Author |
Topic: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics (Read 85335 times) |
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
  
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
 |
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #400 on: May 18th, 2009, 4:49pm » |
 Quote  Modify
|
Harrison says, "No thank you," to a White House tay-to-tay...  I understand that what he said made NO sense and there are matters of etiquette and respect with respect to both the Office of the President and Dan Rooney, the owner of the Steelers, a Republican who openly endorsed Obama, who, mind yous, (not that I agree with everything he has done, but) I think is doing a good job overall, BUT, nevertheless, it is somewhat refreshing to see someone not affiliated with FOX News, moreover, a black person (apparently or at least) possibly NOT gaga  for Barack.  From "The REAL Feed":
Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker James Harrison says he'll skip White House visit
ESPN: NFL (18.05.2009 09:16)
When the Steelers visit the White House as Super Bowl champions on Thursday, they'll be without their reigning defensive player of the year.
|
|
 Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
 |
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #402 on: May 22nd, 2009, 9:08pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I wasn't going to post this HERE... until I saw the second headline...  Don't get me wrong, though... This is not to say that I defend the "logic", or entire lack thereof, of Harrison's stated reasoning. With that said, I almost feel like the combined knee-jerk habitual ill will of vitriolically hateful liberals towards anybody who remotely snubs their messiah Barack caused this... A terribly sad story... from "The REAL Feed":
Report: Pit bull owned by Steelers LB Harrison attacks young son
NFL.com (22.05.2009 15:56)
A pit bull owned by Pittsburgh Steelers linebacker James Harrison has reportedly attacked the player's young son, but police, hospital officials and team officials are releasing little information.
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
 |
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #403 on: May 23rd, 2009, 7:27am » |
Quote Modify
|
I caught this interview with John McCain the other night. He was being asked about what informs his staunch position against torture/"enhanced interrogation", and his response is taken by the interviewer, and many others that I know of, to be very authoritative considering his personal military experiences as a P.O.W. He tells of an interrogation, obviously unenhanced, of a captured top-level al-Qaida operative, who, when asked (over a cup of tea and a danish, I can only guess) about what drives their recruiting, answers that American mistreatment of captured Muslims is what drives up recruitment more than anything. McCain cites this as not just support for an anti-torture position, but a fortiori "proof" of the correctness of such! After all, it is coming from the horse's mouth, moreover, in the "insider knowledge", "see even they're saying it" kind of way McCain is extrapolating it. Huh? YIKES... Worse yet, to the less savvy of us his "reasoning" seems to make some sense and, in any event, is surely taken to be well informed given his experiences. That there is the inside scoop we're getting, moreover, because former P.O.W., war hero John McCain says so. Double YIKES!!! With all due respect, Mr. McCain, but ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? You've got this totally bass-ackwards. Not only is this NOT a fortiori proof that the anti-enhanced interrogation position is the correct one, it is ACTUALLY a fortiori proof of the opposite. A captive al-Qaida operative,... gee, he has no incentive to make that claim... How droll? A higher-up no less,... gee, he's surely just telling the truth,... and he's surely not clever enough to deceive us... Truth really be said, he probably is telling a (very calculated) half-truth, i.e., he's telling us the truth without revealing the motive... They're thinking get these self-loathing Americans to stop making our captivity uncomfortable in the least by telling them mistreatment of captured combatants drives up recruitment, and, VERY LITERALLY, we will have nothing to fear... but fear itself! THE IRONY!
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
|
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #404 on: Jun 3rd, 2009, 10:03pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I just saw a report on ABC's World News with Charles Gibson on the issue of grocery bags,... plastic, paper, recycled paper, reusable and even recycled reusable,... and the possibility of taxing the first two (or even three) kinds... to the tune of 33¢ a la Ireland. Why not, right? FOOLS RUSH IN (kind of per this paper of mine: http://www.internetstitute.com/Self-finalpaper.pdf)! It will kill off two birds with one stone. Our government surely needs the money, and, moreover, it will contribute to their social engineering goals, which are based in [liberal social(istic)] ideology [not personalism (note that I didn't say individualism)]. HOWEVER, there is such an EASY (at least partial, but nevertheless VERY EFFECTIVE) AND COST-EFFECTIVE solution to this that, granted, though, it took me my years in Korea to pick up on, you can act on it today. It is SO EASY that making this change is WAY EASIER than, say, converting to these TOXIC energy-saver light bulbs (which is pretty easy, that is if you want to take the chance with handling mercury in your house)!
Here we go... Brace yourselves for this "revolutionary" suggestion... Use smaller garbage cans in your house and use, so to speak, reuse your grocery bags as your garbage bags! You'll save quite a bit of money by not buying, as I would surmise,... uh-duh,... plastic garbage bags (for the garbage you produce in your house, at least) and you'll also be,... eh-hem,... killing two birds,... and contributing to saving the environment insofar as, unless you walk around shedding Benjamins, you're probably using plastic bags anyway for your household garbage. Actually, there is even a potential third and fourth fold here, that is, less plastic will anticipatively be needed in the production of household garbage cans AND for garbage bags because grocery bags are typically WAY THINNER (but still sufficiently thick) than garbage bags you purchase, say, Hefty bags. At any rate, OF ALL the suggestions, I actually think REUSING your grocery bags as garbage bags is the best way of contributing to taking it easy on the environment, AT LEAST in terms of cost-effectiveness and making an easy, truly actionable, reasonable "first-step" transition, and instead of having "fools rush in" (to less affordable "green" options). [Ultimately, could it, a GASP, be that the "green" movement too is more hype than substance and but another way of making "the green"?  BUT, I digress... I'm not here to bash the green movement. I'm just saying that progress usually happens step-by-step and not by rushing in like fools (isn't that what got us here?), and I am suggesting a very reasonable first step that you can quietly act on on your own without "announcing" your fart-sniffing superiority to others with your recycled reusable grocery bag.]
Oh, and by the way (for those of you more sympathetic with bin Laden than Bush), in other news, Osama bin Laden has stated that "Obama and his administration have sowed new seeds of hatred against America. Let the American people prepare to harvest the crops of what the leaders of the White House plant in the next years and decades." Hay,... I mean,... hey, it's from the horse's mouth! 
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
 |
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #405 on: Jun 7th, 2009, 7:08pm » |
Quote Modify
|
In relation to the post right above about the "plastic grocery bag - garbage bag" option as a method of taking an EASY step toward a "greener" future, I just saw a commercial for "unscented" Hefty garbage bags. With it understood that you, of course, obviously have to collect the garbage a little more often,  count that as yet another benefit of using grocery bags as garbage bags and smaller garbage cans,... combatting the smelliness that is.
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
 |
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #408 on: Jul 28th, 2010, 2:19am » |
Quote Modify
|
I am so sick and tired of the tendentious befuddlement, especially from the left, about the terms un-American or anti-American. Let me just get a working definition out there for us... To be un- or anti-American is to reject or, at least, look with disdain or, at least, discomfort on OUR culture, traditions and history, loathe and deny American exceptionalism, and seek a radical transformation of America that requires such rejection, disdain, loathing and denial, which necessarily entails some self-loathing and a lack of love for our country.  There, you have it now!
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
 |
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #413 on: Jan 10th, 2011, 4:40pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 8th, 2011, 12:28pm, sk wrote:| At least the first part is somewhat understandable. Look at Proctor and Gamble. A huge US employer in terms of white collar employees is bracing for large losses as the Fed announced a reduction in Fluoride in our water. Our government says that we no longer need it as our tooth paste and mouth washes are much better in this age.( nut shelled) However it doesnt go un-noticed that it costs the government approximately 11 dollars per tax payer annually. As we pay less taxes we will need to receive less entitlements. Cuts like these are sneaky in job elimination. Entitlements equal jobs. |
|
I'm sure unwittingly and not tendentially, but there is an important distinction here not being made that often is not made in the rhetoric on the left, that is, unless it serves them to point it out, namely government subsidies/contracts versus government programs. Is the flouride thing an "entitlement"? I would not categorize it as such. As I am understanding, at least, your explanation, sk, that is a subsidized, in other words, not (even close to) fully funded, program. Privately generated funds are also going into the project. Proctor and Gamble is not a fully funded government agency. It is a company that brings its facilities and human resources to the table that has a contractual agreement with the government to get said job done. Strictly speaking - and not too long ago I had it out with "one" of my (MANY HARDCORE) liberal colleagues along these lines - you do not, in an organic free-enterprise sense, CREATE jobs with tax dollars. With tax dollars it is just fund (re)allocation. Bureaucrats do not create jobs; they just distribute the money. It is in this way that the public sector is so vulnerable to fraud, waste and abuse, like to the tune of the $10,000 per sign being flushed down the drain  on those Obama Recovery Act road construction signs (now THAT is a subsidy - go look it up). Politicians do not "create" jobs. Job creation (ultimately) involves generating the revenue that funds the job. If you are not generating the revenue that "creates" a job, you are not "creating" a job. Also, job creation at its best involves generating the very need itself for the job. Government programs, strictly speaking, "create" appointments, not jobs.
On a very different note, thoughts and prayers go out to Congresswoman Giffords, all those injured or slain on Saturday, and their families.
|
| « Last Edit: Jul 13th, 2011, 8:49pm by Stegfucius » |
Logged |
|
|
|
Assistant Coach
# 657
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 56
Back to top
|
 |
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #414 on: Jan 11th, 2011, 9:12pm » |
Quote Modify
|
Quote:| On a very different note, thoughts and prayers go out to Congresswoman Giffords, all those injured or slain on Saturday, and their families |
|
Yeah, Right on...You can go ahead and hook the electricity up to that SOB right now  . Spare us the media coverage.
Quote:| As I am understanding, at least, your explanation, sk, that is a subsidized, in other words, not (even close to) fully funded, program. Privately generated funds are also going into the project. Proctor and Gamble is not a fully funded government agency. It is a company that brings its facilities and human resources to the table that has a contractual agreement with the government to get said job done. |
|
What is your point? Funding is funding, public or private. If you cut down on your potato chip intake, Lays will lay people off. I my case that would be Budwieser. The last big lay off there was a direct result of my 2 month liver break.
Quote:| If you are not generating the revenue that "creates" a job, you are not "creating" a job. Also, job creation at its best involves generating the very need itself for the job. Government programs, strictly speaking, "create" appointments, not jobs. |
|
Theres a back side to that as well. Not creating a job creates a wealthier upper class. Case and point. My company like many others have laid off almost a half of their employees yet still manage to operate on or about the same bottom line as they did 5 years ago. In other words the economy trouble has proved to be a mirage in their business. Yet they have been able to get by on the backs of threatend employees. They cut salery's and tokk away all the benifits and told people to be glad they had a job. They will never hire those people they laid off back. They will continue to rake in huge profits and scream to not be taxed. Poor people without jobs dont give a fuck how much they are taxed. Its the rich people that want you out of their pocket. America's rich used to give money for everything. It used to be a very friendly nation. Not anymore! Its cut throat now. Its a nation of liars. 
Have you checked out "Celebration"? Thats Disneys town. It hilarious.
The real fact is that there is only so much money out there. The richer some people get, the more in number people become poor. And when the poor people become large enough in number, well thats what revolutions are made of. 
Quote:| It is in this way that the public sector is so vulnerable to fraud, waste and abuse, like to the tune of the $10,000 per sign being flushed down the drain on those Obama Recovery Act road construction signs (now THAT is a subsidy - go look it up). |
|
They could have funded federal and state prisons instead. Thats where they keep the poor people who's unemployment has run out.  They could have made licence plates.
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 11th, 2011, 9:43pm by sk » |
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
|
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #416 on: Jan 14th, 2011, 3:25pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I'm getting around to the rest as time permits... For now, I've got to post this... Harry Reid has said that there are no problems with Social Security.  Tell that to all the people relying on SSI, especially the aging, who have not received an increase since Obama took office. Now, I'm not saying that Obama is making the wrong choice here, but don't go saying there ain't no problem, Mr. Reid. Anyway, so much for those "Obama bucks". I remember the days when there was a little stimulus for the little guy, under G-Dub when for two years lower-income tax payers received about $600 per head. So, there was such a thing as Bush bucks. But, whatever... While FOX News has been somewhere between fair to and fawning over Obama in response to his speech at the Tucson memorial service, I expect one-sided lefties reading this to be as unfair to G-Dub as ever... and, of course, not see it as unfair at all, just like this idiot libbo chick at the Stewart-Colbert "Restoring Sanity" rally calling for a moratorium on comparisons to Hitler being speechless when asked about the greater prevelance of such allusions aimed at Bush, ultimately saying, "Well, he deserved it."
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
|
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #417 on: Jan 17th, 2011, 12:42am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 11th, 2011, 9:12pm, sk wrote:
Simply that systematically taking someone else's money through taxation and using it to pay someone's salary is not the same as building a business, needing employees, that is, certain roles to be filled for the business to run, and generating the revenue to fill those positions. Let me frame this in a different way... The Communist/Socialist ideal is equality of income, that is, for everybody to earn the same wage. Sounds good, but think the implications of that through. If the government/public sector bloats to 50% of the population, what would the tax on those working in the private sector have to be? The answer, 100%! 100% of the earnings of private-sector workers would have to be taken and given to public-sector workers (and/or government-program recipients) for there to be equal earnings across the board. Yikes!
More generally speaking, it would have been nice if you had secured yourself an understanding of what my point is before trying to refute or respond to it and adding to the thicket.
Quote:| Theres a back side to that as well. Not creating a job creates a wealthier upper class. Case and point. My company like many others have laid off almost a half of their employees yet still manage to operate on or about the same bottom line as they did 5 years ago. In other words the economy trouble has proved to be a mirage in their business. Yet they have been able to get by on the backs of threatend employees. They cut salery's and tokk away all the benifits and told people to be glad they had a job. They will never hire those people they laid off back. They will continue to rake in huge profits and scream to not be taxed. |
|
Well, first off, this does not speak to my point (how could it have, right?). I mean, I understand what you are saying, namely that the private sector in consideration of profit has an incentive to cut jobs, moreover, in a way that the public sector does not. Now, again, aside from your not speaking to my point, that is erroneous on two counts. First off, from an ethical perspective, I think that is to have it bass-ackwards. If anything, as they are spending other people's money, the government should be mindful of the payroll (in a way that a business is not ethically bound).
Secondly - and this is really the more important point - is what you are contending, sk, really the case in terms of economics? Doesn't it totally depend on the circumstances? Isn't the contrary to what you are claiming exactly how businesses go about expanding? I mean, to keep the example simple, if a business owner can employ somebody at (a total of) $20 an hour (that is, including benefits), 8 hours a day, to do something that brings in more than $160 a day, economics, that is the bottom line, dictates that that is a good hire, no? Your company is but one particular situation. I fear that you are committing a logical fallacy which many in politics, especially on the so-called bleeding-heart liberal left, commit, that is, universalizing a particular. But, I digress.
As for me, don't get me on the salaries of public-school administrators, moreover, as compared to educators. It is absolutely sinful how many tax dollars we waste on school administration, and, moreover, how few we spend on educators. We could go tit-for-tat with that kind of stuff and talk past each other all day, though, and get nowhere.
Bottom line, think the logic of what you've written through... No business or agency, as a matter of solvency, seeks to employ more people than needed or pay their employees more than can be afforded, nor should they, right? That does not make fiscal sense, right? No organization is bound to cut a check to someone just to sit around, right? So, if all that common sense is the case, what you are saying here, according to your own account, is that your company either had been employing too many people who were receiving too much in the way of pay/benefits (because of "generous" loose accounting) during good times or a bad economy really does make a difference. Either way, there is evidence of trickle-down, mind you, not pour-down, which is the unreasonable expectation the liberal "critics" gin up, economics. Now, look, if you've followed my thoughts on economics on this site, you know that I am no fan of Americano market capitalism, at least in its present-day form, and the egregious bonuses given to executives, especially those failures and cheats on Wall Street. But, that is beyond the immediate purview of this analysis, and, in any event, what I have argued here holds notwithstanding the factor of atrocious bonuses, which I suspect is not the case for your case in point anyway. The point is that your story may actually serve as a case in point of the opposite of what you are wanting to say. When the getting is good, it is largely good for all. When it's not, it sucks more for us folks at the bottom. Like it or lump it the way that works seems to make sense.
But, look, I think it is more complicated than all this. However, that it is more complicated in and of itself speaks to and supports my point more than yours.
Quote:| Poor people without jobs dont give a fuck how much they are taxed. Its the rich people that want you out of their pocket. America's rich used to give money for everything. It used to be a very friendly nation. Not anymore! Its cut throat now. Its a nation of liars. |
|
Holy hell... This took a turn for the way worse here. First, of course, "Poor people without jobs dont give a fuck how much they are taxed." That is not a revelation. If you don't have a job, you don't pay income tax and perhaps not any tax based on what government assistance you receive. In any event, that, in and of itself, surely does not make them the good guys, nor does it make the rich the bad guys. Look, I am and have always been for my whole life financially poor (though I've usually made the most of the hands I've been dealt), but somewhere along the way I learned, perhaps, paradoxically, from my truck-driver dad and secretary mom, that the rich being rich is not why I am poor. At least, if I so choose, I have a chance to become rich in America. Thing is, I know that money is necessary, but not sufficient for happiness/contentment, and to make the merely necessary one's goal is to live life according to the lowest common denominator. It is, if you are happy/content, then you have (enough) money, not, if you have (enough) money, then you are happy/content, no? That is why "money people" far from corner the market on contentment or happiness. They are going after the merely necessary, not the sufficient. Worse yet, their pursuit of money obfuscates the path to happiness and contentment. But, I digress.
As for the rest, that is all just rambling conjecture and generalization, which I - and I think most other thoughtful people - do not think accurately characterizes our nation.
Quote:| Have you checked out "Celebration"? Thats Disneys town. It hilarious. The real fact is that there is only so much money out there. The richer some people get, the more in number people become poor. And when the poor people become large enough in number, well thats what revolutions are made of. |
|
This is where the wheels are really coming off! First off, your "real fact" is not necessarily true, especially with the Fed flooding the economy with dollars. In any event, I just hope that what you are suggesting here is not a call to armed revolution, but just an observation. That said, given the overall tenor of your post and how you state this here, you seem to be making more of a rallying call than a sober cautionary observation and a call for pause. And, if you are calling for revolution, you surely are not calling for anything like the Russian or French revolutions, right? They really resulted in equal distribution of wealth,... not!
But, just in case, on to the more troubling aspect of what you've written here... Who are these rich against whom the poor should revolt? Is it a certain level of lavishness that is the target? Who determines what's too much? Somehow I think the convoluted answer would boil down to something tantamount to the "bad rich guys" (as if there are no "bad poor guys"), which brings me back to my point right above... Of the rich, it is those who are intoxicated with money, the, so to speak, "bad rich guys", who are deluded and to be pitied. Mind you, this all stands for the poor as well. Their pursuit has just not gone as well. But, I digress. The point is that, even if the lines in the sand could be drawn in a way that is clear-cut and not arbitrary, which, of course, is not possible, of the rich, just like the rest of us, there are the good guys and the pitiable.
Or, is it actually the "rich" in happiness and contentment that are the target? After all, they are too happy and content(ed) with the way things are to help with the radical change we "oh, so" need. Again, are you cautioning, or is this the path you are really wanting to go down?
As for your following post... While I tend to agree with you about semi-automatic weapons, twisting free from our gun heritage is more complicated than one-sided slogans and statistics that are countered and refuted by the other side's slogans and statistics. As such, even if it is timely, I do not want this to be a place where people with axes to grind on hot-button issues come and post spam of a polemical nature. This is a place for rational and civil argumentation not tit-for-tat infomercial pissing contests. If you cannot handle the logical critique of your positions and can only go your "facts" against my "facts", this is not the place for you. The lesson to take away from this message-board forum is not "what" position to take (indoctrination) but "how" to even go about taking a position in the first place (self-cultivation).
|
| « Last Edit: Feb 5th, 2011, 8:34pm by Stegfucius » |
Logged |
|
|
|
Assistant Coach
# 657
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 56
Back to top
|
|
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #418 on: Jan 17th, 2011, 4:51pm » |
Quote Modify
|
In reverse order
Quote:| While I tend to agree with you about semi-automatic weapons, twisting free from our gun heritage is more complicated than one-sided slogans and statistics that are countered and refuted by the other side's slogans and statistics. As such, even if it is timely, I do not want this to be a place where people with axes to grind on hot-button issues come and post spam of a polemical nature. This is a place for rational and civil argumentation not tit-for-tat infomercial pissing contests. If you cannot handle the logical critique of your positions and can only go your "facts" against my "facts", this is not the place for you. The lesson to take away from this message-board forum is not "what" position to take (indoctrination) but "how" to even go about taking a position in the first place (self-cultivation). |
|
Even as I have read and re-read your statement above, I am not sure I understand it correctly. It could be that you in fact misunderstood my intentions or you simply would prefer I just go away. If its the latter I would prefer you just simply say, "Go Away!"
As far as my gun control intentions concerned. It was simply to point out that in this country those type of killings are the daily norm. They just dont all involve a congresswoman, a judge, a nine year old and 2 political parties lobbing stones at each other. However almost all of them involve crazy desperate people who absolutely shouldnt own guns that are made for one thing only.
It just doesnt make sence that in Arizona its ok to pull people over because the officer is suspicious that the person is not a citizen, yet it is some kind of freedom violation if we question the fact that a guy can go to every Walmart in the city buying up all the loose clips and glock ammo he can get in the same day. It doesnt make sense! I mean, in this country is not legal to own a live grenade. But I ask you, Steve. Could he have killed more by pulling the pin on a grenade instead of using a automatic hand gun?
Quote:| And when the poor people become large enough in number, well thats what revolutions are made of. |
|
I'll credit it you with the fact that I wasnt very clear in my statement. My reference to revolution was symbolic. As in your current President being elected by poor people who heard the word "change". They revolted by coming out to vote in droves. Its not an inditement or endorsement of the current administration. Just a symbol of what a motivated lower class can bring to the table.
Quote:| It used to be a very friendly nation. Not anymore! Its cut throat now. Its a nation of liars. |
|
Purhaps I was a tad harsh.
Quote:| Simply that systematically taking someone else's money through taxation and using it to pay someone's salary is not the same as building a business, needing employees, that is, certain roles to be filled for the business to run, and generating the revenue to fill those positions. |
|
I'm talking about the other end of that rope. By not taking someone elses money, you are forced to cut back somewhere else. Somebody gets paid to perform the services that will need to be cut. You are a very smart guy Steve. I think it impossible to debate with you on the same level. I'm not in that league. However I would ask if you have pondered this aspect of the topic.
Do you suppose the reason our very liberal president has allowed the war in Afganistan to continue could be tied to the negitive effects ending it would have on u.s. unemployment?
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 17th, 2011, 4:54pm by sk » |
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
 |
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #419 on: Jan 17th, 2011, 9:37pm » |
Quote Modify
|
(I know you are going to start shaking when you read this, so I just want to tell you up front, "DON'T!")
Go away, you dumb bastard!  ... You are not on the level of the Steg!  ... 
Give me a break, Todd! You (should) know me better than that! I'm just stating the fact of the matter for you... and all onlookers. I'm always thinking bigger picture.
This last post of yours is quite well-stated.  I'd have to think it through, but I think your analogy between checking for immigration status and gun carrying might hold and, in any case, is persuasive. That said, analogousness aside, in reality, they may not be equally solvable, and being unable to solve one of the problems does not justify not trying to solve the other just because they are analogous. But, anyway, point well taken! 
I don't know if your grenade analogy works, though. For one, I do tend to think that more damage can be done with grenades. I also think there are other factors at play such as prevelance and enforceability, but anyway.
Regarding revolting by way of the ballot box, I gotcha!
This is the one part I am hazy on...
Quote:| I'm talking about the other end of that rope. By not taking someone elses money, you are forced to cut back somewhere else. Somebody gets paid to perform the services that will need to be cut. |
|
I am not quite sure what you are getting at or, to be hoenst, even exactly what you are plainly saying, no less in relation to my point(s).
Other than that, though, well done! Thanks for taking your time to make the post, sk.  You are not the dummy you think you are, Todd. You sincerely care. That's half the battle!
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 19th, 2011, 10:11pm by Stegfucius » |
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
 |
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #421 on: Apr 25th, 2011, 3:43pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I just made a post up "between the 20's", and this was part of it...
on Apr 25th, 2011, 3:31pm, StegRock wrote:With 6 of top 92, Patriots open to deals (AP)
Yahoo! News: Democratic Party (25.04.2011 11:58)
Bill Belichick is a wheeler-dealer during the NFL draft. In each of the last two years he made seven trades while it was going on. Expect more of the same. The coach of the New England Patriots has six of the top 92 picks in the three-day draft -- three in each of the first two rounds -- plenty o... |
|
It just reminds me, yet again... Why does Yahoo! News's news feed say "Democratic Party"? I guess they are telling on themselves. I suppose I have to give them credit for being honest about their bias. But, they only deserve that credit if we take note of it!  Yahoo! News LIES! 
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
 |
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #422 on: May 25th, 2011, 7:20pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I literally just FLICK on over to MSNBC during a commercial break to see Michael Steele, who was trying to explain the Ryan Medicare Plan with some specificity, get shout down by the HOST Chris Matthews and the other guest, whom Matthews is obviously on the same side as, another smug leftist that is, with platitudes and utter hyperbole like saying that Ryan's plan is about granting the elderly "gift certificates". Are you kidding me? Generally speaking, you tell me who is trying to get the truth out, someone trying to speak in specifics or two guys on a bully pulpit shouting down that person with platitudes and hyperbole mob-rule style?!?!
This happens all the time, actually. I check out what is going on elsewhere, and this almost invariably happens with MSNBC. I just shared it with you all this time because it did not require much elaboration and I had the time. MSNBC is so smug and so in the tank for leftism.
MIND YOU, there was a time when I liked Chris Matthews. Such evidence can be found right here on this thread (2004)! This is when he was more of a center-left guy who helped maintain balance. That is no longer the case. Now he is a smug far-leftist befitting the network for which he works.
With all this said, I ask you to take "the Gridiron" FOX News Challenge,... especially those of you who enjoy the Kool-Aid over at MSNBC. You do not have to convert. This is the challenge... Just, on occasion during a commercial break every now and then, flick over to FOX News and in the few minutes that you spend there see if you actually encounter ANYthing really objectionable (and in accordance with the way FOX News gets depicted by the left). Just give it a try, and please let me know what you find. I make this challenge because I hear people on the left, who criticize FOX News, (have to) admit that they do not watch it (because ultimately they typically cannot cite examples) and that they are just basing their impression off hearsay. In any case, based on whether or not you find anything objectionable and, if you do, what it is that you find objectionable, you will come to realize how much leftist Kool-Aid you have imbibed and whether you just need to stick with MSNBC or CNN for your political news coverage or not.
|
|
Logged |
|
|
|
Philosopher King
of Fantasy Football
Site Administrator
GBRFLer
Champ - '94, '99, '02, '04
I love ''the Gridiron''!
Posts: 19657
Back to top
|
|
Re: G.T.K.Y.G. - Topic: Politics
« Reply #424 on: Jun 14th, 2011, 2:08am » |
Quote Modify
|
So, we got an army of left-wing reporters, many explicitly encouraged by the New York Times, headed all the way up to Alaska to sift through some 13,000/24,000 (who knows how many) e-mails to find something contemptible or at least embarrassing enough to prevent one politician from running for office, and meanwhile we have got a sitting New York Congressman caught red-handed through his own stupidity e-mailing young women lurid messages and PHOTOS OF HIS COCK who is staying put and, worse yet, being defended by many of the same people who are supporting and even financing reporters' trips to Alaska. 
Are you kidding me? Are we really this stupid of a country? Yes, there are lurid stories on both sides of the aisle. That is just a tit-for-tat way of looking at it that gets us nowhere. The huge disparity depicted above is truer to the tenor of the conversation in the mainstream media and spirit of the coverage.
...
Lifetime insight... Ever wonder why every empire collapses? The fall always comes with a decline in morals. Ever wonder why the trajectory of morality is always toward decay? All public figures, especially politicians, have a vested interest in moral decay. The lower the standards of the populace, the lower the standards those in the public eye are held to!
|
| « Last Edit: Jul 7th, 2011, 11:30am by Stegfucius » |
Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Games
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print
mania". From "The REAL Feed": 
Quote: