Kim wrote:
"bb" wrote in message
oups.com...

Kim wrote:
"bb" wrote in message
oups.com...

Mike said: """Everyone is entitled to an opinion, Brian."""

Reeaally???

"""We wouldn't have anywhere near as much fun if we could only
give
opinions on what we have personal experience in! 8^)"""

Then lotsa people on RRAP owe Len Anderson an apology.

I think Len owes many more apologies to other rrappers than he is
owed....

When I see those apologies, I'll stop pointing out that "true
blue"
Jim

Would that be me?

has never served his country in any capacity,

Not in *any* capacity? Obviously that's false.

yet has availed himself
to the finest education and standard of living in a system
where the
freedom to do so were paid for with the blood of other people's
sons.
Happy New Year.

Can't be referring to me. "Finest education and standard of living"?

So...wait just a minute. Are you saying that anyone who does not
serve
his
country in any capacity (you'd have to define in any capacity, by
the
way)is not supposed to live in the United States?

***That isn't what I said, but do you argue that I'm not entitled
to my
own opinion?***

Anyone is entitled to their opinion, and I deny no one that.
However, in
general, one cannot expect to express things without discourse on
them. So,
if you are taking offense that I would seek clarification for what
you are
saying, then to add or disagree with it--then you're offense is duly
noted.

Well said, Kim, but also consider this: An opinion can be based on
facts, or it can be based on falsehoods. It can be developed by sound
reasoning, or by faulty logic.

Also, the term "serve his country in any capacity" has to be defined
clearly. Does it mean only uniformed military service? That would leave
out a lot of people like police, firefighters, EMS.

Because, in the United States

Is Kim going to tell ---me--- about America???

Please allow me to assume the position.

You really do seem rather argumentative. And, in my opinion (may Kim
tell
you about Kim, even?) to assume an argumentative (if not rather
childish)
position (or, perhaps that is not what you meant by "position") leads
me to
believe that this reply-post is an exercise in futility.

Depends on your purpose, Kim. If you expect to convince "William" that
he is mistaken about some things, it's probably futile. OTOH, if you
want to point out his errors, express your own opinion and some facts,
it's not futile at all.

we--regardless of *military* service to the country or not--DO
avail
ourselves of whatever is available, be that a good education, a
good
job, a good doctor, a good teacher, a good whatever.

Indeed many do.

They take and they take, good whatever.

Good everythig!!!

Do you count yourself among those???

What in the world do you mean, "among those"? I seek good everything
and
anything. What do you want me to do? Strive to be a failure?! Your
question is startling.

There's a big difference in simply taking and paying one's way.

That the freedoms we enjoy are here, because of the military
service
of others, is greatly appreciated by most--

Huge, huge appreciations. Yellow magnet ribbons and all....

Is your comment somewhat resentful of the ribbons, moreover the
sentiment to
support our troops?! Again, your startling.

It should also be remembered that while military service is appreciated
and praiseworthy, our country and its freedoms, wealth and way of life
are not due solely to military service or military actions. Although
firefighters are important, they don't build houses - they only protect
them.

there are those that are just plain
idiots (and Jim is not one of them).

If you mean me, you have my thanks, Kim.

Why do you say that Jim is not?

Oh, wait. Let me communicate back to you the same way you
communicated to
me: are you saying I am not entitled to my opinion? Hey, you opened
that
friggin' door, now close it.

As a matteer of fact, I think Jim IS one of the idiots.

Why?

Oh, and here, let me demonstrate how much more human I am capable of
being
than you: You are entitled to your opinion about Jim--or anyone else.
BUT,
I do not share your opinion.

And, to read your comment above
without having paid attention to this thread, seems to say that
anyone who
doesn't meet your standards of service should just roll up and
die?

If you like you can read it that way.

Well, I don't "like" to think that anyone would believe like that.
There
are those who serve their nation through military means, there are
those
that support them in any and every way they can; there are those who
remain
here at home and help their families; there are those who go to their
jobs
every day to keep the inner-workings (and the reason for living in
such a
wonderful country, by the way) moving; there are those who serve
their
nation politically; and,

then, there are those who sponge off any opportunity, until it all
dries up.

Very well said, Kim. I agree 100%.

For anyone to have a scholarship in this country, they had to meet
criteria--set forth by the governing body of that scholarship. For
anyone
to have availed themselves of any oppportunity to get as top-notch an
education, or as top-notch an opportunity, as they could possibly get
is for
them to have participated in their own destiny, rather than letting
things
just happen to them. I don't think you're capable of understanding
where it
is I would go with this...so I'll not bother.

Well, I have some experience with scholarships, so let me add this:

The scholarships I had for undergraduate education were based on
academic achievement alone, as was my admission to the university I
attended. I also had National Direct Student Loans, all of which were
paid back on-time, with interest. I also worked full-time during school
breaks and part-time during the school year (if you can call 35+
hours/wk "part time") in order to pay for things not covered by
scholarship or loan.

Graduate education funding came from two sources: my pocket and my
employer, who would reimburse some of the cost of tuition *after* the
course was successfully completed. Taking one graduate course at a
time, the reimbursement worked out to about 40% of the tuition. Books,
fees and other costs were on me.

But that is not what I meant. Meanwhile, Len, who has served is
supposed to roll up and die.

When has anyone told Len to do that?

It is Len who has told people here to "shut up", said their days are
numbered, etc.

Why is that???

Surely
I am mistaken in my interpretation of your comment, above.

Kim W5TIT

To be -perfectly- clear, I think Jim is a welfare freeloader to
avail
hisself to the freedom to go to USA engineering schools, to avail
hisself to a career in engineering, and then to comment on how bad
life
in America is without ***ever*** having done a Goddamned thing to
risk
even a split fingernail,

Can't be talking about me, then.

You know what? Screw your ever-loving split fingernail theory. You
are one
of those who seem (and note I've said "seem") to be of the opinion
that only
those who have served in the United States military are entitled to
all the
benefits of HAVING BEEN BORN in the USA. You see? That's all it
takes for
entitlement he being born in the USA, or becoming a US citizen
(although,
and here's a drift to another thread for you--if you can handle it:
there
are those who are NOT from this country who come over here with their
little
weenie green cards, suck up what they can from the United States,
send it
back home, and then go back home themselves...or go on to becoming a
US
citizen but are pretty darned slinky folks...in my opinion).

Should only those with military service be allowed to express opinions?
go to engineering school? vote? express opinions?

all the while putting down Len Anderson who
has contributed more to America than a single Jim/N2EY fingernail.

How does anyone know what our relative contributions "to America"
really are?

Is uniformed military service the only thing that counts?

Does it make everything Len writes here somehow OK?

Kim, you did ask.

bb

Uh huh. I did ask. And, you came back with this argument initially
that--paraphrasing--were you not entitled to your opinion. You are
entitled. You are entitled to believe that the ground a military
person
walks on is sacred and that no one else is "entitled" to the same
benefits
from the United States as a person who has served in the military.
You are
entitled to believe that we don't all, in some form or other,
contribute to
the integrity, continuance, and strength of the United States--some
of us by
just damned getting up out of bed every morning and going to some
dorky job
where a damned good portion of our income goes to supporting the
military,
and the government, and the "other" people (you know...those who are
not
worthy)...

It seems a lot of us are "not worthy".

What about police, firefighters, EMS and other people who have no
military service?

Or doctors, nurses, and other health-care people who risk infection
from incurable diseases on the job?

Or plain ol' working people, with no military service, who do dangerous
but essential things to keep the lights on, the water flowing, etc.?
The wires on the poles didn't put themselves up there, and when there's
a problem, the workers don't get to wait for a nice day to fix them.

So, yeah. I asked. And, I should have known better...

Kim W5TIT

I'll sum it up this way: Each and every person makes some sort of
contribution to a community/society, and is also a burden of some sort
too. Some people give more than they take, others take more than they
give. To judge someone, you need to know the sum total of what they
give and take, not just one item.

The person calling others "welfare freeloaders" doesn't know what he's
writing about. His opinion is not based on facts, and was developed
with faulty logic.

Of course he's entitled to any opinion he wants. Just as people are
entitled to believe that the earth is flat and/or less than 7000 years
old. Or that the moon landings were staged. Or any of many other things
that are simply not true.


73 de Jim, N2EY