 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued
|
|
|
Subject: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: mousethief Date: 03 Jan 01 - 11:33 PM Old thread was getting WAY too long. Please continue discussion here. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: catspaw49 Date: 03 Jan 01 - 11:38 PM Thanks MT......Now maybe we can get some serious clarification and definition on the concealed capo issue. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: mousethief Date: 04 Jan 01 - 12:03 AM I see that even after I capped the old thread, MAV insisted on posting not just once (which could have been a crossing-in-the-mail) but twice. It well behooves a guest or a newcomer to try to follow the rules (and there are so few here at Mudcat!) of the place they are new to. Of course the Internet is not new and MAV unfortuantely seems to lack any sense of netiquette, so this may be an ongoing thing with him. Rarely have I seen so much self-righteousness in one place. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: paddymac Date: 04 Jan 01 - 12:49 AM I followed that thread very early, but lost interest. Glad I haven't tried to keep up with it. I'm not overly fond of self-righteousness. Hmm. Perhaps a grammarian in the family could tell me if it would be an oxymoron to say "self-righteousness is wrong-headed." Or, maybe just moronic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: juju Cobra Date: 04 Jan 01 - 12:50 AM Those without substantive arguments resort to personal attacks. This is an especially useful lesson for anyone who attempts to understand the modern left. Thank you Mousethief, for demonstrating this principle here for us. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: katlaughing Date: 04 Jan 01 - 05:45 AM Are you saying MAV is the "modern Left?!!" What a hoot! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 Jan 01 - 06:08 AM Pedantic drift: "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."
None of them got a majority. What you mean is that more people voted for Clinton than for Daddy Bush and whoever the guy was last time (Dole was it? Footnotes of history), and more people voted for Gore than for Baby Bush.
But it wasn't a majority of the voters, since there were third party candidates around to share the votes - and nothing like a majority of the people who could have voted, since thye USA has such an remarkably low tuirnout in elections (I think it's probably the lowest in the world world - the spin on that when the turnout goes down in England is that it shows how contented people are...
THe word you want is plurality.
I don't know why anyone should be keen to emphasise that they live in a Republic, but be pleased that it is not a Democracy. You could say the same of South Africa under apartheid. The same for Hitler's Germany and Stalin's Russia, Saddam's Iraq, the Taliban's Afghanistan, Pol Pot's Cambodia...and a lot more. I doubt very much if there's anyone around here who much fancies that bunch. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Greg F. Date: 04 Jan 01 - 07:14 AM Kat, I think he's maintaining that MAV is employing "substantive arguments"--- which is even MORE of a hoot! Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: catspaw49 Date: 04 Jan 01 - 07:20 AM Whichever way it is, its a hoot. But Greg, lemmee ask you, whaddaya' think? Shubb or Kyser? Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Greg F. Date: 04 Jan 01 - 08:28 AM Actually, 'Spaw, I use an aluminum el-cheapo Shubb-clone on my Guild 12 & the old junky "Jim Dunlop" type on my 6. Guess I'm a bit of a Luddite. Or a cheapskate. And how about them Sooners, eh??? Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: kendall Date: 04 Jan 01 - 08:38 AM Does anyone make a 12 string capo that really works? I have an old Hamilton, but, it is getting weak. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: GUEST,Stackly Date: 04 Jan 01 - 08:53 AM 03-Jan-01 - 10:45 PM
Guys, guys, guys...
That wasn't name calling... I call 'em like I see 'em....
See ya.
MAV
Right then, MAV, by your own definitions, here's some analysis for you: |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Midchuck Date: 04 Jan 01 - 09:06 AM Does anyone make a 12 string capo that really works? I have an old Hamilton, but, it is getting weak. Shupp 12-string model is excellent, but may not work on a very deep neck. YOU'RE AN OBNOXIOUS, LOUDMOUTHED, SELF-RIGHTEOUS ARSEHOLE. And a moron into the bargain if you actually believe the mindless nonsense you spew. Piss off back into your compound & clean your AR-15, OK? Eternal Vigilence being the price of paranoia, and all. Was that a liberal showing the true depth of his intellect or a conservative showing the true depth of his intellect? It's getting hard to tell the players without a scorecard. (When confused, I find it helps to recite the first line of the chorus of Barrett's Privateers over and over until one feels better.) Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: kendall Date: 04 Jan 01 - 09:09 AM I will post no more forever. (to this thread) for you folks across the pond, that is a paraphrase of a statement by Chief Joseph of the Nez Perse indians when his position became hopeless. This thread is just too damn nasty for me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 Jan 01 - 09:47 AM Well, I swear by my Kyser. But it'd be good if they could come up with a Kyser which could be adjusted delicately, like a Shubb.
But here are the sort of capos more in keeping with the tone of some of this thread... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Kim C Date: 04 Jan 01 - 10:55 AM Well, okay, I'm a conservative, and a gun owner. I am also a harmless cuddly little fuzzball UNTIL I get backed into a corner. However I do not insist that everyone agree with me as I also believe in the balance of the universe, and that all viewpoints are important in the attempt to achieve that balance. And we may never get the balance, but the attempting is important nonetheless. We have a Shubb and a Kyser. Mister likes the Shubb for the classical guitar because it accommodates the fat neck. I like the Kyser for my own guitar because it's just simpler. :) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: jeffp Date: 04 Jan 01 - 10:59 AM You might try a Victor capo. They have a sort of rack-and-pinion type of arrangement tightened by a thumbscrew. I'm really satisfied with mine. I can tighten it just until the strings don't buzz and it doesn't throw my tuning off. jeffp |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: mousethief Date: 04 Jan 01 - 11:02 AM I have one of them one-hand capos but I'll be hornswoggled if I know the brand name. I bought it when I joined a music group and was informed that they all had one and to be part of the "in" gang I needed to get one too. I was less self-assured at the time so I fell into lock-step. Anyway, it's at home, and I'm at work, so I can't even look to tell you what brand-name it is. But I like it fine enough. I'm surprised nobody called me on the self-righteous comment. It was meant to be obviously tongue-in-cheek (calling somebody else self-righteous is a very self-righteous thing to do!). Sigh. Either I'm losing my edge, or you all are a bunch of simpering idiots. Must be losing my edge. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Rick Fielding Date: 04 Jan 01 - 11:20 AM Dammit Kendall, I'm not starting another damn "capo thread" just for you..so get back here and listen to what we're telling you! Best way to capo a 12 string is to cut two tiny "V" shaped grooves where the "Big" E and A strings contact the rubber. This works! I'me a tuning fanatic, and never had any trouble after I started doing this. Personally I use a Golden Gate capo for 12 string, but it works well with Shubb, Dunlop "C" clamp or Kaiser. I guess like a few of us, I too lost interest in what at times was an interesting thread. Folks who see absolutely NO fault in their own ideology ALWAYS end up overstating their case...and then it's just like listening to advertising or commercials. Rick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: mousethief Date: 04 Jan 01 - 12:09 PM Actually, regarding the politics, I feel Jaques has let us down. We were promised a serious, well-thought-out, non-inflammatory discursion by this MAV fellow, and when he finally appeared, we got flames and smoke but nothing approaching what was suggested by Jaques. Although I must say that on our own we had a pretty good discussion going for a bit there. Unfortunately the conclusion most easily drawn from this is that too many conservative brains are like soup in a bad restaurant: best left unstirred. We know that very intelligent conservatives exist out there. DougR seems intelligent enough most of the time (although he couldn't resist being snide when he posted here, could he?). Troll likewise. Until we can have newcomers of roughly equivalent (or higher) caliber to them, we may just have to be content with them as our token conservative folkies. I hope they feel themselves up to the task! Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: GUEST,colwyn dane Date: 04 Jan 01 - 12:14 PM Hi,
Mcgrath of Harlow wrote:
I found this reply to a question about US politics on an newgroup last night:
"The Republican Party is a political party which at its heart supports the Republican form of government. Democrats on the otherhand favor a democracy. One might be confused by this, thinking there is little difference between the two, but while republicanism as established in the U.S. is a democratic process, it still differs substancially from a democracy.
First: central to the republican form of government is the idea that the principle of law must prevail. In other words, unlike democracy where
The author was Semperfinite.
How accurate is this? Perhaps some of the US denizens of the Mudcat will focus some of their brightness on the above and illuminate,for me,this shadowy subject.
It seems that before you can have a major political change in the US, e.g. banning Christianity, you would have to perform major surgery on the Constitution/Ammendments using the political operating facilities in DC.
Regards,
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 Jan 01 - 12:25 PM When the people you're arguing with go way over the top it doesn't really hurt at all. It's when the people who are "on your side" do it that it must get embarrassing.
There was a good quote on a thread some time back to the effect that in every struggle you find yourself involved in, sooner or later you run up alongside someone whom you profoundly wish was on the other side.
The good thing with Kysers is that you can use them instantly, without any fiddling about - which means you can move them around in the middle of a tune in a session. I've found that the tuning still stays ok for my ear, most of the time (which it doesn't with the elasticated capos I've used). But it'd be good to be able to adjust them so they were exactly right for a particular instrument.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: mousethief Date: 04 Jan 01 - 12:29 PM The terms "republic" and "democracy" are nearly as flexible as a rubber snake, and therefore about as useful in serious discussion. Until everyone at the table agrees on what they mean, you can get lots of shouting accomplished by saying this or that country is or isn't a democracy, or is or isn't a republic. But little of worth will be accomplished, again, if they aren't nailed down first. Many people -- particularly conservatives in the USA -- like to use "democracy" to mean "a regime in which every law is voted on directly by all the people." Not sure why; there has never been such a beast in the history of the world, nor will there likely ever be one. Nor is it clear to me why, in a "democracy," you couldn't have a hierarchy of laws in which the "higher" laws (comparable, say, to the US constitution) take a larger "majority" to change than the lower laws, and thus if freedom of religion is a higher law, say one requiring a 75% majority to change, and the populace voted 60-40 on outlawing christianity, the ban would fail, because it contradicted the higher law. Thus your author with the cute pen-name must be thinking of adding to his definition of democracy, "and every law is passed with a simple majority." And how THIS can be justified as part of the definition of "democracy" is completely beyond my ability to fathom. Presumably "republic" means some sort of representative government. If I were as pedantic as this Semperfinite fellow (always of fixed size? does this refer to his private parts?) I might say that since the Roman senators were not popularly elected, and this was the first example of a Republic, then a country in which the representatives are popularly elected (e.g. the USA, UK, etc) is not really a Republic. But I'm not that pedantic. Speaking for myself, I would say the USA is a Republic because it is a representative government, and it is a Democracy because the representives are popularly elected. As someone has once said, it's a democratic Republic (or, to vice the versa, a republican Democracy). Gotta run to a meeting. Great questions, Colwyn, and thanks for getting us back on track! Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 Jan 01 - 03:56 PM I don't think equating Republic with having representative government really works - there are too many countries which are called Republics which don't have representative government, and other countries which aren't called Republics which do have it.
I mean, you can't really say that countries like Sweden or Holland or Spain or Great Britain, none of them "Republics" don't have governments at least as representative as France or the USA or Argentina. Essentially a Republic means the ceremonial or actual head of state isn't there because his father had the job. Which normally means the USA qualifies. (Not so sure for the next four years...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: mousethief Date: 04 Jan 01 - 04:26 PM Okay, McGrath, I can accept that definition of Republic, seeing as both are given in the online Webster's. This just highlights what I was saying: you need to make sure people are using the same definitions of words to ensure that real communication is taking place. Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Richard Bridge Date: 04 Jan 01 - 05:11 PM "Republic" is the antonym of "Monarchy". A "Democracy" is a society where rules are made by the decision of the majority (or in the case of multiple choices, the largest number) of votes cast. Therefore a system which prevents this happening is not democratic, and this is as true of the USA as of the UK (or Tsarist Russia or the former USSR). There has been a society in which all laws were discussed at a forum of all members of the society and passed by majority vote. It was ancient Greece, but the definition of "society" or "member of society" excluded slaves and foreigners. I am not sure I want to get too close to a woman with the strength of grip to prefer a Kyser to other capos. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Little Hawk Date: 04 Jan 01 - 05:12 PM Okay. Capos. I started out using a kyser, and didn't like it much, cos it squeezes too hard, which causes the 6th string to go sharp, which requires retuning said string, and then retuning it again when you take the damn capo off! Of course, you can angle the capo away some from the fret at the base end, and that helps, but the 6th string still usually goes sharp. Phooey. Shubb capos, on the other hand, are marvellous. They don't cause the 6th string to go sharp when you have them adjusted right. It's Shubb all the way with me. Furthermore, you CAN put the Shubb capo on the guitar (just above the nut, over the strings, with a very slight amount of squeeze) while you're not using it. Causes no problems, and works great. Try it. As for the Conservative cavalry in Canada, they've shot themselves in the foot so many times that they have become a spent force in this country, at least for the time being. And the so-called "Liberal" party? It's as corrupt as Tammany Hall. The only good thing you can say about it is that at least it's not "conservative"...if you can tell the difference, that is...
O, Canada, our home and native soil (Alternate version of the Canadian national anthem...try it out at the next hockey game when they play the music.) - LH
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 04 Jan 01 - 05:50 PM Have you tried putting the Kyser the other way round and seeing if that works better, Little Hawk? The trouble is they're one-size fits all, and guitars aren't. That's why an adjustable one would be a good idea. (Well, you can adjust them if you've got a couple of pairs of pliers etc, but it's a rough and ready approach.)
And I can't see being able to move a Shubb from the second fret to the seventh without losing your place in a tune.
I don't see Monarchy as an antonym of Republic. Hereditary Monarchy, yes. But the President of the United States is a temporarily elected Monarch. (At least that's how it's supposed to work. For Salman Rushdie's versification of this, click here.)
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Bill D Date: 04 Jan 01 - 07:03 PM re: one handed capos....a number of years ago, Wilkerson capos were all the rage...my wife(Ferrara) has an original (Waaaaaayyyyyyy back in the first post on the original thread, Uncle Jacque said that he felt that 'folkies' were assumed to be mostly 'liberal' etc., etc.....IF this is sort of true, does anyone but me wonder why that happens?) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: juju Cobra Date: 04 Jan 01 - 08:56 PM mousethief, who are you to be constantly judging peoples caliber? That goofy "soup" homily proves that you're not the sharpest tool in the shed yourself. The fact that your posts always concern some percieved shortcoming of MAV's and never any genuine explanation for your desire to surrender our liberty to an authoritarian government, show me that your more interested in punishing people who disagree with you than you do explaining your political position. Perhaps you can't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: John P Date: 05 Jan 01 - 08:25 AM juju Cobra, I don't know when Mousethief decided that Mav's brain was best left unregarded, but for me it was when he accused me of probably getting ready to start resorting to name calling (which I don't think I've done in this thread), immediately after calling me a fascist. When I called his attention to this anomaly, he said he didn't see anything strange about the logic of it. I'm not sure why he decided I am a fascist --I've only actually taken two positions in this thread: that people who are willing to kill other people shouldn't call themselves pro-life, and that training and licensing gun owners might be a good idea. Mav's ability to draw the conclusion that I am a fascist based on these positions does not give me much desire to know more about how his mind works. And that was what Mousethief was saying: it's a soup best left unstirred. He was not saying that anyone was stupid. You drew the conclusion that he was saying that all on your own, took him to taksk for it, and then accused him of being stupid. I'll ask you the same question I asked Mav: Doesn't this juxtaposition strike you as a bit odd? John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Little Hawk Date: 05 Jan 01 - 10:49 AM John P - Interesting comments. We actually do train and license gun owners in Canada. You have to take a very thorough gun handling course and get the certificate before you can buy one. I took the course, simply because I thought it would be interesting (it was), but I have never followed it up and bought a gun, cos I don't have the feeling I need one particularly. Do you mean to say that in the USA there is no such mandatory course? Sounds like a recipe for disaster. Name calling...well, it's easy for leftist/liberals to slip and call someone or something "fascist", just like it's easy for conservatives to slip and call someone a "bleeding heart". Being leftist by nature, I utterly hate the latter term (no matter what the occasion), and feel disgusted when I hear it...while conservatives no doubt feel that way when they hear the word "fascist" used against them. I guess we all need to learn a bit of tolerance... - LH
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Little Hawk Date: 05 Jan 01 - 12:09 PM McGrath - Yes, the kaiser capo is handy to slide to a new position. Can't argue with that. But I still prefer the Shubb. Regarding your quote: "I don't see Monarchy as an antonym of Republic. Hereditary Monarchy, yes. But the President of the United States is a temporarily elected Monarch. Yes! Wow! Precisely! This is what I said on another thread on political stuff. All elected "heads of state" are temporarily elected monarchs as far as I'm concerned. America threw out King George the Third in 1776. Now they've got King George the Second for the next four years. George the Third was called "the idiot king" by history, cos he lost the British half of North America. I wonder what nickname George the Second will earn? - LH
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 05 Jan 01 - 12:40 PM Surely it'd be George the Third at least, since you've had George Washington and Daddy Bush already? (There may be more, but I don't know most of the ones in between too well.)
So I suppose that would make him "George the Third the Second." (But I think Salman Rushdie's nickname for him "The Grinch who stole America" has a better ring to it.)
Isn't it Kyser? It should be Kaiser I imagine, but I believe American immigration officials didn't worry too much about getting foreign names right sometimes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Rick Fielding Date: 05 Jan 01 - 12:49 PM I love this! Konservative Kavalry Kolides with Kaiser Kapos...Krikee! Just out of curiosity (since I gotta go shovel snow) can anyone add up the "capo posters"? I'm curious whether it's just the liberals who are adding music stuff to their political posts. Are the conservatives pulling their weight "capo-wise"? Rick |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: CarolC Date: 05 Jan 01 - 07:15 PM The problem that I, personally, have with MAV, is that s/he was brought in by Uncle Jaques as a ringer because of his/her penchant for using strong-arm tactics in order to win an argument. Not because s/he necessarily has any interest in this forum or the people who use it. In that context, Uncle Jaques was behaving like a Troll, and MAV, a flamer. Uncle Jaques may have decided to reconsider this tactic. I hope he has. I don't see MAV on this continuation thread, so maybe s/he has had a similar change of heart. MAV, if you would like to participate in this forum as a human being, rather than as a bully, you might make some very good friends. Something to consider. Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: GUEST Date: 05 Jan 01 - 08:21 PM Fair chance that MAV and UNK are the same person. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: juju Cobra Date: 05 Jan 01 - 09:40 PM My complaint here is that when anyone here expresses an unpopular opinion they are always met with a chorus of personal derisions. When MAV, for example, speaks his mind, the subject of the replies always seems to be some critical judgment of MAV personally, not the subject of his post. I can argue the 14th admendment protection of same sex marriages in a thread full of conservatives and I'll be treated to some tortured constitutional interpretations but not the malicious personal critques one experiences here when defending the 2nd amendment. Anyway, I don't like the way capos leave you with such a low action. When I want to reference open strings, usually the rel. 1 and 5 to fatten up the sound I change the tuning to suit the key. It has some of the advantages of a capo and you don't lose all those nice low notes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: CarolC Date: 05 Jan 01 - 11:03 PM juju Cobra, I have to disagree with you on that one. troll is a conservative, and he commands a lot of admiration and respect around here. (He certainly has mine.) Click on troll's name in one of the threads and spend some time researching his posting history. MAV got the responses s/he got because of the way s/he expressed his/her opinions. Not because s/he has them. I don't use a capo. I play the accordion. Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: juju Cobra Date: 06 Jan 01 - 02:54 AM Carol, Although we disagree, I want you to know I appreciate your candor, yet unreproachable manners through this unpleasant thread. Good by and it was nice to meet you, really! JJ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 06 Jan 01 - 06:50 AM Straight personal insults are not a good way of conducting arguments. But anyone who throws round word like "fascist" (except when they are using them accurately, which they normally aren't, and which MAV definitely was not) is inviting it.
I think it's better however to ignore the personal abuse, and to ignore the people who get it going. If that means their arguments get ignored, tough. (Not that I saw any that seemed to have much weight.)
Retuning is fine if you're playing on your own and there's no hurry. But it's no good in the middle of a tune. I suppose you could have soem kind of Scruggs tuning pegs - has anyone ever experimented with using these on guitars? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: InOBU Date: 06 Jan 01 - 10:02 AM HEY GUYS! I tired THREE different capos on my Uilleann pipes, and none of the damn things changed the key, so I took a lesson from Uncle Jaque - and I shot the damn thing! It worked! It made a new hole in the chanter, and changed the pitch, unfortunatly it is no longer in tune, and the dog who lives in the appartment under mine... is dead. Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: John P Date: 06 Jan 01 - 10:08 AM After many years of practicing with a Shubb capo, I can move it about as fast as a Kyser. But it takes two hands. I recently worked out a tune change where I struck a chord in the first key and held it while I moved the capo to the new key. The sound of the cittern never stopped. I couldn't do that with my Shubb, unless I was just removing the capo. I use a capo a lot, often high on the neck, so when I have the necks of my instruments worked on, I am careful to let the luthier know that. He seems to be able to adjust the action and intonation to support that a bit, probably finding some happier middle ground. Shall we assign political camps to capos? Would the Kyser be more conservative, with its vice-like grip, its unwillingness to bend? The Shubb is perhaps more liberal, more adjustable, willing to compromise into more situations. ;-) John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: John P Date: 06 Jan 01 - 10:17 AM Little Hawk, No, in the United States we don't need a license to keep a gun. We need a license to carry a concealed weapon in public, but that is all. I'm curious: Do you feel that you are living under a fascist regime, like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union, because your populace is not generally carrying guns around? Or because you require those who want to have guns to know how to use them safely? Do you find that your homes are being invaded on a regular basis by criminals with guns, and that you could defend yourself against this if you had a gun, or that it would make any difference if you didn't have a license to keep the gun? How about our friends in the UK? I believe you have stricter gun laws than we do. How's the state of your society? John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 06 Jan 01 - 10:41 AM The Kyser is more flexible and ready to move around in a hurry and do what needs doing to take care of business.
The Shubb is adjustable and adaptable but a bit slow to move to take up new positions.
I'd say the Kyster is more of a leftish radical activist, and the Shubbster is a middle-of-the road type, what we'd call liberal where I live.
A conservative capo would be one of those ones that classical guitarists use with a sort of screw clamp, or with a string and a peg. Though maybe a true American Conservative would scorn capos and use the finger. (English Conervatives wouldn't be playing a guitar anyway.)
After all, there's nothing in the Constitution about a right to bear capos. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Dave Wynn Date: 06 Jan 01 - 10:59 AM CarolC...If you can't capo accordians how do you manage to play in keys like Eb , Bb and F.? I'm a conservative in the UK coz my master won't feed me unless I agree with him and I prefer the Shubb....in brass not steel. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Richard Bridge Date: 06 Jan 01 - 06:33 PM English conservatives do play guitar. Well, TOny Blair does, and that's close enough. The newspaper view over here is that the belief that the second amendment authorises all and sundry in the USA to carry rifles, pistols, and other firearms is a misinterpretation. And most other (major european) countries I think prohibit the carrying of knives with blades over a certain length, and other "offensive weapons". And could we perhaps start to think about other things in the left-right divide - like the right to unionise or strike, to a living wage, a social security system that permits a person to live a civilised life, proper national health service, all things stolen from the people by that lunatic Thatcher and sometimes sought to be justified by the new wave economic theorists by reference to the recent US boom - that now appears to be turning into an implosion. DO these things and the eventual success of Keynesians in taming the great recession teach us anything? Will respect for continuity in Japan make that the first economy to lead the world out of the economic shadows that seem to be falling? Why does the USA with less than 20% of the wold's population think itself entitled on economic grounds to produce 80% of the world's greenhouse gases when the hole in the ozone layer will lead to the inundation of how many percent of the world's dry land? Why shoud WIPO feel entitled to dictate economic and social policy outside the USA? Etcetera. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: CarolC Date: 06 Jan 01 - 06:58 PM Spot the Dog, you use the little black keys, just like a piano. Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Dave Wynn Date: 06 Jan 01 - 07:10 PM CarolC Cheat Cheat .....you are a musician....and thats cheating.....course we all know that musicians can do that kind of thing...But fancy admitting it.....Shame on you. Decent law abiding folksingers don't mess with those dots and lines thing...No good will come of it my grandad said and he sang with the Spinners.....(or was it the he met them once?).. Spot (the extremely trad and bad musician) :-) aye ..and proud of it I tell you....! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 06 Jan 01 - 07:15 PM No, Tony Blair is an American style Democrat, which make him a "Liberal" in transatlantic-speak.
The other question of course is, if you use a Kyser, do have have it pointing towards you or away - I go for away from me, because that way I can use my right hand to move it and I find that's quicker. But does that have a political implication?
I think Richard's figures aren't quite right - we had a thread about petrol (gas) and forth, and I thinki the figure for CO2 anyway for the States is about 24% - which is still pretty high, because America is nowhere near 20% of the world's population.
Any genuine conservative of course ought to be sttrongly against pollution. The label has been hi-jacked by people with very strange and totally non-conservative attitudes on both sides of the Atlantic. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: CarolC Date: 06 Jan 01 - 07:49 PM Spot the Dog, I am not a folksinger. I do not sing. I am an accordionist. (I play music that is generally shady and somewhat disreputable.) Very sincerely, CarolC |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Dave Wynn Date: 06 Jan 01 - 08:22 PM CarolC See...by your own admission...you play music.....what is left for us......at least I have the dignity to put one paw in my ear and walk off singing (slightly off key) into the sunset...... Stop. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: CarolC Date: 06 Jan 01 - 08:34 PM Spot... Does that mean it's over between us? But I just broke up with the ferret. Now you, too? Is it just me and my accordion now? *sigh* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Little Hawk Date: 06 Jan 01 - 10:02 PM Yup, Carol, it's just you and the accordion. C'est la vie... John P - You asked..."I'm curious: Do you feel that you are living under a fascist regime, like Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union, because your populace is not generally carrying guns around? Or because you require those who want to have guns to know how to use them safely? Well...I actually feel that all present regimes are "fascist" to some extent...the question is to what extent? Governments are supposed to exist in order to SERVE the people, but I think you will find that they sometimes turn that equation around backwards, and assume that the people are there to serve them. Of course, it is in the interest of the people to have a coherently functioning society, and for that we DO need a governmental structure, and so on... There are no really simple answers to these matters. It's necessary for a good government to serve its people in order to maintain its legitimacy. Likewise, it's necessary for a good citizen to serve the greater community around him by obeying the laws. So...are the laws right, just, and proper? Every individual has to decide that for himself. If he decides that a law is NOT just or proper, then he has to decide whether it is worth opposing...either passively or actively. Civil disobedience can be a legitimate response to an unjust law...if you agree that it IS unjust. If you don't, then the person committing that civil disobedience will be seen as perhaps...a criminal...or someone who has been misled...but he will see himself as an idealist who is fighting for human rights. And so it goes. You also asked: "Do you find that your homes are being invaded on a regular basis by criminals with guns, and that you could defend yourself against this if you had a gun, or that it would make any difference if you didn't have a license to keep the gun? How about our friends in the UK? I believe you have stricter gun laws than we do. How's the state of your society?" Are homes in Canada being invaded by criminals with guns on a regular basis? No. Very rarely. I don't actually recall ever having met someone whose home was invaded by a criminal with a gun. I know that it occasionally happens, and when it does the press pays a great deal of attention to the matter...such that you might think it was happening "on a regular basis". I would actually rather defend myself with a baseball bat or a frying pan, since I would be more likely to injur and deter the criminal rather than kill him. I don't relish the thought of killing another human being. Also, he is much more likely to try to kill me if I am trying to kill him...because he is no doubt scared out of his wits to find someone pointing a gun at him, and he will most likely shoot at once, without considering the consequences. This is precisely why the police in England did NOT carry guns for most of the 20th century. They rightly reasoned that if they did not, then most of the criminals would not either...and it WORKED! (riminals who did resort to firearms suffered very severe penalties, and there were special detective units called out to deal with them....it rarely happened). I realize, however, that it's way too late for a solution of that kind (police without sidearms) to work anymore in the U.K. or the USA or Canada either, for that matter. Things have deteriorated badly in the last 50 years (roughly since the advent of television and the highly mobile, anonymous consumer society we have today, where people may not even know their neighbours across the hall!). I do think this. Material possessions are not worth killing another human being over. If you think they are, then you have to determine what a human life is really worth...as opposed to a stereo, a TV, a computer...or whatever. Yes, I know that the "criminal" is showing no regard for YOUR worth...but that's his problem, isn't it? So, are you going to solve his problem by imitating it? He didn't get that way because he was born evil, he probably got that way due to a huge number of factors that occurred over his whole lifetime, and you don't know what they were. I knew kids in school who were definitely headed for trouble in life. It wasn't usually hard to see why. They were usually living in highly disfunctional families, and had been brutalized in one way or another (emotionally, physically, whatever). They were taught that "life is a struggle for survival, and the tough guy wins, and winning is all that matters", and similar crap like that. And it is crap. They could just as well have been taught that we are all here to mutually assist one another (which we are), and that life is beautiful (which it is), and that when you help someone else you have just helped yourself. If someone invaded my house to steal things, you bet I would be mad, and you bet I would use all necessary force to stop him. It is very seldom necessary, however, to kill. It's easy, though. Call it the lazy man's way out of a bad situation. Any fool with a gun in his hands can easily kill someone. Why, it's almost like playing a video game...Bang! You're dead. Gotcha! Didn't! Did too! And so on... You asked what is the state of society in Canada? Generally very good, except that there are more homeless people on the streets of big cities now, due to the efforts of recent neo-Conservative politicians. There is what I would call a fairly minimal level of crime, although a fair number of break-ins (more than in the past), and very few violent crimes. There is a better social safety net here (that's socialism...) than in the USA, and a smaller population. Both those factors have helped reduce crime here. There's also a generally less paranoid attitude here, which I think may be the most important factor of all. Teach people to live in fear, and they WILL react violently. Every society tries to strike a balance between individual rights and freedoms (looking out for number 1), and collective responsibilities (looking out for your neighbours). Conservatives are in love with the first concept, and Socialists are in love with the second. They are both right. You've gotta combine both in a reasonably even mix to have a decent and humane society. We've done tolerably well at doing that in Canada, although better in the past than now. There are cracks showing in the social edifice, that's for sure. With every social service that is cut, the cracks grow wider. Guns won't help. Social justice will. By social justice, I mean...by ending poverty, ending homelessness, healing the sick, educating the uneducated, giving hope to those who presently have none. And by rating a human life as more important than a f*cking dollar...or a f*cking ten thousand dollars. (No offense intended...I am just indicating the emphasis behind the sentiment). - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: CarolC Date: 06 Jan 01 - 10:18 PM Oops, Spot the Dog/Iarf, I mistook you for someone who was fun to play with. My mistake. Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: DougR Date: 06 Jan 01 - 11:16 PM Geeze, Little Hawk, no offense, but if someone asks you the time of day, you tend to tell them how to make a clock. I enjoy your posts, but my interst starts waning about half way through for some reason. Probably my old attention span. No flame intended. DougR |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: kendall Date: 06 Jan 01 - 11:30 PM If I find some son of a bitch in my house at night, he wont get the chance to shoot me. Too many home invasions in the USA result in senseless murders by drugged out whackos. If I come home and catch him stealing my property..no I would never shoot a person just to hang onto any property. However, I would keep him there while the cops got to the scene. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Dave Wynn Date: 07 Jan 01 - 12:09 AM CarolC, Aw....I need pats an things....I am real nice..I don't pee on the carpet (ask Catspaw) and apart from a poor start in my Mudcat life I am considered acceptable. Please don't dump me (specially not for a ferret). I can roll over and play dead and offer my paw if you are feeling down. Maybe our genetics will forbid anything too permanent and I must apologise for moving off thread topic. I do however have a wet nose but if you join the Pat a Dog a Day Club you will soon get used to it. Post. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Little Hawk Date: 07 Jan 01 - 01:34 AM Sorry, Doug...I sometimes get carried away when it comes to social or spiritual issues...and then I tend to go on and on. It's cos I feel very strongly about those things. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Ebbie Date: 07 Jan 01 - 01:47 AM No offense, Doug Re, but, Little Hawk, he doesn't speak for us all. I enjoy your posts and often find food to munch on in them. If I were in a hurry, I would just skim over it until later. Ebbie |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: John P Date: 07 Jan 01 - 10:49 AM Little Hawk, Thanks for the great, though-provoking response. I like the balance you are advocating. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: InOBU Date: 07 Jan 01 - 11:05 AM Carol! The black keys! Wow! Have you tried my (inspired by Uncle Jaque) experiment of shooting your instrument? If you have any NYC cop friends they may be able to help, espciallty if you ask them to shoot the black keys! You can get them to perform the expeiment by shouting, "Look out! He's got a wallet!" Make sure there is a heavy object to hide behind as you do so because of ricochets... then let us know if it works better than a capo on you accordian for changing the key... Larry Maybe someone will try this on bodhran also... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: InOBU Date: 07 Jan 01 - 11:07 AM Oh, and one more thing... Uncle, mon chere, is your calvery riding snails? Agian, the Indians seem to have not only won, but are now peacably hunting buffalos and making capo jokes... Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 07 Jan 01 - 12:38 PM "If I find some son of a bitch in my house at night, he wont get the chance to shoot me."
Right kendall, I've sent Father Christmas a warning PM, and he won't be calling on you next year. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: kendall Date: 07 Jan 01 - 01:34 PM So, what would YOU do? passivly resist the bastard? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Little Hawk Date: 07 Jan 01 - 06:04 PM I'd attack him with the nearest handy object, if it came to that...and past experience has shown that I am quite fast when I'm truly upset. And I would be if my home were invaded. Rather than worry about this kind of thing, however, I prefer to concentrate on the constructive possibilities of life, like what kind of useful and creative thing I can do today, or how I can enjoy myself today. I mean, I could worry about an airplane falling on the building too, and build an armoured bunker to live in, but why bother? It's a waste of energy. Likewise, I don't feel the need to be armed to the teeth because somewhere in the world there are some burglars, and I don't feel the need to be fearful of life in general because sometimes things don't work out. Most of the people I've ever met have behaved pretty decently...except back in Junior High School...that was like a brief sojourn in hell...but it's over, thank God. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 07 Jan 01 - 08:04 PM Father Christmas?
But if it was a burglar downstairs, and not Father Christmas, I suppose I'd ring up the police on my phone, probably my mobile phone, and I'd push a wardrobe in front of my bedroom door with me inside, and him outside, and I'd shout out telling him I'd phoned the police and they'd be there any minute, and he'd better scarper.
And the chances are, he would.
If I found myself in hand to hand combat with some intruder who was threatening the life of a member of my family, I'd do whatever seemed sensible at the time, which might not in fact be sensible at all. But I think in a dark room at night you'd have a better chance of coming out alive if you were using a hurling stick or a golf club than a gun anyway. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Little Hawk Date: 07 Jan 01 - 08:25 PM Right. And you're more likely to kill yourself or a family member with the gun too...or the family dog...or whatever. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Greg F. Date: 07 Jan 01 - 08:37 PM Santa Claus wears a Red Suit, He's a communist. And a beard and long hair, Must be a pacifist. What's in that pipe that he's smoking? ..........................Arlo Guthrie Perhaps he's also taken up home invasion as a sideline? Santa, I mean... not Arlo. ;-) Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: kendall Date: 07 Jan 01 - 09:21 PM I dont own a hockey stick...too dangerous! Seriously, I live alone,so, anyone found in my house at night, will be found there in the morning, as the saying goes. I'm well trained in the use of firearms, and in this country, the bad guys are better armed than the police. So, trying to scare one would be a joke. Maybe your burglars are more civilized than ours? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Margo Date: 07 Jan 01 - 10:03 PM Shubb on both banjo and guitar. Because that's the kind my teacher suggested. It's different from state to state here in the USA as far as requirements for concealed weapons permits. My state has no requirement for getting the permit except that the Sheriff's department checks you out thoroughly. In my neighboring state, a class is required. I have taken several gun safety classes just because I wanted to, not because I had to. The first one I took was in San Francisco back in the dark ages. It was actually fun. It was not just gun safety, it was hunter safety. They showed a film where a hunter has the opportunity to shoot, and the action froze while the narrator asks, should he shoot or not? Then they continue the action, showing whether or not the hunter shoots and why he could or couldn't. I wish they'd get a clue here in the states and teach the basic principles of shooting in public schools, as well as what the law is. Educate, educate, educate. Margo |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Uncle Jaque Date: 08 Jan 01 - 12:40 AM For someone who's supposedly getting "ignored", about 200 (?) hits between 2 threads on a topic i started all in good fun isn't too bad, eh? Shazaam! Capos are great on guitars, but how many of us have used 'em on a 5-string banjo? You've got to trig that little 5th string down with something to keep in in tune with the other 4, cause if you just keep crankin' it up, it'll surely snap on ye! I used to catch it under an HO model railroad spike driven into the fingerboard about 3 frets below the 5th -string peg, and whittled notches on both ends of a 2" X 3/8" dowel which I glommed over the strings with rubber bands passed around the neck to capo the main 4. In order to get a Concealed Permit in Maine, you have to provide evidence of training, as an NRA firearms safety course - which is, IMO, fitting and proper. My certificate of 1st-Place service-revolver award from the NH State Police Academy did the trick just fine. I would reccomend the book "In The Gravest Extreme" by Massadd AYOOB as a must-read primer for anyone even considering the use of firearms for home and/or self defence. I got in trouble with some of my NRA cohorts a while back by agreeing with Gov. KING that individuals under a protective restraining order from the Court generally be excluded from CW (Concealed Weapons) permits. If some yahoo has been abusing or stalking his "ex", he (in 99.9% of the cases it's a "he") has NO business packing, IMHO. I went beyond that to suggest that similar limits / sanctions to intoxiction be placed on the bearing of arms as is currently applied to operating motor vehicles. I've seen too many then-fellow Cops too wasted to walk in a bar, knowing that they were packing hot (loaded) iron; sometimes more than one. Badge or no badge, that practice never struck me as being at all intelligent, and I don't think that the 2nd Ammendment was ever intended to apply to drunks and lunatics! "Well Regulated" sort of implies "sane and sober" to me. I seem to be able to alienate folks on BOTH sides of an issue. It's a gift. MAV and I are seperate entities, although we share a bench at the Lantern Works and certain political persuasions. He likes Jazz and Swing, but has not nearly the affection for "Folk" Music as I do. But he's very tolerant and a good sport about my Irish jigs, reels and Shanteys on the pennywhistle out in the parking lot during breaks. I've broached the subject of "Blues Whistle", and he just smiles and shakes his head...
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Gervase Date: 08 Jan 01 - 06:28 AM In the UK, strangely, you DO have less chance of being burgled if you keep a gun - but only because the police (quite rightly) insist on stringent security checks of your house before you can get a firearms licence or shotgun certificate. However, at the risk of sounding like a reactionary redneck, I think the British firearms laws have now gone too far, prompted by reactionary rabble-rousing in the tabloids and shroud-waving by special-interest groups. As a Labour Party member, I was personally affronted at the fawning over the Snowdrop campaigners at the party conference a while back. Yes, to lose someone to a lunatic is appalling, and there should be stringent checks, both medical and social, before anyone can be permitted to own a lethal weapon, but to attempt moral blackmail on such a huge scale and to wipe out an entire sport in the UK is surely not on. The trouble is, in the UK the whole fieldsports issue (which incorporates shooting) has become highly politicised and is very much a hot potato, polarised into bunny-huggers versus bloodthirsty toffs, neither of which is a fair description. (Personally, I respect people views on animal rights, but only if they themselves are completely vegan and will not wear leather, wool or silk. And there ain't an awful lot of those around.) It is something which tends to engage people passionately, however. I've had to deal with sabateurs and "antis" when out fowling, and have been called a murder, had my car vandalised and been spat upon by people with whom I could probably quite happily spend an evening at a singaround or session. Interestingly, in the UK I have known there to be boos, hisses and murmurs of disapproval at the singing of hunting songs (and there are some darned good ones), yet no-one demurs at songs about whaling, murder, adultery, drunkenness or any number of frowned-upon practices. On the subject of what one would do when confronted by an intruder, if anyone tried to break into my place I'd never get the gunsafe open in time, so it would have to be the cavalry sabre. ;^) However, the only time it's come near to happening a full-blooded bellow made the little bugger shit himself and turn tail. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: John P Date: 08 Jan 01 - 10:03 AM Uncle Jaque, the pennywhistle is a great blues instrument. Lots of potential for sliding around the notes and into to flatted 5th and all that, and the basic blues scales fall fairly naturally under the fingers. I'm a terrible whistle player myself, but my wife and another good friend have both done some great blues playing. John |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: mousethief Date: 08 Jan 01 - 12:10 PM Kendall, do you know how many people have killed their college students returning for a surprise visit by your "shoot first" policy? I pray for your kids. Juju Cobra: You should be thanking MAV, who has not had anything substantial to say WHATEVER in this thread, but almost instantly resorted to personal attacks. Hence my quip about not wanting to "stir" his brain any further, i.e. not caring to know what else is lurking there. You have also shown yourself not immune to attacking, so your self-righteousness about my attacking is severely misplaced. Another case of the pot calling the kettle black. Like MAV, you have not added anything of substance to this thread. Why not get off your shrill hobbyhorse, and say something we can either agree or disagree with? Defend some conservative position with your best rhetoric, and let us bandy it back and forth a little! Or are you only able to take pot-shots? Uncle Jacque: Next time you invite somebody to come over and argue politics, pick someone who is willing to come over and argue politics. MAV has proved singularly unable to do so, alas. I was hoping for a good fat-chew with a thinking conservative. I begin to think they're an all-too-rare breed. LH: You are wordy but at least you make sense. Carol: Hope your accordian gives good backrubs. Spot: You're funny. I like that in a dog. Everyone: Let's all play nice! Alex |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Little Hawk Date: 08 Jan 01 - 12:49 PM Hey, Alex...yeah, I'm wordy all right...you should hear how long some of my songs are! I'm infamous for that. Learned it from Dylan... Everybody: Regarding NRA people, anti-gun people, and so on...I find there's some extreme silliness at both ends of that issue, which, I guess, is to be expected. The 2nd Amendment was written in a time when most folks were country folks, and the frontier was subject to frequent raids by Indians (or Natives, if you prefer) who were darned ticked off at the White community for a variety of understandable reasons. It was absolutely vital for everyone to have access to a gun in those days, both for self-defence and hunting, and for outright war. It's a very different situation now. In this sense, the NRA are acting like it's still 1779 or something, which it is not. And...they are just a tad paranoid about normal daily life, at least by my standards. On the other hand, the people who turn purple with indignation at the very mention of a gun, or at the sight of a toy gun in the hands of a 7 year-old kid...those people are slightly nuts, in my opinion, and they are a royal pain to those around them. They remind me of the people who won't allow "Catcher In The Rye" or "Huckleberry Finn" in their school library. I came across a copy of "Tom Sawyer" in the local book store the other day. It was a brand new edition, and guess what? They have edited out the chapter where Tom gets into a fight with the new kid in town. It's completely gone. Some politically correct lunatic decided that it was too violent, I suppose, and that it might corrupt some young reader. Despite these inane efforts to force everyone to deny certain obvious aspects of reality and pretend they don't exist, kids continue to get into fights at school and elsewhere, and I imagine they always will, with or without Tom Sawyer, for heaven's sake! In the field of plastic models, there have been repeated efforts by certain factions to regulate what insignia can or cannot be shown on the decal sheets of certain airplanes. In the former Soviet Union, no airplane kits of ANY German planes were allowed to be sold, period. Now that has changed in Russia. Now is this kind of thing smart? Does it teach people anything about history? If you're going to make a model of something historical, then make it accurate, for God's sake! Otherwise, what's the point? To build a model of a German plane does NOT necessarily indicate that you support the ideals and aims of WWII Nazi Germany. To take the analogy just a little further...the Spanish Inquisition and the Roman Catholic Church were responsible for the most hideous torture and execution of millions of wholly innocent people over a very lengthy historical period. Should we, on that basis, ban all visual representations of anything from that Church? No we shouldn't. Nor should we ban pictures of vikings and viking ships because they pillaged and raped all over Europe. Nor should we ban flying the US flag because soldiers under that flag massacred Native Americans, and Vietnamese at My Lai. You don't learn about injustice by denying all visual evidence that it ever existed. Oops! Running off again at the mouth, aren't I? Sheesh. Okay, I'll stop now. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 08 Jan 01 - 12:59 PM Capos and banjos: I've never understood why most five-string banjos go in for that tuning-peg on the side for the fifth string, instead of having the tuning peg dowbn a t teh bottom, with a little tunnel for the fifth string, luike "zither banjos" wich were quite common in England at one time. That reduced one capo problem.
But if I played the 5-string banjo seriusly, I think I'd try getting one of those built-in fifth string capos, and use it with a short Kyser to hold the other four strings.
Uncle J: As I said earlier in the thread or its daddy, I'm sure that most gun-owners in the States are reasonable people who can see the value of sensible limitations and requirments. What you said there fits into that. In fact they are such sensible requirements tht I would think only an extremist and fanatic could disagree with them.
But then you say "I got in trouble with some of my NRA cohorts" for advocating them - and the question is, why do you see people who think like that as allies, rather than enemies? Surely dangerous extremists who oppose ideas like that threaten to undermine support for the kind of gun policies you would favour? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: CarolC Date: 08 Jan 01 - 03:56 PM "For someone who's supposedly getting "ignored", about 200 (?) hits between 2 threads on a topic i started all in good fun isn't too bad, eh? Shazaam!" --Uncle Jaque Uncle Jaque, it may have felt like fun to you, but if you take a good look at the 200 or so hits to these threads, I'm hoping you are sensitive enough to see that many of the other people involved were not having fun. In fact, I would suggest that there has been a certain amount of hurt generated by your "fun". Trolling for flames is really only fun for the one doing the trolling, and sometimes for the flamers. Sensitive and thoughtful people actually have feelings invested in these discussions. Once again, I'm asking you to behave responsibly here in the Mudcat, for the sake of all of us. Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: CarolC Date: 08 Jan 01 - 04:02 PM >"Carol: Hope your accordian gives good backrubs." --Mousethief *sigh* Alas, no. No backrubs for me. (Ah, well...) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: kendall Date: 08 Jan 01 - 04:41 PM I'm well aware of all those accidental shootings. However, I live alone and no one has permission to enter unannounced. If he is in my house without my permission, he is in grave danger. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Richard Bridge Date: 10 Jan 01 - 06:45 PM I am really becoming very depressed about the fact that the entire left-right divide is being ignored over the single issue of gun control. How about the fact(s) (if they be fact(s)) that the UK has just woken up to the fact that you can't trust capitalists to run a safe railway (=railroad in the USA) and the governor of California has just woken up to the fact that you can't trust capitalists to deliver electricity to the state, and even Bush may have spotted that if you scrutinise a really reactionary bathmat you will find they think it's OK to import thier personal slaves. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: kendall Date: 10 Jan 01 - 07:59 PM Well said sir |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Jan 01 - 02:07 PM Matter of fact, you can't trust capitalists to do much of anything...except make money! If life was primarily about money, that would be great, but it's not. We all like to have money to spend (I know I do), but must everything else be sacrificed in its pursuit? Capitalism actually works very well as long as it's small-scale and locally based. Remember when there were hundreds of small car companies in the USA? Now there are just 3 huge ones that gobbled up all the little guys...and I believe there's one rather small one, I forget their name at the moment. It's when capitalism becomes huge, monopolistic, and multinational that it begins to take on really evil overtones, and that's what has happened. When businesses are no longer locally based, then they can no longer be held responsible for their bad behaviour. When they can move a whole industry to some wretched 3rd World country, and employ the people there as de facto slaves, then they are just robber barons...above conscience, above consequences, and above the law. Sounds more like communism to me, in fact, only it's not communism on behalf of the state...it's way bigger than that...it's communism on behalf of the dollar, which knows no borders. Its propaganda is heard every day in the ceaseless ads on your radio and your TV. It is the biggest Evil Empire of them all...so far. - LH |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Richard Bridge Date: 11 Jan 01 - 02:45 PM The problem with the love of small capitalism is that "the greater capital drives out the smaller" - then you get the abuses that even a republican like Roosevelt felt obliged to reform. A little bit capitalist is no safer than a little bit pregnant. The choice as I see it is between regulated capitalism where the price of free enterprise is eternal vigilance to prevent abuse (that is to say to add responsibility to profitability), or a dirigiste economy where the price of control is eternal vigilance to add profitability to responsibility. In both you need eternal vigilance to restrain corruption. Rather like the vegetarian I would prefer to see no harm done than grow fat (metaphorically). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 11 Jan 01 - 03:43 PM The crucial thing is way up there and out of the control of ordinary people. Whether it is a centralised state that had got out of control, or huge capitalist enterprises is a secondary matter.
THe rationale for state control is that the state machinery is under the control of ordinary peiople through the democratic process. The rationale for capitalism is that the market puts ordinary consumers in control.
But neither mechanism seems to work very satisfactorily. When we pull on the ropes we find they are made of sand. I think that both paradigms have very consistently souight to minimise and exclude all mechanisms by which ordinary people can exercise control directly and effectively. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: GUEST,MAV Date: 11 Jan 01 - 08:17 PM "I see that even after I capped the old thread, MAV insisted on posting not just once (which could have been a crossing-in-the-mail) but twice" What the hell are you talking about? "It well behooves a guest or a newcomer to try to follow the rules (and there are so few here at Mudcat!) of the place they are new to" Well Excuuuuuuuse me! I didn't realize there was restricted speech here. (What rules?) "Of course the Internet is not new and MAV unfortuantely seems to lack any sense of netiquette, so this may be an ongoing thing with him" Well since I can't find the original postings so I can't comment on my "netiquette" but if it has anything to do with political correctness, don't count on a change. "Rarely have I seen so much self-righteousness in one place" What makes you say I'm "self-righteous"? I do know the difference between right and wrong. I don't remember any name calling, vulgarigy or flaming on my part. As for fascism, I am very familiar with the tactics used by the baddest left-wing bald headed hippie digital liberals you ever saw in your life. If they disagree with one's message, they begin to question the individual's mental state or intelligence and continue to beat on him until he relents or gives up. Sound familiar?????????????????????? I don't think I was anywhere near as brutal as you portray me and invite you to copy/paste any of my comments which you think unreasonable. I'll be glad to defend them. I fully believe in the Constitution and reject any "living breathing" crap that seems to be the "conventional wisdom". "Conventional wisdom" is frequently part and parcel of the "big lie" tactic, alive and well in both the media and educational system as well as those self-important elitists who as so much smarter than I.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: GUEST,MAV Date: 11 Jan 01 - 08:31 PM Now where was I, Oh yeah, "Uncle Jaques was behaving like a Troll, and MAV, a flamer" Pardon my begging, but I believe I have received a lot more grief than I've given here, please prove me wrong and I'll lighten up. "Uncle Jaques may have decided to reconsider this tactic. I hope he has. I don't see MAV on this continuation thread, so maybe s/he has had a similar change of heart" Change from what? I couldn't find a place to post last time I looked, I do have other things to do. If my rant damaged your tender sensiblilties, I'm so sorry. Think how the millions of us have felt for the last 8 years. "MAV, if you would like to participate in this forum as a human being, rather than as a bully, you might make some very good friends. Something to consider" One again, show me where I have been anywhere near as harsh as your own fine upstanding members.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Midchuck Date: 11 Jan 01 - 08:32 PM McGrath, you said what I think. And I thought you were on the other side. Maybe if you go far enough to the right or far enough to the left, you meet on the far side of the circle. Peter. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: GUEST,MAV Date: 11 Jan 01 - 08:37 PM "Fair chance that MAV and UNK are the same person" Au contraire mon frere. Jaque is a good foot taller and has greyed somewhat, but I'm much better looking. We do agree on most topics and we do work together. Not the same guy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 11 Jan 01 - 08:46 PM "I see that even after I capped the old thread, MAV insisted on posting not just once (which could have been a crossing-in-the-mail) but twice"
"What the hell are you talking about? "
Well, MAV old lad, it's like this. When a thread goes on and on it gets inconveniently long, and that means that it takes ages to open it up - and some people can't open it up, because their comouters can't manage it.
So what happens is that, when a thread is getting a bit long in the tooth, some helpful soul, in this case mousethief, starts a new thread with the same name, but Part 2.
And at the same time they stick a post in the old thread, saying what they have done, with a blue clicky underlined link to the new thread. And in the new thread they stick a blue clicky to the old thread.
The idea being to ensure that everyone can transfer their attention to the new thread, and the discussion can continue.
But what you did was to continue posting your messages to the old thread, "not just once (which could have been a crossing-in-the-mail) but twice" - and mousethief's comment which you quoted was suggesting this indicated an element of discourtesy or something. I imagine it wasn't that, you just hadn't picked up on how that kind of thing was meant to work. And your reaction in that last post confirms my assumption.
Too late at night where I am to comment on the rest - except your statement: "I don't remember any name calling, vulgarity or flaming on my part. "
How about, when you wrote "When confronted with an inability to respond coherently, the fascist's best defense is demonization." And that was directed at John P for declining to comment on some things you had said because he felt he disagreed too much with them. (The "find" facility on your browser is a good way you can check-up on past posts). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: kendall Date: 11 Jan 01 - 09:07 PM Can you spell "Polorize"? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Little Hawk Date: 11 Jan 01 - 09:24 PM Hmmm...here a fascist, there a fascist, everywhere a flippin' fascist...! Funny how everyone thinks it's the OTHER guy who's the fascist. Or maybe it's not so funny. I think there is a little fascist in all of us. Yes I do. Here's my definition of "fascist": The fascist is one who is absolutely CERTAIN that he is right and those who see it any other way are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. He is also certain that his way is the BEST way, if not the ONLY way worth considering. Now there are no doubt moments when all of us think that way, aren't there? Unbalanced personalities like Archie Bunker do it almost constantly, thus making themselves a nuisance to others. By this definition pretty well all religious zealots, political zealots, or zealots of any stripe whatever are in danger of becoming fascists as an occupational hazard...and they more than frequently do. A seriously dangerous fascist, however, is one who is willing to use unscrupulous or violent methods to suppress, convert, or destroy those who don't agree with him on the issues which he considers paramount. He becomes REALLY dangerous when he has the force of a government behind him or under his personal control. He will then use methods such as slander, false show trials (as in the McCarthy era or in various communist systems, etc.), character assassination, actual physical assassination, imprisonment, pogroms, ethnic "cleansing" (what a godawful term that is...), invasion, torture, brainwashing, concentration camps and even mass execution...all in his efforts to make a "better" world, as he envisions it. No fascist thinks of himself as evil, he thinks of himself as fighting for truth, justice, and a better way...HIS way. He figures it's the other guys who are evil, and he behaves accordingly, with righteous fervor. So...let's all take a deep breath...and try taking on the little fascist that rails inside our own breast...and speaks out of our own mouth when we get overly excited over issues...in the heat of the moment. We all want a better world, don't we? See if you can beat the "little man within" first. - LH p.s. I know this stuff is obvious, but that doesn't mean it ain't worth sayin'...a little good will goes a long way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Troll Date: 11 Jan 01 - 10:03 PM Little Hawk, you're just a Goody Two-Shoes. Flames! Blood, Guts And Gore( Gore? Al Gore? Nah!) that's the thing! All this namby-pamby "lets get along" stuff. Sheesh!!! Next thing you know, you and I will be swaping recipes! Back to the barricades, you bleeding heart socialist! Rip up those cobblestones and turn over those carts. etc etc bla bla bla bla. NOW we're having fun! troll *sorry. they changed my medication again* BG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: GUEST,MAV Date: 11 Jan 01 - 10:18 PM McGrath, Thanks so much for the detailed explaination. I read it right after I discovered how this thread works, unfortunately. "When confronted with an inability to respond coherently, the fascist's best defense is demonization." This is true and if this is the only example of "name calling" which spawned this series of ad hominem attacks, I rest my case. "And that was directed at John P for declining to comment on some things you had said because he felt he disagreed too much with them" Actually his comment felt pretty condecending, that's not quite what he said. John P turned out to be more civil than I was expecting. I said at the outset that I did not appreciate personal attacks and you folks didn't let me down. Name calling by others did occur, however. I guess you can see for yourselves what was said and who said it. Fascism and racism does indeed eminate from the left and I certainly resent being labeled by these individuals as something I am not. In reference to the "right wing nut" post by Little Hawk; If my comments are not accurate and there are those out there who may agree with his "nut" positions, accusing me of "name calling"..........sorry. This is the same thing that has been happening to Conservatives for years by the pandering extreme left in Congress and by the print and broadcast media, "starve children, kill more people, racist etc." Hopefully this little demonstration (limited due to my diminished IQ, mental instability and way-out-there-ness) can cause some of you smarter than me socialist elitists and kind, caring, tolerant, loving and compassionate liberals (you know who you are), to think about something besides how superior you are to the average working class rural American. By the way I don't hunt and have never contemplated shooting anything but tin cans. I do have the right to defend myself and given that we have no police here, I like to be prepared.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: catspaw49 Date: 11 Jan 01 - 10:25 PM If my comments are not accurate and there are those out there who may agree with his "nut" positions, accusing me of "name calling"..........sorry. Apology accepted, much obliged. Spaw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: GUEST,MAV Date: 11 Jan 01 - 11:21 PM Dear Little Hawk; 100% agreement with your commentary on fascism. That's what it is. I lost family to Hitler, damned if I'll stand silently by.
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: CarolC Date: 12 Jan 01 - 02:39 AM GUEST MAV, I actually don't have the energy or the inclination to argue with you. It's just not my idea of fun, and I have other things to do also. I will make one point. If you find yourself to be the target of flames, you need to consider the possibility that your way of expressing your thoughts, rather than the thoughts, themselves, are making you a good target for flames. If you get flamed repeatedly, it's possible that you are using a tone that comes across as inflamatory. That's just the way things seem to work, regardless of the nature of the issues that are being discussed. It happens in discussions that don't even have anything to do with politics. It happens between people who do not live in the U.S., and do not fit into our categories of "conservative" and "liberal". If you spend some time researching old threads in the Mudcat archives, you can see this for yourself. An easy way to do this would be to click on someone's name and view their posting history. Another good way would be to type the words "folk music" and "singer songwriter" into the "Digitrad and Lyrics" search box that is just above and to the left of the thread titles in the forum home page, and click on "search" (I think that's what it says). When I said "behave like a human being rather than a bully", I was talking about being here for some reason other than just to argue. I can't speak for Uncle Jacques, but I suspect he sees the Mudcat as a potential source of friends and people to play music with. For that reason, I think it might matter to him how he is regarded in this community, as opposed to someone who doesn't seem to care about anything except arguing about a single issue, and is only here for that purpose. Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: CarolC Date: 12 Jan 01 - 04:40 AM GUEST MAV, I need to make a correction to my previous post. Don't type your search query into the "Digitrad and Lyrics" box. Type it into the "Digitrad and Forum Search" box, and then click on "Go". I want to make one other observation. There are sometimes other reasons for flaming besides the one I mentioned in my previous post. For instance, if you are percieved to be a racist of any kind, even if your tone doesn't seem to be inflamatory, there is a good chance that you will be the recipient of flames. I'm not saying that this necessarily applies to you, but it is something that sometimes happens to people. Carol |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: InOBU Date: 12 Jan 01 - 07:35 AM Dear MAV EXTREME LEFT IN CONGRESS??????? While generally understanding your point, we have not had a leftist in Congress since the Palmer raids in 1919, when, after over 300 comunists, socialists and anarchists were elected to office in the US, (from mayors to congressmen)tens of thousands of American leftists were put in concentration camps and jails. Most Americans don't know about the Plamer raids, which mark the begin of the end of political freedom in this nation. A good book with an acurate picture of this time, is Roughneck, about Big Bill Heywood. The period of overert oppression of leftist thought in the US only ended, after the McCarthy era, when newspapers declined in this nation and TV completely red lined leftist thought - when was the last time you heard Nom Chompsky comment on politics on air? When was the last time the Socialist canadate was included in debates... my dear dear MAV I have to chuckle when I hear peole speak of leftists in government in the USA. Larry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Greg F. Date: 12 Jan 01 - 07:48 AM C'mon gang- don't encourage this MAV character. Life's too short... Best, Greg |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Little Hawk Date: 12 Jan 01 - 04:28 PM INOBU - Good point. I'm a Canadian, and in Canada we actually have a socialist party...it's called the New Democratic Party, and it has traditionally gotten anywhere from 10 to 22% of the national vote. The NDP has formed provincial governments on several occasions, and nothing terribly drastic occurred. Communists did not descend from the skies on those provinces, and freedom did not cease to exist. In fact, sometimes things got better, specially for the poor and those in need of medical attention. I lived in New York State for 10 years, and never did I see even a trace of anything that could be called "leftist" or "socialist" in the political arena there. All I saw was the eternal boondoggle and nonsense between the Democrats and the Republicans that passes for a political debate in the USA. The Democrats and Republicans are both fond of accusing the other of various heinous acts, sometimes with justice, but neither one of them could be accused of being "leftist" by general world standards. They are both right of center by those standards. Many Americans, however, (if not most of them) don't seem to realize that...so the Republicans, who are usually a tad more reactionary than the Democrats, just blithely assume that the Democrats are leftists! Hah! They may be corrupt and power-hungry (the Democratic Party machine itself, I mean...not you individual Democrats out there!), but they are NOT leftists. Finding a genuine leftist alternative in the USA is like looking for ice in the Sahara or fleas on a week-old dead camel...hopeless. Of course, it's all a matter of what you're used to isn't it? When an eskimo thinks it's warm outside, you might still think it's cold... MAV - I'm glad we agree on the definition of "fascist". As for the "right wing nut" quote...wasn't that somebody else? I don't think that one was my post. Troll - I appreciate your humour! Maybe you're right...maybe we should get back to the fun of mud-slinging, name-calling, and bowdlerization! You sir, are a bootlicking scoundrel, a knave of the first order. I would not toss you a twinky if you were adrift without a life jacket in the North Sea. Rot and perish, you detestable swine!!! :-D - LH Now, do we really want to launch round 3 of this thread? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: GUEST,MAV Date: 12 Jan 01 - 08:10 PM "Dear MAV EXTREME LEFT IN CONGRESS??????? While generally understanding your point, we have not had a leftist in Congress since the Palmer raids in 1919, when, after over 300 comunists, socialists and anarchists were elected to office in the US, (from mayors to congressmen)" I disagree, it sounds like our current congress including some Republicans. Hillary and Maxine Waters rise to the top. "When was the last time the Socialist canadate was included in debates..." Did you mean algor or Bill Bradley, they tried to out "socialist" each other. "my dear dear MAV I have to chuckle when I hear peole speak of leftists in government in the USA" You can chuckle if you want, but most of what is in place at the federal level including the depts. of education and labor are illegal. Look for their authorization in the Constitution or any ratified amendments to allow them, you will see what I'm talking about. Most federal spending is UNCONSTITUTIONAL, look it up for yourselves. The bulk of federal spending is also simply a redistribution of the wealth called "entitlements"(socialism). |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Conservative Cavalry, Continued From: Greg F. Date: 12 Jan 01 - 08:33 PM Thread continued HERE |