Getting scarier and scarier... TONYT- for you. Signy by Niki2

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Kwicko, I think you said better than I.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 11:28 AM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

No.

I do not see myself as having been spawned from the earth, complete and whole.

Nor do I agree that everyone exists in their own self-made world.

However, do I believe that a person, actual and whole, on their own, can do well without the influence of others? Yes.

Roads? You mean the over-priced lanes that are now being given over to private companies? For tolls?

Schools? LOL Lets not even go there.

Demon seed? You mean the illegitimate spawn that propagate themselves and continue to ruin EVERY major urban area? The gangs, the drug runners, the criminals?

But, NOW, Im expected to not only feed and house and clothe these monsters, these filth... but even to pay for their healthcare? Are you serious?

While the new filth may be the slaves of the rich, arrogant, elitist pigs... its up to us to pay for their well being?

Fuck that.

You know what? How about you make those folks who bring in over 100 grand pay for the slime? Instead of people who are barely getting by?

Or... how about everyone who is FOR "universal healthcare" be the ones to pay for it? We could have a vote... those who say they want to pay for it CAN, and those who don't... they DO NOT?

Otherwise, let the rich pay for their indentured servants, and leave the free citizens alone?

Isn't that fair?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 11:43 AM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

"In truth, I think that using the word "allow" was a kindness, on my part. "

Again, I'd like to remind you there is no regulation against monopolies. So, if you are concerned about corporate size as an issue, and you are concerned about government non-regulation of corporate szie, it's a regulation that had yet to be written.

But more broadly, it's not ALL government ALL of the time that does such things. Reagan did it to the max. Bush I did it some. Clinton didn't interfere with enforcement of laws, but he was non-supportive either. The departments were on their own. Bush II did it a LOT.

But the u-soft trial DID go forward. And u-soft WAS found guilty. As was Ken Lay. Bernie Madoff DID go to jail.

You may see only small differences in politicians. But I think the record shows that that's why WHO gets into office is important.

BTW - as bad as I think Obama is - and I think he's bad - I still think he's better than McCain would have been. McCain would have been owned by Cheney and con-conspirators. Obama is far more conservative than most people realized. But he's push-able.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 11:54 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
on their own, can do well without the influence of others? Yes.

NO.

Quote:
How about you make those folks who bring in over 100 grand pay for the slime? Instead of people who are barely getting by?

That's the plan, dumbo. Only it's $250 grand, not $100.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 11:56 AM

HKCAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
For the most part, I think everyone here believes in the power of the individual.

The power of one person to run their own life.

To protect, feed, and care for themselves and others.

Am I wrong?

Most of us just disagree on whether or not we should be forced to care for strangers.

Just like to add my voice to the chorus of get your head out of your ass, Wulf.

You wouldn't survive for a week without other humans. Interdependence is the human condition. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that--in fact, it is what's gonna save us from annihilating ourselves in the final analysis.

You know, there's kind of an elephant in the room that almost never gets talked about here in the RWED. That elephant would be gender--specifically, the default gender of those who voice certain aggressively antisocial opinions. No sane woman could ever agree with your rants, Wulf. And you may find that, eventually, you'll want such women in your life.

HKCavalier

Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 12:02 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Ok... maybe you CAN'T do well without human interaction. I admit that.

But forcing people to do something? When has that EVER worked?

Like I said, I tell you what.... you have a vote. All of the people who are in favor of paying for healthcare for those who can't afford it, go ahead and put your names down...

The 3 of you can then pay for the booboos, sniffles, and std treatments of the dregs, and leave the rest of us alone.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 12:08 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
But forcing people to do something? When has that EVER worked?

BWAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!

This gets back to the "truly free" concept.

We're "forced" by our need to eat and drink; to be warm and safe; to be cared for when sick, young or old... to make all kinds of compromises... with each other, with corporations, with government.

And even if you're limiting the idea of "force" to someone holding a gun over someone else... as you seem to think gubmint does ... well, then, truly it works quite often! Because governments have been in existance for a long, looooong time.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 12:27 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Kind of scares you, Sig, doesn't it?

Saying, "If you want to pay for the healthcare of those who can't afford it, raise your hand".

And then FORCING those who said they would, to do it?

"And even if you're limiting the idea of "force" to someone holding a gun over someone else... as you seem to think gubmint does ... well, then, truly it works quite often! Because governments have been in existance for a long, looooong time."

Yeah, and thats why the American government was SUPPOSED to be different. Not this horrible abortion that the libs and conservatives have turned it into.

ETA: Which is why we are head to a revolution, btw. (For those of you who havn't been paying attention)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 12:56 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Eh ... their idea of government was not what you think it was.

They had a law - in the constitution no less - against treason. You might have run afoul of that. They felt the government should 'promote the general welfare'. Everbody's welfare, not the few who voted for it. And so on.

They were MUCH more social and sane than you.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 1:06 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Kind of scares you, Sig, doesn't it?Saying, "If you want to pay for the healthcare of those who can't afford it, raise your hand".

FWIW I AM willing to pay for healthcare for those who can't afford it. And that means yours too, if you can't. So go suck on a turd.

Quote:
Yeah, and thats why the American government was SUPPOSED to be different. Not this horrible abortion that the libs and conservatives have turned it into. ETA: Which is why we are head to a revolution, btw. (For those of you who havn't been paying attention)

Oh, grow up, you simpleton! They DID have laws back then! They even had taxes!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 1:14 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"FWIW I AM willing to pay for healthcare for those who can't afford it. And that means yours too, if you can't. So go suck on a turd."

Cute, but if I need healthcare, and can't afford it... I have FRIENDS and FAMILY....

So really, you and the 2 others... go ahead. Pay for the uninsured. Please, by all means. Just leave the rest of us alone.

While you are at it, btw,... when the next round of whining for reparations comes up... go ahead and take care of that too.

ETA: Oh, yeah, almost forgot... same thing with paying for illegal immigrants educations... oh and their licenses....

I'm sure the 3 of you will be great at paying for all of that. Thanks so much!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 1:19 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Cute, but if I need healthcare, and can't afford it... I have FRIENDS and FAMILY....

YOU DO???

AFAIK your "family" was useless, and quite frankly I can't imagine you having any friends.... at least, not any rich enough to handle a $250,000 surgery... let alone a simple trip to the ER...

But, hey... I can slap on a poultice with the best of 'em. So if your friends can do the same, I guess you're all set!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 1:21 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

Wulfie

You KNOW you're just digging yourself in deeper and deeper - right ?

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 1:22 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"YOU DO??? AFAIK your "family" was useless, and quite frankly I can't imagine you having any friends.... at least, not any rich enough to handle a $250,000 surgery... let alone a simple trip to the ER... "

And here come the personal attacks... (or at least as personal as they can be over the internet)

Sorry Sig, I gave you more credit than to try this when you are losing an argument... I guess I was wrong.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 1:28 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Frankly Wulf, when you said "I have FRIENDS and FAMILY..." (implying that I don't

) all I could think of was "I have a fwiend fwom Wome named 'Biggus Dickus.'" (For you Monty Python fans out there...!)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 1:29 PM

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

You CLAIM your friends and family will be able to take care of you no matter what - you don't need no stinkin' health care !

Could they really afford a $250,000 surgery ? What about if you become disabled at an early age ? What about when you WILL become disabled when you are older ? Questions and comments about your (supposed) friends and family and their ability to do what you CLAIM they will do are relevant - because YOU brought them into this. If you didn't want that to be part of the discussion, you should have left it out. Doooood.

***************************************************************

Silence is consent.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 1:34 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

And then, of course there's the consideration that Wulf may not have any such... in which case, he's a bliar.

Wulf, don't mean to pile on like this...

Well, OK, I do.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 1:43 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Hey, its cool. Im sure I've given the 2 of you sisters MORE than enough reason to "pile on me" as you so eloquently put it...

But, for as pretty as I am, I'm just not into bull dykes...

Now, can we get back to where you were saying that I, or anyone else MUST pay for them that won't help themselves?

Or were you and Rue going to do it?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 1:52 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Now, can we get back to where you were saying that I, or anyone else MUST pay for them that won't help themselves?

First of all, there is a difference between "won't" and "can't", which I invite you to explore. Unless there is a job with survival wages for everyone willing to work, there will always be people who "can't". (And that's not counting the sick, eldery, the very young and their care-givers, and the pregnant.. which make up roughly 50% of the population of the USA)

Despite what Frem and HK aspire to, ALL societies have some element of coercion. That's one of them.

There are sound reasons (aside from being nice)for making people pay for others. Those who derive the most from society should pay the most for its maintenance. There would not BE any wealth if "someone" hadn't laid the groundwork for sewage, roads, education, safety etc. That points to the fact that a society which is secure, healthy, stable, and educated is a productive society. All you have to do is look at Europe versus Somalia to know this is true.

But there is a more fundamental question than that.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 1:59 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Sig, these sound like the same failed arguments that the 70's hippies used when they started (and ultimatly ABANDONED) their communes...

"Those who derive the most from society should pay the most for its maintenance."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 2:02 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

No, the communes were based on "cooperation". Taxes? Not so much.

You young pup, you!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 2:12 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Cooperation? Don't you mean.... drum roll please..... SOCIALISM?

The basic premise that you have to care for your neighbor works ONLY if you actually CARE for your neighbor.

Its the same principle of arranged marriages... you cannot love someone you are FORCED to love.

In the same vein, you cannot build a good civilization on the basis of FORCE. Or feelings of being "owed" something.

Sig, being forced to take care of strangers, or those who cannot or will not take care of themselves, WILL lead to revolt.

Especially in this country, where individualism is a keystone of our combined national self.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 2:25 PM

BYTEMITE

Not necessarily. I'd like to build a system where people like you, who would rather go on their own, would be free to do so. If you'd rather be left alone, then by all means.

But is what I envision socialism? Perhaps. Forced? I don't think so, because what I'd like to do is rebuild a sense of family, friendship, and community, so that people who choose to settle near each other do actually care about each other. In doing so, I think they would want to help each other... Although, I would also hope that they wouldn't be obligated to.

It's not as though I agree to do everything my friends and family ask of me. But I because I do care about them, I do enough that we get along, and do cooperate.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 2:32 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Cooperation? Don't you mean.... drum roll please..... SOCIALISM?

No, I think this would have been closer to anarchism or communalism.

Quote:
The basic premise that you have to care for your neighbor works ONLY if you actually CARE for your neighbor.

But you can't "CARE" for your neighbor if it's beyond your capacity. What if they need brain surgery? Gonna do that on your kitchen table? Pay out of pocket? It can't be personal, limited to "friends and family". Just like building roads can't be limited to "friends and family".

Quote:
Its the same principle of arranged marriages... you cannot love someone you are FORCED to love.

But you can partner with someone if they're hardworking and honest.

Quote:
In the same vein, you cannot build a good civilization on the basis of FORCE. Or feelings of being "owed" something.

Most people have enough empathy to want to help less fortunate. I know from your history that may have been more-or-less beaten out of you, but it doesn't take strong personal feelings to create a more caring society.

Quote:
Sig, being forced to take care of strangers, or those who cannot or will not take care of themselves, WILL lead to revolt.

That's just YOU talking. I know that in your case, "strangers" is a code word for violent black gang members and their equally ignorant and resentful moms, but... ya gotta look past that, man. There are a lot of honest, hardworking people who are truly being beaten down by the system.

Quote:
Especially in this country, where individualism is a keystone of our combined national self.

Not really. The peeps in this country are far more indoctrinated and uniform that in... say.. Europe. We're more religious, more inclined to believe demagogues, more brand/ corporate-loyal, less able to consider and discuss alternate opinions... in other words, we've given our brains, wallets, and loyalties over to churches, corporations, and mouthpieces at alarminlgy higher rates than in other developed countries.

My hubby works at a major So Cal university, they have many Chinese and Russian graduate students, who almost all say that the level of propaganization here is far worse than in their country.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 2:49 PM

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

"and their equally ignorant and resentful moms..."

Huh?

But again, this isnt about me.

This is about the idea, and the ideal, of who and what we are as a country. Are we to be forced to pay for those who cannot or will not do for themselves?

Are we?

Hell, can we even afford it?

Do we really want to turn the middle class into the revenue generators for the scum, while the rich laugh? Use us as indentured servants?

I say hell no.

I say no more.

Enough is enough.

Now, that family you were deriving me about just finished cooking dinner... so Im off to eat the food I worked to pay for, in the house I worked to pay for, at the table I saved for...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 3:00 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
But again, this isnt about me.

Wulf, it's ALL about you.

Quote:
This is about the idea, and the ideal, of who and what we are as a country.

You're simply trying to convince me of YOUR ideals. YOUR ideas.

Quote:
Are we to be forced to pay for those who cannot or will not do for themselves?

What mean this "we", kimo sabe? YOU will not be forced to pay for anything unless you're a helluva lot richer than I think you are. (Which I doubt)

Quote:
Hell, can we even afford it?

Can we afford to be in Iraq? Can we afford 800 military installations around the world? Maybe we should re-set our priorities, eh? Less about invading other countries, bombing them back to the stone age and killing people, and more about providing actual ... yanno... services.

Quote:
Do we really want to turn the middle class into the revenue generators for the scum, while the rich laugh?

Of course not. You heard this from... who??? Why do you think that's the plan?

Quote:
Use us as indentured servants?

What world are you living in?

Quote:
I say hell no.

Bully for you!

Quote:
Now, that family you were deriving (sic) me about just finished cooking dinner... so Im off to eat the food I worked to pay for, in the house I worked to pay for, at the table I saved for...

Ah, so you have a WIFE and she's gonna pay for your healthcare. Isn't that sweet? (Unrealistic, but sweet...

!) BTW- does she know that she's your healthcare plan?

Wulf, I'm trying to get you off your sopabox and plant your feet back on the ground. You get carried away sometimes.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 3:26 PM

PIZMOBEACH

... fully loaded, safety off...

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Are we to be forced to pay for those who cannot or will not do for themselves?

I may have missed someone explaining this already... but *IF* you pay any taxes then you pay for them already. Medicare and Medicaid get syphoned right out of your paycheck - it goes for those useless old people who can no longer do for themselves. Maybe you should call them and let them know that by Gawd, you've had enough, no more care for anyone over - what do you think? 70? 75? Flush them after they're 80 for sure, right? It's a tough call, but you have your principles right?

Good news - it gets taken even if you don't pay for your own health care!

"Even though you may not have health insurance, about $219.40 of every $1,000 of your taxes went to pay for health care last year. On an annual salary of $52,000, that works out to $11,408.80 a year. The biggest chunk of that ($124.20 per thousand) went to pay for Medicare, which provides health coverage for people over 65. The rest ($95.20) went for Medicaid, which covers low-income families and individual, and state administered health coverage for children.

It's all moot though because I doubt you pay any taxes.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com Now available on your iPhone

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 4:25 PM

CUDA77

Like woman, I am a mystery.

Quote:
Originally posted by Wulfenstar:
Cute, but if I need healthcare, and can't afford it... I have FRIENDS and FAMILY....

I'm shocked that nobody jumped on your ass for this post. Hasn't your big platform been up until this point that you can stand on your own two feet and do absolutely anything without the help from others and that everyone else should have to do that too? Well then why would you go to your friends and family for healthcare Wulf? If you can't pay for it, isn't that your fault in your little world? Shouldn't your response be "Well, I don't have healthcare. Guess I better just hope this passes."

Practice what your preach son!

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 5:11 PM

KWICKO

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Quote:
Kind of scares you, Sig, doesn't it?Saying, "If you want to pay for the healthcare of those who can't afford it, raise your hand".
FWIW I AM willing to pay for healthcare for those who can't afford it. And that means yours too, if you can't. So go suck on a turd.
Quote:
Yeah, and thats why the American government was SUPPOSED to be different. Not this horrible abortion that the libs and conservatives have turned it into. ETA: Which is why we are head to a revolution, btw. (For those of you who havn't been paying attention)
Oh, grow up, you simpleton! They DID have laws back then! They even had taxes!

Wulfie, you poor misguided shit-head... Have you ever actually read a history book, gone to a class, LEARNED about ANYTHING at all having to do with your country's history? Well after the Revolutionary War, we had taxes, fines, fees - and debtors' prisons. We had laws whereby you could be tossed in debtor's prison for not paying your debts. Hell, we threw SOLDIERS in them for not paying the debts which they accrued WHILE FIGHTING THAT WAR - fighting, it should be noted, without any pay whatsoever.

And beloved "patriots" like Sam Adams advocated killing these people if they wouldn't pay for the war they'd helped win with their blood. There was even a documented case of a woman being thrown from her sickbed when she couldn't pay her bills, and her bed was sold out from under her. She was left to die on a bare floor.

That "revolution" you dream of? It wasn't anywhere near as glamorous as you think it was.

Mike

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 5:28 PM

BYTEMITE

Hey, um, I know we don't agree with Wulf on his outlook towards other human beings, or about revolution and the suffering and dying it would bring, but I'm not sure this is going to convince him otherwise.

I just see this backing the big angry Wulf into a corner, and, I admit I don't know him well, but when people get backed into a corner, they take away a negative perception of it. <_<

Maybe a time'll come when something changes in his life for the better, and he might be more open to hearing this stuff. That's what I hope for, anyway.

'Til then, I think we ought to try to not reinforce his beliefs through sheer negativity. Disagree, because there are things he says I disagree with, but don't push him further the other direction, you know? >_>

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 6:30 PM

DREAMTROVE

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, August 21, 2009 7:08 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

So Byte- So what should we do? Agree him to death?

Wulf's problem far as I can gather, is that he grew up in the projects and was harassed and beaten by black thugs most of his young days. Him mom, near as I can tell, was a non-entity and his dad was out of the picture. But Wulf fought back, progressed, and learned several things from this early, scarring experience:

Violence pays, because most problems are about violence and therefore most problems are solved by violence.
Anyone can make it.
Blacks are violent, shiftless, lazy, resentful and feel entitled.

The problem is, he can't see beyond it. So everything is about whether a program would help "those people" or not. If it does, or might, no matter HOW good the programs, Wulf is against it!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 2:59 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
The problem is, he can't see beyond it.

There is quite a bit of that going around, IMHO.
Signy, how are you any less authoritarian than you like to blame other's of being? You seem to have no problem with forcing other's to do something against their will as long as it is "right" in your books. You seem to have no problem with demonizing your opponent as long as they are in the "wrong". So come on Purplebelly, tell us all how your meddling will make this a better world. (Hey, I could have gone with jack-booted thug, I believe that is your favorite refrain)

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 3:29 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Part of Wulfies issue is reflexively posting knee-jerk responses he *knows* are idiotic and then feeling the need to defend them so he doesn't look like an idiot about it, cause of an also reflexive instinct not to show weakness.

That this winds up makin him look worse isn't quite lost on him when he chills out.

Likely his subconscious-triggered racism lead to bad reactions from any person of color to him and those bad reactions amplified his unfortunate opinion, a bit of self-fulfilling prophecy there stirred up quite deliberately the rightist end of the political spectrum as a useful prod.

Perhaps one would do better to point out to him that he's railing at the rats in the cages, instead of the folk building them, and what chance at a natural existence is there for those born into the "captivity" of deliberately fostered ignorance, malice, and economic suppression which has little incentive for improvement anyway, cause even IF you manage to survive, even IF you manage to escape without a criminal history, even IF you find the money and the time and get a degree...

That piece of paper won't make you a single shade whiter when the boss that's part of the cage builders shitcans your resume to keep you in your place.

To deny the obvious realities these people face is an act of cruel mockery, without doing some very dark deeds you ain't EVER gettin out of the trap, and those deeds and the doing of em, they HAUNT a person, prey on their mind and chase em screaming down the corridors of their own consciousness in the wee hours of the night...

And Wulf *knows* this, damn well he knows it, it's just a matter of getting him to understand that instead of gassing the cage contents, maybe breaking open the door so they don't have to climb out on top of their fellow victims is a good idea - cause have you really bettered yourself if you come out of it with mental aberration and a side order of racism, compounded by the haunting of your own actions in the escape ?

And just cause someone is a semi-literate thug doesn't mean they don't WANT to better themselves, but what good is a college degree with a felony conviction draggin it right back down like an anchor, from something they HAD to do in order to feed themselves or their family ?

Anyhows, as far as medical care...

Roads, communications lines, railways, power lines, all that infrastructure stuff I got NO problem payin tax dollars on if it is considered the dominion and property of the people as a whole, rather than payin for the comm lines and having some corporation co-opt them and bail on it's promise to share, operating them for profit as their exclusive playground, hell with that.

WE paid for it, it belongs to US, way I see it, and each state and locality can set things up the way they like, far as regulation goes, as it was intended.

And medical care, that's one of the infrastructure bits which I think is worth the money, buy it out, make it OURS instead of renting it at the purchase price plus, that's bullshit.

We gonna pay for it, then it should belong to US, all of us, something that is no more "socialist" than public school, which FOR THE BASICS, doesn't do that bad of a job, it's just been badly neglected and abused by folk with political reason to do so - and by taking back such things as the dominion and property of the people collectively, we can then apply ourselves to it to improve it if we wish, or not.

I mean, for the rapacious tax bite we pay, oughten we GET something for it, for once ?

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 3:54 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Signy, how are you any less authoritarian than you like to blame other's of being? You seem to have no problem with forcing other's to do something against their will as long as it is "right" in your books.

In terms of...? The discussion here? Taxes? Health care?

Quote:
You seem to have no problem with demonizing your opponent as long as they are in the "wrong".

Do you think I'm demonizing Wulf? I'm not. I think Wulf is wrong in his opinions, but I also think he's fully human.

You're just pushing back because you thought my argument was effective.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 3:59 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Frem, I obviously don't have either your or Wulf's background. I'm not good at pushing buttons, I don't know where the levers are, I don't know of any other approach than straightforward logic and... alas... I think I will never learn.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 4:12 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
You're just pushing back because you thought my argument was effective.

uh, no.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 4:32 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Well BDN, if that's the best argument that you can come up with - I'm authoritarian and I'm somehow demonizing Wulf - then go point by point with me on that. And if you can't, then I'd say you got nuttin'.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 4:53 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Yep. Ya got nuttin'.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 4:56 AM

Signy,
Just my opinion, mind you.

Only Bush followers were authoritarians. I remember you throwing that term around quite a bit on a myriad number of subjects.
Is it somehow different now that the head honcho has changed?
How about the FLDA crisis? How about your views on smoking?
Seems to me that we all follow authority, just in different ways.

And by demonize, I meant attacking the Poster not the post. If your argument is so strong, why the pontificating on your perceptions of Wulf's background?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 4:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Yep. Ya got nuttin'.

Patience is a virtue, might want to look to that.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 5:01 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

ANTHONY, I would like your specific response to this:

Quote:
Try that with a corporation. Declare Microsoft a free software community, distribute their software, break their intellectual property protection, and learn the hard lesson that once corporations starts taking care of you, it's hard to get them to stop.

Thought it might have got lost in the shuffle. Thanks.

BDN-

Quote:
Signy, Just my opinion, mind you. Only Bush followers were authoritarians. I remember you throwing that term around quite a bit on a myriad number of subjects. Is it somehow different now that the head honcho has changed? How about the FLDA crisis? How about your views on smoking? Seems to me that we all follow authority, just in different ways.

AFA any change of attitude from Bush to Obama: Obama's followers are MUCH more critical of Obama than Bush's followers were of Bush. All you have to do is go here www.alternet.org to see that

BTW- Non-authoritarian doesn't mean lack of rules, it means rules reached by logic and consensus, not by receiving "the word" from on high (Bush, Rush, Glenn or whomever). So I'll be happy to discuss point by point. Smoking, for example. Feel free to smoke. But YOUR right to smoke ends at my nose, not? AFA the FDLA crisis, I haven't looked into it so I have no real opinion. I can see how it COULD have been manufactured by the authorities. OTOH, I could also see how children might have been abused. If that is the case, intervention was necessary. If it makes any difference, I thought the whole Koresh thing was grossly mishandled.

Quote:
And by demonize, I meant attacking the Poster not the post. If your argument is so strong, why the pontificating on your perceptions of Wulf's background?

I don't feel I'm attacking, I feel that I'm explaining the basis of Wulf's pretty visceral reactions in a rather neutral way. It's an model of his behavior that I find quite predictive. (It predicts what he says and how he reacts almost all of the time.) Possibly I should have PMd him instead, but the message was really for Wulf.

BTW, I'm using the term "authoritarian" very specifically, from this book:
http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 5:04 AM

Try looking up and then get back to me.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 5:05 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

posted a quick oops. My response will be above.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 6:14 AM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
Frem, I obviously don't have either your or Wulf's background. I'm not good at pushing buttons, I don't know where the levers are, I don't know of any other approach than straightforward logic and... alas... I think I will never learn.

So ?

We might not always agree, and I can be right snappy about it at times, but the fact is the more windows and viewpoints you have on a subject the clearer the picture is - it's when folk smear mud on them windows I get pissed off, and the only reason I ain't ripping the folks all up in Obamas shit a new one is cause that pressure is the only way to bring enough force, misguided that it is, upon a bad idea before we get handed over on a plate to Big Pharma and the insurance companies.

I have real, valid concerns those dipwads ain't expressing, which ain't likely to get heard in all the shouting, but I do note a net positive effect in that said sandblasting is forcing them to remove a lot of side-issue flakery that doesn't belong on the core bill and should in fact be a seperate bill itself.

Meanwhile, it's right wing public suicide on a massive level, something I got NO problem with either.

Logic is a valued viewpoint, but once human emotion gets involved in things, applying it becomes a lot tricker.

As for gears & levers, think of it like a programming problem -
10 IF A=5 THEN GOSUB 100
20 IF B=5 THEN A=A+1
30 GOTO 10
100 SELECT $RNDPHRASE$ ECHO "$RNDPHRASE$"
110 RETURN

Trust me, the mentality of your average rightwingnut isn't much more complex than that when you reduce it to the components, and if you know the right INPUTS to get the correct OUTPUTS, you can make em do anything you please without em even really being aware of it.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 6:21 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM:
AFA the FDLA crisis, I haven't looked into it so I have no real opinion. I can see how it COULD have been manufactured by the authorities. OTOH, I could also see how children might have been abused. If that is the case, intervention was necessary.

Remember this thread?
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=33401#602592

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 6:49 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Remember this thread?

Yes BDN, thank you for bringing this up. What I said was:

Quote:
If the girls have undergone physical exam (and I believe they have) that would certainly reveal if underage girls are non-virgins, have signs of sexual intercourse (bruising etc.), have borne children. If the practice of marrying off and impregnating underage girls is as widespread as has been suggested, then physical evidence will be easy to find, and a case could be made based on that evidence irrespective of what the children have been taught to say.

I had not then reached any conclusion about what was going on in the FLDS. I still haven't. I simply have not had the time to go into a detailed examination to my satisfaction about what the evidence says or does not say. But thanks for proving my point.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 7:09 AM

All of your responses in that thread and you chose that particular bit. Interesting that.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, August 22, 2009 7:21 AM