|
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:26:22 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in : On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:27:04 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: We live in a society. This has obvious benefits, but it also demands some responsibilities. One of those responsibilites is to make sure everyone has a reasonable opportunity to succeed and not become a burden on our society. No, that is not necessarily true. We have the responsibility as a society to provide opportunities. But we bare no responsibility to guarantee success. I said nothing about a guarantee of success, only the opportunity to succeed. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Your horse is drinking from the wrong end if you think an "opportunity" is also a "guarantee". But because there are racist attitudes among many employers, there are fewer opportunities for people of other races. It then becomes the responsibility of everyone else to pick up the slack left by the racists. That's why we have affirmative action. I think we all understand why AA came to be. The problem is that what AA does in essence, is to fight discrimination with reverse discrimination. Yes it is. The difference is that opportunities are lost when racial discrimination is based on prejudice; lost opportunities are regained when discrimination is used to counter the consequences of prejudice. Is it fair, that someone who is not a part of the recognized minority (And this is not just blacks. It could be women, latinos, gays, or anyone who isn't a WASP male), who goes through the right hoops, studies hard, and works to make his place in society, only to have his "place" taken from him and given to an arbitrary person of recognized minority status, who did not work nearly as hard? I think you switched positions in mid-speech, but I understood what you were saying. I lost my job at HP because of AA but I didn't lay down a die. I had a pretty good resume and a fine recommendation. It wasn't long before I had another job. And it worked out for the best since the local HP plant turned sour a short time later. I have plenty of opportunities and I can afford to give up a few for a good cause. So don't blame the government and don't blame people "of color". Blame Canada..... (hehe, just kidding). The problem originates with racist attitudes which have been around for quite a while and aren't going away anytime soon. Minority people share much of the responsibility for their own situation. Many throw up their hands when things get tough and simply blame it on the "white folks". You actually think that kind of projection is exclusive to minorities? Look in the mirror, Dave -- in many of your posts over the years you have clearly stated that you don't want to share the responsibilities of society, so you blame all the country's problems on the liberals. That's prejudice, Dave. While racism is still alive and well in many places, it's a shadow of what it was 50 years ago. It's just hiding in the shadows. And in the airports since the Patriot Act went into effect. Racial profiling, despite Bush's excuse that it weeds out terrorists, is nothing more than racial discrimination based upon prejudice. BTW, ever hear of Mark Fuhrman? He lives in Idaho right across the state line from here, and just a few miles from where Richard Butler had his neo-Nazi compound which drew support from anonymous people all across the nation. But I suppose you're right, racism is pretty much dead, huh? By cooperating with Affirmative Action you are shouldering the responsibilities that are shirked by racist employers, and for that you should be commended -- after all, nobody is forcing you to do business with Issaquah, are they? I'd be curious as to some of the claims of racism. How many people of recognized minority status who claim "racism" or discrimination, are simply playing that card as a cover for simply being inferior to another potential job candidate? I'd be curious to know how many people use that argument to justify their racism? Then you have to consider that the more we make laws and policies that highlight and call attention to our differences, the more they will remain? The answer to true equality in not to emphasize our differences, but to eliminate them. Just one "master race", huh Dave? |
N3CVJ wrote:
Where is the proof that Bush is a "criminal"? Frank Gilliland wrote: (How about his conviction for DUI? That alone defines him as a criminal.) N3CVJ wrote: And Clinton never inhaled Focused, Dave, remain focused on your inquiry. (But did dodge the draft) so what's your point? Your failure to grasp what's given to you is the point,,,you asked what makes Bush a criminal, you were proven it, and you are pooping yourself tlaking about Clinton ,,,,, Only conviction of a crime makes one a criminal, not your self-professed "empirical observations" which bring us your acknowledged hallucinations of hams agreeing with your ridiculous claim that roger beeps are illegal. How does a DUI conviction that happened many years ago affect his leadership of the country now? You're grasping at straws Frank... You were answered. The straws are yours. |
David Berkowitz; either the dog spoke or he
lied about it. Son of Sam maintained regular communication with the neighbor's dog. |
"itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... Frank Gilliland wrote in : If you have a scanner, spend a few days listening in on some of your neighbors' telephone conversations. You might be suprised. That would make you a criminal Frank. ****ing Hypocrite assclown Only cell phone conversations are protected. |
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 22:58:07 GMT, "U Know Who"
wrote in : "itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge" wrote in message ... Frank Gilliland wrote in : If you have a scanner, spend a few days listening in on some of your neighbors' telephone conversations. You might be suprised. That would make you a criminal Frank. ****ing Hypocrite assclown Only cell phone conversations are protected. Don't waste your time responding to Race Warrior -- he's just bitter and refuses to do anything constructive with his miserable life. ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message ... On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:01:09 GMT, "Landshark" wrote in : "Frank Gilliland" wrote in message . .. snip We live in a society. This has obvious benefits, but it also demands some responsibilities. One of those responsibilites is to make sure everyone has a reasonable opportunity to succeed and not become a burden on our society. If one goes to school, gets an education, promotes that education by further schooling, aggressively seeks employment, maintains that employment showing a commitment to the employer and his business, then he's is not being a burden on society. That opportunity is there for almost everyone, they have to "want" it, not expect it. See below. But because there are racist attitudes among many employers, there are fewer opportunities for people of other races. It then becomes the responsibility of everyone else to pick up the slack left by the racists. That's why we have affirmative action. I don't believe that's prevalent anymore. If we were in the 50's, 60's & even the early 70's I would say yes, but I feel it's not the case now. I used to think that way. But over the years I've seen that racial discrimination is present just as much as it was before -- it's just not as visible. That maybe so, but where I live and have gone I don't see it. So don't blame the government and don't blame people "of color". Blame Canada..... (hehe, just kidding). Nope, don't blame them, but do blame Canada ;) The problem originates with racist attitudes which have been around for quite a while and aren't going away anytime soon. Those will always be around, affirmative action or not, but again I feel that's far & few in between. If you have a scanner, spend a few days listening in on some of your neighbors' telephone conversations. You might be suprised. Nah, no thanks. I've got way to much stuff to do before I start to worry about my neighbors. By cooperating with Affirmative Action you are shouldering the responsibilities that are shirked by racist employers, and for that you should be commended -- after all, nobody is forcing you to do business with Issaquah, are they? If my business is with them, why must I be forced to "not" do business with them? Because my company has 12 employee's, all qualified to do the job, but none are of "color" or just one person, so that's not enough. If I remember right, there's a minimum number of employees you must have before you are required to comply with AA. Is 12 over that threshold? I don't own a business, I was using that as an example. I thnk you are right though, it's probally more like 20 or 30 people. My last job I was a manager, I did the hiring & firing and to me I didn't care what color you were, just so you did the job & did it well. That attitude is the same where I'm at now. We have people of color, women working there. I remember a person of color hired and was asked to take the owners truck over to the car wash and have them wash it. He refused and said it was a job that degraded him. I LOL!!! I had done that very same job a dozen times, among many others when I first started there, I didn't care, just as long as I was paid. I understand what you are saying and I agree completely. It would be great if everyone was color-blind. But that's just not the case. It has lot to do with attitude, people have become complacent and started to live off of welfare, SSI, disability etc. Those programs were only meant as a crutch, but have grown into basically an income for those that don't want to work .....people like Eric, Don't know. If what that guy posts about him yes, that's correct, but again, I don't know Eric. (I saw it for years when working in SF). Some truly need those programs and don't abuse them, but more than not abuse it and almost never have to work because people like you & I support them with "our" hard earned taxes. Yep. But eliminating the programs hurt the people they were intended to help. The problem is the abuse, not the programs. Agreed. every time you start to investigate abuse of these programs, "activist" jump & down about the poor being singled out. You'll never see these programs shut down, to many people that are getting rich off them, will complain to the activist and they in-turn will protest and get a hold of the media and start their little show of "they are trying to persecute us because we are poor". Landshark -- Is it so frightening to have me at your shoulder? Thunder and lightning couldn't be bolder. I'll write on your tombstone, ``I thank you for dinner.'' This game that we animals play is a winner. |
"Dave Hall" wrote in message ... On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:01:09 GMT, "Landshark" wrote: We live in a society. This has obvious benefits, but it also demands some responsibilities. One of those responsibilites is to make sure everyone has a reasonable opportunity to succeed and not become a burden on our society. If one goes to school, gets an education, promotes that education by further schooling, aggressively seeks employment, maintains that employment showing a commitment to the employer and his business, then he's is not being a burden on society. That opportunity is there for almost everyone, they have to "want" it, not expect it. That's called personal responsibility. It's at the core of the conservative mantra. But because there are racist attitudes among many employers, there are fewer opportunities for people of other races. It then becomes the responsibility of everyone else to pick up the slack left by the racists. That's why we have affirmative action. I don't believe that's prevalent anymore. If we were in the 50's, 60's & even the early 70's I would say yes, but I feel it's not the case now. I never see racism in my daily conduction of business. We employ all sorts of diverse ethnic people. Nobody even thinks about it. Oh it's out there Dave, it's just not as bad or prevalent as it was. In fact, when I see some of the older members of my family and they let out a racially insensitive comment, it makes me cringe. But there are people of recognized minority status who "play" the system. The problem is that when the majority tries to open up dialog to address this subject, they are shouted down and demonized by the opposition by calling the discussions "racist", "sexist", or "xenophobic". I applaud Bill Cosby for speaking out and highlighting many of the problems which are affecting the black community. Maybe coming from one of their own, the dialog might stand a better chance of happening. Yup, that's true too, but again, it's a mind set that was caused because of the large amount of racism, a long time ago. So don't blame the government and don't blame people "of color". Blame Canada..... (hehe, just kidding). Nope, don't blame them, but do blame Canada ;) You're such a hoser! Take off eh? The problem originates with racist attitudes which have been around for quite a while and aren't going away anytime soon. Those will always be around, affirmative action or not, but again I feel that's far & few in between. By cooperating with Affirmative Action you are shouldering the responsibilities that are shirked by racist employers, and for that you should be commended -- after all, nobody is forcing you to do business with Issaquah, are they? If my business is with them, why must I be forced to "not" do business with them? Because my company has 12 employee's, all qualified to do the job, but none are of "color" or just one person, so that's not enough. My last job I was a manager, I did the hiring & firing and to me I didn't care what color you were, just so you did the job & did it well. That attitude is the same where I'm at now. That is the only criteria that should be considered IMHO. We have people of color, women working there. I remember a person of color hired and was asked to take the owners truck over to the car wash and have them wash it. He refused and said it was a job that degraded him. And some wonder why many minority people are still falling short in the wealth category........ I LOL!!! I had done that very same job a dozen times, among many others when I first started there, I didn't care, just as long as I was paid. It has lot to do with attitude, people have become complacent and started to live off of welfare, SSI, disability etc. Those programs were only meant as a crutch, but have grown into basically an income for those that don't want to work (I saw it for years when working in SF). Some truly need those programs and don't abuse them, but more than not abuse it and almost never have to work because people like you & I support them with "our" hard earned taxes. And you can thank the liberals for creating the "entitlement" generation... Dave. Both sides of the spectrum play the game, Demo's play that side a little harder. Liberals & conservatives keep the country from swinging one way or the other politically. Your tax dollars NOT at work........ Dave "Sandbagger" Landshark -- __ o /' ) /' ( , __/' ) .' `; o _.-~~~~' ``---..__ .' ; _.--' b) LANDSHARK ``--...____. .' ( _. )). `-._ `\|\|\|\|)-.....___.- `-. __...--'-.'. `---......____...---`.___.'----... .' `.; `-` ` |
"Dave Hall" wrote in message ... On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 04:12:59 GMT, "Landshark" wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message . .. On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 05:21:07 GMT, "Landshark" wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message m... At least back before you guys found a common love for the wrong side of the political spectrum.... Dave "Sandbagger" What makes you think that "they" are on the wrong side of the political spectrum? Now think about it Dave, Frank has said a number of times he is not a liberal, he just doesn't like Bush's policy's. Yet he voted for Nader?(While also defending Kerry to the teeth) Doesn't that sound a bit off to you? If a conservative or even a moderate had a problem with Bush politically, do you think that they would vote for Nader? My dad's a republican, he voted for Nader. He hated Kerry, but disliked Bush just as much, so rather than not vote at all he voted for who "he" wanted. Was it simply a "protest" vote, or did he actually agree with his platform? Protest Twist is what I would say a liberal, but how does that make him on the "wrong side"? Because you don't agree with them, that makes them on the wrong side? No, not at all. But trust me, the liberal side of the political equation has done little to help and far more to ruin this country at practically every turn. From the creation of the welfare state, I'll agree there. to frivolous lawsuits, I don't see that being any fault of a political agenda. It's the whole liberal culture of deflecting responsibility. A conservative believes in personal responsibility. Meaning that if you run your foot over with a lawn mower, you smack yourself in the head for being an idiot, and then head to the emergency room. You don't now sue the lawn mower company and try to make a windfall from it. to the creation and expansion of federal taxes, Nixon, I think Regan, Bush Sr. raised taxes, along with Clinton so I again don't see a liberal agenda there. But if you look at WHY the taxes need to be raised, and the social programs that eat up much of it, you'll discover that they're not conservative. Oh, Regan had at the time the largest military budget in history that ate up the most money (I liked Regan). to affirmative action, I'll agree there to mollycoddling terrorists, liberals have been on the wrong side of history, and the wrong side for Americans. I could list a whole host of examples, but this is not the place for that. What about Saddam, Samosa, Shah of Iran, among many other dictators, heads of state that the US under many different administrations supported? We pick our business partners according do what they can do for us. If they later turn out to be "bad" people, we deal with them then. Liberals have all the best intentions. They are not "evil" people. They are just hopelessly naive and overly idealistic. It's no wonder that most Hollywierd types tend to be liberals. What about Arnold, Bo Derek, Bruce Willis, Tom Selleck, Dennis Miller, Mel Gibson, Chuck Norris, Ben Stein, Pat Sajak, Kelsey Grammer, Danny Aiello, Patricia Heaton and James Woods? What about them? I didn't say *all* Hollywierd types, I said most. Hell, Ronald Reagan, who was arguably the model of the modern conservative, was a former actor. But I can make a much longer list of the Hollywood Limousine liberals. Dave "Sandbagger" Landshark -- __ o /' ) /' ( , __/' ) .' `; o _.-~~~~' ``---..__ .' ; _.--' b) LANDSHARK ``--...____. .' ( _. )). `-._ `\|\|\|\|)-.....___.- `-. __...--'-.'. `---......____...---`.___.'----... .' `.; `-` ` |
"Landshark" wrote:
Oh, Regan had at the time the largest military budget in history that ate up the most money (I liked Regan). Yup, he had to make up for the peanut farmer and friends before him. They donut want to spend what it takes to be us. Best money spent lately..closed the Soviets right down. |
"Landshark" wrote:
You'll never see these programs shut down, to many people that are getting rich off them, will complain to the activist and they in-turn will protest and get a hold of the media and start their little show of "they are trying to persecute us because we are poor". Landshark There's reverse discrimination going on now, and it's not just in the job market. |
itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote: Dave Hall wrote in : I gave it to you. Now you grapple for an argument that could just as easily vindicate Ted Kennedy Ted Kennedy was responsible for the loss of a life. At the very least he should have been found guilty of negligent homicide. That's a far more serious charge than a simple DUI ticket. That is called a felony DUI which ted kennedy should have recieved. a simple dui is not called the same. That was a major err-ahhh. |
itoldyouiamnotiamnotgeorge
wrote: Dave Hall wrote in : Dave; either you violated federal laws with your illegal radio operation or you lied about it. So you are either a criminal or a liar. Which is it, Dave? I was a criminal, when I ran illegal equipment. That is no longer true. And so is Frank when he listens to his neighbors cordless phone convesations. I used to also, before I moved out here in the sticks. The cell phones usually suck cuz of switching. |
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:27:46 -0800, Frank Gilliland
wrote: On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 12:26:22 -0500, Dave Hall wrote in : On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 03:27:04 -0800, Frank Gilliland wrote: We live in a society. This has obvious benefits, but it also demands some responsibilities. One of those responsibilites is to make sure everyone has a reasonable opportunity to succeed and not become a burden on our society. No, that is not necessarily true. We have the responsibility as a society to provide opportunities. But we bare no responsibility to guarantee success. I said nothing about a guarantee of success, only the opportunity to succeed. No, but by acknowledging that some need the path made easier, you are in essence promoting a socialistic concept. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Your horse is drinking from the wrong end if you think an "opportunity" is also a "guarantee". Opportunity was what one makes by the efforts of their own doing. Success is capitalizing on that opportunity. But because there are racist attitudes among many employers, there are fewer opportunities for people of other races. It then becomes the responsibility of everyone else to pick up the slack left by the racists. That's why we have affirmative action. I think we all understand why AA came to be. The problem is that what AA does in essence, is to fight discrimination with reverse discrimination. Yes it is. The difference is that opportunities are lost when racial discrimination is based on prejudice; lost opportunities are regained when discrimination is used to counter the consequences of prejudice. Wrong. Lost opportunities are not regained, they are simply transferred to a different group of people who, in most cases, are more deserving of the opportunity since they worked harder for it. Is it fair, that someone who is not a part of the recognized minority (And this is not just blacks. It could be women, latinos, gays, or anyone who isn't a WASP male), who goes through the right hoops, studies hard, and works to make his place in society, only to have his "place" taken from him and given to an arbitrary person of recognized minority status, who did not work nearly as hard? I think you switched positions in mid-speech, No, I don't think so. but I understood what you were saying. I lost my job at HP because of AA but I didn't lay down a die. But I'd bet you were ****ed. But how does one "lose" a job due to AA? It isn't legal to lay off one person and hire another for the same job. I had a pretty good resume and a fine recommendation. It wasn't long before I had another job. And it worked out for the best since the local HP plant turned sour a short time later. I have plenty of opportunities and I can afford to give up a few for a good cause. It's not a good cause. It is building a bridge to make a career path easier for some, while that bridge is built on the backs of more deserving people, who are usually better qualified. So don't blame the government and don't blame people "of color". Blame Canada..... (hehe, just kidding). The problem originates with racist attitudes which have been around for quite a while and aren't going away anytime soon. Minority people share much of the responsibility for their own situation. Many throw up their hands when things get tough and simply blame it on the "white folks". You actually think that kind of projection is exclusive to minorities? No, it is normally a symptom of people who live on the lower rungs of the socio-economic scale. The problem is drawn across socio-economic lines rather than racial ones. The difference is that an unmotivated poor white guy is told "too bad", while an equally unmotivated poor black guy is given special treatment under the perception that his predicament is not of his own doing, but rather the fault of perceived racial prejudice. Look in the mirror, Dave -- in many of your posts over the years you have clearly stated that you don't want to share the responsibilities of society, so you blame all the country's problems on the liberals. That's prejudice, Dave. No that's called personal responsibility. I am responsible for MY contribution to society, no one else's. I don't want the government's help or hinderance in my pursuit of wealth and happiness. I don't believe that anyone should have it. You make your own life. If people are faced with a "do or die" scenario, there would be many less underachievers by necessity. And illegal immigrants would not be flocking here in as many droves if there were less "welfare" programs that pay them to do it. While racism is still alive and well in many places, it's a shadow of what it was 50 years ago. It's just hiding in the shadows. No, it's really not as bad. I've seen a marked decline in the last 20 years. I used to hear people make racially insensitive comments all the time back then. I hardly hear it now. It also offends me more now. And in the airports since the Patriot Act went into effect. Racial profiling, despite Bush's excuse that it weeds out terrorists, is nothing more than racial discrimination based upon prejudice. No, it is profiling based on statistical probability. How many terrorist acts have been carried out by 60 year old blonde females? BTW, ever hear of Mark Fuhrman? He lives in Idaho right across the state line from here, and just a few miles from where Richard Butler had his neo-Nazi compound which drew support from anonymous people all across the nation. But I suppose you're right, racism is pretty much dead, huh? Oooohhh You found one example, so that must mean that racism is rampant through typical communities. Yes, there are skin-head groups that preach white pride and make racially insensitive rhetoric. But they are a fringe and a minority group themselves. By cooperating with Affirmative Action you are shouldering the responsibilities that are shirked by racist employers, and for that you should be commended -- after all, nobody is forcing you to do business with Issaquah, are they? I'd be curious as to some of the claims of racism. How many people of recognized minority status who claim "racism" or discrimination, are simply playing that card as a cover for simply being inferior to another potential job candidate? I'd be curious to know how many people use that argument to justify their racism? I'd bet it was far fewer than those who try to use it to their advantage. There's a difference between racism- the hatred of another race for nothing more than superficial attributes, and the dislike of policies which either extend or deny privileges to any one or few groups of people over others. Then you have to consider that the more we make laws and policies that highlight and call attention to our differences, the more they will remain? The answer to true equality in not to emphasize our differences, but to eliminate them. Just one "master race", huh Dave? No, a homogeneous blending of all the races. A melting pot if you will. That's what America had been for many years. Dave "Sandbagger" |
On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 14:56:45 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:01:09 GMT, "Landshark" wrote: We live in a society. This has obvious benefits, but it also demands some responsibilities. One of those responsibilites is to make sure everyone has a reasonable opportunity to succeed and not become a burden on our society. If one goes to school, gets an education, promotes that education by further schooling, aggressively seeks employment, maintains that employment showing a commitment to the employer and his business, then he's is not being a burden on society. That opportunity is there for almost everyone, they have to "want" it, not expect it. That's called personal responsibility. It's at the core of the conservative mantra. But because there are racist attitudes among many employers, there are fewer opportunities for people of other races. It then becomes the responsibility of everyone else to pick up the slack left by the racists. That's why we have affirmative action. I don't believe that's prevalent anymore. If we were in the 50's, 60's & even the early 70's I would say yes, but I feel it's not the case now. I never see racism in my daily conduction of business. We employ all sorts of diverse ethnic people. Nobody even thinks about it. Oh it's out there Dave, it's just not as bad or prevalent as it was. No argument. But the fact that's it's disappeared from the workplace in my conduction of business, certainly means that it's not as bad as it used to be, or that some people think it is. In fact, when I see some of the older members of my family and they let out a racially insensitive comment, it makes me cringe. But there are people of recognized minority status who "play" the system. The problem is that when the majority tries to open up dialog to address this subject, they are shouted down and demonized by the opposition by calling the discussions "racist", "sexist", or "xenophobic". I applaud Bill Cosby for speaking out and highlighting many of the problems which are affecting the black community. Maybe coming from one of their own, the dialog might stand a better chance of happening. Yup, that's true too, but again, it's a mind set that was caused because of the large amount of racism, a long time ago. So don't blame the government and don't blame people "of color". Blame Canada..... (hehe, just kidding). Nope, don't blame them, but do blame Canada ;) You're such a hoser! Take off eh? The problem originates with racist attitudes which have been around for quite a while and aren't going away anytime soon. Those will always be around, affirmative action or not, but again I feel that's far & few in between. By cooperating with Affirmative Action you are shouldering the responsibilities that are shirked by racist employers, and for that you should be commended -- after all, nobody is forcing you to do business with Issaquah, are they? If my business is with them, why must I be forced to "not" do business with them? Because my company has 12 employee's, all qualified to do the job, but none are of "color" or just one person, so that's not enough. My last job I was a manager, I did the hiring & firing and to me I didn't care what color you were, just so you did the job & did it well. That attitude is the same where I'm at now. That is the only criteria that should be considered IMHO. We have people of color, women working there. I remember a person of color hired and was asked to take the owners truck over to the car wash and have them wash it. He refused and said it was a job that degraded him. And some wonder why many minority people are still falling short in the wealth category........ I LOL!!! I had done that very same job a dozen times, among many others when I first started there, I didn't care, just as long as I was paid. It has lot to do with attitude, people have become complacent and started to live off of welfare, SSI, disability etc. Those programs were only meant as a crutch, but have grown into basically an income for those that don't want to work (I saw it for years when working in SF). Some truly need those programs and don't abuse them, but more than not abuse it and almost never have to work because people like you & I support them with "our" hard earned taxes. And you can thank the liberals for creating the "entitlement" generation... Dave. Both sides of the spectrum play the game, Demo's play that side a little harder. Liberals & conservatives keep the country from swinging one way or the other politically. It's true that both sides have their respective agendas, but core conservative beliefs tend to lean toward those of personal responsibility, less government intrusion in our lives, and the maximization of capitalism. This is a great system for the Donald Trump types in the world with type "A" personalities, who are go-getters, and will make a buck any way they can. It's no so great for those who aren't motivated to do what needs to be done to get ahead in life. Liberals are "the great protectors". They are the ones who want to use the government to do what individual charity already does, only extend it. The more you offer aid and comfort to people who are otherwise able bodied, the less incentive they have to work on their own. And the less they value what they achieve. Dave "Sandbagger" |
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 15:41:27 -0500, (I
AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote: From: (Dave*Hall) On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 10:55:08 -0500, (I AmnotGeorgeBush) wrote: I'm not the one who changes my screen name at the drop of a hat. Quite right,,you're the one who changes their access path to the group with different servers at the drop of a hat.. You give me far more credit than I deserve. I give you credit for exactly what you deserve. I use a single newserver to access this newsgroup. Nothing else. Nevertheless, your access path has changed So? It's no secret that I have a different IP when I'm at work versus when I'm at home. But the news server is the same. Always has been. Now go change your NIC again and spin this a bit more.... Dave "Sandbagger" |
"Dave Hall" wrote in message ... On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 14:56:45 GMT, "Landshark" wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message . .. I never see racism in my daily conduction of business. We employ all sorts of diverse ethnic people. Nobody even thinks about it. Oh it's out there Dave, it's just not as bad or prevalent as it was. No argument. But the fact that's it's disappeared from the workplace in my conduction of business, certainly means that it's not as bad as it used to be, or that some people think it is. Well I'm sure it's still active in some area's and probably outright too. But overall, in major city and urban area's it's not the case. Dave. Both sides of the spectrum play the game, Demo's play that side a little harder. Liberals & conservatives keep the country from swinging one way or the other politically. It's true that both sides have their respective agendas, but core conservative beliefs tend to lean toward those of personal responsibility, less government intrusion in our lives, and the maximization of capitalism. This is a great system for the Donald Trump types in the world with type "A" personalities, who are go-getters, and will make a buck any way they can. It's no so great for those who aren't motivated to do what needs to be done to get ahead in life. Liberals are "the great protectors". They are the ones who want to use the government to do what individual charity already does, only extend it. The more you offer aid and comfort to people who are otherwise able bodied, the less incentive they have to work on their own. And the less they value what they achieve. Well as it's been said, those are your beliefs, more power to you. I personally believe without both sides, if one party has total power over the other, it would be an ugly thing. Dave "Sandbagger" |
Heheh..Dave,. your linkage has slipped again. Here's a few more
N3CVJ-isms to keep you spinning and paying proper homage over the weekend. It's also of very interesting note you are the only one who hasn't been forged in this group,,your timing of the forges and your "gay attacks" on Frank and the group were not only coincidental, but impeccable. Your voice is no longer one of integrity or even remote reason. Off you go, now. - N3CVJ-isms: "I really can't condemn illegal operation, since I've been involved in it as well. But I am really becoming disgusted with the degree and sheer volume of operators that seemingly have the goods." "Once one chooses to engage in the criminal mentality of breaking federal law, they can no longer be trusted." N3CVJ "I=A0try not to come down hard on illegal radio operators, since I'd be hypocritical in doing so" N3CVJ "If the shoe fits..if you don't like being called a federal criminal perhaps you should change your ways" (in regards to dx) N3CVJ "I find it just a tad disgusting that poor, unskilled, Hispanic people can come to this country" N3CVJ "I have ALWAYS used this account that you see here." (voicenet) N3CVJ "I've always accessed this group in the same manner" (supernews) N3CVJ .........in addition to Sprint (via Bedford County Computer Services in Roaring Sprig, Pa.), Yipes! Qwest, usenetserver.com,ucis.vill.edu, cats.vill.edu, ptd.net "Calls to the FCC fall on deaf ears, and I am into radio to enjoy myself, not to create friction with various groups. Maybe my approach is a bit of a cop-out, but personally, as long as they don't affect my operation then I have nothing to complain about. Life is too full of aggrevation (sic) as it is, I'm not going to look for it in my hobbies" N3CVJ "Perhaps not. But calls to the FCC are one way to fight back" N3CVJ "Some of the excuses and reasons I've heard so far are feeble at best. There is really NO legitimate reason for ANY ham to need general coverage transmit, unless he planned on USING It" N3CVJ "I can now access the worldlynx news server from other internet means." (US West) N3CVJ =A0"I have always had the ability to access the INTERNET through a T1 line, as well as my dialup account." N3CV "Canada must be a wonderful place. There the Cops are radio literate, the truckers are couteous, and intelligent, and people obey all facets of the law. And best of all, a 29 cent wire dipole will outperform a $100 "gain" vertical. If it wasn't so dang cold, I'd love to move there ;)" N3CVJ "I don't typically modify radios (unless they want to pay dearly for it) N3CVJ "I seem to find a disproportionate amount of females on ham radio. That's why I like cb" N3CVJ "I find truckers are the worst radio operators on the band" N3CVJ "The biggest problem on CB today is ignorance" N3CVJ "Roger beeps are illegal" N3CVJ "You can't produce a rule saying they (roger beeps) are legal" N3CVJ "You are a federal criminal. It (the dx rule) is federal law" N3CVJ "Most hams still respect the rules, and would not be an accomplise (sic) to a criminal act" N3CVJ "My point is that hams are just as capable of being negligent of the rules as CBers." N3CVJ |
|
On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 15:02:22 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message .. . On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 14:56:45 GMT, "Landshark" wrote: "Dave Hall" wrote in message ... I never see racism in my daily conduction of business. We employ all sorts of diverse ethnic people. Nobody even thinks about it. Oh it's out there Dave, it's just not as bad or prevalent as it was. No argument. But the fact that's it's disappeared from the workplace in my conduction of business, certainly means that it's not as bad as it used to be, or that some people think it is. Well I'm sure it's still active in some area's and probably outright too. But overall, in major city and urban area's it's not the case. Well sure. Some people also hide it better. But it appears that we're heading in the right direction. Dave. Both sides of the spectrum play the game, Demo's play that side a little harder. Liberals & conservatives keep the country from swinging one way or the other politically. It's true that both sides have their respective agendas, but core conservative beliefs tend to lean toward those of personal responsibility, less government intrusion in our lives, and the maximization of capitalism. This is a great system for the Donald Trump types in the world with type "A" personalities, who are go-getters, and will make a buck any way they can. It's no so great for those who aren't motivated to do what needs to be done to get ahead in life. Liberals are "the great protectors". They are the ones who want to use the government to do what individual charity already does, only extend it. The more you offer aid and comfort to people who are otherwise able bodied, the less incentive they have to work on their own. And the less they value what they achieve. Well as it's been said, those are your beliefs, more power to you. I personally believe without both sides, if one party has total power over the other, it would be an ugly thing. Yes, it would. If, for no other reason, having two diametrically opposed political ideologies provides perspective. I doubt is there is a single person who is either 100% liberal or conservative. Most of us pick and choose certain parts of each "a la carte" to add to their own beliefs. The majority of those determines our overall slant. Dave "Sandbagger" |
I bought a Realistic TRC 465 SSB which receives but only hums on
transmit. Can anyone recommend a GOOD cb shop for repairs? I really want to use this radio and would like it fixed. Thanks. |
Communication Experts
www.communicationsexperts.com "Barry" wrote in message ... I bought a Realistic TRC 465 SSB which receives but only hums on transmit. Can anyone recommend a GOOD cb shop for repairs? I really want to use this radio and would like it fixed. Thanks. |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:52 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com