In remembrance of 9/11/01



Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register.
Nov 22nd, 2017, 7:06pm EST

Home Home Help Help Search Search Members Members GamesGames Login Login Register Register
Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic:  Politics

"Welcome to 'the Gridiron'... Fantasy football at its best!"

Fantasy Football News Feed Co-commissioner Services Add "the Gridiron" to your site
Lend a hand... Make a donation to "the Gridiron"!!!
   Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron
   the Gridiron
   the Sidelines
(Moderators: Replay Official, Side Judge, Line Judge, Umpire, Head Linesman, Back Judge, Field Judge, Referee)
   G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic:  Politics
No topic|Next topic
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12  ...  24 Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print
   Author  Topic: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic:  Politics  (Read 52378 times)
MordecaiCourage
Guest

Email

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #225 on: Jun 25th, 2006, 4:51pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

If you are a Democrat I apologize ahead of time. I know that this has a decidedly Republican slant. I am sure that the Republican party has just as many glaring faults within the FICA program. Do not shoot me, I am just a messenger.  
 
Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social
 Security (FICA) Program. He promised:
 
 1.) That participation in the Program would be
 completely voluntary,
 
 2.) That the participants would only have to pay
 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual
 incomes into the Program,
 
3.) That the money the participants elected to put
 into the Program would be deductible from
 their income for tax purposes each year,
 
 4.) That the money the participants put into the
 independent "Trust Fund" rather than into the
 General operating fund, and therefore, would
Only be used to fund the Social Security
 Retirement Program, and no other
 Government program, and,
 
 5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees
 would never be taxed as income.
 
Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are
 now receiving a Social Security check every month --
 and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of
 The money we paid to the Federal government to "p u t
 away" -- you may be interested in the following:
 
Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent "Trust Fund" and put it into the General fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democratically Controlled House and Senate.
 
Q:   Which Political Party eliminated the income tax
Deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
A:  The Democratic Party.
 
Q:  Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?
A:  The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the "tie-breaking" deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US.
 
Q:  Which Political Party decided to start giving
annuity payments to immigrants?
A:  That's right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party.
 
Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65,
began to receive Social Security payments! The
Democratic Party gave these payments to them,
Even though they never paid a dime into it!
Then, after doing all this lying and thieving and  
violating of the original contract (FICA), the  Dems.     turn around and tell you that the Republicans want  
to take your Social Security away!
Logged
junkyardjake
GM
*****
# 58




"Do or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

   
View Profile WWW

Posts: 498

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #226 on: Jun 26th, 2006, 2:24pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Mordeci, great post, yes the social security system is a debacle. Obviously, the program was well-intentioned, but it is a great example of why government should be as limited and unintrusive as possible, and that personal accountability in retirement planning would probably work best.  There certainly have been many structural changes in the economy since the 1930's, the most significant of which as related to personal retirement planning is the accessibility of 401K savings accounts.  Seemingly, you would think that there should be little reason for retaining the social security system in it's current albatross form.
 
Of course, there still needs to remain some kind of safety net system for those who are incapable, or stubbornly refuse to save for their own retirements.  I've always thought that there should be a completely voluntary opt-out process, where you could take a standardized test to demonstrate your financial acumen and absolve yourself of the whole mess.  If you pass the test, which would primarily cover your knowledge of financial markets, retirement options, basic accounting etc...., you could elect to no longer pay into the system.
 
If you fail the test, or otherwise decide to stay in the system, then you have your government account.  One huge difference from the current system however, is that every dollar you put into the system should go to buying Treasury notes, which at worst earn around 3-4% a year (They have earned as much as 11% during periods of high inflation).  Under the current system you don't see any direct correlation between your savings and a return of your savings.  In fact, I've it was effectively around an annual 1% ?
 
Speaking of 1%, it's also interesting to look at the origins of the federal income tax.  According to Wikipedia, in 1913 when the first income tax was introduced 'Congress levied a 1% tax on net personal incomes above $3,000 with a 6% surtax on incomes of more than $500,000'.   Look at what a monster that has turned into.
 
The other real tragedy with the current system is the extent to which so much social security money is allocated to inefficient government spending, completely unrelated from it's original purpose.  The macroeconomic consequences of this are not insignificant, government expenditure 'crowds out' productive investment.  A simple example- instead of private capital that have been used to help finance the development of a solar powered car, we instead finance the building of a bridge in Alaska for a town with a population of 300 persons, or use more money to pay farmers not to plant anything.
 
One thing though, I'm not sure it's entirely appropriate to cast the blame on any one party.  Let's face it, long are the days since the financial conservatism of Barry Goldwater, Ronald Reagan, and even Newt Gringich.  The current Republican party has proven that they can be as fiscally irresponsible as any loony democrat:
 

Logged

"A child of five could understand this (someone fetch me a child of five)" - Groucho Marx
junkyardjake
GM
*****
# 58




"Do or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

   
View Profile WWW

Posts: 498

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #227 on: Jun 26th, 2006, 2:27pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Jun 19th, 2006, 5:36pm, StegRock wrote:



 
I would have to say, that is the most eloquent, well-reasoned 'fuck you' message I think I have ever seen.  Not to say I didn't deserve it, I was just tired of hearing alot of my points trifled away as 'conspiracy theories', and then to top it off, you had to trash my Jets.
 
In any event, you have a real gift.  
Logged

"A child of five could understand this (someone fetch me a child of five)" - Groucho Marx
junkyardjake
GM
*****
# 58




"Do or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

   
View Profile WWW

Posts: 498

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #228 on: Jun 26th, 2006, 2:43pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Jun 20th, 2006, 3:05am, StegRock wrote:
Just to get this out there...
 
I would defend Hillary Clinton if she were our President and the target of these over-the-top accusations.

 
That kind of virtue goes above and beyond that which could be expected of any American.  
 
on Jun 20th, 2006, 3:05am, StegRock wrote:

My wife, wondering if this BS is what's still causing me to be in a bit of a funk, wanted to discuss this with me and read through the thread. Her one comment, "This guy needs to live in China for a year."

 
I just heard an interesting story the other day about the 'Chinese Death Van', evidently the oppressive totalitarian society equivalent of the 'Publisher's Clearing House Prize Patrol'.   The key differences, of course, are that the probability of getting a visit from the death van are much higher than winning a sweepstakes, and when they stop by, there are no balloons, because their purpose is to snuff you out as a result of your political dissent or whatever other arbitrary reason. How any American is not ashamed of our free trade policy with that country is incomprehensible.
 
on Jun 20th, 2006, 3:05am, StegRock wrote:

Another question I'd like to throw out there,... what do you guys think of Tucker Carlson? I ask because I don't quite know what to make of the guy...

 
Really photogenic, well-prepared, smart guy, but completely partisan to the point where he almost reduces himself to irrelevancy.
 
Carlson kind of reminds me of a cross between an articulate Sean Hannity, and Johnny Depp, if Johnny Depp was a homo who wore bowties.
 
(Sorry, that was as complimentary as I could get with that guy).  
 
on Jun 20th, 2006, 3:05am, StegRock wrote:

And, what the hell,... I'll throw this one out there for Jake... JYJ, why do you think that theories like Griffin's don't really take hold?

 
If I had to guess, I would say the reason the American public does not pay sufficient attention to alternate media could be a general combination of three factors:
 
1) Optimism - For good reason, Americans are basically an optimistic bunch, residing in the greatest country in the world will certainly help enforce that kind of disposition.  Civil servants in this country are afforded a very strong rebuttable presumption of good faith.  Americans don't want to believe these people are not acting in the best interest of the country.
 
2) Stability of the political system - Our carefully crafted system of checks and balances, in most cases, ensures that when a breach of the public trust occurs, there will be consequences.  Ironically, alternative media, independent research, unfettered free expression, and the media in general, is instrumental in making sure this happens.
 
3) Shortage of time and short attention span -  Americans, especially in recent years, have incurred increased financial obligations, and the fact that so much of their income must be committed first to taxes (as alluded to indirectly by Mordeci above), makes it necessary to devote much of their time to attempting to attain financial stability.  This means, for example, many more working couples, much less free time as they attempt to catch up with family obligations when they are not chasing the dollar bills.  Bottom line, most Americans simply don't have time or patience to care about investigative reporting, and are generally content with relying on mainstream media sources, sources who generally try to remain as unprovocative, and sporadically sensationalistic as possible to balance the demands of their short attention audience, and their intolerant corporate sponsors.
Logged

"A child of five could understand this (someone fetch me a child of five)" - Groucho Marx
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: Tucker Carlson
« Reply #229 on: Jun 28th, 2006, 5:22am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Re:  Tucker Carlson
 
on Jun 26th, 2006, 2:43pm, junkyardjake wrote:
Really photogenic, well-prepared, smart guy, but completely partisan to the point where he almost reduces himself to irrelevancy.
 
Carlson kind of reminds me of a cross between an articulate Sean Hannity, and Johnny Depp, if Johnny Depp was a homo who wore bowties.
 
(Sorry, that was as complimentary as I could get with that guy).  

 
No need to be sorry...  In fact, I think we agree, and, furthermore, I think you have largely captured my sentiments about the guy that I couldn't put together... Hannity, who I find that I happen to often agree with, is ultimately WAY TOO partisan for my (true) tastes, so I realize that we are coming to our conclusions, similar though they often may be, in VERY different manners.  But, at least he is abundantly clear about his partisanness...  For him, he is working absolutely, but at least admittedly, in our two-party political system and he is fighting for what he thinks is the right side.  Again, I'm NOT endorsing that approach.  I think it's -headed.  What I would like to add to your commentary JYJ is that Carlson, besides all that you said, also seems to have a "wolf in sheep's clothing" aspect to him that makes him also seem disingenuous.  He is obviously partisan, but apparently wants to make it seem as though he entertains the ideas of the other side in a way that seems very insincere.  Hannity, again, not my favorite, at least doesn't do that, not that that is an ultimate saving grace.  I can surely appreciate where people who say they just can't stand Hannity are coming from.  It seems like Carlson avoids such backlash by "appearing" to play the middle when really his m.o. is virtually no different than Hannity's.  Maybe, all of what I'm saying here is what you were trying to capture when you threw in the Johnny Depp allusion.  Anyway, I think we are on the same page here.
Logged
junkyardjake
GM
*****
# 58




"Do or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

   
View Profile WWW

Posts: 498

Back to top

Re: Tucker Carlson
« Reply #230 on: Jun 28th, 2006, 1:53pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Jun 28th, 2006, 5:22am, StegRock wrote:
Re: Tucker Carlson
He is obviously partisan, but apparently wants to make it seem as though he entertains the ideas of the other side in a way that seems very insincere.... It seems like Carlson avoids such backlash by "appearing" to play the middle when really his m.o. is virtually no different than Hannity's.

 
That's an interesting observation.  Honestly, I haven't paid attention to him all that closely, I tend to quickly tune out anyone of those talking heads who seem overly subjective. (Maybe too quickly).  Carlson does seem overly subjective, but if he is also a phony, that makes him especially useless.  
Logged

"A child of five could understand this (someone fetch me a child of five)" - Groucho Marx
Tony_O
Guest

Email

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #231 on: Jun 28th, 2006, 2:47pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

Just my opinion........
 
If you guys took as much time to read the BIBLE as you do to read the writings of umimportant political authors or conspiriacy theories, you would be much better off.  
 
Heres a tip......Stop reading the newspaper and Stop watching the news.
 
The world is messed up and it's not going to get any better. Both parties have an agenda and both parties will lie, cheat, cover up, and kill to achieve it. (although I think the Democratic Presidents have been FAR greater for me as a person and my economic stability)  
 
All I "really"(and by really I mean spending a great amount of time on) focus on now is my relationship with my Savior, Jesus Christ, and my right standing with him. Granted, I love and honor my wife and kids, and I continue to work, provide, and have fun with my family. I still play Fantasy Football and have other interests, but they are secondary to my relationship with God, my helping others, spreading the gospel, and insuring that me and my family have attained salvation.
 
Steg, I'm sure your wife knows that in China they Kill more Christians then they do political malcontents!
 
Don't get my post wrong either....I'm not here to judge anyone. I just think there is a lot better things to do with your time than worry about what our government is doing or getting into dissagreements with someone else about their idea or view on the subject. For example, all it did for you Steve was make you upset and irritable in your house, in some way disturb your relationship with your wife, and waste countless hours of your time defending yourself to Jake.  
 
Take the time to enjoy yourself, enjoy your families, and focus on the things that really matter.
 
WHERE AM I GOING WHEN I DIE??????
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #232 on: Jun 28th, 2006, 4:45pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Is this the same Tony_O who said at a time that if I were standing before him saying what I was saying I'd be picking my teeth up off the ground? ... Maybe it is... Maybe it isn't... It's all good... I'm just going to say this... As long as it, the debate, the discussion, doesn't end acrimoniously/mentally unresolved in the end, it's all good. Yes, I was aggravated. But, through (exposing oneself to non-trivial (we can differ on what's trivial and not trivial;... for me, traffic - trivial; engaging and even contentious discussion on matters of life, including but not limited to politics, religion, philosophy, world-views, psychology, etc. - not trivial)) aggravation, and a panoply of other emotions, comes growth and really getting to know people (beyond the veneer). Truth be said, I only went out of my way to express the aggravation I was enduring... when, in fact, as things come to a head here and there on this thread and there's some give-and-take, even in just the slightest of ways, there is GREAT SATISFACTION... and not just in merely "winning", but in the feeling that you have come to understand another human being (moreover, someone who you are working somewhat closely with on a project) more deeply, and, furthermore, to a degree that outweighs the aggravation endured tenfold. It's a mental and emotional investment not all too different from a financial one. This place (from a strict financial perspective) does nothing but consume my time and money, but it all seems so worth it when someone throws me a 20 spot or whatever to "help the cause" because it "substantively" shows that they appreciate and endorse my efforts. If I wanted to really avoid aggravation, I'd have dropped "the Gridiron" like a hot potato long ago. In fact, it is my "tolerance" for it that keeps this place alive... and well.
 
Anyway,... now we're talking politics AND RELIGION! YIKES!!! My toes are feeling pretty raw! But, I am going to keep this innocuous (though I know there is a caustic response to your post (especially the "WHERE AM I GOING WHEN I DIE?" part), which I truly do have NO interest in getting into (that's why I went with "politics" here with this thread rather than "religion", contentious, but not that contentious))... As for me,... I have a "deistish" approach to life which is VERY fulfilling... As for the American brand of Christianity,... it's all good... as can the Korean brand of Buddhism be... and so on. I lean toward what I was raised in, Roman Catholicism,... but whatever. My extended family covers the range of denominations from Roman Catholics to Born-again Baptists,... and via my wife's family, Buddhists. Mainly (as per my dissertational interests which I mentioned earlier), I am just a fan of the philosophy of Karol Wojtyla, Pope John Paul II (popularly known as Personalism, but I think that is a limiting term). I am also a fan of the philosophy of Tenzen Gyatso, The Dalai Lama (popularly known as Tibetan Zen Buddhism, but, again, I think that is a limiting label). ... Anyway, I am sure that you are not saying that Christianity puts you in a state of ultimate and absolute beatitude. It just helps you find solace amidst the aggravations of the world. It doesn't eliminate them. It is just that mine are on display here on "the Gridiron" because,... well,... first off, this is my "home (away from home)" to some degree (a degree, though, with all due respect to the amount of time some of you guys hang out here, you cannot begin to fathom) but, furthermore, because I tend to deal with people in life and, in any event, run this place with my heart on my sleeve and, moreover, with the eye of a perfectionist wanting to (do his best to) do things the right and fair way.
 
I appreciate the sentiments, at any rate, though, Toner.
« Last Edit: Jun 28th, 2006, 11:56pm by Stegfucius » Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #233 on: Jul 4th, 2006, 2:00am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I DIGRESS...
    I'm just going to throw this little tidbit out there for those interested to chew on...
     
    Some people are "outside -> in" people, searching for the truth "outside" in the world or from above and bringing it in. VERY generally speaking, we in the West, e.g. Christians as well as scientists in the western tradition, tend in this direction. Other people are "inside -> out" people, searching for the truth "inside" themselves and extending it out to the world. Again, VERY generally speaking, people in the East, e.g. Buddhists, Confucians and Daoists, tend this way. I personally lean toward the latter (in fact, "from within" is where I believe it, the journey, must begin,... but understand that what I am talking about is NOT analogous to praying to God or having a "personal" relationship with Christ), but was raised in and have an appreciation of the former. Ultimately,... when it's all clicking,... it should be an outward spiral,... inside -> out and outside -> in and around and around, increasing in scope (understanding/enlightenment) with each cycle.
     
    Anyway,... I am not going to write it "ALL" out here and now. This is not the right place, both generally and specifically, nor the right time. In fact, displaying the "WHOLE" picture isn't even an option yet for me. It's a work in progress. The proof, in any event, does not come in the form of (persuasive) writing/discussion. The proof is in the pudding, and the pudding is life itself. Also, I really don't have a whole lot figured out, anyway. I am on the right path, I believe, a really good one, at any rate (in VERY short, that of the examined life). I think I have a great understanding of the "how" of things (which is what I think must be tackled first, in any case), but most of the "whats" and "whys" still elude me. So, someday I'll right my spiel on the deal (there go those rhymin' skillz again). The reason for waiting, again, is twofold. One, after (many) more years of living, I'll (potentially) have more "proof in the pudding" to present. Two, I'll (potentially) be more the wiser, having nailed the how and figured out some of the key whats and whys and being able to intelligibly relate it all. Furthermore, from a practical perspective, I will (God and me willing) have that Ph.D. in Philosophy to lend credence to my words.
     
    So, in lieu of "spelling it ALL out" as if,... I would surely welcome questions and conversation if you actually have a "sincere" interest in what Steggie's "deal" might be. We shouldn't do that here, however. If you want to shoot some questions my way or strike up a conversation about this "real life" stuff, it would be better to do so via this old thread:
     
    http://www.fantasyfootballer.com/cgi-bin/theGridiron/YaBB.cgi?board=58;a ction=display;num=1037120039.
     
    Again,... I'm NOT up for a debate with this stuff. This is about living life and how I "live" mine, which I am absolutely content with and (as such) am willing to share (like I do this very site). This is NOT a "topic" up for debate, per se, BUT one that could be "conversed" about if for some "odd" reason you're interested... in seeing what makes the old Stegger here tick. So, if you want a little "Steggie" style dharma talk, head on over to that thread and let's talk... ...
« Last Edit: Jul 4th, 2006, 2:01am by Stegfucius » Logged
junkyardjake
GM
*****
# 58




"Do or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

   
View Profile WWW

Posts: 498

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #234 on: Jul 6th, 2006, 12:31am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

The always incisive Ron Paul....  If only we had around 500 more congressman like him.  
 
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst070306.htm
 
A New Declaration  
 
July 3,  2006    
 
On the fourth day of July, in 1776, a small group of men, representing 13 colonies in the far-off Americas, boldly told the most powerful nation on earth that they were free.  
 
They declared, in terms that still are radical today, that all men are created equal, and endowed with certain inalienable rights that government neither grants nor can take away.  
 
In the Declaration of Independence, the founding fathers sought to demonstrate to the world that they were rejecting a tyrannical king.  They listed the 'injuries and usurpations' that contain the philosophical basis for our Constitution and Bill of Rights.  
 
One point of consternation to our founding fathers was that the king had been 'imposing Taxes on us without our Consent'.  But 230 years later, taxation with representation has not worked out much better.  
 
Indeed, one has to wonder how Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin would react to the current state of affairs. After all, they were outraged by mere import tariffs of a few pennies on the dollar.  Today, the average American pays roughly 50 percent of their income in direct and indirect taxes.  
 
In fact, most Texans will not start working for themselves for another week. Texans, like most Americans, work from January until early July just to pay their federal income taxes, state and local taxes, and the enormous costs of regulation.  Only about half the year is spent working to pay for food, clothing, shelter, or education.  
 
It is easy to simply blame faceless bureaucrats and politicians for our current state of affairs, and they do bear much of the blame.  But blame also rests with those who expect Washington DC to solve every problem under the sun. If the public demanded that Congress abide by the Constitution and pass only constitutional spending bills, politicians would have no choice but to respond.  
 
Everybody seems to agree that government waste is rampant and spending should but cut but not when it comes to their communities or pet projects.  So members of Congress have every incentive to support spending bills and adopt a go-along, get-along attitude.  This leads to the famous compromises, but the bill eventually comes due on April 15th.  
 
Our basic problem is that we have lost sight of the simple premise that guided the actions of our founding fathers. That premise? The government that governs least is the government that governs best.  
 
When we cut the size of government, our taxes will fall. When we reduce the power of the federal bureaucracy, the cost of government will plummet. And when we firmly fix our eyes, undistracted, on the principles of liberty, Americans truly will be free.  That should be our new declaration.
Logged

"A child of five could understand this (someone fetch me a child of five)" - Groucho Marx
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #235 on: Jul 12th, 2006, 7:40pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Innocuous post here that is VERY appropriate for "the Gridiron" "politics" thread here...  From "The REAL Feed":
 
 
In run for Pa. governor, ex-football great finds footing a little slippery

SI.com: NFL (12.07.2006 14:19)
 
... kind of...
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #236 on: Jul 26th, 2006, 6:03am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Koffe Annan has proclaimed that he thinks the Israeli strike that caused the death of the U.N. workers was "deliberate".  Isn't that, at least, premature... if not downright irresponsible?  That's what he thinks...  Shouldn't he keep that to himself, though,... for fear of contributing fuel to the fire,... inciting war, a world war given his position. I mean it's one thing if it's JYJ sayin' that kind of thang here on the "G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic:  Politics" thread on "the Sidelines" of "the Gridiron" forum at FantasyFootballer.com, but it's a WHOLE nother when it's the head of the U.N.
 
...
 
ON THE OTHER HAND, I heard (on,... gasp,... FOXNews, Your World w/ Cavuto), unlike a lot of the unsympathetic, mean-spirited spewage I hear... "here and there", a VERY cogent anti-Israel argument... made by an ORTHODOX JEWISH RABBI!!!  He pointed out the fatal flaw of the Zionist ideology.  His main point, which was very cogent and straightforward, is that making a Jewish state (though at the time a well-intentioned response to the holocaust) goes AGAINST Judaism!  Jews (as the chosen ones) are to live and be accomplished in all nations of the world.  They are not supposed to have a "state" and be directly brought per se as a group into the political sphere.  I worked as the Language Arts teacher at one of our many Hillel Academies that exist in America, and, as someone who's philosophically and academically interested in Messianic Judaism and has done some reading in the area and whose best man at his wedding was a Jew, what this rabbi was saying was jiving with my experience.  I too have mentioned on this thread that perhaps we should cut our losses with "respect" to (and for) Israel, but that in doing so it has to be made sure that Islamists (as opposed to Muslims as I am going to start calling them) are NOT emboldened with some warped sense of righteousness.  It's not an easy knot to untangle,... especially since, at its absolute core, there are well-intentioned people.  It just goes to show yet again how "intentions" aren't good enough... if you want to live an ethical life.
 
...
 
To top it off, I hear about this University of Wisconsin professor Kevin Barrett, who thinks that not just 9/11 was orchestrated by OUR governement, but just about everything since, including claiming current attacks in Iraq are performed by the CIA and special ops.  Holy, moron! This guy's got to be a disgruntled (Baltimore) Colts fan, huh?
Logged
junkyardjake
GM
*****
# 58




"Do or do not. There is no try" - Yoda

   
View Profile WWW

Posts: 498

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #237 on: Jul 26th, 2006, 1:28pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

on Jul 26th, 2006, 6:03am, StegRock wrote:
Koffe Annan has proclaimed that he thinks the Israeli strike that caused the death of the U.N. workers was "deliberate". Isn't that, at least, premature... if not downright irresponsible? That's what he thinks... Shouldn't he keep that to himself, though,... for fear of contributing fuel to the fire,... inciting war, a world war given his position. I mean it's one thing if it's JYJ sayin' that kind of thang here on the "G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics" thread on "the Sidelines" of "the Gridiron" forum at FantasyFootballer.com, but it's a WHOLE nother when it's the head of the U.N.

 
I've never accused Israel of anything that wasn't absolutely true.  If you recall, the posts that I deleted from this board made two points:  
 
1) Although Israel, OF COURSE, has the right to exist without worrying about terrorist attacks on it's country (and of course an implied right to defend itself from said terrorist attacks), they have been in violation of numerous UN resolutions associated with their encroachment on, and destruction of Palestinian property, and on this basis alone we should not be sending them $3.5 billion a year.  As a corollary to this issue, also note that Israel possesses unauthorized nuclear weapons.
 
2) Zionism, which is the idea that persons of the Jewish faith, should return to the 'homeland' is essentially the ideology which has created the modern state of Israel.  Because the religious underpinnings of Zionism are inextricable from the secular objectives associated with statehood (i.e. it generally assumes that only persons of the Jewish faith are entitled to full citizenship), my second argument was that support of Israel, in the highly preferential manner currently conducted by the US government, is unconstitutional.
 
I say the current 'highly preferential manner' in which we support Israel, because that is what is happening.   Ideally, we should not be continuously supporting any country financially. or otherwise, but when we do, we should do so in a way that does not offend persons of any religion.
 
A simple synopsis of the situation right now is:  we support Israel unconditionally, send them $3.5 billion a year, and supply their military with essentially anything they ask for.   What do we do for the state of Palestine ?  Not much, I believe total annual aid may be a few $100 million, but essentially they are treated as an obstacle to our unconditional support of Israel.
 
This form of foreign policy, I submit, violates the free exercise clause of the Constitution.  When the Supreme Court rules on a case that involves legislation acting on US residents, one important general legal principal applied is, the legislation may not result in the preference of one particular religion over any other.   There is no reason why this principal should be inapplicable to foreign policy, if we wish to support Israel with a certain level of funding, then we must treat all fundamentalist Islamic countries, all Christian countries, all Hindu countries, etc... the same exact way.
 
Once again, ideally, we should not be supporting any foreign country with US tax money.  Emergency situations are one thing, but regular $3.5 billion stipends to a country with higher per capita income than most areas of the United States is just ludicrous.
 
In the context of current events, it should be evident that our foreign policy fallacy of supporting Israel no matter what they do, is not in the best interests of this country.  While there is no argument that Israel has the right to defend itself, we should impartially assess the infractions of both Israel and Hezbollah and act as an honest mediator, or at least allow the UN to do so.   This is not what is happening right now.
 
Logged

"A child of five could understand this (someone fetch me a child of five)" - Groucho Marx
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #238 on: Jul 26th, 2006, 5:50pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

I (and that aforementioned rabbi FOXNews had on) don't disagree with you, Jake,... with these following (rather small) caveats (which I'm thinking you won't totally disagree with me on)...
 
1) All of that doesn't justify Annan's proclamation notwithstanding his mousy, after-the-fact response today.
 
2) It must be acknowledged that Hezbollah is, ultimately (i.e. the fact that they are a "political party" in Lebanon aside), a terrorist organization working within the sovereign state of Lebanon, not all too similar to the early days of the Taliban in Afganistan and needs to be "considered"/"dealt with" accordingly.
 
3) And, finally, as a slight mitigating factor to what I wrote about in my post above with respect to the what the anti-Israel rabbi had to say, for "19th/20th-century" Muslims,... before it was the Jews (of course, it has always been the Jews throughout this tormented history to one degree or another), it was the Hindus.  They have just shown themselves not to be an "open-minded", "open-society" group, and this, again, would be a good point for those of you who haven't or those of you who have forgotten its point to give that article of mine, "Freedom or Chaos", which I copied and pasted on this very thread, a good read.
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #239 on: Jul 27th, 2006, 8:32pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

Didn't quite know where to post this, but I suppose here is the most apropos place...
 
THIS I don't like to hear...  Exxon/Mobil recorded like their biggest quarterly profit EVER this quarter...  While we're all paying through the nose at the pump,... what the fuck is up with that???  What is up with that fucked-up picture???
Logged
steelkings
Guest

Email

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #240 on: Jul 29th, 2006, 8:16am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

ExxonMobil's Profits Take Us Backwards, says Exxpose Exxon
 
For Immediate Release: July 27, 2006
Contact: Shawnee Hoover, 202-546-9707
(Washington, DC) - As ExxonMobil announces $10.36 billion in profits for its second quarter, over half a million people are actively pressuring the oil giant through the Exxpose Exxon campaign to invest those profits in alternative energy that will help lower energy costs and secure America's future.
"We're not asking ExxonMobil to do anything its competitors are not doing," says Shawnee Hoover, campaign director for Exxpose Exxon - a coalition of some of the nation's largest environmental and public advocacy campaigns.
"Unlike other oil giants, ExxonMobil refuses to invest the profits it's making off the American consumer in renewable energy, which would lower energy costs, strengthen our economy, create jobs, protect public health and combat global warming. ExxonMobil is reaping the profits but ignoring the needs of the nation."
In 2006, the federal government invested $351 million in alternative fuels, according to The Stella Group. If ExxonMobil invested just one week's worth of its quarterly profit, it would more than double all federal spending on alternative fuels for 2006.
Shell has invested $1 billion in alternative energies with investments in wind, solar, biofuels and hydrogen. BP anticipates investing $8 billion over the next decade. Both oil giants and ChevronTexaco have acknowledged the problems of global warming and oil addiction.
In contrast, ExxonMobil argues that the U.S. should stop trying to become energy independent and funds 'climate skeptics' that confuse the facts and delay progress on reducing global warming pollution.
In the past year, the Exxpose Exxon campaign has educated millions of people, half a million of which are actively boycotting ExxonMobil, tying up its phone lines, protesting, adopting gas stations, and pressuring Congress to rein in Big Oil profits, stop handouts and secure alternative energy sources.
Since the campaign started, politicians have begun shunning the company to win elections, other companies have publicly distanced themselves from ExxonMobil, and ExxonMobil's funding of global warming skeptics has entered mainstream discourse.
As the world's largest and most profitable private oil company ExxonMobil has the power to use its technological know-how and massive resources to positively impact the availability of alternative energies and reduce global warming pollution, says Exxpose Exxon. That's what the Exxpose Exxon campaign is all about.
Logged
steelkings
Guest

Email

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #241 on: Jul 29th, 2006, 8:22am »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

Logged
MordecaiCourage
Guest

Email

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #242 on: Jul 29th, 2006, 2:24pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

Nice post sk!!! We finally stand on the same side of the fence politically!!!!! Go figure???
Logged
Stegfucius
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

*****




I love ''the Gridiron''!

   
View Profile WWW Email

Posts: 18971

Back to top

Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #243 on: Jul 29th, 2006, 10:17pm »
Quote Quote Modify Modify

This seems like a good time for me to get this off my chest... Way back at the start of this thread I wrote, among a bunch of things, the following... despite my leaning to the right... toward the Republican party...
 
on Jun 24th, 2004, 1:34am, StegRock wrote:
  • Social Issues and Domestic Politics - An area that has a moderate effect on my "politics of the day" is one on which I am, well, a "moderate". But, more a "cumulative moderate" than a "wishy-washy moderate", i.e., I do have convictions on social issues, but they vary widely and ultimately it all "averages out"; I ultimately rely on reason and common sense, which in the current era we are in leads me to being "liberal" when it comes to ... protecting the environment...

  •  
    Ultimately, this should (have) be(en) a fourth category...
     
    • The Environment - This is an issue on which I stand fairly far on the left and (hence) against the position of the Republicans. Ultimately, as per my position on "international politics", mainly dealing with the Middle East (which is in that original post of mine), within (what I, subjectively like us all, find to be) reasonable bounds, I am for proactive measures. As obvious as it is (to me) that the Middle East must be dealt with proactively, it is just as obvious (to me) that Global Warming must be dealt with proactively. Whether it is holes in the ozone letting more sunrays through or a thickening of our Earth's atmosphere with, most notably, carbon dioxide, ever-increasing the greenhouse effect on our plant, Global Warming exists, and I would be a philosophical hypocrite to say that, while the Middle Eastern Muslim World needs to be dealt with proactively, Global Warming doesn't. In fact, solving Global Warming would partially solve our problems in the Middle East, though, it MUST be noted, only in a(n, again, partial and) indirect fashion that almost definitely would NOT solve the WHOLE problem, which, economics and politics aside if you will, goes well beyond oil and into Middle Eastern sociology, psychology, spirituality, anthropology and philosophy, and American hegemony and "support" (in the broadest sense) of Israel.

     
    Now, there is a(n albeit unlikely) generous view to take with the oil companies... The fact is that the oil companies, while having been great perpetrators against the environment (but great fuelers (literally and figuratively) of industrial revolution and, in that sense, helpers to humans), are in a position to make "a world" "of difference", so to speak. They could actually be trying to effect change on two fronts. IF (a HUMUNGOUS IF, mind you) this exorbitant profit were (being) "calculated" (in both senses) and being generated with research and development of alternative sources of energy in mind and, to be fair, or at least not overly idealistic, a consideration of the potential severe decrease in the profit margin during a long period of excessive expenditure transitioning to new energy sources, then, first front, in terms of the "bigger picture", it could be justified or, at least, "understandable" (in both senses), and, furthermore, second front, it could even be argued, then, that charging high prices at the pump is an attempt at beginning to wean us (Americans, the biggest guzzlers of petro on the planet, who are just now almost paying for gas what Koreans were paying FIVE YEARS AGO (my wife still thinks gas here is cheap )) off our oil/petroleum addiction. Granted, that is a HUGELY generous outlook, but it is the great opportunity that the world's BIG oil companies are presented with. Will they take it? I'm not optimistic, but I'm not pessimistic enough to ignore it (or get too conspiratorial about it). So, while I obviously ABSOLUTLEY AGREE that the issue of global warming MUST be addressed, if the aforementioned is NOT the case (which, I suppose, it probably isn't), then, at least, PASS THE SAVINGS ON TO THE CONSUMER, for God's sake (at least until it is the case). That's my take!
    « Last Edit: Jul 30th, 2006, 2:04am by Stegfucius » Logged
    steelkings
    Guest

    Email

    Back to top

    Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
    « Reply #244 on: Jul 30th, 2006, 8:38am »
    Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

    Facts:
     
    If evry person in America would change 2   standard 60 watt bulbs to florecent bulbs 15% less coal would be consumed.
     
    If fast food consumers would go into the restaraunt instead of using the drive thru, The daily addition of fuel emitions would be reduced by 2%.
     
    Logged
    MordecaiCourage
    Guest

    Email

    Back to top

    Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
    « Reply #245 on: Jul 30th, 2006, 2:39pm »
    Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

    That's good information sk!! Now if we could only get that more than .00000002% of the population to participate!  That's the shame with these types of grass roots movements.....you can't find enough people that give a darn! Especially in America where we just can't be inconvenienced as to actually get out of our cars and go in. And heaven forbid we spend the extra couple of bucks to go flourecent!!
    « Last Edit: Jul 30th, 2006, 2:39pm by MordecaiCourage » Logged
    Stegfucius
    Philosopher King
    of Fantasy Football
    Site Administrator
    GBRFLer
    Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

    *****




    I love ''the Gridiron''!

       
    View Profile WWW Email

    Posts: 18971

    Back to top

    Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
    « Reply #246 on: Jul 30th, 2006, 7:16pm »
    Quote Quote Modify Modify

    While I have never been a drive-thru guy, Gino and I RARELY, virtually never, use the drive-thru window at the local McDonald's here which we go to on an average of once to 1.5 times a week (in fact, we've used it exactly ONCE; I/we just prefer walking in; I always have, nothing to do with saving the environment), and I drive a tiny Hyundai accent (yes, I had the FantasyFootballer.com mobile shipped here to Hawaii) (but that's pretty much out of necessity), I haven't yet converted over to flourescent bulbs.  Nor have I yet evolved far enough to remember to pull the plug out on my TV or other electronic appliances that have a stand-by mode when they're not in use, but I often shut the power bar off when my computer's not in use and, despite being in sweltering Hawaii, currently don't have an air conditioner (mainly because of the falderal I'd have to go through with my landlord to have one). I used to recycle a lot until I learned that most recycling plants are, like most factory plants, not environmentally safe.  Less CO2 is given off by your can laying in a land-fill than if it's processed by a recycling plant.  So, I'm now on a half-half recycling plan.  We should all grow our own vegetables and start farting less, too (methane, after all, is a green-house emission).
     
    I mean... there is MUCH to be said about Americans having it TOO GOOD and being TOO motivated by doing things with EVER-INCREASING EASE and what that means both for the environment and us as a people...  But, I don't think this is really the right forum to be (most effectively) discussing it, where everybody is hidden behind their computer screens.  In this type of "environment" it's easy to make righteous proclamations and have pious attitudes.  It's really in your homes, first, and, then, neighborhoods and local communities where this stuff needs to be pursued.  People can say whatever the hell they want here.  There's no accountability, and there's no really "adding it up" and seeing/knowing the "real motivations/reasons" for people's environmentally-conscious behavior patterns.
    Logged
    Stegfucius
    Philosopher King
    of Fantasy Football
    Site Administrator
    GBRFLer
    Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04

    *****




    I love ''the Gridiron''!

       
    View Profile WWW Email

    Posts: 18971

    Back to top

    Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
    « Reply #247 on: Aug 11th, 2006, 7:12am »
    Quote Quote Modify Modify

    I GOT TO keep this short... It's late... There's FOOTBALL... And, I have to be up at 2:15 a.m. my time to help my mom out with some computer problems she's having while she has a relative over on that end to assist... I don't have time for this... But, with this latest terrorist action... I am going to try to be pithy with this. I just hope the point/what I'm saying doesn't get lost (on you guys) in the "pith".
     

     
    Again, in VERY short,... Bill O'Reilly had some civil liberties lawyer on tonight. This civil libertarian is suspect of Britian's tactics and the tactics of any organization which cooperated with them in stemming this latest terrorist plot. Bill was suggesting that maybe Britain's threshold (pardon me if I fail to use the precisely proper legalese here) for search and seizure, "reasonable suspicion", may be better, in this day and age, than what ours has been, "probable cause" (or something like that), as the strictures of our burden would not have allowed such a plot to be foiled the way it was here. Mr. Liberte can only retort with something like "but that tramples on civil liberties," a term which loses all meaning when thrown around so much. Bill points out that Britain surely isn't a "police state" just because their search and seizure threshold is what it is. After dodging the point time and time again, Mr. Esqueer has to say that that's the path they're going down, though, and wips out some out-of-context, cut-and-pasted quote from Thomas Jefferson, an isolationist, mind you. Bill is suggesting that, here and now, in 2006, maybe we can learn a thing or two from countries who successfully thwart terrorist acts like this most recent one, and, of course, learning means implementing, and that moving from "reasonable suspicion" to "probable cause" (or whatever) isn't necessarily setting us out on a path to becoming a police state. Who knows? Maybe what the Brits mean today by "reasonable suspicion" may have been what was meant way back when by "probable cause". Anyway, Cybil Liberte continues to reply with inane, I will even go as far as to say, "philosophical," nonsense about it's being against our Constitution, BS that you can't pin down and that O'Reilly coins, "theory." This now steps on my toes and puts this guy in my wheelhouse. This guy's laughable attempts at trying to get at the "theory" of the matter make philosophy look bad. First off, don't the real philosophical aspects of this lie in how to "grow" our "living", breathing Constitution rather than in defending it like some dead document inflexible from rigor mortis. This guy couldn't "think" his way out of a cardboard box. It's not merely "security" versus "freedom" (hearkening back to the cut-and-pasted quote from T.J. that this schmuck (ab)used), which is how these numb nuts like to frame it,... thus, needlessly, polarizing the terms. THAT'S POLITICS!!! The deeper issue to confront is what is it about our system of freedom that is causing this "insecurity" (you can read that in both ways if you like). Maybe, just maybe, isn't there a relation between the appearance (to me and many) that these terrorists work within our system, even appealing to it to stimey us, and the fact that we have lawyers here, not just required to, but willing to defend them? Uhhh... Duhhh... Isn't there something ill about our need to defend the Constitutional rights and civil rights of people who seek to trample on people's HUMAN rights? Don't we have the order there bass-ackwards... Isn't it "LIFE, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness", not "the Pursuit of Happiness, Liberty and Life"? Are our priorities not out-of-whack here? In any event, we speak about being an open-minded country to other cultures and the practices of other nations. That's okay when it regards the new Mosque being built down the road... in the name of The Constitution, but it's not okay when it comes to learning from, and perhaps adopting (a few), sound security tactics... in the name of The Constitution. They call the former defending their Constitutional rights while they call the latter defending the Constitution. YIKES!!! We are to defend the Constitution from that which can help it "live" on so that it, as it stands (still), can continue to provide the rights and, thus, the means to those who want to destroy it... I mean... how have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too, burning-the-candle-at-both-ends cockeyed is it for some of us Americans to actually theorize that our President and our people plotted 9/11 and, then, criticize Britain's tack in twarting this potential disaster and loss of innocent life? The only way will be to claim that it is a hoax. So, brace yourselves!!! Are the self-contradictions NOT stifling...???
     
    My wife sums it up thusly, "You have too many lawyers in America," who, in short, "have big mouths, small brains, but think they're smart because of their law degree, wide eyes for the almighty and need a cause/purpose/NICHE/...JOB."
     
    A lawyer friend of mine, who, never living outside the country, has said to me that, while flawed, our legal system is the best in the world (something, I guess, law school sold him on), once, since I returned to grad school aimed toward my Ph.D. in Philosophy, said to me, "You know... lawyers (having graduated from all of two years of law school) technically are Juris Doctors." I looked at him, smiled, knodded my head, and thought, "Yea, really, so what was your dissertation on? And, your foreign languages were...???"
     
    Let's face it! It's too damn easy to get a law degree in America.
     
    Step down... (Okay, that wasn't so short after all... , but it wasn't tooooo looooong. ...  I got to be "awake" in an hour... )
    « Last Edit: Aug 11th, 2006, 7:20am by Stegfucius » Logged
    MordecaiCourage
    Guest

    Email

    Back to top

    Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
    « Reply #248 on: Feb 27th, 2007, 2:27am »
    Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

    Boy.... I love this guy!! For as much as I love him, I know my boys JYJ and SK are gonna hate him!! Anyway, I liked what he said and see it the same way for what it's worth!!!
     
     
    Quote  
    Due to the thunderous applause that I received from the far-left over the "I Am Tired" letter written by one of our troops in Iraq, I thought it prudent to follow up with one last attempt to be very specific about what I have observed and actually personally encountered during my 36 years of service to this Great Country. Unlike Bob McClellan, I will not continue to whine, twist and degrade our country's leaders on a weekly basis. Instead, this will be a one time input attempting to reach some of those who are confused by McClellan and his ilk's unethical rantings and give some insight through my personal experience as a professional military officer over the years. These examples are but a few. In real life there were many more which space and time will not allow.
     
    As a young fighter pilot, flying F-4s in Vietnam, I was stopped in my tracks by the decisions made by Lyndon Johnson and Robert McNamara. I was young and naive, but even then I knew their daily interference was wro ng and would not allow us to win this thing and go home. Decisions like not allowing us to strike enemy aircraft while still on the ground, keeping real targets off the target list, and allowing us to strike only rusted-out trucks made us basically a toothpick factory. However, the big one for me came the day I saw the President Lyndon Johnson on television, forcefully lying to the American people. I'll never forget the language, "I want to assure the American people that the United States of America has never, and will never, bomb or use force inside the borders of Cambodia". On and on he disavowed the reports that this was happening. I was amazed. Guess where I had put sev eral F-4 loads of 750 pound general purpose bombs every day for the past five days. You guessed it, Cambodia!!!? So much for Mr. Johnson. The only question in my mind was simply, "Was it just Johnson or was it the methodology of a particular political party?" I decided to delay answering that question until more experience was gained.
     
    Years passed, and I ignored politics as much as possible, as a good military man should. Then came Jimmy Carter. Our young people don't remember 18% interest rates and 18% inflation, but I'll bet someone in your family does. That is one really bad thing Carter did for our country, but it is not the worst. During this period, I was an F-15 Squadron Commander, located at Langley AFB, VA. Jimmy Carter and his democratic party stopped spare parts procurement for almost every weapon system in our military, and diverted the funds to social programs. The F-15 was brand new at the time with leading edge technology designed to provide air superiority anywhere in the world on a moments notice. That was my job. I loved it, but guess what? In a two year period from 1979 to 1981, there was not one day when more that one-third of my assigned aircraft were flyable. It is amazing the lengths we went to in those days, cannibalizing parts, expending twice the time and energy to fix every little item, and still two-thirds of the birds were always broken because of no spare parts. Had this country faced a really serious military threat during that time frame, only Montana Hunters could have saved us. The military had some equipment, but it was all broken. Do you want to know the really bad part for me and the young fighter pilots working for me? Our flying sortie rate was so low that pilot proficiency dropped to dangerous levels. The accident rate tripled. That obviously was totally unacceptable, as we were losing expensive airplanes and highly trained young pilots at a rate comparable to losses seen in actual combat. All of a sudden, even a Texas Aggie like me began to see a trend.
     
    Forward a few years to 1986. I am an F-16 Wing Commander at MacDill AFB Florida, and Ronald Regan is president. His change in attitude and policy toward the military had time to fix the spare parts problem.? We were flying
    26,000 flying sorties per year out of MacDill AFB, my aircraft fully mission capable rate (FMC) was above 90%, the aircraft accident rate was below 1.75 per hundred thousand flying hours, fighter pilots were flying and proficiency levels were at an all time high. The United States Air Force was ready to defend this Wonderful Country. Proof of the pudding is simple. Look what the USAF, and the military in general, accomplished in Iraq during Desert Storm. And, they did it in less than 100 hours. Yeah, at this point I was starting to realize there was a difference in mentality between Democrats and Republicans, or should I say, the Right and the Left. Then, came everyone's favorite---Bill Clinton. If there ever was an individual 180 degrees out of sync with the ideals and the values of the US military, it was Clinton. He was a known draft dodger, military hating, self absorbed, speakingly shameless and immoral individual, who the Left managed to elect President of the United States of America? Clinton's antics in the White House would have brought court martial, conviction, and Dishonorable Discharge had he been a military member. We still suffer oral sex on school buses, because the President told the world it wasn't "real sex", and some of our children believed him. It took a lot of years, but now I became certain. There is a big difference in the right and the left on all fronts, and for the first time I started feeling angry and shamed that the majority of the American people were actually willing to vote for such an individual.
     
    Sometimes, an abstract such as the following tells the story in very simple terms: Jane Fonda, Tom Hayden, Lyndon Johnson, Robert McNamara, Ted Kennedy, Howard Dean, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Michael Moore, Tim Robbins, Susan Sarandon, Nancy Pelosi, Barbra Boxer, John Kerry, Benedict Arnold, and the list goes on. America, wake up. Giving in to the likes of these people and Abraham Lincoln's prediction of destruction from within just may come true. There is not a country in the world that can be considered a conventional military threat to the United States today. However, this country faces a new kind of threat---one that will not go away. It is a threat even more serious that WWII, because money, industry and technology will not defeat it. It is a threat of defeat from within. It is a threat of a faltering economy because of a lack of resources, or the even the simple threat of such a loss brought on by terrorism. It is a threat created by the American people trusting the inept. It is a threat created by the people wanting change, and perilously believing that the left can successfully deliver that change. Have you seen anything from the left that remotely resembles an answer to the Iraq situation?? Have you seen anything more than continued Bush-Bashing?? Is that an answer?? If there was ever a need for a strong, well trained military, it is now. THE LEFT HAS HISTORICALLY DISMANTLED OUR MILITARY IN THE NAME OF REDISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH FAVORING SOCIAL PROGRAMS.? We just cannot afford to let that happen now. If we do, the entire country will be bowing to the east several times a day within the next 50 years, maybe sooner.
     
    Now a final thought meant to upset as many as possible on the far-left. As you might guess, I don't believe in political correctness. So, let's look at the facts, not far-left rhetoric attempting to empower the democratic party. Initially, I was not a George Bush fan. I am not even a Republican. I normally vote Republican, because of my total despise of Communism, Socialism and the far-left in this country. I am a Conservative. However, during his watch, I feel President Bush just happened to stumble upon the leading edge of the greatest threat this country has ever faced. Mistakes have been made, because of the newness of the threat. Overall, the President has done a superb job dealing with the threat, and at the same time held off the constant ranting, raving, deceitful and malicious escapades of the far-left attempting to regain political power. IF THERE WAS EVER A TIME THE COUNTRY NEEDS TO COME TOGETHER AND BACK OUR PRESIDENT, IT IS RIGHT NOW. WITHOUT CONSENSUS WE ARE EMPOWERING THE TERRORIST!!!! The far-left is totally absorbed with the power struggle and regaining control of congress. They couldn't care less about defeating the threat. It literally disgusts me to hear the constant disagreement with everything the President tries to do, all in the name of trying to make him look bad to the voters. Unfortunately, by the time the American people really appreciate how bad the far-left really is, it may too late.
     
    What a re the real facts?? On the home front this country's economy is the strongest it has been in my lifetime. Interest rates are as low as they were when I was in high school forty years ago. Inflation does not exist for all practical purposes. For you youngster's, please remember the Jimmy Carter comments?? The Dow is approaching 13,000. Unemployment is nonexistent. Wages are at an all time high. Home ownership is at an all time high. Taxes have been lowered to an almost acceptable level. Because of the surging economy the deficit is under control and projected to go away far ahead of schedule. The far-left is rich beyond its wildest dreams, so Mr. President when are you going to "fix" all these domestic problems Bob and George, give me a break!
     
    On the war front this country has not been touched since 2001. I remember being part of a seminar at the USAF War College in 1983 discussing the terrorist threat. There were some good minds at that table and a lot of disagreement. However, one common thought was that the US would be hit within th e next five years. Answers to the terrorist threat were just as hard to come by then as they are now. Well, it took a little longer than the projection, but the attack occurred. For an old military guy like me, the main point here is that it has not happened again. We have suckered the bad guys into entering the fight somewhere other than in our country. To hell with political correctness. The President can't say this, but I sure can. I smile every morning when I get up and realize that one of our great cities has not been blown away. And, there is zero doubt in my mind that if we pull out of Iraq prematurely, that will happen within a short period of time after our departure. I don't care what you might think of President Bush personally. He has done the best h e can with what he has, and this country is not smoking because of it. So, back off McLean and McClellan. You honestly don't have a clue about what you are talking about. Call me, and I will tell you what I really think. I realize there are different points of view on war, and I do not believe the meek will inherit the earth, at least not in the next few hundred years. To those like McClellan, McLean, poor Eve Kyes and Sinowa Cruz let me say, "This is a strong country!!!" It has survived the uneducated thinking of the far-left before, and I'll just bet it will again. Regardless of who is President, the people will not tolerate mass explosions on a daily basis, as our good friends in Israel have been forced to do. To protect that position of power, even Hillary will be forced to become a true hawk. To guarantee a few more votes Ted Kennedy may be forced to begin supporting a strong military. One more attack on America might even wipe the giddy, 'I-am-finally-somebody' grin from Nancy Pelosi's face, and make her realize that is not about votes and personal power. IT IS ABOUT PROTECTING THIS GREAT COUNTRY FROM ALL ENEMIES, BOTH FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC.
     
    Jimmy L. Cash, Brig. Gen., USAF, Ret.
    349 Jib Lane Lakeside, Montana
     

    « Last Edit: Feb 27th, 2007, 2:30am by MordecaiCourage » Logged
    steelkings
    Guest

    Email

    Back to top

    Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
    « Reply #249 on: Feb 27th, 2007, 11:12am »
    Quote Quote Modify Modify Remove Remove

    Oh no you dont, MC. Thats like running the count to 3 balls and no strikes then walking the next pitch down and setting it on a tee, Hoping I'll swing at it. Aint gonna happen my brother. Like Bob McClellan I too am tired. Tired of sporting an opinion that gets me gang tackled like a prison gaurd in the longest yard.

    Unnecessary Roughness- Piling on
     
    Look MC. The only thing your gonna get out of me in this thread are sounds resembling the wild . Now all you right winged John Wayne wanna be's can jump up on your and debate the war without me. I'll be over here being quiet as a church mouse.
    For those who were hoping to kick around a liberal........

    Now thats a bad ass post!
    « Last Edit: Feb 27th, 2007, 11:14am by steelkings » Logged
    Pages: 1 ... 8 9 10 11 12  ...  24 Reply Reply Notify of replies Notify of replies Send Topic Send Topic Print Print

    No topic|Next topic

    Fantasyfootballer.com's Gridiron » Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.1!
    YaBB 2000-2002,
    Xnull. All Rights Reserved.

    Most smilies provided by "MySmilies.com", "Jason's Smiley Collection" or "Clicksmilies.com".
    "the Gridiron" Copyright 2002-2016 - Product of FantasyFootballer.com. All rights reserved.