"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
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. 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?
I don't agree with Geo on much, but politically he's
seems to have the same views as I, but should I disagree
with that because I don't like him?

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.


Landshark

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 05:21:07 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
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?

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, to
frivolous lawsuits, to the creation and expansion of federal taxes, to
affirmative action, 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.

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. They did little to
truly earn their money. Their job is to play make believe, so it
should come as no surprise that they are so naive about world affairs
and human nature.

I don't agree with Geo on much, but politically he's
seems to have the same views as I, but should I disagree
with that because I don't like him?

You should ask Frank that one, as he seems to have soured considerably
in his opinion of me since he found out that I was one of those
stuffy, old fashioned conservatives.

I try to keep things civil, and in fact, I try to keep politics out of
the discussion. But ol' Frank can resist the temptation to fling a
little barb at me in the middle of a totally unrelated subject.
Because I disagree with him politically, he's now challenging my
expertise in radio repair.

Not that it bothers me much. If this newsgroup ever prompted an
emotional reaction from me, I'd just shut it off.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 05:21:07 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote:


"Dave Hall" wrote in message
. ..
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?

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, to
frivolous lawsuits, to the creation and expansion of federal taxes, to
affirmative action, 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.

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. They did little to
truly earn their money. Their job is to play make believe, so it
should come as no surprise that they are so naive about world affairs
and human nature.

I don't agree with Geo on much, but politically he's
seems to have the same views as I, but should I disagree
with that because I don't like him?

You should ask Frank that one, as he seems to have soured considerably
in his opinion of me since he found out that I was one of those
stuffy, old fashioned conservatives.

I try to keep things civil, and in fact, I try to keep politics out of
the discussion. But ol' Frank can resist the temptation to fling a
little barb at me in the middle of a totally unrelated subject.
Because I disagree with him politically, he's now challenging my
expertise in radio repair.

Not that it bothers me much. If this newsgroup ever prompted an
emotional reaction from me, I'd just shut it off.

Dave
"Sandbagger"


_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:11:41 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

snip
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, to
frivolous lawsuits, to the creation and expansion of federal taxes, to
affirmative action.....


What's your problem with affirmative action?

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:11:41 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

snip
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, to
frivolous lawsuits, to the creation and expansion of federal taxes, to
affirmative action.....


What's your problem with affirmative action?

Well I'm a business owner that has contracts with
the city of Issaquah Washington. As an independent
contractor with the city, I must adhere to their rules on affirmative action
employment.
So rather than hire a electrical engineer of 30 years
experience who was Caucasian, I have to hire an employee
of color, with less experience. That now means possibly more training,
inferior quality work, more issues with their work
because of their lack of experience.
Why as a business owner must I be FORCED to hire
someone of less experience to meet affirmative action
requirements? Why can't I just hire the right person for the
job, no matter what their color of skin is?

Landshark


--
__
o /' )
/' ( ,
__/' ) .' `;
o _.-~~~~' ``---..__ .' ;
_.--' b) LANDSHARK ``--...____. .'
( _. )). `-._
`\|\|\|\|)-.....___.- `-. __...--'-.'.
`---......____...---`.___.'----... .' `.;
`-` `

On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 04:12:59 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote in :


"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:11:41 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

snip
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, to
frivolous lawsuits, to the creation and expansion of federal taxes, to
affirmative action.....


What's your problem with affirmative action?

Well I'm a business owner that has contracts with
the city of Issaquah Washington. As an independent
contractor with the city, I must adhere to their rules on affirmative action
employment.
So rather than hire a electrical engineer of 30 years
experience who was Caucasian, I have to hire an employee
of color, with less experience. That now means possibly more training,
inferior quality work, more issues with their work
because of their lack of experience.
Why as a business owner must I be FORCED to hire
someone of less experience to meet affirmative action
requirements? Why can't I just hire the right person for the
job, no matter what their color of skin is?


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. 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.

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. 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?

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 04:12:59 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote in :


"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:11:41 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

snip
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, to
frivolous lawsuits, to the creation and expansion of federal taxes, to
affirmative action.....


What's your problem with affirmative action?

Well I'm a business owner that has contracts with
the city of Issaquah Washington. As an independent
contractor with the city, I must adhere to their rules on affirmative
action
employment.
So rather than hire a electrical engineer of 30 years
experience who was Caucasian, I have to hire an employee
of color, with less experience. That now means possibly more training,
inferior quality work, more issues with their work
because of their lack of experience.
Why as a business owner must I be FORCED to hire
someone of less experience to meet affirmative action
requirements? Why can't I just hire the right person for the
job, no matter what their color of skin is?


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. 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.

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. 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?






_________________________________________
Usenet Zone Free Binaries Usenet Server
More than 120,000 groups
Unlimited download
http://www.usenetzone.com to open account

I AM NOT 172.142.29.246 wrote in message
...

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 04:12:59 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote in :


"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:11:41 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

snip
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, to
frivolous lawsuits, to the creation and expansion of federal taxes, to
affirmative action.....


What's your problem with affirmative action?

Well I'm a business owner that has contracts with
the city of Issaquah Washington. As an independent
contractor with the city, I must adhere to their rules on affirmative
action
employment.
So rather than hire a electrical engineer of 30 years
experience who was Caucasian, I have to hire an employee
of color, with less experience. That now means possibly more training,
inferior quality work, more issues with their work
because of their lack of experience.
Why as a business owner must I be FORCED to hire
someone of less experience to meet affirmative action
requirements? Why can't I just hire the right person for the
job, no matter what their color of skin is?


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. 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.

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. 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?

Doug, you really do have some serious mental issues.
You are deliberately cross posting everything just to create flames.


Landshark


--
__
o /' )
/' ( ,
__/' ) .' `;
o _.-~~~~' ``---..__ .' ;
_.--' b) LANDSHARK ``--...____. .'
( _. )). `-._
`\|\|\|\|)-.....___.- `-. __...--'-.'.
`---......____...---`.___.'----... .' `.;
`-` `

"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 04:12:59 GMT, "Landshark"
wrote in :


"Frank Gilliland" wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 25 Jan 2005 12:11:41 -0500, Dave Hall
wrote in :

snip
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, to
frivolous lawsuits, to the creation and expansion of federal taxes, to
affirmative action.....


What's your problem with affirmative action?

Well I'm a business owner that has contracts with
the city of Issaquah Washington. As an independent
contractor with the city, I must adhere to their rules on affirmative
action
employment.
So rather than hire a electrical engineer of 30 years
experience who was Caucasian, I have to hire an employee
of color, with less experience. That now means possibly more training,
inferior quality work, more issues with their work
because of their lack of experience.
Why as a business owner must I be FORCED to hire
someone of less experience to meet affirmative action
requirements? Why can't I just hire the right person for the
job, no matter what their color of skin is?


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.

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.


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.

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.
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.

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.

Landshark

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.


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.


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?


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,


(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.