On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 1:57 PM, Sam wrote: > > On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 9:57 PM, denstar wrote: >> >>> Do you see your bias yet or do we need to keep drilling? >> >> The problem is that the scenarios are not "equal". Although *both* do >> Bad Things, that doesn't make them the "same". > > Keep drilling he says.
Unless Obama starts getting all loco, you'll never convince me he's worse or equal to Bush43. The religious stuff with Bush43 really bugged me. And it's going to be a bitch now to contain the Executive Branch. Bush43 set precedents. Obama has at least been focusing on ethics and health related stuff. Social programs, I guess. Obama seems inclusive, Bush43 seemed exclusive. >> Look dude, we can *easily* /fake/ DNA now. Manufacture it to appear >> to be from whatever person we want. You knew that, right? There's a >> test to see if DNA has been manufactured, but it's not used by any law >> enforcement agencies as yet. > > Are you accusing law enforcement or just saying it's easy to frame someone? I'm saying it's easy to frame someone. Coupled with the push for draconian ideals such as "guilty before innocent", that's a pretty Bad Thing. >> You seem to be saying that we should just (indeed, can *only*) "trust" >> the watchers. I disagree. >> >> If anything, we need *more* checks on that power, not /less/. > > I totally agree. I thought you're point was we can't trust anybody so > do away with. That *is* my point. Safest is to not have the temptation, right? But barring that, we can't "trust" people to do stuff right, we have to build the system so their only option is to do stuff right. Transparency and whatnot. None of this "we gave your phone records to some random person". And those court cases from 2005 haven't been settled yet-- here's to hoping that we do classify what went down as illegal. It was plain criminal, and getting that power back into the hands of the people is proving to be quite a fight (which I predicted it would be, because I'm like; super-smart). >> I like hash that agrees with me. And hash that doesn't. Ah hell- I >> just like hash, period. Hash-marks, hash-ish, hash-browns... > > Hash tables? Slap 'em on a butter knife! >> Seriously tho; saying that McCarthy was actually an OK dude, unfairly >> slandered by a rival politician*... seems like a bit of a stretch. > > More like he was an OK dude UNTIL he was slandered by the news and > went off the deep end. In the end he was very flawed. Maybe what drove him mad was the popularity, period. He had a meteoric rise there, neh? That seems to "do stuff" to most folk. While it's possible that his initial claims were correct, and the government really was infested with spies, the result was Bad with a capital "B". You don't deal with that kind of stuff by spreading fear and panic and whatnot. Unless your true motive is of a more personal nature, I reckon. >> Saying Bush43 was no worse than the rest is a similar stretch, IMHO. > > You probably think Carter was a great President. We have different opinions. Maybe him and Bush43 suffered the same problem? Surrounded by the wrong people? I hear they were both well meaning. I think Bush43 was less well meaning than Carter tho, with like, a bunch of conflict of interest type stuph. >> Who really raped us? Those at the top, of course! Been that way for >> ever and ever. That's not a party deal. > > No, it's really bad now. Much worse than it's ever been. It's not worse now because the democrats are in the majority though. "The Party" isn't the root problem, in my mind. Maybe it's the love of money that's the problem, sorta. It's amazing how willing people are to totally screw thousands of other people for a grip of cash. Do you think Obama is going to get a grip of cash out of this stuff? His buddy trial lawyers and whatnot? What is the sinister goal that makes this stuff Evil vs. just misguided? >> What do you think about the "Citizens United v. Federal Election >> Commission" SC ruling? > > I don't think I heard about it. That's the deal about corps contributing to political stuff. The SC ruled that denying Big Money's freedom of speech was unconstitutional. Because corps are people too! They can't vote or be citizens, but hey, what /really/ defines a person anyway? I like how freedom of speech was used for this tho: http://epic.org/privacy/terrorism/fisa/acluvnsaop081706.pdf >> So you think that it's Obama's fault, and the fault of this health >> care legislation? > > Yes. If so, it's because we didn't nip Bush43 in the bud! I'm telling you, that dude set precedent, and it's a real bitch putting the stuff back in Pandora's box. If the Tea Party-ers were ruled by principle, they would have been up in arms when Bush43 started rocking the "hey, let's put it on credit!" meme. Back then tho a *lot* of them were like "yay Bush!". >> Did Bush43 leave Obama with a surplus he mishandled or some such? > > He left a $750 billion package to save the banks. Money was wasted and > spend again after it was paid back. Then more money was taken, the > stimulus, and wasted. Now we borrowed $10 trillion more for a health > plan most don't like. Now he want's more money for the banks. > He did it wrong and that's forgivable if he learned from his first > mistake. He didn't and doesn't seem to want to learn. The future looks grim. I remember when 4 trillion was grim, and a number we had no hope of lessening. You are a Regan fan tho, aren't you? I bet you think he fixed stuff while he was in office, and it just took a while for people to see he was right. >> I bet that's what happened! The lefty media just spun this whole story >> about massive debt prior to Obama taking office out of nothing, and >> now that's what people think happened. In reality things were "fine, >> just fine" before Obama took office (then), but since he has been at >> the helm (now)-- man the country is in the crapper! > > We had a banking crisis at the end of Bush's term. Test of leadership > shall we say. How did that test play out? Frankly I'm sad that "we the people" haven't held more folks feet to the fire. But come on, look at the Enron scandal. One or two people would have seen jail time out of like thousands of folks neck deep in the scam. We the people don't really care that much, it seems. >> Who's fault is it, that we're more than ankle-deep in debt? A >> specific individual? Congress? Us? > > Obama, Pelosi, Reid. They're just continuing the trend, as you noted. The *real* blame is of course on the Republicans, who's very platform rests on things like "fiscal responsibility", and yet who did *nothing* to curtail the rampant spending when it was totally within their power to do so. >> Eh. We'll be back. It's what we do. > > That's not the plan. We don't like being the superpower, so they think. We can't help it. It's mixed into how we were formed, and now we've infected the rest of the world with that goodness. Perhaps because we let the rest of the world infect us. We've pulled off ill shit before, this ain't nuth'n. Plus, do you have any idea how much just 1 stealth bomber costs? ;) >> Maybe that Oil money from the war will start to come in soon. > > That's be nice but it won't be enough anymore. You're right. Necessity is the mother of invention. So is war. We got both ends covered, dude. >> Was I "here"? I don't remember it. Unless it was some discussion >> about the PBS special on Clinton, perhaps? > > You were using your other name back then. It's possible, but I don't think I was signed up that far back. Most my nyms are dennish. =] >> That Clinton guy knew how to get stuff done, scams or no. > > Did he? I though he just let the GOP do whatever they wanted. He was that good! >> Stuff was proven, but I don't think proven bogus. > > It was all proven bogus. It would be quite a coincidence if *all* the evidence that has been coming out is proven false. >> What's TPM? M == Media? > > Talking Points Memo, like you didn't know :) I know what a TPS report is. Vaguely. :) And that illegal wiretapping deal was called TSP... It's all starting to make sense now. "Candy-bars!" >> Reform is reform. It's an ongoing process. This was vetted a lot >> better than the war was, and people weren't rebounding from a terror >> attack. > > The war was bi-partisan, this wasn't. I'm not sure people will bounce > back from an overburdened health care system. As many people have pointed out, it wasn't for lack of trying. To be successful it really does take teamwork. And we've got, what, calls for a revolution? When I was banging that drum, people with my perspective were labeled "unpatriotic". And that was with riots and free speech zones and a president who said he could do what he pleased because his lawyers said he could. Are the Tea Party people called "unpatriotic"? Maybe America really is about money (taxes) and not about freedom (religious or otherwise). That would be not so cool and unique and whatnot tho. *sniff* >> Bush43, as an individual, had a real opportunity to do something >> amazing there. What a waste of a united front. > > That's weird, everyone was happy when he said he'd do something but > half got mad when he did. You're saying the same thing about Obama. At least what Obama is trying to do makes a certain kind of sense. And not that kind of sense where you're like, "well, they do have a lot of money invested in us and vice versa, and they are political allies... it would be bad if we bitch-slapped them even though they had a pretty obvious hand in this attack which claimed 3000 or so American lives, on American soil". I mean they both make sense, ya know? But one kind of, well, objectively sucks. >> This is America! The only people who can't find work are those who >> are too lazy, right? > > That was 2 years ago when unemployment was at 5%. Then you could get a > job if you tried hard enough and maybe sacrificed a little salary. > Now, you're shit out of luck. Bullshit. You *make* your own luck. Use the fucking Force, bro. >> We're damn lucky we're not worse off, IMO. Cut taxes and increase >> spending? Yesh, sounds like a good idea to me! And it works, see! >> Or it would have, had we given it more of a chance. > > Are you trying to imply tax cuts caused the banking crisis? They portray a pretty messed up mindset. Like I'm one to talk, I know, but still. All these threads weave together. From a certain distance, it might seem like there are distinct lines and patterns, but it's still all tied together. Sorta. >> Because people at the top generally don't want to be at the top all >> alone. They want to bring the masses up with 'em. That's why Bush43 >> was such a good thing for this country. > > Now you're saying the rich got richer and the poor got poorer under Bush. > That's not really the case. Less poor and more rich would be more accurate. I'm sure there are statistics for this stuff. Maybe the ones I thought I saw were mere spin! Who trusts statistics, anyways? The devil, and all that... > How about today? > More poor people, especially minorities. More rich people. The highest > pay now is government workers. Imagine a day when the more government > worker earn over $100k than non-government workers. LOL! You don't work for the government, do you? >> I thought about working for Google when they "looked me up", so to >> speak. Even be they scary. If there was a 'burque branch, I'd have >> gone for it, probably... I need more loot, like many others. > > A lot of hours but free food, if you work a lot of hours :) Heh! Free food is how I got started down my career path. >> Heh. Work. ... Do you think that the New Deal was a scam too, Sam? >> Some history books say it was Good, but you know how history books >> are. It's one way of employing people tho, that's for sure! (history >> book writing, that is) > > I think there are good and bad parts. I'm cool with that. Did the good outweigh the bad though? 50/50, 70/30? >> Government? Sorta. Back when I was on "soft" money (which I was for >> almost a decade IIRC, and never assured for more than a year), >> totally. I work for the university, but my pay comes from Continuing >> Education, which is self-sustaining. > > Ah, so you're a lifer. You're safe. Why would you care about the > unemployment rate. Actually the more unemployed the more education you > can sell. Actually, that should have conveyed that if we do poorly, we go out of business. And the government money was in grants, and was never assured for more than a year. The online stuff and community college is doing better than the universities these days... We'll see if it's been about a piece of paper or not pretty soon! So to sum it up, the only job security I've had is that I know how to do stuff. And gosh darn it, people like me. Retirement isn't something to sneeze at tho, everybody tells me. So maybe I should keep working for The Man... what do you think, Sam? >> I do love our country tho, and don't think it's in the shitter any >> more than it usually is. I'm certainly not in the mood for revolution >> because of this health care bill, or our deficit. Other stuff, sure! >> (I'm always up for a good revolution)... but not this. > > We're not there yet. It's more like a warning, if things keep heading > down this unsustainable path then in a few We'll do what it takes, we always do. Sometimes we require a while to get up off our duffs, but get up off our duffs we do. I'm such a flip-flopper. "The country's in the crapper!" ... "This too shall pass" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJKythlXAIY) ... You know, this is unrelated, but when someone said the bit about how direct democracy can be a bad thing, it made me think of this HST deal I saw on twitter. A tax change in BC, I take it, pretty unpopular it seems. I think the health stuff was pretty popular, or else nothing at all at all would have happened, but this is my question: Are there times when the government should *not* do what the majority of it's citizens desire? Man, thinking is a trip sometimes. :DeN* -- In law a man is guilty when he violates the rights of others. In ethics he is guilty if ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:319261 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
