|
Post by Max Headroom on Dec 26, 2009 1:40:25 GMT -5
Oh, and the post started with Nader's quote because I like the notion that Presidents always need to take the hard line and make a stand or else they inevitably get railroaded. Laying down on any issue results in laying down on all. I'm nor sure he said all that precisely, but it's something I think is apt; the role demands always sending a clear message about who is in charge so the special interests cannot get their hooks into Congress. Preemptive. Signals get sent in fuzzy ways, but declining to require a public option allowed entrenchment by lobbyists in opposition to it.
|
|
|
Post by Ken on Feb 12, 2010 18:19:23 GMT -5
I posted this on the political thread b/c its an article by Bill O'Reilly, but other than that, this, for me, has no political disposition. I posted it though because I really think that it is a shame that our society has changed so much from the days when we were growing up. I think we were literally the last generation to grow up with the freedom and encouragement to run the streets and explore our world with impunity, something I think the kids of today are not experiencing, although I doubt they are missing it.
I think tech savvy is an important thing, and I love the march of technology as much as anyone else I guess, but I think there is something to be said for getting outdoors, having a dirt-ball fight with the kids from an opposing block, building a clubhouse, playing king-of-the-hill, etc. What say you message boarders?
My Special Valentine By Bill O'Reilly for BillOReilly.com Thursday, February 11, 2010
My special valentine this year is a beautiful ten-year-old girl named Madeline. She is a typical American kid confronted by a vastly different world than the one in which her parents grew up. Instead of inventing games and projects with other children, Madeline has an array of high tech gizmos to keep her occupied. While my transistor AM radio kept me up to date on the Beatles, Madeline's small music machine holds thousands of tunes that are piped into her ear on demand. And she doesn't even have to go to a record store! She can download any song she wants from a computer.
On the playtime front, Madeline has a Nintendo DS and Wii. Instantly, games appear on small and big screens. She doesn't have to go bowling; she can simulate bowling using the Wii on her giant TV set. She can play tennis there as well. In fact, Madeline never even has to go outside to play sports. They are all virtually in her living room.
"Can Eddie come out and play?" That was my question after I knocked on my friend's door back in Levittown. But Madeline has never said those words. She can call her friends on a cell phone and the playtime is arranged in advance by nervous parents who wouldn't dare allow their young children to roam the neighborhood unattended. Madeline has fun on her "play dates," but spontaneity is missing, as are gangs of kids. "Play dates" are usually limited to one or two urchins.
Despite all the tech and protection, Madeline has somehow developed interests in time-honored hobbies like horses, pop idols, and volleyball. Also, she has developed a deep sensitivity towards other people. Like many children, Madeline has seen her peers brutalized by cyber-bullying, and she finds it cruel and unacceptable. She even wrote a school paper about it.
But the tech revolution has also made it easier for Madeline to escape from reality. The machines allow her to avoid thinking about problems and solutions. With a flick of a finger, Madeline can enter a fantasy world where she doesn't have to think about bad things or work out complicated situations. She can play emotional hide-and-not-seek all day long.
It is not easy for an adult to talk with Madeline; she prefers to be otherwise occupied, which is normal at that age. Her favorite phrases are "I don't know" and "I don't care." Perhaps for Valentine's Day I'll get her a shirt with those words printed on the front and back. But, most likely, I'll get Madeline a card that says I love her more than anything, or some such Valentine's endearment. She is America's future, and I know she will make this country better... machines or no machines.
|
|
|
Post by xbones on Feb 21, 2010 23:36:08 GMT -5
My kids have a ton of toys. Getting them to play with them is like pulling teeth. They want TV and Wii (We tell our families that the kids will NEVER have portable handheld games and fortunately no one has produced one as a gift). I turn the TV off for several hours a day, wherupon they spend those same hours repeatedly asking for TV and Wii. At some point, when they finally realize that I'm NOT turning it on, they do play with their stuff, or God forbid! - color in a coloring book. However, chores are to be done, mommy and daddy need a few minutes to themselves and TV and Wii come back on and all progress is quickly erased. I actually remember the countless hours playing video games in my youth and early adulthood. As I look back, I realize that it was an utter waste of time. It takes away any incentive to go out in the real world and live life. Playing Leisure Suit Larry should never substitute for going out and trying to get laid (and don't use Larry's moves either, by the way ;D ). It is worse now than ever when you hear of complete imbeciles paying actual monetary currency to get "items" in video game land. They need that new sword in World of Warcraft - are you fucking kidding me? (At least in D&D, which I have never played, you are face to face with other players and there is actual creativity as players and the DM create the story themselves) With that introduction, I actually have to disagree with Bill. I think that the problem is a lot more serious than he depicts it. All of this tech and on-demand hedonism makes for a detached, disjointed society, always striving for the next immediate gratification. It is our modern "bread and circuses," similar to that which slowly caused Roman initiative to stagnate ( why work when you could attend the Games?) and ultimately led to the fall of the Empire. It also allows people to escape unpleasant reality too easily - the electronic equivalent of burying one's head in the sand. When one is escaping reality, how the hell does one solve real problems? Shit! I've been surfing the internet for the last few hours instead of trying to actively engage in meaningful conversation with the Mrs. (all married guys know this ain't easy to begin with, but surfing the net for stupid youtube videos makes it damned sure not to happen). We used to talk in bed before we went to sleep (no sex of course - we're married you know ). Nowadays I actually forward emails to her. This is the new form of human "interaction." This "interaction" actually will erode our society even more. It is easier not to care about others when such interactions have become so impersonal. It's easier to cheat on one's spouse through the net. Angry emails are easier to write than if you actually had to say it to someone's face. People take more cheap shots at others for a cheap laugh. Empathy for fellow humans disappears if you don't have to personally interact with others. Furthermore, the important has become trivial, and the trivial has become important. And people have lost focus on things that really matter. How many countless "bloggers" are writing their whole life's story on the net....WHO GIVES A SHIT?! AARRGGHH! The focus has been drawn to self and not to social connections (sorry boys, a short, grammatically incorrect post on someone's Facebook page doesn't cut it - but it sure make people puff up with pride about how many so-called "friends" they have. Ugghh!). Perez Hilton gets better coverage than a Memorial Day parade. And this "cyber-bullying" bullshit... People are worried as to whether they are popular, or whether they are getting flamed on some internet board. If they actually got out of their little tech universe once in a while, and smelled some reality, that shit wouldn't even matter. Here's an idea for all those with very fragile feelings... don't visit the board where you are getting flamed and delete emails from those assholes with whom you would not like to correspond. Massive amounts of energy is expended on pursuits that do NOTHING to make us, our country, or society better. That is no small problem.
|
|
|
Post by Larry G on Mar 25, 2010 14:33:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by larry on Apr 15, 2010 9:47:12 GMT -5
pub crawl gone bad
|
|
|
Post by Crickets on Apr 17, 2010 10:12:25 GMT -5
Chirp. Chirp. Chip........
|
|
|
Post by LARRY G on May 7, 2010 15:48:13 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Ken on May 12, 2010 19:28:03 GMT -5
Larry, if you weren't my friend, I'd run you over in my truck, laughing all the way. Try watching the History channel once in a while about the Iran Hostage crises. President Carter was interviewed extensively and takes full credit for negotiating the realease of the hostages in the final waning hours of his presidency.
|
|
|
Post by Rob G on May 14, 2010 16:30:02 GMT -5
That Ronald Reagon traitor thing was funny. thats like reverse fox news.
Larry you need to go in reverse order of all Republican presidents siting stories about how they were all traitor sons of bitches.
|
|
|
Post by Ken on May 22, 2010 7:07:12 GMT -5
Oil spill's political consequences rise for Obama
(Reuters) - President Barack Obama has prevented the BP oil spill from becoming his own Katrina-like nightmare so far, but the political and policy consequences of the disaster are likely to increase as the oil spreads.
Jeff Mason - Analysis WASHINGTON Fri May 21, 2010 1:06am EDT
By repeatedly assigning blame to energy giant BP Plc and focusing ire on the government agency responsible for regulating offshore drilling, Obama has deflected criticism that his administration was sluggish in its initial response to the Gulf of Mexico spill.
That may not last. A month since the Deepwater Horizon rig exploded and sank, killing 11 people and leaving a ruptured well that has been leaking crude ever since, the feared environmental catastrophe is becoming more and more real.
Heavy oil is hitting Louisiana's wetlands. Oil-stained animals are being rescued and cleaned. Gulf Coast economies are suffering and preparing for drawn-out damage.
Analysts say as the ecological crisis gains traction, voters will punish the president regardless of who is responsible -- an important consideration for Obama ahead of congressional elections in November.
"There is a strong tendency for the public to penalize incumbents even for natural disasters if there is a plausible governmental angle -- regardless of whether the government failed to respond adequately," said Eric Schickler, a political science professor at the University of California, Berkley.
"If the oil spill has a significant impact on the Gulf Coast economy -- and as a result, on the U.S. economy as a whole -- it is likely to impose at least some damage on the president and his party."
Obama's Democrats, who control both houses of Congress, are expected to lose seats in the election and want to avoid shifting power to Republicans, who would make it more difficult for the president to achieve his policy goals.
Obama is aware of the government angle in the crisis and has made his displeasure with the Minerals Management Service (MMS), the Interior Department agency that regulates offshore drilling, very clear.
That agency is now being restructured, but other policy consequences loom, most notably the president's efforts to pass energy legislation that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions, increase domestic production of renewable fuels and -- tricky under current circumstances -- expand offshore drilling. John Leshy, who served as general counsel for the Interior Department in the Clinton administration, said the spill could hurt Obama's short-term prospects for an energy overhaul. "Clearly the spill has dramatized the cost of fossil fuels -- coal, oil and gas, particularly oil. So to that extent it has, I think, boosted the idea that there needs to be energy reform," said Leshy, now a professor at the University of California Hastings College of the Law.
"But in the short term you have to get 60 votes in the Senate," he said. "I think the spill has made that harder."
An energy bill introduced by Democratic Senator John Kerry and independent Senator Joe Lieberman is languishing in the 100-member legislative body. The offshore drilling provisions were meant to attract Republican support for the bill.
Obama's action plan for advancing that energy law is not clear, but his strategy for dealing with the oil spill has been to act fast. Mindful of the political damage incurred by President George W. Bush's administration for its response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005, Obama has not wasted any opportunity to show he is moving quickly and assigning blame.
'MADE-TO-ORDER BAD GUY'
"Katrina was a natural disaster. This is a man-made disaster," said Ken Medlock, an energy fellow at Rice University in Houston, Texas. "With this particular case, from Day One the Coast Guard has been on the scene. The federal government, as a result, has been involved from Day One."
Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia, said Obama had learned from Katrina and made clear BP carried the blame for this Gulf disaster.
"Obama has a made-to-order bad guy in BP. And he sure hasn't been hesitant about pointing fingers," Sabato said. Bad guy or not, public anger about the spill has not helped Obama prevail in getting Congress to raise the cap on oil companies' liability for big spills.
It has also given Republicans, whose support Obama needs to achieve his energy overhaul, potential ammunition against the administration if MMS is found to have been negligent.
"The president has spent a whole lot of time pointing the finger at BP and you should point a finger at BP and the other companies involved," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said on Sunday on NBC's "Meet the Press" show.
"We're also interested to know what the administration did. Was the Mineral Management Service a part of this administration that approved this site? It also approved this spill response plan. What kind of oversight did the administration provide during the course of the drilling?"
Obama plans to create a presidential commission to answer questions such as these and identify the causes of the spill. The amount of time he has will depend on how soon BP plugs the well, how far the oil flows, and how focused the U.S. public remains on the role of companies rather than the role of the government in this environmental crisis. ________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I know we started to talk about this on my FB page, but it is easier to talk about it here, on the message board...if anybody even comes here anymore.
The article is definitely a FAIR article towards Obama, so I don’t expect people to go ape-shit over it, but really, why SHOULDN”T this be compared to Bush and Katrina? Rob has already stated that it is a “natural disaster” on my FB page, so was Katrina. However, we saw Katrina coming for days, people were TOLD to evacuate, and didn’t. This oil spill was completely unexpected and happened immediately, before anybody could do anything about it.
Similarly, GW Bush wasn’t in charge of rescuing people from Katrina, FEMA was, and THEY screwed up, not Bush, however there was an incredible backlash against Bush. Why? Because the left was out to demonize him.
Now Obama has BP and the MME to blame, but there is no backlash against him. Why? Well, because of the Left media outlets who are in love with him. Should Obama be blamed? OF COURSE NOT!!!!! He didn’t create this problem! He didn’t blow up the oil rig and force billions of gallons of oil into the pristine environment of the Gulf of Mexico!
So why was Bush blamed for Katrina? He didn’t cause a level 5 hurricane to hit New Orleans! He didn’t force people to STAY in New Orleans! He wasn’t flying helicopters with supplies into New Orleans!
But perhaps people became upset when the idiots who DID stay in New Orleans, who DID need help, weren’t getting any help over a protracted period of time...like three days.
Well this oil spill is going on for longer than three days. BP has proved themselves incompetent, the MME has proven themselves incompetent....kind of like FEMA did under Bush. This has gone on over a month. Our economy will suffer...it suffered b/c of Katrina too. Yet still Obama is the Golden Boy.
Too many similarities to ignore. Too many.
|
|
|
Post by Rob G on May 25, 2010 23:38:23 GMT -5
So Fox News has been pushing this propaganda since day 1. Like the day after the Oil Spill they were talking about. Obamas slow response and is this his Katrina. It felt like they were just trying to fabricate failures for Obama and then compare them to Bush to somehow validate Bush. Totally disgusting. It was not far or true then. and it annoyed me.
But now its a month later and perhaps there could be somethign to this. I dont think there is but I must struggle maination my objectivety which was titled after the fox news bullshit.
As far as drawing correllations. I would be more inclined to absolve Bush and Katrina and OBama of Oil Spill then I would be to blame them both respectively.
But we know Bush fucked up with Katrina. He admitted it. So all thats left is if we can indite Obama. And I just dont what he more he could do. All of the tools needed to stop the Spill appear to be only possessed by the oil companies. Which makes sense. What Obama needs to do is pressure them hard to get it fixed and make everything available to them to do it. Meanwhile he apply the resources we have as far as containment. Get the coast guard down there. Seek help from anyone who can help. After that he needs to get to the source of how this happened and what he can do to niot let it happen again. Step one is addressing the inefficiencies of MMS (Mineral Management Service). Then to fix whatever regulations that are in place that led to this. HES DOING ALL THESE THINGS.
Its definatly BP's fault. I mean transocean built the rig and Haliburton constructed the part that broke. But there are redundancies in procedure that BP completely neglected. If the oil companies are just are gonna act like this then theres simply nothing the governemnt can do to prevent this. Short of opperating the rigs ourselves. Which of course would be socialism.
Some blame I think can fairly be cast on MMS for not better regulating things. Now Obama did not write any new stuff that contirbuted to this. So all that then remains is why did he not reform the oil regulations to prevent something like this. For me that would require Nostradamus like skills and is not valid.
In conclusion I see no credible blame that can be cast on Obama for the Spill happening in the first place and can find nothing to crtiticse him for in his response.
I accept the entire argument as propaganda from the oppoistion to burn Obama wherever they can.
PS: Ken Nasi is not a propagansit Rob Gault is not a Socialist Dave Buckley is not an anesthesiologist
|
|
|
Post by Rob G on May 25, 2010 23:46:27 GMT -5
So theres no reason we cant have more then one topic going on here.
Arizona Immigration bill: I suspect that this bill could never hold up in the Supreme Court. for a number of different reasons. Now its not totally dissimilar from federal law. But there are differences and those differences could lead into discrimination. But more then that speaking legalluy. The Supremecy Claus in the Constituion allocates certain things to the province of the federal government. The states may not legally be allowed to legislate immigration law. I'm not saying I am against the Arizona law. I'm still on the fence. Just from a legal standpoint I dont think it holds up.
I think the Governer knows this. So I thought to myself. Why do this. And I considered the whole may be one big political gambit to manipulate the federal government into providing greater resources to combat the immigration problem.
If I am correct about the federal illegality of the Arizona law. That would mean Arizona is victum to an outrageous immigration problem which they are banned from protecting themselves from. Meanwhile the federal government does little to aid them. Thats a fucked up situation to be in. If it is a policatl gambit then its a genius move and the citizens of arizona should be proud of their Governer.
As of today Obama is sending a horde of national guardsmen down there. So the gambit may be working perfectly.
|
|
ring87
General Greivous
3rd density endgame.
Posts: 329
|
Post by ring87 on May 27, 2010 18:49:56 GMT -5
What up guys....
1200 is not a horde. And not nearly enough. He only did it because the Republicans were pushing to send 4500 plus allot of cash as well. Public opinion has forced action. The Arizona bill only tested the waters. This shit is well over-due. Both parties have neglected this issue for years and now we have been invaded by Mexicans. Fuck they didn't even need guns. Pretty soon their children will hold the majority vote. It's not too late but it's getting there.
|
|
|
Post by Ken on May 29, 2010 6:40:56 GMT -5
The Message Board is BACK BABY!!!! Whoo Hoo!
OK, first I'd like to talk about the oil spill in the gulf, my original post. I'd like to clarify that the oil spill is NOT Obama's fault! In this humble teacher's opinion. How can it be? That was never my intent, and I know that you guys know that. Similarly, my goal was to compare and contrast Katrina to this disaster to show that Katrina was NOT Bush's fault, and he was unfairly treated in the media.
Rob wrote:
Now I appreciate your perspective here, Rob, right up until you say that Bush fucked up...and he admitted it. But we both know that the president has to come out and accept the blame for these type of things. Its just a matter of course. Well, in another stunning similarity to these two natural disasters, Katrina and the BP oil spill respectively, Obama came out yesterday in a speech and took the blame, and the responsibility for the seemingly slow response to the oil spill. In fact, he said the buck stops with him. Again, he has to come out and accept the blame as a matter of course.
Now fuck Fox news. I don't give a shit about what Fox News "talking points' are, and I don't care what they say. It has been inferred by some that I am just regurgitating Fox News or Rush Limbaugh "talking points," as if I don't have a brain of my own, or my own thoughts. This really bugs me. There are thousands of my posts on this very message board that show original and strategic thinking. I don't need to create political controversy for the sake of self-aggrandizing. I'm small, and miserable and I know it. In the minds of political-minded people, a comparison of Obama and Bush is inevitable and logical, and whether Fox got to it before me or not does not indicate whether I'm following the Conservative agenda, although I most often do.
So in closing, it seems that public opinion is interestingly against the slow response and resolution of this disaster, but so far Obama is still getting favorable treatment on those leftist news outlets, except for Fox of course. I appreciated his speech yesterday, and it seems that he is doing all he can, except getting in a wet suit and diving down there himself to plug the leak with his fingers. But I thought the same thing about Bush and Katrina. Oh well.
Arizona Immigration Law
I think Rob's post is 99% on target there. I can't add in any new info or insight, so I will tackle the discrimination aspect. It has been widely reported that the Arizona law pretty much mirrors the federal law, so why all the hub-bub? It comes down to the discrimination factor. Basically, this is the same argument against the "racial profiling" process that the airlines use to decide who to search before allowing people on planes. I don't have a problem with racial profiling in NYC, or using profiling to identify potential suspects on the airlines, and I certainly don't have a problem using profiling to identify illegal immigrants.
What I do have a problem with is the Mexican President coming over to this country, speaking in front of Congress about how the Arizona Immigration Bill is inhuman, and then OUR CONGRESS STANDING UP AND APPLAUDING!!! I have a HUGE FUCKING PROBLEM WITH THAT!!!! Especially when you consider Mexico's immigration policy that would lock up an American illegal immigrant for years! I mean, what is THIS bullshit?
The interesting thing I heard was that Arizona was considering suing the federal governement for not upholding the Constitution in regards to protecting the states and enforcing the FEDERAL immigration laws. Interesting huh?
|
|
|
Post by xbones on May 29, 2010 10:38:17 GMT -5
www.wsbtv.com/video/23438021/index.htmlA little about why we should secure our borders. I like the part where Napolitano who is Secretary of Homeland Security and former Gov. of Arizona doesn't have much to say. Apparently her successor is doing a HELL of a lot more and she is embarrased.
|
|