the current vilification of paedophiles? How about the US and UK former witchhunts, compared to the new religiouls tolerance that bars saying "Happy CHristmas" in case you offend a Jew or a Muslim, and bars opening stocks of coffee and tea from being left in corporate flats for new joiners in case a Mormon moved in and was offended by the presence of stimulants? No, I can't be bothered to correct my spelling, which is down to typing not ignorance. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: katlaughing Date: 01 Jan 01 - 07:53 PM Richard, my Mormon relatives drink tea and coffee AND, last I knew the Mormon church owned PepsiCo. Too bad we can't all swing into a measured balance of some sort on all of these issues. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: juju Cobra Date: 01 Jan 01 - 10:27 PM A fairly jocular fashion? "Unka Jaqueass" ?? Sorry, I grade that remark as schoolyard drivel. There are legitimate points of wiew on both sides of the issue but, I see the standard retreat into personal attacks, childish name calling and nonsensical amalgamation coming on strong here.I don't begrudge anyone their moral/political beliefs but, I will always argue the value of liberty and try to convince people that the Bill of Rights is something to be cherished and expanded, not diminished. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: CarolC Date: 02 Jan 01 - 02:43 AM juju Cobra, If you click on the name of the Guest who has been using names like Unka Jaqueass to flame people, and read his/her posting history, you will see that this is a fake identity of a person who flames for sport. Not because he/she actually has anything to say. This is why the tone and language that people use is very important. When you use tone and rhetoric that is inflamatory in nature you WILL attract these kinds of people. Flamers like GUEST Stackly are not participants in the discussion. They are people who get their jollies by making sport of what would otherwise be serious discussions. If you don't want to attract these kinds of flames, I suggest that you moderate your tone. Flamers like Stackley aside, from where I'm standing (as a moderate who voted for Gore, but would probably have voted for McCain, given the opportunity) it looks to me like both the liberal and conservative sides are giving as good as they are getting. Finger pointing accomplishes nothing except to attract more flames. Respectfully, Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST Date: 02 Jan 01 - 03:37 AM Why is everyone getting so het up about guns - with W in power, I doubt there's any threat to gun ownership for the next four-to-eight years. Not to mention that the "special relationship" between the United Kingdom and its former colonials will be reinforced with him in power. All's happy on the conservative front. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Richard Bridge Date: 02 Jan 01 - 02:56 PM Dear Kat/Katlaughing Maybe there should be another thread on religious tolerance (personally I abominate most organised religions with fairly equal fervour, having as a teenager had a religious phase and later coming to the conclusion that all orgainsed religions were forces of repression, but that is another story. You want to worship, that's fine, but don't hassle me to join your beliefs or set them up as better than my conscience.) My daughter just joined Intel and was obliged to go to the USA to be inducted etc. Upon arrival she was put in a corporate flat (that's apartment, for those of you who prefer AMerican to ENglish), briefly. THere was no kettle or tea or coffee. SHe complained that these would be merely courtesy to those incoming until they had time to buy their own, and was firmly told that they could not possibly be provided in case an incoming person was a Mormon nad was offenc=ded by the presence of "stimulants". SHe was told that the Mormon religion prihibited all stimulants. SHe retorted that with all those wives, you'd have thought they needed them, and seemed to cause near apoplexy. She has since ben formally reprimanded for wishing a passer -by a "Merry Christmas" in case that might not ahve been thier religion. Sorry about the typing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,Barry Date: 02 Jan 01 - 03:30 PM So CC, Stack's a flamer but Jaque's OK? Can't say as I see much difference 'twixt the two. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Midchuck Date: 02 Jan 01 - 03:59 PM ...THere was no kettle or tea or coffee. SHe complained that these would be merely courtesy to those incoming until they had time to buy their own, and was firmly told that they could not possibly be provided in case an incoming person was a Mormon nad was offenc=ded by the presence of "stimulants". SHe was told that the Mormon religion prihibited all stimulants. SHe retorted that with all those wives, you'd have thought they needed them, and seemed to cause near apoplexy. My daughter, who lives in Salt Lake, told me a joke that's quite popular there. The story is that you must never take one Mormon fishing with you. Two or more is fine, but never just one. He'll drink up all your beer. Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Little Hawk Date: 02 Jan 01 - 07:09 PM Wowee! Quite a thread. Midchuck - I like your thoughts on this one, back in the early postings. Everybody - I have a folkie friend here in Orillia who is SO right-wing that he can't find anyone to vote for...he says they're all too far to the left for him. He would like to run the government himself...and here's what he says he would do: 1. Deport ALL foreigners, specially Asians and blacks. (He actually emigrated here from Scotland, but that doesn't count.) 2. Ban mixed marriages (he means mixed race, not male and female). 3. Put gays back in the closet where they belong, and shoot 'em if they put up a fuss about it. 4. Have at least one firearm in every household so decent people can protect themselves. 5. Feed all prisoners on bread and water, with no parole ever. And lots and lots of capital punishment, of course. 6. Tell the major corporations to share the wealth...and if they don't, shoot their board of directors (I kind of like that one). 7. Ditto for the banks (again, I sort of sympathize). 8. Lay off 95% of the government workers, and have private industry take over their jobs. 9. Shut down the labour unions. 10. Shoot anyone who disagrees with the above agenda. The scary thing is, I think he means it. However, he is not going to get elected, so I'm not worried...and actually he is a good friend anyway, and really quite a pleasure to know, as we tend to like the same music. His bark is worse than his bite, in my experience. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: katlaughing Date: 02 Jan 01 - 07:29 PM Richard Bridge, sounds to me like Intel has gone a bit overboard, but I suppose it was on the advice of their lawyers, so as to avoid lawsuits. I would love to have been there when your daughter made her comments; that would've been a sight! I always say the only prejudice I was really raised with was for Mormons and sheepherders (some of them tried to get my great-granddad hung.) Usually they were one in the same and, this prejudice was in spite of one of my very favourite aunts being staunch LDS and, later, my ex-husband having been one. He and his family, btw, never waivered on the coffee, soda, etc.! Also, having worked in Utah and having a dad who lives there, I can attest to the fact that coffee and other liquid "stimulants" are always available in the restaurants of which many are LDS-member owned. So, Intel is just being silly, IMO. Thanks for letting us know what happened. Does this mean my Pentium prcoessor is Ultra-PC?**BG** |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 02 Jan 01 - 07:59 PM I can see the logic of trying to exclude tea and coffee - in fact it's a lot more logical than mainstream society banning grass while keeping alcohol and tobacco legal. Batty, but logical.
But kettles! I always thought Mormons were pretty keen on hot water and washing and that. The ones I've met always look like they are anyway.
And these Intel guys are the ones who make the chips? Good grief. No wonder they keeps crashing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Uncle Jaque Date: 02 Jan 01 - 09:28 PM Kat/KL: "Swinging into a measured balance" is sort of what I was trying to do, here.... but it turned out like trying to perform the "Dance of the Sugarplum Fairys" accross a Serbian minefield! Well, you probably wouldn't like me much in a tuttu anyway. Especially a muddy, shredded, charred and smoking one with big chunks ripped out by shrapnel. Perhaps my attempted presentation of the olive branch while setting what seemed like reasonable limits could use some brushing up on; but don't count on (dare I say "us"?) grabbing the an...er,.. going belly-up.. as part of that routine. I could go dig up a bunch of counter-statistics and we could go on ad nauseum, but I really don't want to declare war with you - not that I'm particularly afraid of "losing", but I think too much of you for that. And that goes for nearly everybody weighing in on this. I could go back to the bunker and swap the tuttu for the cammies, but I pray it never gets to that level with anybody, and it hardly seems called for here. Besides, don't we both have better things to do? So Carol; if I get back in the closet, promise you won't sic Stackley on me again? Goood Stackley; down boy! Here's another freshly killed hyena... atta boy; behaaaave now! Littlehawk: If you get along all right with that buddy of yours, you have my nomination for the annual tolerance awards! Now for all you gentle sports out there who have been labeling me as "Extreme", I want you to know that this fella is leaning WAAAay further out over the starbord rail than I have any intention of going! If you subscribe to the "circular continuum" theory, he's neither left nor right, but glommed on to the keel... with his teeth! Other than # 8 and #9 (which seem like reasonable propositions to me) I couldn't subscribe to any of his platform's planks. # 5, in some cases, is not a big problem; like the guy who recently returned to Maine to help round up all the dismembered body parts of about 3 of his known female victims in return for not having to serve out his time in Texas, where they were "harassing" the poor duckie. My sense of "mercy" and "tolerance" runs a little thin in those cases, and if that offends any, so be it, darn it! Before you get on your pulpit and criticize that attitude, dear hearts, go out and run under the blue lights for about 7 years, pick over the crime scenes, talk to the surviving victims, bag up the bodies, and go notify the next of kin in the middle of the night. Then come back here and give me spat about my "extremist attitude"! Ok, I'm getting my dander up, here; pretty soon Stakley will be out of his cage and it might get ugly, as I've had about enough of him . Time to count to ten and reboot. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Rick Fielding Date: 02 Jan 01 - 09:39 PM Hey "Hawk", I have a friend like yours. I'm his token "bleeding heart" and we get along famously. He's knowledgable about boxing, History (we obviously interpret it differently) and Toronto's Mob scene of the fifties and sixties. He's been drivin' a cab for 35 years and consequently sees a great deal of the dark side of human nature. The majority of my friends are at least somewhat "lefty" so I keep Peter FAR away from them! (B.G.) Rick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: catspaw49 Date: 02 Jan 01 - 09:44 PM But the question is Rick........Does HE have a capo preference? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: katlaughing Date: 02 Jan 01 - 09:57 PM Ah, Jaques, save the tutu for your wife, m'thinks! And, I wasn't speaking of you specifically when I posted that balance thing. Friends like Little Hawk's are the types I have been tracking and studying for years, as my family and friends are some of the first people they'd like to eliminate. While Hawk's friend may not get elected, those types and the groups they belong to, here in the States, are not to be taken lightly. They are dead serious and making inroads. Lest you think I am paranoid, I do not live in direct fear of them, although I have received hate mail from them for my op/ed columns. I fear for our society in general. kat |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Bill D Date: 03 Jan 01 - 12:02 AM lordy!...look what I missed being busy for a few day! I guess I won't even try to get in on this one...... (parts of this remind me of Bob Beers' song..
"By golly, by jingo, by gosh and by Jesus, |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: CarolC Date: 03 Jan 01 - 03:27 AM GUEST Barry, Re: your post of Jan. 2, 3:30 pm... I saw Uncle Jaques as being more of a Troll than a flamer, and that's what I said to him in my Dec. 30, 9:41 pm post. Uncle Jaques, you flatter me. However, I do not have any control over Stackly. How you behave in this forum, regardless of what your political views are, will determine what kind of experience you have here. This is as true for liberals as it is for conservatives, and it was true long before I ever got here. If you do some research in the inactive threads, you can see for yourself. I joined in July of 2000. Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 03 Jan 01 - 08:26 AM One way people tease their friends is to say things which will offend against their deepest principles, without really meaning them; and one way people stay friends with people with whom they disagree on deep isues is to make-believe that that is what is going on, and they don't really mean it.
When words turn to actions involving other people, that's when the line of friendship is crossed. I suppose that's why arguments about votes etc can get so heated, because in a way that's an action rather than just words. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: kendall Date: 03 Jan 01 - 08:49 AM Jaque is not a troll, or a flamer. He firmly believes what he says. Dont be too hard on him, he's young yet. I remember spouting the same right wing stuff years ago when I was a Barry Goldwater republican. Since then my mind has opened up..probably his will too! As I said to harpgirl, I will defend HIS right to his opinion too, unless I am obligated to shoot someone. LOL |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,Dan Ratherski Date: 03 Jan 01 - 09:23 AM Jacque, after your prior finger-pointing, name-calling, bombast, hyperbole, threats, fabrications, know-all attitude, condescending pats on the head for the good little 'lefties', and absolutely foolish provocation its really too funny to see you whining, pissing and moaning when someone answers you in kind. Get a bloody life, will ya? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Little Hawk Date: 03 Jan 01 - 10:31 AM Hey, Dan Rather doesn't talk like that! Dan Ratherski must be the dark side of Dan Rather... Nice to hear the word "bombast" though, not to mention "hyperbole". What marvelous words. - LH Kat - You need not fear for Canadian society as long as we remain an independent country. People are decidedly moderate up here, and are happy to mix socialism and capitalism into a harmonious brew. There just aren't enough conservative curmudgeons in this country to swing things their way on the federal level, although they did manage to get a provincial government elected in Ontario back in the 90's. That government has since managed to damage the health care system and the educational system very severely in its efforts to chase, worship, and adore the almighty dollar...and people don't appreciate it one bit. The Conservatives don't have a dog's chance in hell of winning the next election in this province. To put it simply, they have put their own government's financial house in order by eviscerating public services, and by downloading provincial expenses and responsibilities on municipal governments that cannot afford to pay those expenses in the first place. Call it "robbing Peter to pay Paul." This was the program they ran on, and they called it the "common sense revolution". They were greatly assisted through the whole period by a bouyant American economy (which always helps Canada). Ironically enough, that American economic boom happened during Clinton's term of office, and Mike Harris'es Conservatives in Ontario hate Clinton and consider the Republicans to be their blood brothers. Funny, ain't it? Now the US media is talking about a looming recession, just as Dubya gets ready to take over. Must be some kind of leftist plot to screw up his term of office! Either that, or it's the right laying the financial groundwork to cut what social services you have left and privatize absolutely EVERYTHING in the name of fiscal responsibility! Let's all get paranoid... Yes, soon you will have to hire your own private police (for a hefty fee), pay for every road you drive on (or walk), get thrown into debtor's prison if you can't, and so on...glorious free enterprise! Recession? Phooey! The public should just refuse to play along and keep spending like usual, but I doubt that will happen. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,Oldtimemusic1 Date: 03 Jan 01 - 12:22 PM While I do read political commentary (mudcat's threads in particular) - at least when I'm awake here at the "home" - I do tend to nod off.... Any way I hope you'll allow this old coot to make a few observations. We must remember that no president can do very much - good or bad without the support of his party. So it is the PARTY that we must be wary of. what party was in control during slavery? Democrats What party freed the slaves? Lincoln's Republicans Which party was in power after the civil war (actually there wasn't much "civil" about it with the nation losing approximately 1/5 of its population to the war); and kept black people repressed - particularly in the South? Did you ever hear of the "share cropper" system with it's plantation stores which made sure that black (and white) share croppers didn't break free from the system. If you say Democrat - you got it!! What party has gotten US into most wars? WWI? Wasn't it Wilson's Democrats. WWII? Roosevelt's democrats. They even "lost" some important intelligence reports re the Japanese armada ane some would say allowed the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Korea? Truman's democrats. OK well give Bush the Persian Gulf War. What about all the "mini" wars created by Clinton's Democrats - without adequate logistic support. Which party gave us the socialistic programs which are still alive and growing today? Roosevelts Democrats. FDR's VP for his second term was Wallace (Henry - not George) was so far left that they had to keep a rope tied to his heel to keep him from floating off into left field). Which party gave us Ruby Ridge and Waco? If you guessed Democrat - you win a cigar. Democrats have little to fear from Republicans. Remember the impeachment trial when Lott determines that it is not necessary to call witnesses. What kindadeal is that? I doubt very much that GW's administration will be all that conservative. Most of his cabinet appear to be center - a couple slightly right of center; and a couple slightly left of center. Watch his Supreme Court appointees that'll tell the tale. Watch the Left (that is to say: Democrats do every thing they can to "Bork" any conservative nominee. Where was I? Oh yes the nurses came and gave me a cup of pudding - (no teeth, you know...). as I was saying in one of my more lucid moments: The American People have far less to fear from the Left - (Democrats) than they do from the Right (Republicans). Ask the folks at Ruby Ridge; ask the children at Waco; ask Elian Gonzales.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,Oldtimemusic1 Date: 03 Jan 01 - 12:26 PM That should be MORE to fear from the LEFT and LESS to fear from the RIGHT.... That just goes to show you that you have to write fast when you have to slip into the "home's" office to use the computer..... Here they cooommeee after me againnnnn. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,History major Date: 03 Jan 01 - 12:58 PM That sir is a very large pile of clap trap! It's interesting that you right wingers refuse to give credit for womens right to vote to Wilson, but, you blame him for ww1. The German sub sank the Lusitania, remember? Wilson tried his best to keep out of that war. In 1940, they sank the Ruben James. We did not retaliate. In 1941, the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. And, if you say FDR knew they were going to do it..you are full of shit! He knew there was a strong possibility that they would hit us somewhere, but, you will never make me believe he knew where or when. In Korea, we had troops there, just like the rest of the UN. That was NOT Trumans war. Why did you not mention The Actor and Granada? that was nothing more than a ruse to get us off Iran-Contre. Or, Panama? George had to get us off the recession, so, he suddenly attacked a former ally. You wanna get silly? why not blame the republicans for getting us into all those recessions, and depressions? Get real mate! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Amergin Date: 03 Jan 01 - 01:01 PM Uh, I would dearly hate to burst your bubble, GUEST, Oldtimemusic1, but being as where my home town is only a few miles (as the crow flies) from Ruby Ridge, I know....Bush, Sr. was still president when that was going down. It happened in late August/early September of 1992....Clinton hadn't even won the presidency yet. You say there is more to fear from the left? Tell that to every striker who was gunned down just for wanting things better than they had....tell that to Sacco and Vanzetti....tell that to the countless unmarked graves dotting this country, because the bossmen didn't want to lose any of their precious profits....Do you think the right is responsible for what we have today? The forty hour week, overtime, benefits, and etc..? No, that is because of the left, who seem to care a whole lot more about the working class (my class), then the right do.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,kendall Date: 03 Jan 01 - 01:09 PM Right on Amergin. Here is a good example of how the right wing thinks..in the 20's, the cannery owners wanted the workers to be required to work on Sunday. They got a bill before congress to make it legal, and, Al Smith killed it.Want more? watch the film MATEWAN. How about the men who were beaten to death and shot by company thugs for wanting an 8 hour day? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: SINSULL Date: 03 Jan 01 - 01:19 PM For all his sharp edges and bristling, Uncle Jacques is a big teddy bear. Hate to give you away Jack but... I tried to shake his hand and say goodnight at the Shanty Sing and was enveloped in a warm fuzzy hug. Simply put: Jacques is a good man. I believe he means it when it says he wants you all to see the "other side". He would probably be disappointed if he won you over to it - who would he have to argue with? Sorry - With whom would he then argue (with)? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Amergin Date: 03 Jan 01 - 01:21 PM Hey, Kendall, I love that movie!! I keep looking for it, but haven't found it yet.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 03 Jan 01 - 02:11 PM Teddy Roosevelt was the sort of Republican they used to have before they got bought up and modernised by the fat cats wasn't he? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Jed at Work Date: 03 Jan 01 - 02:30 PM The surest way I know to fill up a thread on this music website is to start a conversation about politics. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Jed at Work Date: 03 Jan 01 - 02:31 PM shubb, is my personal choice. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Jed at Work Date: 03 Jan 01 - 02:32 PM no, wait - I think it's Kaiser! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,pistol packin' mama Date: 03 Jan 01 - 02:41 PM Amergin, you said "You say there is more to fear from the left? Tell that to every striker who was gunned down just for wanting things better than they had....tell that to Sacco and Vanzetti....tell that to the countless unmarked graves dotting this country, because the bossmen didn't want to lose any of their precious profits...." It really irks me that you tar all people who say they're right wingers with the same brush. I am conservative, and I certainly don't believe in shooting people because they want to join a union. How dare you implicate me! There is positively nothing wrong with someone in business making a profit. But it is stupid for an employer (besides immoral) to want to keep a labor force as cheaply as he can with no regard to the employee's rights and needs. If industrial bosses had been right in the first place, there would have been no reason for unions. They shot themselves in the foot with their greed. A person in business needs to make a profit. Why else go into business? Business owners deserve to make more than their employees. THE BUSINESS OWNER is the one who is taking the risk! When you start a business, you put your heart and soul into it. Ask any business owner who's been in it for more than five years. Ask how much money they had to sink into it to get it started. Ask about the hours they put in at the start. Ask how many YEARS it took to make a profit. There is a lot of sweat and tears in starting an enterprise. I respect the ones who have made it big by dint of their own effort. I believe that it is a good thing that we have labor laws, for even the simplest things like making sure employees get a break (coffee break, you know). But I believe it is bad to be extreme in either way. It is the nature of man to be tempted by greed, and that is why the laws exist. Maybe some bosses don't need the law, because they're fair people anyway. So guys, does that make me moderate? I don't know. Probably not, since I carry a concealed weapon (and am licensed to do so) PPM |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: catspaw49 Date: 03 Jan 01 - 02:49 PM Thanks Sins..........and I'm sure you're right of course. I have friends all over the board on most issues. 'Gin boy.....I taped "Matewan" off BRAVO awile back because its NEVER at any video store. Jed, I appreciate your confused input on the burning issue of capos. I am waiting for some definitive answer. As for me, I use both. Shubb is the best thing going, but for just fooling around the Kyser is a decent capo and much faster and easier to change. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 03 Jan 01 - 02:52 PM I am conservative, and I certainly don't believe in shooting people because they want to join a union. How dare you implicate me! (pistol packin mama)
Good on ya! That's the point I've been trying to make - the people who think that way try to usurp the term "conservative", and they are the ones who you need to have in your sights, because they are the ones who bring it into disrepute. And in the real world they've managed to trap a lot of decent people into colluding with some very bad things. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: InOBU Date: 03 Jan 01 - 02:55 PM Dear PPM "THE BUSINESS OWNER is the one who is taking the risk" This was said in a law school class in which I found myself. My answer was, some risk. When at the age of thriteen my father went down in the coal mine, the owner took all the risk? Down in that hell where he could not see his hand in the light of his lamp from al the coal dust, down there where water or gas could kill him at any moment and with no warning, the poor old boss - living on 5th Ave in NY, was likely loosing sleep for fear of the risk, the risk that he could loose all the money he made off my dad's labour and find himself down in the risk my dad took every day. I don't think the boss died, gasping for every breath of emphasima, as my dad did, and so many others who left the risk up to the boss. Cheers, Larry PS My dad deserved the palace of gold, not the son of a bitch who sent him down in the ground, my dad worked for it, he didn't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,Kendall Date: 03 Jan 01 - 03:11 PM Mama, most of what you said is right on the money..no arguement here, but inOBU is also right. The original republican party was formed to get the robber barons of the backs of the working man. Teddy Roosevelt was the last republican to give a damn about the working man. Remember..A working man voting for a republican, is like a chicken voting for Colonel Sanders. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: InOBU Date: 03 Jan 01 - 04:11 PM Hi Kendall ANd let us not forget that Ted was a member of the Bull Moose party... a strange sort of populist fair play wing, in fact such a different party that he would not have been elected, became president by reason of an assasination... Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Ribbit Date: 03 Jan 01 - 04:17 PM Amergin, I have a copy of Matewan I'd be glad to let you borrow. Just PM with your address and I'll get it out to you. All the best Thom |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 03 Jan 01 - 04:36 PM AS I understand it the Bull Moose Party only came into existence when Teddy Roosevelt was rejected by the Republican Party machine, in spite of the fact that the overwhelming majority of those who took part in the primaries voted for him. So his supporters walked out and set up a new party with him, and the Republican candidate was wiped out in the election, even though Teddy lost to the Democrats.
(I only know this because the BBC ran a documentary about him the other day.) The point is, in many ways the Democrats and the Republicans swapped clothes a couple of generations back, so stuff about Lincoln being a Republican is essentially a-historical hogwash, though technically true. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: InOBU Date: 03 Jan 01 - 04:42 PM Ahhhh! The BBC, As I started to read your post, I thought, Jeeze, why can't US citizen's know as much about our government! I am a little realived that you did not learn about this as a part of the general Irish or English grade school education! I must say, I was very disappointed to see how American crime and agony programs are taking over English TV these days. But, you are indeed right. However, even Lincoln was a sort of Clintonesk charactor, a great middle of the roader, didn't even free all the slaves, only those in cessionist states. Part of his great success was his ability to find coalition, and the fact that he got shot, always does wonders for one's historical place! Cheers, Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,MAV Date: 03 Jan 01 - 05:32 PM John P said; "Mav, I started to write a point by point response to your last message, but then I realized that you are so far outside the norm that nothing is going to have any effect on you" When confronted with an inability to respond coherently, the fascist's best defense is demonization. He hasn't resorted to name calling yet, perhaps that is next. "What's the point of trying?" The only thing that puts me outside the norm is being a musician.....You? "Have a nice life" I have so far.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,MAV Date: 03 Jan 01 - 05:53 PM Dear Little Hawk, "Everybody - I have a folkie friend here in Orillia who is SO right-wing that he can't find anyone to vote for...he says they're all too far to the left for him. He would like to run the government himself...and here's what he says he would do" Your friend is not right wing, he is a brutal authoritarian. All control freaks belong on the left. Those of us real right wingers love freedom and the US Constitution. "1. Deport ALL foreigners, specially Asians and blacks. (He actually emigrated here from Scotland, but that doesn't count.)" Racist "2. Ban mixed marriages (he means mixed race, not male and female)" Racist "3. Put gays back in the closet where they belong, and shoot 'em if they put up a fuss about it" fascist "4. Have at least one firearm in every household so decent people can protect themselves" Right wing "5. Feed all prisoners on bread and water, with no parole ever. And lots and lots of capital punishment, of course" No comment "6. Tell the major corporations to share the wealth...and if they don't, shoot their board of directors (I kind of like that one)" Communist (If you want to share the wealth, but some stock) "7. Ditto for the banks (again, I sort of sympathize)" I prefer credit unions and brokerages myself. "8. Lay off 95% of the government workers, and have private industry take over their jobs" Right wing and right on! "9. Shut down the labour unions" He scores BIG TIME! "10. Shoot anyone who disagrees with the above agenda" Criminal, he can't really expect you to believe that one. He has a mixture of beliefs and may also fall into the anarchy camp. He is no associate of mine.
MAV |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: mousethief Date: 03 Jan 01 - 06:00 PM Mav, your namecalling really shows you in a poor light. My suggestion: try being a little more civil. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,Stackley Date: 03 Jan 01 - 06:13 PM He's only following Jaque's lead- and fairly well, at that. If we grant for sake of argument that Jack may indeed be a "teddy bear" then why does he behave like such a jerk? Does he think he's amusing? And what makes him think we haven't 'seen the other side' (so nice of him to eddicate us po' dumb folks) and rejected it? Cheers. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: SINSULL Date: 03 Jan 01 - 07:14 PM Sorry Jacque. I never should have called you a "teddy bear". I don't usually resort to name calling. Mousethief - rascist and fascist work for me in the above situations. How would you prefer to see it handled? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 03 Jan 01 - 08:25 PM "Lincoln was a sort of Clintonesk character" - the mind boggles. I know what you mean, InOBU, but if they ever put a monument up to Clinton depicting what he'll be remembered for...I'll be a bit surprised.
What's different with Uncle Jacque is that he has posted on musical threads as well. There's a difference in a session between someone who's there for the music, but who has a bee in their bonnet they want to air (like a lotb of us), and someone who doesn't show any interest in the music but just seems to want an audience for their opinions.
As for "teddy bears" - since that was one of Teddy Roosevelt contributions, perhaps the use of the term was meant to nudge Uncle towards a different vision of Republicanism! (Where I live you'd be more likely to use the expression "pussy-cat" than "teddy-bear" in this sort of context.) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: Amergin Date: 03 Jan 01 - 10:09 PM Hmmmmm, what if they did do a statue of Clinton....what would it show?.....some middle aged guy with his back arched in his chair and two feet sticking out from under his desk? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: John P Date: 03 Jan 01 - 10:41 PM Mav, I don't have any problem responding coherently. I just don't see the point of debating with someone who honestly believes that the only thing that stands between us and a totalitarian dictatorial regime is having guns in our pockets. And who says that taxes are literally the same as armed robbery. Here's an interesting quote from your last post, with you talking about me: When confronted with an inability to respond coherently, the fascist's best defense is demonization. He hasn't resorted to name calling yet, perhaps that is next. Doesn't that juxtaposition strike you as a bit odd? While we are on the subject of name calling, you should get over your penchant for belittling people. You referred to our president and vice president as clinton/gore and algore. Do you have understanding of how much that makes you sound like a mean-spirited churl? Whether you like it or not, these people were elected by a majority of the population of our fair country, and they deserve the respect of their offices. In Al Gore's case, he got a majority of the vote and still didn't get elected. I hate to have to tell you this, but if you claim to love America you have to actually accept things like democracy and the fact that most of us don't agree with your views. You seem to love America, but you don't seem to like most Americans very much. While we are on the subject of name calling and belittling, calling me laughing boy and accusing me of being a fascist is really kind of crude. What are you hoping to accomplish by this? This is not the way to win friends and influence people. I use a Shub capo on my guitar and a Kaiser on my cittern. I'm not sure why, they just seem to work better that way. Mav, I'm glad you are having a good life. I'm a musician, too. What kind of music do you play? Maybe we can get together sometime and jam and not talk politics. ;-) John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,MAV Date: 03 Jan 01 - 10:45 PM Guys, guys, guys. That wasn't name calling, if you want to see name calling, you only need to look at some of your own posts. If you disagreed with my analysis of the so-called right winger (probably a David Duke type) fine. I call 'em like I see 'em. Have I stepped on some toes? Well if the shoe fits. See ya. MAV
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: mousethief Date: 03 Jan 01 - 11:18 PM Ah, if a liberal does it, it's name calling. If a conservative does it, it's analysis. I think someone here could use a little analysis, if you get my drift. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: DougR Date: 03 Jan 01 - 11:24 PM I'm sure everybody gets your drift, Alex. Larry: Your father had no other choice? He HAD to go down in that mine? There were no roads leading out of your hometown to towns where jobs might be available that did not involve going down into that dirty old coal mine? Maybe he should have come out west and become a cowboy! Outdoor life, healthy, and the only danger from consumption was swallowing too much Bull Durham smoke. Just curious. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: mousethief Date: 03 Jan 01 - 11:37 PM Hi! This thread is getting too long by normal Mudcat standards; we are asked by the Powers That Be to, when a thread gets to be over 100 posts, create a new thread to continue the discussion, hence, please cease & desist from posting to this thread, and continue the discussion here. (how's THAT for a split infinitive? pedants, eat dust!) Thanks! Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,MAV Date: 03 Jan 01 - 11:49 PM "I just don't see the point of debating with someone who honestly believes that the only thing that stands between us and a totalitarian dictatorial regime is having guns in our pockets" Well, that's what the second amendment is all about, a corrupt government fears an armed citizenry. "And who says that taxes are literally the same as armed robbery" Professor Walter Williams, Head of the economics department at GMU. The IRS doesn't exactly say it but, try not paying and watch them come (with guns) and seize your property. If anyone else took 45% of your hard earned cash you'd call it theft wouldn't you? "When confronted with an inability to respond coherently, the fascist's best defense is demonization" I've had a little experience in this area, I make comments and the liberals cop a condecending attitude and start name calling. The early indicators were pointing in that direction "He hasn't resorted to name calling yet, perhaps that is next.Doesn't that juxtaposition strike you as a bit odd?" No "While we are on the subject of name calling, you should get over your penchant for belittling people. You referred to our president and vice president as clinton/gore and algore. Do you have understanding of how much that makes you sound like a mean-spirited churl?" They should both be tried for treason and if convicted punished in the traditional manner. Selling the nuclear arsonal to the Chinese Communists makes them the lowest form of scum, need I explain any further? "Whether you like it or not, these people were elected by a majority of the population of our fair country" No they weren't! The first time clinton received a 23%plurality, more people voted against him than for him. "...they deserve the respect of their offices." Why? They sure as HELL don't respect their offices (sex in the oval office/no controlling legal authority etc.) "In Al Gore's case, he got a majority of the vote and still didn't get elected" LOOK! There were 50 state races with various "winner takes all" amounts of electoral votes. Those were the rules before the election and since the beginning of the US. Bush won more of those eletoral votes. The so-called "popular vote" is a contrived meaningless number and has no bearing whatsoever on the outcome of a Presidential election. "I hate to have to tell you this, but if you claim to love America you have to actually accept things like democracy and the fact that most of us don't agree with your views" No I don't! My views come from the Constitution. Elected officials and military take an oath to defend and uphole the Constitution of the US. I hate to tell YOU this, but the word "democracy" does not appear in the Constitution. This is not and never has been a "democracy" and I indeed do not like "democracy" In a "democracy" you would vote on every bit of minutia to come along, like what color uniforms the guards at the White House would have, appropriations bills, everything. There would be no congress, they would not be necessary. Democracy is mob rule. Five guys decide (vote)to rape a woman, that's democracy. The democrats have been repeating this democracy lie for years just to market their corrupt fascist party. We live in a Republic. Check out the pledge of allegiance "and to the REPUBLIC for which it stands" "You seem to love America, but you don't seem to like most Americans very much" I like them just fine. If you look at the election 2000 political map you will see that this country is divided between country and city people. I'm a country person. Most algor voters live in the corrupt and psychotic cities. "While we are on the subject of name calling and belittling, calling me laughing boy and accusing me of being a fascist is really kind of crude. What are you hoping to accomplish by this? This is not the way to win friends and influence people" I'll get back to you on this one, see earliest posts. "I'm a musician, too. What kind of music do you play? Maybe we can get together sometime and jam and not talk politics. ;-)" I play blues, boogie woogie and swing on B-3, Wurlie and regular pianos and blues harp. MAV
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry Enroute! From: GUEST,MAV Date: 03 Jan 01 - 11:53 PM "And yes, I was laughing at you. For your sake, I hope I was laughing with you as well. I've never tried a euphonium, but I have laughed hysterically (at myself) while playing the baritone horn. Does that count?" This is why I was calling you laughing boy. I just couldn't find it earlier. MAV |